Galaxy want exception to the rule

[denime]

Galaxy want exception to the rule


The man who brought the "Beckham Rule" to Major League Soccer now wants to change it in a dramatic fashion. And if Tim Leiweke gets his way, David Beckham and MLS' other marquee players wouldn't count a dime against the league's salary cap. :)

Read more (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/grant_wahl/09/23/galaxy.leiweke/?eref=sircrc)

[David_Oliveira]

Unfucking believable. I hope the league doesn't fall for this shit.

[RPB_RED_NATION_RPB]

its a start....hope it gets done.....if we can land a dp......we would have and extra 400 000 to spend on another quality player

[BuSaPuNk]

Why don't they just make there own MLS Cup and give it to themselves? Be a lot less money.

[RPB_RED_NATION_RPB]

Unfucking believable. I hope the league doesn't fall for this shit.

why is this a bad thing dave?....signing a dp....is one thing.....but to not have it go against your cap....is a great idea....in a already low capped leauge..it gives teams a little more freedom...

[rocker]

if Columbus made this argument, most people would agree with it, but because it's LA, it seems like whiny posturing.

but i actually agree with the proposal. That $400,000 against the cap is a huge hindrance to developing the rest of the team, as evidenced by how few teams have signed DPs. There's too much risk there and not enough benefit. 20% of your budget would go to 1 player. If he gets hurt, you still have to pay that 20% of your budget even if he doesn't play the rest of the year.

I think the players would also like this because that means $400,000 more to the regular guys, and the big shots are not taking $$$$ away from them from the cap.

This is a way to raise the cap immediately without too much hassle. I like it.

[Fort York Redcoat]

I think thsi is a joke coming from LA but this does make a step away from the ridiculous salary restrictions. It still will be up to a team to choose talent over fluff.

[Cashcleaner]

Fucking joke of a league. I'm all for having the DP count for nothing against the cap, but I hate how the Galaxy is demanding the world - and getting it from Garber.

The Commish already has egg on his face for making LA the flagship team of the MLS and seeing them end up towards the bottom of the table in the West is probably just going to force him to make more concessions to the club.

It actually is a good idea to take the DP completely off the cap, but the fact that it will go through because the Galaxy wants it is what annoys me.

[RPB_RED_NATION_RPB]

if Columbus made this argument, most people would agree with it, but because it's LA, it seems like whiny posturing.

but i actually agree with the proposal. That $400,000 against the cap is a huge hindrance to developing the rest of the team, as evidenced by how few teams have signed DPs. There's too much risk there and not enough benefit. 20% of your budget would go to 1 player. If he gets hurt, you still have to pay that 20% of your budget even if he doesn't play the rest of the year.

I think the players would also like this because that means $400,000 more to the regular guys, and the big shots are not taking $$$$ away from them from the cap.

This is a way to raise the cap immediately without too much hassle. I like it.


exaclty what i was getting at....just detailed better!..:D

[Azerban]

making LA the flagship team of the MLS


Fucking joke of a league.

pretty much this

[David_Oliveira]

I think that until the vast majority of teams have a DP, it is unfair for the other teams. It's rewarding the Gals, Shitcago, Red Bulls (are shite), DCU and KC for getting one. Why not just raise the cap an extra 400k allowing for everyone to sign better quality players.

[Fort York Redcoat]

Fucking joke of a league. I'm all for having the DP count for nothing against the cap, but I hate how the Galaxy is demanding the world - and getting it from Garber.

The Commish already has egg on his face for making LA the flagship team of the MLS and seeing them end up towards the bottom of the table in the West is probably just going to force him to make more concessions to the club.

It actually is a good idea to take the DP completely off the cap, but the fact that it will go through because the Galaxy wants it is what annoys me.

Just considered that choice in the flagship. It made sense since LA is the second biggest city and more soccer is played there than most US cities. NY wasn't upping the ante with its image of Giants tennants. I wouldn't dream of defending Garber because he went way too far with the superclub kool aid, but ya know?

[Broadview]

As a TFC fan I'm all for it. Like others said, if I'm a Wizzard or Crew fan then not so much.

This is just another way to raise the cap and hopefully improve the product on the field.

I'm 'fer it!

[giambac]

Galaxy want exception to the rule


The man who brought the "Beckham Rule" to Major League Soccer now wants to change it in a dramatic fashion. And if Tim Leiweke gets his way, David Beckham and MLS' other marquee players wouldn't count a dime against the league's salary cap. :)

Read more (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/grant_wahl/09/23/galaxy.leiweke/?eref=sircrc)

I think this would be great. why is everyone complaining. Basically it gives each team an etra 400k salary cap room they don't have. What's wrong with that. The rule would apply to each team. MLSE can go out an sign a player and not worry about the salary cap impact.

It will bring more high profile players to the league and it won'yt hurt the teams cap space.

It's all good. This league has to spend more to attract better quality.

[giambac]

I think that until the vast majority of teams have a DP, it is unfair for the other teams. It's rewarding the Gals, Shitcago, Red Bulls (are shite), DCU and KC for getting one. Why not just raise the cap an extra 400k allowing for everyone to sign better quality players.


what's the difffernce? It has the same impact. Basically the salary cap ha sgone up by $400k

[Broadview]

If the upcomming CBA only entailed a mere $400k raise, people would poop bricks. Keeping a DP off the books is a nice little top up.

Just no more "grandfathering". Gotta be the same for everybody.

[ricciboy]

what ever goes

[S_D]

The Galaxy have nobody to blame but themselves.

It isn't the fact that the 400K was a hindrance. It was the 400K + 325 (Donovan) + 325 (Ruiz) against the cap that hurt them and having nothing left over to buy players for the rest of the team, especially defense. If the Galaxy had at least minimally competent defenders , they would be in the playoffs.

[MisterMacphisto]

Why don't they just make there own MLS Cup and give it to themselves? Be a lot less money.

ROFL... Fuck, water came out my nose on that one. :p

[BakaGaijin]

I think that until the vast majority of teams have a DP, it is unfair for the other teams. It's rewarding the Gals, Shitcago, Red Bulls (are shite), DCU and KC for getting one. Why not just raise the cap an extra 400k allowing for everyone to sign better quality players.

The reason they won't raise the cap another $400 000 is because next year they are entering collective bargaining with the union, and the league wants to enter those negotiations with a low cap, so it helps their negotiations.

This proposal from LA is genius. It essentially allows each team to spend an additional $400K, without affecting the league's negotiating starting point next year.

[Wooster_TFC]

what's the difffernce? It has the same impact. Basically the salary cap ha sgone up by $400k

It's actually quite the opposite. The cap goes up 400k for teams with one DP, and 725k for teams with 2 DPs. So, if you are a Columbus or even a TFC (as of right now) this does not benefit you in any way shape or form, whereas a LAG benefits immensely (you can bring in 4-5 quality MLS players with 725k).

IMO, if they do this, they should just increase the cap by 725k across the board (or more likely something like 500-600k). This would benefit every team, rather than simply the ones who already have the money to spend.

[BuSaPuNk]

ROFL... Fuck, water came out my nose on that one. :p

Well it's true! lol. Even if they raise the cap it would hinder the teams that can't spend due to financial restrictions. (Dam cheap MLSE)

[S_D]

IMO, if they do this, they should just increase the cap by 725k across the board (or more likely something like 500-600k). This would benefit every team, rather than simply the ones who already have the money to spend.

MLS would never go for that though as they would be the one's paying the salaries. As it is they barely increase the cap to cover raises.

I think things should stay how they are now with the DP's, get rid of the grandfathering altogether, and increase the cap by 200K + whatever the raises are and allow the teams to expand their rosters by 1 spot.

Since the teams don't have to keep to full roster:

1) those teams that aren't in the Superliga, CC, USOC etc can spend it on their existing 18 man roster thus hopefully improving the quality of those 18 players, or go to 19 to cover for injuries etc,

2) the teams that are in the other competitions are already decent (or at least should be) can get the extra man and spend the 200K on him to give them some depth to cover for injuries etc.

[rocker]

It isn't the fact that the 400K was a hindrance.

LA is an unusual case... but it was a fact that it was a hindrance for Houston in signing a DP. They said as much earlier this year.

Now, Houston is tops in the west so some will say they don't need it. But if we want to see better players come into the league, it'd still be a good thing to add more DPs. Currently a number of teams don't have a DP because it's a hindrance in cap terms.

Also, to another point someone else made: I don't think it matters that it "hurts" teams who haven't signed a DP yet. They had the opportunity to do it, and chose not too. They even were able to get 400K of it paid for by their brother teams through revenue sharing if they had tried.

Many of them might be encouraged to sign a DP if they don't have to knock off a whole bunch of players from the roster due to cap restrictions. Right now the DP thing is just a bit too risky in my opinion. It's great to bring in great players, but the downside is rough.. look at how DC has gone without Gallardo for so long.
If teams still choose not to buy a DP (cuz it still costs them too much) then they can use the "DP" on relatively cheap player, to give them some added flexibility to pay the rest of the team a bit more. It wouldn't so much be a "rich player spot" but a "non-cap player spot" and that would benefit all teams.

as well, cuz MLS can always limit the # of these spots a team can have (right now 1 is a given, and 2 through trades) then you always keep the parity in place. Every team can do it. If they feel they don't want to, they can trade the spot for something of equal value, like allocation money or a player. but it gives flexibility to bring in some good players without levelling off the benefit by waiving or trading others.

[TFCREDNWHITE]

if Columbus made this argument, most people would agree with it, but because it's LA, it seems like whiny posturing.

but i actually agree with the proposal. That $400,000 against the cap is a huge hindrance to developing the rest of the team, as evidenced by how few teams have signed DPs. There's too much risk there and not enough benefit. 20% of your budget would go to 1 player. If he gets hurt, you still have to pay that 20% of your budget even if he doesn't play the rest of the year.

I think the players would also like this because that means $400,000 more to the regular guys, and the big shots are not taking $$$$ away from them from the cap.

This is a way to raise the cap immediately without too much hassle. I like it.

EXACTLY!!

This is a great fookin' idea!! They need to implement this ASAP!(Nov)

Also they need to STILL raise the cap across the board...

[Toronto_Bhoy]

I can't believe they were paying Ruiz $325k?

[Jack]

Still, you would suspect that a player you could get for $4,000,000 would be a better player than you could get for $400,000, so paying $400k for a player who is *supposedly* that much better should be worth it. I mean, if I'm going to sign a league-MVP type and offer him the max salary and build around him, how is that any different than signing a multi-million dollar DP and building around him? The cost against the cap is roughly the same. The problem is, they tied up too much money in other, mediocre players. I mean, put Becks on New England and I bet they'd still kick some ass.

Bottom line is, you make your bed, you lie in it. Overspend on one player and you're screwed in another position. But ooohhhh how LA loves those Beckham dollars rolling in.

[rocker]

I mean, if I'm going to sign a league-MVP type and offer him the max salary and build around him, how is that any different than signing a multi-million dollar DP and building around him?

well the assumption is the multimullion dollar DP is going to be easier to find than to get a max salary (non-DP) player..... It's not easy to find a DeRosario (a guy who will play for 325K, and who will not leave for Europe. You couldn't find a player better than him from Europe for 325K (some people cite Schellotto but his salary is getting paid down with allocation).



The cost against the cap is roughly the same. The problem is, they tied up too much money in other, mediocre players. I mean, put Becks on New England and I bet they'd still kick some ass.

I agree a lot of LA's problems are self-inflicted, but I don't think LA's fuckups should cloud the merits of the proposal.
I'm not so sure New England would quick ass with Beckham, because they'd have to unload about 4-5 cheap and good Americans to fit in Beckham's 400K.



Bottom line is, you make your bed, you lie in it. Overspend on one player and you're screwed in another position.

So then what's the point of having a DP? the overspending is set by MLS (400K). They put in a rule that is supposed to attract great players to the league, but then they force you to overspend on it (as it relates to the cap).

I'm also in favour, as people have said above, of raising the cap overall a bit (maybe like the amount they did last year). But raising the cap a bit isn't going to raise the quality of the league that much because you can't buy Beckhams for another $200K. But if you reduce the cap risk (no need to jettison 3-4 players to fit in the 400K) you encourage teams to go out and get some better players.

[Jack]

well the assumption is the multimullion dollar DP is going to be easier to find than to get a max salary (non-DP) player..... It's not easy to find a DeRosario (a guy who will play for 325K, and who will not leave for Europe. You couldn't find a player better than him from Europe for 325K (some people cite Schellotto but his salary is getting paid down with allocation).
Not so easy to find a good DP as we think. There seem to be more good $300k players around than DPs



I agree a lot of LA's problems are self-inflicted, but I don't think LA's fuckups should cloud the merits of the proposal.
I'm not so sure New England would quick ass with Beckham, because they'd have to unload about 4-5 cheap and good Americans to fit in Beckham's 400K.
Maybe, maybe not. I guess it's not something we'll ever know. Obviously how you build the team makes a lot of difference.



So then what's the point of having a DP? the overspending is set by MLS (400K). They put in a rule that is supposed to attract great players to the league, but then they force you to overspend on it (as it relates to the cap).
Sorry, I didn't express that correctly. The overspending did not take place on the DP. They overspent on several players and we see the result. They went for the proverbial "bling" over substance. A few star players and bunch of hacks.



I'm also in favour, as people have said above, of raising the cap overall a bit (maybe like the amount they did last year). But raising the cap a bit isn't going to raise the quality of the league that much because you can't buy Beckhams for another $200K. But if you reduce the cap risk (no need to jettison 3-4 players to fit in the 400K) you encourage teams to go out and get some better players.
I don't know about that. Teams that are doing very well in the league do so without the DP. Maybe it's because of the salary issue as pointed out by LA, or maybe it's because of shrewd management and having the right players.

There are so many possibilites. I still don't see how having a superstar player on your team shouldn't cost you the max salary against your cap. It penalizes teams with good managers and coaching who have eschewed the DP route in favour of building a balance squad.

[TFCREDNWHITE]

So then what's the point of having a DP? the overspending is set by MLS (400K). They put in a rule that is supposed to attract great players to the league, but then they force you to overspend on it (as it relates to the cap).

I'm also in favour, as people have said above, of raising the cap overall a bit (maybe like the amount they did last year). But raising the cap a bit isn't going to raise the quality of the league that much because you can't buy Beckhams for another $200K. But if you reduce the cap risk (no need to jettison 3-4 players to fit in the 400K) you encourage teams to go out and get some better players.

This is an excellent point! You my friend have a firm grasp of the DP rule, Salary Cap, and Salary Allocation....I mean the $400,000 against the Cap is roughly 20% of the total amount your allowed to spend. Which many might say is not that much, BUT(insert big BUT) when you ONLY have around 2 million to spend on the entire team!! and your Mexican freakin' compadres to the way south of us spend roughly 3.5 - 4 million on the entire team then you are at a serious disadvantage!!

So yeah, Tim Liweike should for sure move this along...

[TFCREDNWHITE]

Football has a convoluted history, games similar to soccer were played by the ancient Chinese, Greek and Roman civilizations. However, Britain is the birthplace of modern football, where set rules were established in early 19th century. The international body that governs the sport is Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). The salary of a football player varies based on an athlete’s talent, experience, series/division, the country and/or league he is playing for. Whether it was Maradona, Ronaldo or Pelé, football fans have always been looking for football idols. Team owners have been willing to quench the thirst of fans by shelling out millions of dollars to attract the best talent to their team. Talented soccer Player’s have been known to have high salaries as early as 1970’s when Pelé was paid $7 million to play for New York Cosmos.
The salary of a football player varies based on individual strengths, overall talent, age, previous performances etc-. Currently the average salary of a player for English Premiership is $1,177,967 a year. It is also said that the highest paid age bracket in the premiership is 27-28 year old where the average salary is $2.02 million The highest paid soccer player in the world is Los Angles Galaxy player David Beckham whose salary after guaranteed bonuses averages at $50 million a year. That's enough money to buy 250 Ferrari F430's or 19 Eclipse500 Private jets. If you look at his last GPY (goals per year) record for club games its 4 GPY. So if Beckham plays with the same GPY rate this year than each goal should be worth $12.5 million (talk about golden goals). This also makes David Beckham the sixth highest paid athlete in the world (as of June 2007).

[jloome]

I can't believe they were paying Ruiz $325k?

He's one of the best strikers in league history and has only been in the league since 2002, with a 1-in-2 strike rate. He's had one poor season (maybe two by the end of this one, I guess) in six years. Why wouldn't they?

Base it on his stats, not some preconception of the type of player he is. He has 82 goals in 152 games in this league, an exceptional strike rate. As mentioned with Cunningham many times, some strikers can't create everything themselves, they require service.

Is he playing lacksadaisically and making that harder than it has to be as a result? Maybe. But don't question the guy's pedigree; that's asinine.

[TFCREDNWHITE]

Gap widens between rich and poor in MLS

USA - 10 April, 2008

The gap between the haves and the have-nots has expanded in the MLS.

The MLS players' union published its salary list. Obviously, L.A. Galaxy import David Beckham is the main money man, and salaries have increased an average of USD 129,395 thanks in part to his contract, but 46 players earn the league minimum of USD 33,000.

Thirty developmental players are checking in at USD 17,000, while another 43 make USD 12,900.

Five players are making more than USD 1 million, Beckham included. Claudio Reyna is the only U.S. national earning more than a million. Landon Donovan is just shy at USD 900,000.

[Blizzard]

if Columbus made this argument, most people would agree with it, but because it's LA, it seems like whiny posturing.

but i actually agree with the proposal. That $400,000 against the cap is a huge hindrance to developing the rest of the team, as evidenced by how few teams have signed DPs. There's too much risk there and not enough benefit. 20% of your budget would go to 1 player. If he gets hurt, you still have to pay that 20% of your budget even if he doesn't play the rest of the year.

I think the players would also like this because that means $400,000 more to the regular guys, and the big shots are not taking $$$$ away from them from the cap.

This is a way to raise the cap immediately without too much hassle. I like it.

Yes, exactly. This change of regulation means an immediate $400k increase to the salary cap for all intents and purposes.

We are all hammering MLS because of the restrictive salary cap and now that somebody is suggesting a way of around some of the restrictiveness, some are slamming this potential change.

I can't think why!

B

[Jack]

Yes, exactly. This change of regulation means an immediate $400k increase to the salary cap for all intents and purposes.

We are all hammering MLS because of the restrictive salary cap and now that somebody is suggesting a way of around some of the restrictiveness, some are slamming this potential change.

I can't think why!

B

Because it's just more of them trying to find a way out of the hole into which they dug themselves.

Just raise the salary cap by $400k.

Then the teams that don't want a DP can still take advantage of the money and sign two $200k players or whatever.

This is just a bailout to those teams who have DPs, which is not everybody.

[S_D]

This is just a bailout to those teams who have DPs, which is not everybody.

Exactly. And you watch LA if they manage to push this through. The first thing they will do is push to grandfather Donovan at the review time (again), keep Beckham (of course), and trade for another DP spot.

When they pushed for the grandfathering of the Donovan, Johnson and Ruiz contracts and got it through (with the exception of having the teams pay for the contracts) they immediatly went and got Ruiz.

They will try it again I have no doubt.

[Oldtimer]

There is a good argument that LA and their owners AEG did a lot for the league by taking on Beckham. Every team has benefited from the exposure that that Becks brought the league. So why should LA be penalized for doing what was best for MLS? They took the risk when no-one else was willing to, and credit to them it has worked out well.

A change like this would benefit all bigger-market teams (including Toronto) that can afford a DP. The only teams that wouldn't directly benefit would be ones like KC in too small markets to support a DP, but it could be argued that even they would benefit by having better and more exciting players in the league.

There isn't too much down-side to this. It would pressure teams that can afford a DP to get one, and the whole league will benefit.

[Shakes McQueen]

How about just increasing the cap, and maintaining the salary cap hit for DP's?

This change wouldn't be fair to any club who has traded away their DP slot, as all of a sudden the slot has far more value than it used to.

I don't want to accept shitty, short sighted rules designed to benefit a few teams, just because we as fans want the salary cap increased, badly.

Just increase the cap to whatever, and keep the 400K DP slot hit - or even increase the cap hit proportionally.

Hilarious that a club with huge impending salary cap problems is the one trying to push this through, though.

- Scott

[Fort York Redcoat]

Increase the gap. Do it. The "have's" are in last place and the "have nots" are cleaning up with sensible team management. We're pissed at LA, sure but is anyone afraid? LA will get a better grip on their franchise at least on the field and that might help them compete which in turn will help MLS and their pitiable pandering to fluff fans that can point to one player(or maybe two now) and let competent fans enjoy their own teams building contenders. I know I will.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

Thered be no excuse for MLSE not to spend and noone could accuse them of being cheap, unless of course they were.

[Shakes McQueen]

Thered be no excuse for MLSE not to spend and noone could accuse them of being cheap, unless of course they were.

What are you referring to, here?

- Scott

[TFCREDNWHITE]

How about just increasing the cap, and maintaining the salary cap hit for DP's?

This change wouldn't be fair to any club who has traded away their DP slot, as all of a sudden the slot has far more value than it used to.

I don't want to accept shitty, short sighted rules designed to benefit a few teams, just because we as fans want the salary cap increased, badly.



@Scott

You have to try and wrap your head around the American Market firstly. Plus you also have to understand the situation that MLS was in(very bad), and is currently in(improving)...One of the reasons why MLS is doing quite well financially is because of TV Contracts, Advertising, Merchandise Revenue and so on and so on...AEG//GALAXY//BECKHAM are the main reasons for the positive shift. In addition to raising the overall level of play, the league also needs Star Power, Star power is what can bring in more of those much needed Advertising and Merchandise DOLLARS! Thats what Americans what to latch on too...Star Power is also what can bring up attendance numbers...Thats why having unlimited money to sign a DP and NOT have it count against the Shitty cap is a great thing! Lets hope and pray that this happens!

[Jay1974]

There is a good argument that LA and their owners AEG did a lot for the league by taking on Beckham. Every team has benefited from the exposure that that Becks brought the league. So why should LA be penalized for doing what was best for MLS? They took the risk when no-one else was willing to, and credit to them it has worked out well.

A change like this would benefit all bigger-market teams (including Toronto) that can afford a DP. The only teams that wouldn't directly benefit would be ones like KC in too small markets to support a DP, but it could be argued that even they would benefit by having better and more exciting players in the league.

There isn't too much down-side to this. It would pressure teams that can afford a DP to get one, and the whole league will benefit.

I agree, the league benefited greatly after Beckham signed. Who knows what would have happened in Toronto, season ticket sales went through the roof when he signed on.

I like the idea of a DP not having a cap hit but I think it should be limited to 1 per team and have it as a commodity that cannot be traded. Any team that can afford to pay the players with 2 or 3 spots not hitting the cap, with proper management, should be able to unfairly dominate the league.

[NF-FC]

It's actually quite the opposite. The cap goes up 400k for teams with one DP, and 725k for teams with 2 DPs. So, if you are a Columbus or even a TFC (as of right now) this does not benefit you in any way shape or form, whereas a LAG benefits immensely (you can bring in 4-5 quality MLS players with 725k).

IMO, if they do this, they should just increase the cap by 725k across the board (or more likely something like 500-600k). This would benefit every team, rather than simply the ones who already have the money to spend.

Sorry but this is the complete opposite of what should be happening. Right now we have Columbus at the top of the table playing in front of 9000 (13500 is a bold faced lie) every night while the top 2 attended teams in the league are at the bottom. The teams with proper support should be able to spend more money to reward their fans.

[flatpicker]

well, in a twisted way, this is almost an alternative to raising the salary cap.
Personally, I think anything that allows teams to spend more money in this league is good.
(within reason of course... teams need to spend within their budgets)

[giambac]

It's actually quite the opposite. The cap goes up 400k for teams with one DP, and 725k for teams with 2 DPs. So, if you are a Columbus or even a TFC (as of right now) this does not benefit you in any way shape or form, whereas a LAG benefits immensely (you can bring in 4-5 quality MLS players with 725k).

IMO, if they do this, they should just increase the cap by 725k across the board (or more likely something like 500-600k). This would benefit every team, rather than simply the ones who already have the money to spend.


I disagree,

The rationale behind the motion is that you want teams tp bring in quality DP players. Teams that are willing to spend the money on quality players will be rewrded with the $400k excemption. TFC and MLSE has been so cheap and busy counting their money that they still haven't gotten us the promised DP.

[flatpicker]

^ "the promised DP" wasn't expected until the third year...

it's coming...

[Roogsy]

Why don't they just raise the stupid cap?

Gawd...why do people make things more complicated than they need to be?

[flatpicker]

^ answer... MLS!


but as I have said repeatedly in the past...
I want to see a flexible cap... one that ranges between $3 - $6 million
Then I want each team's cap to be dictated by their generated revenue.

So if you are Columbus and nobody goes to watch you play, then you get to spend about $3 mil.
If you are L.A., Toronto etc... then you get to spend more...

[Roogsy]

Lord knows we need it...

[Yohan]

This idea might be better, because I'm not sure how the DP rule works, but isn't it that MLS pays for $400k, and the team pays for the rest of the salaryÉ

If this is the case, and since MLS don`t want to raise the salary cap due to the fact that the league pays for the salary, transferring the cost of DP directly to ind teams would satisfy both parties.

[flatpicker]

^ I don't think the league pays salaries... I think players simply have a contract with the league and teams dish out the cash...

then again... I get so confused with the rules that i don't know what I am talking about.

[S_D]

This idea might be better, because I'm not sure how the DP rule works, but isn't it that MLS pays for $400k, and the team pays for the rest of the salaryÉ

If this is the case, and since MLS don`t want to raise the salary cap due to the fact that the league pays for the salary, transferring the cost of DP directly to ind teams would satisfy both parties.

Well I just looked through the Collective bargaining agreement and I didn't see anything about DP's. But since it was written pre-beckham, I am not surprised. I would assume since the 400K goes against the cap that MLS pays that. The only reason I say that though is if the team was responsible for paying it, the MLS would actually be paying out LESS cash on salaries, and I am not sure the union would be into that.


^ I don't think the league pays salaries... I think players simply have a contract with the league and teams dish out the cash...

then again... I get so confused with the rules that i don't know what I am talking about.

The league pays the salaries. You are correct that the players sign an agreement with the league not the team. (It is the reason why teams can trade/sell players to each other outside of the official transfer windows.)

MLS takes a cut of gate receipts from the teams to pay for it all. I assume MLS also gets a cut of all of the TV deals, shirt sales and anything else the MLS name is on.

In 2004 MLS even started direct deposit :eek:.

If you want a dry read, have a look at the collective bargaining agreement:

http://www.mlsplayers.org/files/collective_bargaining_agreement__final.pdf

Compensation starts on page 19, your head will start spinning by page 21 :D

[icecoldbeer]

Well I just looked through the Collective bargaining agreement and I didn't see anything about DP's. But since it was written pre-beckham, I am not surprised. I would assume since the 400K goes against the cap that MLS pays that. The only reason I say that though is if the team was responsible for paying it, the MLS would actually be paying out LESS cash on salaries, and I am not sure the union would be into that.



The league pays the salaries. You are correct that the players sign an agreement with the league not the team. (It is the reason why teams can trade/sell players to each other outside of the official transfer windows.)

MLS takes a cut of gate receipts from the teams to pay for it all. I assume MLS also gets a cut of all of the TV deals, shirt sales and anything else the MLS name is on.

In 2004 MLS even started direct deposit :eek:.

If you want a dry read, have a look at the collective bargaining agreement:

http://www.mlsplayers.org/files/collective_bargaining_agreement__final.pdf

Compensation starts on page 19, your head will start spinning by page 21 :D

Page 64 shows the approved hotels. Too bad its out of date and doesn't list Toronto or we could have had fun with that one :p.

[Shakes McQueen]

@Scott

You have to try and wrap your head around the American Market firstly. Plus you also have to understand the situation that MLS was in(very bad), and is currently in(improving)...One of the reasons why MLS is doing quite well financially is because of TV Contracts, Advertising, Merchandise Revenue and so on and so on...AEG//GALAXY//BECKHAM are the main reasons for the positive shift. In addition to raising the overall level of play, the league also needs Star Power, Star power is what can bring in more of those much needed Advertising and Merchandise DOLLARS! Thats what Americans what to latch on too...Star Power is also what can bring up attendance numbers...Thats why having unlimited money to sign a DP and NOT have it count against the Shitty cap is a great thing! Lets hope and pray that this happens!

Again though - I understand the growth concerns MLS has. But this rule severely punishes clubs who already traded away their DP slots, since they now traded not only the slot, but a bunch of free cap space, if this goes through.

Advocating faster league growth, at the expense of good rules, is not something I support. If I did, I'd advocate getting rid of the cap altogether, and letting rich teams duke it out.

A simple increase of the salary cap, helps every team - not just the ones with DP slots (some more than one).

It raises the level of play across the board, which grows the league as a brand. Maybe not as quickly, but far more sustainably.

- Scott

[nascarguy]

i say raise the salary cap to 800k

[TFCREDNWHITE]

Again though - I understand the growth concerns MLS has. But this rule severely punishes clubs who already traded away their DP slots, since they now traded not only the slot, but a bunch of free cap space, if this goes through.

Advocating faster league growth, at the expense of good rules, is not something I support. If I did, I'd advocate getting rid of the cap altogether, and letting rich teams duke it out.

A simple increase of the salary cap, helps every team - not just the ones with DP slots (some more than one).

It raises the level of play across the board, which grows the league as a brand. Maybe not as quickly, but far more sustainably.

- Scott


Your NOT understanding the American Market!! Please just step outside your box for one second...Of course raising the play across the board is something that Garber and Ivan already want to do and are slowly moving in that direction...By your arguement you would lead us to believe that DP's don't raise the level of play!? come on gimmie a break. Not only do they raise the level of play, but they raise the level of Brand, Awarness, Advertising Dollars and Attendance! plus they also help line the coffers of MLS with some money from Merchandising revenue(Jersey Sales $$$) anyways, DP's also help out TV ratings also because the Networks can showcase the Stars pitted against one another...This plan that Lieweike from the Galaxy is putting forth is Needed NOW, YOUR plan is one that can be executed over the next 5 years!! It doesn't mean that both can't co-exist, because they certainly can....Think about how boring and uneventful YOUR plan is for one second...and please don't get me wrong because your plan is already being implemented MLS...but what i'm trying to say is you have Seattle and Philly coming on board right?? Both of them have some strong sales and groups backing them right now, so why not go and get a star to bridge the support and sales to brand and marketability?? It makes perfect sense doesn't it?? If you didn't do that, then you're kind of letting all the good things that have been created in the last 2 years go to waste...

i dunno just my opinion i guess...

[flatpicker]

All this stuff confuses the hell outa me...

all I know is, I want the teams to be able to spend more money!
and teams that earn more should benefit from bigger team budgets!

[Azerban]

Is it really so fucking hard to go "hey clubs, salary cap is now 4 million, and we're still paying the same as before, 2.5 million of it" that way they still pay out the same amount of money, clubs like Columbus and KC will still be able to function like normal, teams like DC and us who can sell some tickets can strengthen their team a little because, well, we deserve it? Will a team spending a million and a half more dollars of their own money break the league? No.

[flatpicker]

Will a team spending a million and a half more dollars of their own money break the league? No.

a million and a half more dollars plus one or two DP slots that don't count against the cap might do the trick.

[Shakes McQueen]

Your NOT understanding the American Market!! Please just step outside your box for one second...Of course raising the play across the board is something that Garber and Ivan already want to do and are slowly moving in that direction...By your arguement you would lead us to believe that DP's don't raise the level of play!? come on gimmie a break. Not only do they raise the level of play, but they raise the level of Brand, Awarness, Advertising Dollars and Attendance! plus they also help line the coffers of MLS with some money from Merchandising revenue(Jersey Sales $$$) anyways, DP's also help out TV ratings also because the Networks can showcase the Stars pitted against one another...This plan that Lieweike from the Galaxy is putting forth is Needed NOW, YOUR plan is one that can be executed over the next 5 years!! It doesn't mean that both can't co-exist, because they certainly can....Think about how boring and uneventful YOUR plan is for one second...and please don't get me wrong because your plan is already being implemented MLS...but what i'm trying to say is you have Seattle and Philly coming on board right?? Both of them have some strong sales and groups backing them right now, so why not go and get a star to bridge the support and sales to brand and marketability?? It makes perfect sense doesn't it?? If you didn't do that, then you're kind of letting all the good things that have been created in the last 2 years go to waste...

i dunno just my opinion i guess...

I never said DP's don't raise the level of play - of course they do. You're reacting to the realities of what succeeds in the American sports consumer market, but you're not focusing on what is PROFITABLE and SUSTAINABLE for the MLS.

If I was just concerned about rapidly increasing the level of play, and bringing in star international talent at any cost, as I said, I would just get rid of the cap altogether (essentially making everyone a 'DP'), and then watch as 60% of MLS franchises fold within 5 years.

Sustainable teams like Toronto and Los Angeles would benefit from such rules, but places like Columbus and Kansas City would fold quickly. MLS can't let that happen.

If we are just going to throw buckets of money at aging football superstars, in the hopes that it will ensnare American fans - might as well relaunch the USL. Which failed miserably.

Beckham is/was a unique acquisition, in that he enjoys near ubiquitous name recognition throughout the world, and thus puts casual asses in seats. The only other players on the planet who might do that right now, are Cristiano Ronaldo, and MAYBE Ronaldinho.

- Scott

[Roogsy]

OMG...paragraphs please!

:rofl:

[Shakes McQueen]

OMG...paragraphs please!

:rofl:

I know. Had he not quoted me specifically, I usually don't read unformatted posts. My eyes start to hurt from trying to follow the sentences. :D

- Scott

[Fort York Redcoat]

Is it really so fucking hard to go "hey clubs, salary cap is now 4 million, and we're still paying the same as before, 2.5 million of it" that way they still pay out the same amount of money, clubs like Columbus and KC will still be able to function like normal, teams like DC and us who can sell some tickets can strengthen their team a little because, well, we deserve it? Will a team spending a million and a half more dollars of their own money break the league? No.

The clubs that feel like this step will be unfair have to take it on the chin. If their DP was traded away it was a lack of forsight. This league is changing year to year and shouldn't balk at such an opportunity like this one. In the larger picture isn't it anybody's league anyway?

And Azer your sig is the best.:rofl: