Wrong. He was talking out of his ass like he usually does.Originally Posted by Fort York Redcoat
Wrong. He was talking out of his ass like he usually does.
To be clear
Ajax supplied facts for kaz and he responded with what he believes even stating he wasn't sure.
Personal insults will not be tolerated. Continue and infractions will be given again.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
I think the fact there is little news to be had is a good thing. Often when things aren't constructive the media is used as a tool to try gain public support for each side.
According to Bradley, they still haven't discussed the big issues of salaries and free agency. Dealing with the small stuff.
I thought I read an article some where that stated they had already agreed in principle to the small stuff, but were at a roadblock on salary, free agency. Actually now that I think about it I believe the article stated they hadn't even talked about raising the mins yet.
Fine.
However, if somebody (yourself included) says something ignorant about Brampton again, I won't bite my tongue. I'm just letting you know a head of time.
^ But if we plead ignorance in a post about Brampton, while looking for confirmation/clarification, would you be kind in your reply?
First things first: you've been around this forum (off and on) for six years, so you should know how we do things by now.
On the RPB forum, it's quite alright to counter someone's opinion without calling said person out or insulting. Remember, debate the opinions, talk about facts and present counter-arguments. If you do that, there is no problem with correction, discussion or disagreement. Remember that if someone has factually incorrect information, that is not an attack on you personally, it's just incorrect information. But attacking someone because their opinion differs is going to get you a ban.
In this "Brampton the soccer town" argument, neither side presented facts to back up your opinions, so in effect, neither of you is right or both of you are. In fact, until I see some numbers or other facts, how can I be sure that you are, indeed, correct that Brampton is "the soccer town of Canada, bar none"? You presented anecdotal evidence in your post, just like Kaz did. Why is his anecdotal evidence based opinion any more ignorant than yours? Attacking someone for their opinion, which is based on anecdotal evidence just like yours, is the only ignorant action I see here. Tone it down and participate in a respectful manner and we can all spend our time on something a little bit more interesting.
Toronto FC baby...best team everrrrrrrrrr -Jozy
All the notice in the world won't change how users posts are moderated.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
Of course.
To be fair, I was using my anecdotal evidence in a sarcastic manner to demonstrate just how ridiculous his anecdotal evidence was. However, my hard facts about how most of TFC's promising prospects, past and current youth players are from Brampton still trumped anything he had.
Don't push my buttons.
Last edited by Macksam; 02-25-2015 at 09:00 PM.
You get the same civil treatment as everyone else. You are expected to give the same.
FORMER FULL TIME KOOL-AID DRINKER
And now from an actual owner's perspective
http://www.rslsoapbox.com/2015/2/26/...e-conversation
Yes, he's pretty clear when talking about free agency: "When you look at all the owners, they've all been in pro basketball, baseball, football, and that was the one thing they all vowed they'd never do is go through that again."
I've always thought that the reason MLS is single-entity is because that's the only way owners would be interested in a new league.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...81424995743233
Goff is usually on with these things.
Who wouldn't be interested in earning more money? I think his words ring a bit hallow when you look at the number of people who'd line up to buy franchises in non-capped leagues.
Heck, I'm sure if we dug a bit we'd find an example of a MLS owner making an investment in a non-capped league in the last 5 years.
Leafs trade tonight is your example of an owner spending money working within a cap league. But then I get the feeling the guys like RSL and Saputo hate MLSE.
RSL is about as unlike MLSE as possible in this league.
Stan Kroenke, largest shareholder in Arsenal and owner of many North American pro teams including the Rapids
Like, nearly all of them. AIG, Red Bull, Man City, The Brazilian dude from Orlando, Joey Saputo in Bologna, etc etc etc etc
I think he is referring to a group of some of the early owners and current owners, who don't want to control costs like that. A cap is more important though than free agency for that. The issue is Free Agency in an uncapped league. I am against Free Agency on the principle of the thing, I think there are other ways to do that. I don't have a problem with it in principle but in practice it is driven by greed. I mean Jermaine Defoe is a prime example. He came here purely on greed and TFC now has a weaker striker and is out millions. If smaller owners were forced to take chances like that with no cap no free agency MLS would implode.
I think RSL's Owner shows that a few owners at least rhetorically are willing to take their ball and go home.
