TFC 2023 player in-season roster discussion

[leedsandTFC]

I don't believe that off the face of it, though.

The league doesn't allow off-contract marketing deals with a player's club, only through them or third parties. Any compensation that is with TFC has to be reported as part of his overall package.

They might have arranged other contractual ties in Toronto, but they won't be through or with TFC, it just doesn't work that way. For example, Beckham's "shirt" deal was with MLS directly, not part of his Galaxy contract. THey had to cut multiple off contract deals with him, but they were all agreements in writing with the league, separately.

I just don't assume that's true, that's he's on more. They have "verified" and "unverified" status for contract listings, and the verified ones have been affirmed by their player association.

He's on $144,000 a week from TFC. If he's getting more than that, it's not a deal with the team.

He was on much more his first year, because they front-loaded the deal. So last year, he made nearly $300K per week. This year, he's on $144K per week, and is for the next four years. His last three years at Napoli, he was on $184K.

$44M on overall value is still a huge contract, it's just not what was reported. Given the apparent extra year, he may have a clause where he can opt out of his final year but the figure is guaranteed, so we still have to eat it in five years time. Still is well short of what was announced by the Italian press.

I'll be as conspiracy theory as anyone if the facts are there, but this stuff is all released publicly as part of the players' association protecting its members. If they attempted to hide $7M a year off books, we'd be seeing lawsuits out the yin yang.

Insigne's camp explicitly said his contract was worth significantly more than the MLSPA numbers indicated.

And if he was on 7 mill usd a year he'd be easy to shift, that's 21 mill usd over the next 3 seasons as a total outlay assuming we'd let him go for free if we wanted rid.

I wish he was. He's not.

"Insigne’s reps, meanwhile, were upset that the 2023 MLSPA salary release did not include the star’s marketing deal that adds a significant chunk to his earnings"

From the paul tenorio athletic article.

Would guess it's not hidden off books, but seperate salary from his playing salary and maybe not needed to be included in the mlspa earnings?

Would also guess these contracts require him to be in Toronto. Which is why we've not seen any real links from Europe yet.

[jloome]

Insigne's camp explicitly said his contract was worth significantly more than the MLSPA numbers indicated.

And if he was on 7 mill usd a year he'd be easy to shift, that's 21 mill usd over the next 3 seasons as a total outlay assuming we'd let him go for free if we wanted rid.

I wish he was. He's not.

"Insigne’s reps, meanwhile, were upset that the 2023 MLSPA salary release did not include the star’s marketing deal that adds a significant chunk to his earnings"

From the paul tenorio athletic article.

Would guess it's not hidden off books, but seperate salary from his playing salary and maybe not needed to be included in the mlspa earnings?

It's not hidden, though. He had an extra $7.5M last year. The contract length STILL has four years to go, so it was a six year deal, not a four year, and still has $30M remaining, not $21M. IT's literally two years longer than was quoted public, amounting to an extra $14M.

And what agents say publicly and reality are frequently divergent.

I don't think he would be easy to shift on $7M. No one in Europe, including Napoli, offered him more than $5M, and that was 18 months ago. No one wants to touch a 32 year old Insigne on $7M a year. He's not in demand at the kind of club -- like Juve -- that could afford to.

Anyway, agree to disagree dude as the verifiable information publicly available suggests nothing except that he has four years left, and $30M owed. MLS has a contracted duty of disclosure with the MLSPA, and can face drastic legal consequences for lying in salary outlays. The agents have no legal tether forcing honesty.

Perhaps they told their client based on what seems like massive contract balloon payments in years one and six that the extra money was coming from sponsors as part of selling him on the deal, for example. That sort of duplicity would not surprise me in the slightest; given that he has since fired them, perhaps it would also not surprise him.

Either way, we ain't selling that.

[leedsandTFC]

It's not hidden, though. He had an extra $7.5M last year. The contract length STILL has four years to go, so it was a six year deal, not a four year, and still has $30M remaining, not $21M. IT's literally two years longer than was quoted public, amounting to an extra $14M.

And what agents say publicly and reality are frequently divergent.

I don't think he would be easy to shift on $7M. No one in Europe, including Napoli, offered him more than $5M, and that was 18 months ago. No one wants to touch a 32 year old Insigne on $7M a year. He's not in demand at the kind of club -- like Juve -- that could afford to.

Anyway, agree to disagree dude as the verifiable information publicly available suggests nothing except that he has four years left, and $30M owed.

Either way, we ain't selling that.

Ok, well based on salaries in Europe and the interest from teams offering far more than 5 mill usd (more than 7 mill too) I think insigne at 7 mill would be a pretty easily sell with no transfer fee.

Let's say another 4 years at 7 mill usd on a free, 28 mill usd for the whole time.

His transfermarkt value is currently 13.3 mill, so getting him for free basically covers about half the contract in terms of value.

If someone paid full price for him at that number, the salary to get to 28 mill usd gross would only be 3.7 mill gross usd/ year.

That works out to 1.7 mill euros net per year, feasible easily for half or more of serie a, or la liga.

Anyways, this is just why I think he's on a lot more. We haven't had one rumour from even a semi credible source despite him clearly being unhappy. And he told us he was.

But we can agree to disagree.

I hope they announce mailula soon (trying to change topic).

[leedsandTFC]

Gressel to Columbus.

Should have been us, really.

[jloome]

Gressel to Columbus.

Should have been us, really.

Must be some kind of locker room cancer, though. Best player at DC, second best player at Atlanta, second best player at Vancouver....

And they all deal him. Not a great look.

[leedsandTFC]

Must be some kind of locker room cancer, though. Best player at DC, second best player at Atlanta, second best player at Vancouver....

And they all deal him. Not a great look.

Apparently not a west coast fan. Unfortunate for the caps.

[jloome]

Apparently not a west coast fan. Unfortunate for the caps.

I keep saying Insigne is unaffordable but I also keep forgetting about the Saudis.

I don’t think anyone else would touch his deal, but it’s paltry to them.

[Valdal]

I think its going to be hard to get rid of Insigine's 3.5 years left on his contract at $7.5 million per. But its all about fit, the team who is willing to budge on his salary demands and what Insigne wants. Hes a Toronto FC player no matter what. He isnt Berna nor do we treat him like Berna. Hes our star, our main attraction and marketing force for games. We should be building with him, not selling him...

The only way we sell him is if he wants out. When hes healthy and engaged and the only DP on the pitch without Berna, he does very well as does the rest of the team

[leedsandTFC]

I think its going to be hard to get rid of Insigine's 3.5 years left on his contract at $7.5 million per. But its all about fit, the team who is willing to budge on his salary demands and what Insigne wants. Hes a Toronto FC player no matter what. He isnt Berna nor do we treat him like Berna. Hes our star, our main attraction and marketing force for games. We should be building with him, not selling him...

The only way we sell him is if he wants out. When hes healthy and engaged and the only DP on the pitch without Berna, he does very well as does the rest of the team

this is true, i feel like we haven't done nearly enough to keep him healthy.

he has looked very good whenever hes played for the last few months, give him a better striker and he can be very effective (i dont feel that way with bernardeschi).

[jloome]

I think its going to be hard to get rid of Insigine's 3.5 years left on his contract at $7.5 million per. But its all about fit, the team who is willing to budge on his salary demands and what Insigne wants. Hes a Toronto FC player no matter what. He isnt Berna nor do we treat him like Berna. Hes our star, our main attraction and marketing force for games. We should be building with him, not selling him...

The only way we sell him is if he wants out. When hes healthy and engaged and the only DP on the pitch without Berna, he does very well as does the rest of the team

I generally agree.

He's struggled but he hasn't had much support. Problematically, a player of that caliber if unhappy can force something. My suspicion he's going is based on his new agents and that he's probably exasperated with management at this point.

I still think he owes fans more, based on his pedigree and salary. But it's not for lack of effort. The whole muscle injury thing, though? I mean, Dunfield's already said he's passed two scans.

[Valdal]

I generally agree.

He's struggled but he hasn't had much support. Problematically, a player of that caliber if unhappy can force something. My suspicion he's going is based on his new agents and that he's probably exasperated with management at this point.

I still think he owes fans more, based on his pedigree and salary. But it's not for lack of effort. The whole muscle injury thing, though? I mean, Dunfield's already said he's passed two scans.

See the agent thing threw me for a loop as well. But Michael Singh said on the "Toronto Till I Die" podcast, that Insigne signed with a new agent who is around and in MLS. It was mainly for sponsorship and also word wide reach as well.

I think with his groin, he wants to be careful. He knows one more knock on it and he may be out for now weeks, but months. That would hamper his earning power but also his transfer power into another team of his choosing

[Auzzy]

Somebody posted a very detailed analysis a while back, which showed that TFC's injury rate (measured as games lost) over the last 5 years was a bit over the league average, but not that dramatic.

There is a reason big teams in Europe have 25 name guys. Soccer players get hurt, a lot. We over invest dollars in veterans, players from “name” leagues, have done so forever. Our depth is never MLS ready.

The issue is roster construction.

I don't see why it can't be both. Averaging games lost over the squad kinda glosses over things. TFC often has lots of young and/or useless players. Plus players which might be OK but our managers don't seem to trust them and they don't play much. All those players don't get injured much. Then there's too much riding on a small number of players, many of them older, and no load management for them cause you gotta "win now" before the next season ticket renewal. So you get injuries with really negative impacts.

[Valdal]

jloome what other players are you hearing about? Feed my insane transfermarkt addiction please... give.. me..... names!!

[jloome]

jloome what other players are you hearing about? Feed my insane transfermarkt addiction please... give.. me..... names!!

Nada, zip. There were a couple of other African teams floating rumors to try and trigger interest but nothing that looks real.

But I don't have good contacts anymore dude, just occasional TFC chatter. I do get the sense they're more preoccupied with the head coach situation right now, but I could be entirely out to lunch.

[Valdal]

Nada, zip. There were a couple of other African teams floating rumors to try and trigger interest but nothing that looks real.

But I don't have good contacts anymore dude, just occasional TFC chatter. I do get the sense they're more preoccupied with the head coach situation right now, but I could be entirely out to lunch.

Tell me these African teams and names...

[Oldtimer]

Bernardeschi loan deal nearly done.

https://wakingthered.com/2023/07/20/...essing-report/

[Oldtimer]

Things like this defy belief. Bill Manning overseas the entire franchise with the care and attention to detail of me ordering a pizza from dominos.

Nobody did a deep dive as to why we have been ravaged with injuries until now despite it being a major issue for years. This is the obvious answer?

We just get half way out of one locker room hellscape and their next thought is to sign a guy with questions about his character?

I’m starting to think we should view TFC like a shitty reality tv series as opposed to a football club. The dysfunction is just bound to be more entertaining than the football.

The Dominos analogy is pretty good. There's some great artisanal pizza places in the GTA, but Dominos is good enough, quick enough and convenient for most people. In the same way, Manning goes for solutions that are quick and convenient while not taking the effort that's needed for a really good club because as long as he can sell tickets it's "good enough." Where the analogy breaks down is that Dominos makes a better pizza than Bill Manning makes a good club.

[OgtheDim]

That reminds me...does anybody actually the "scan this code to get a free slice of pizza tomorrow" thing they have around the stadium?

[CorrwgBach]

That reminds me...does anybody actually the "scan this code to get a free slice of pizza tomorrow" thing they have around the stadium?

I don’t even know where to find a pizza pizza anymore. And also I’m not installing an app to do the scan.

So that’s me, my son, seat mates and you who don’t do it

[ensco]

I went away for a while. Came back to check in.

So this is what it has come to. A distracted discussion about pizza …

See you for 2024 training camp I guess.

[reggie]

Total TFC
@Total_TFC
·
25m
Bologna CEO Claudio Fenucci on the Bernardeschi situation:


"The negotiation is between him and Toronto. If he can find an agreement to leave on loan, we'll be there, even if other Italian teams like him."

[Mr. Inbetween]

Bernardeschi loan deal nearly done.

https://wakingthered.com/2023/07/20/...essing-report/

My position is that for a host of reasons that may include, yet are also beyond the player type, their performances, discussion, the Fede and Lollo pitch project was essentially still born. I would have preferred the chance to have seen the impact of a proper striker and what a stable and tweaked mid under the supervision of a progressive mister would have added to their mix and the situation. Oh well, that aside, absolutely no way to any type of loan; a 1 year loan. That exposure is unnecessary. Obviously TFC gave Fede permission to engage clubs to foster a transfer. I am sure TFC would have communicated to him/his camp the expectations for such a transfer; maybe, likely, simply, no transfer fee but with no further obligation by TFC. Fede must come to personal terms without TFC's continued financial involvement in any way. Bologna really wants him? Take him. Complications for their operating philosophy? Transfer him to CFMTL, that club has the resources to absorb TFC's obligations and the ability to then loan him. Joey and Marco Di Vaio, then get to mitigate the cost and risk wholeheartedly between the two of those organizations.

[TFC/Everton]

So, if Berna leaves on loan, we don't actually open up a DP slot, right?

What a disaster this signing has been. I can't think of a more underperforming TFC player since Mista.

[Mr. Inbetween]

^

?

'Clubs may trade a Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player, remain responsible for some or all future out of pocket costs, and shed the Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player slot designation under the following limitations:

• Up to one Designated Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Up to one U22 Initiative Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Player may only be traded beginning in his second MLS season
• Roster Slot Designation (Designated Player or U22 Initiative) must be held by one of the two trading teams'

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/2023-...nd-regulations

[Ultra & Proud]

^

?

'Clubs may trade a Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player, remain responsible for some or all future out of pocket costs, and shed the Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player slot designation under the following limitations:

• Up to one Designated Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Up to one U22 Initiative Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Player may only be traded beginning in his second MLS season
• Roster Slot Designation (Designated Player or U22 Initiative) must be held by one of the two trading teams'

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/2023-...nd-regulations

I don't think any of this matter now because we have a half season left before they tear up all the rules and go more "normal".

Besides even if he does go on loan and we don't free the DP spot, we won't sign two this summer, probably not even one, and then the great reset happens.

[Valdal]

So, if Berna leaves on loan, we don't actually open up a DP slot, right?

What a disaster this signing has been. I can't think of a more underperforming TFC player since Mista.

Opens up a DP slot and the team getting the player for the loan agrees to pay a fee. Whatever is left we pay

[jloome]

I could be wrong, but I believe the reason this loan is possible is that his wage is half that reported. His $6.25M includes an annual guaranteed bonus of $3M that isn't part of his wage structure.

So Bologna would only be picking up half, or $3.12M, and MLSE would likely still be paying him the $3M.

Either way, we don't get DP spot relief as we have to leave a slot for him to return to. The only way to get his DP slot is to pay out the entire contract or have it paid in a trade.

So we better hope the rules changes or this is going to be a handicapping factor.

There is an inter-owner debate going on right now apparently about how to change the rules to allow more free spending.

One of the major issues is that teams they're negotiating with now have them over a barrel in situations like Fede, where a team wants roster space, to get rid of a player or make a roster compliant. Ibarra would be another good example.

They want him on Atlanta