^ I know we differ here, but I think he's bluffing. RSL excepted, a lot of these smaller teams are headed for a future where they either get left behind by the leagues growth, or they seriously put their foot in. The old guard is anchored to when they put in extra money to save the league. While that is valuable and they deserve credit for that, it doesn't give you a license to be tight-fisted indefinitely. They're on a crash course with the TFCs, Seattles if this league. It's obvious by leiweke's recent comments there's some disconnect.
I'm cool with free agency and a cap, reasonable increase in the minimum for roster players (not USL prospects). That's good enough.
I don't disagree, I just don't think now is the time. Kevin Payne kinda put it in terms to make sense, The league's wages have been an issue that nearly killed the league in the past. Until the League Min is over 75k (arbitrary number) I don't think free agency is needed or of value.
A) all contracts are with the league, you can't have free agency unless you change... so basically the players are asking the owners to blow up single entity which is more than just free agency.
B) I don't think the players want it for the right reason and that this is more... Europe has it so we want it, but we don't understand what it really means in the reality of this league, and I think this is more about the agents than the players.
Both of those reason along means I don't see the players winning on that issue.
Did the Atlanta owners come in expecting a single entity? Did Man U? Did Orlando? Let the league finish it's expansion, get the cap up, and a new TV deal that will bring salaries up. Then talk about Free Agency. (though I'm still against it because of the greed that fuels it)
I really see a few owners just packing up.
I see Houston, San Jose, Kansas City, and Philly all trying to avoid a league killing strike. (new stadiums and all) Sounders maybe too, I don't know that all wouldn't be willing to let the league die than agree to kill single entity yet.
Seattle, LA, and TFC will be pushing HARD to end the strike and concede ground. Seattle will lose more money by not playing than they will by giving up ground in the cba, it's no-brainer for them. They make money on the field and they're used spending to drive interest in their fan base. Expansion teams will be anxious about striking straight away as well.
I don't see the greed thing as either here nor there. Players wanting to get paid is no different than owners wanting to make profits.
I think it's about more than agents. Players want more control over where they play and on what terms. MLS is too restrictive and mechanical in their processes. The whole exercise is unattractive to potential talent.
Edit: sorry if this comes off as rude (I'm all for healthy debate). Typing on mobile and trying to save time.
Last edited by ag futbol; 02-27-2015 at 12:33 PM.
In most labor confrontations that aren't just about getting rid of the union (there is a lot of those, but this one isn't), mgmt has to give up something tangible to avoid the worse alternative. So what will it take to get the players to step down a top demand for FA? It's not going to be per diem and chartered flights and appearance compensation. It's going to be base wages. If players are making a last stand (for now) for FA, the amount wages would have to go up to get them to forget about FA might be quite high.
You might be right on the crack appearing. First time I can remember the league fining an owner:
http://www.sbisoccer.com/2015/02/lea...otiations.html
The league made darn sure that fine and press release got out there quickly this morning after the interview went out to the universe yesterday.
Even put the fine announcement on the web site.
Pure speculation but I would not be surprised if the owners were planning to go the union with a comprehensive package this weekend that didnt include free agency but a lot of other stuff - and RSL dude basically opened the kitchen door and showed the players he was pissing on the french fries.
I don't know if the term "owner" has ever been used on MLSsoccer.com before, but I find the standout part of that announcement is referring to RSL's owner as an "investor-operator" rather than an owner. Seems like they're trying to put an emphasis on the fact that they're a single entity
The more I look at what Hanson said, the stupider and more upside-down it seems, as a point in law.
MLS doesn't have "rights" over people's ability to change jobs by any sort of moral or legal law. An employee has the legal right in the US and Canada to seek employment inside or outside his/her company for work in another city. Unless the employee bargains that right away. Which is what has happened to date.
The right to obstruct movement is not a right that the the owners of MLS just "have" because of their legal structure.
Last edited by ensco; 02-27-2015 at 05:20 PM.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
The astonishing part of their beating the monopoly argument previously is that they got away with suggesting the A-league (now USL, and affiliated) represents market mobility. It's always been dicey at best, the avoidance of anti-trust.
Sort of comparable to all the restaurants in town colluding to lower wages, with their kicker being you can always go work at McDonald's if you don't like it.
Why doesn't the league just give free agency to 29 year olds, take the cap to $4M, and cut the crap?
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote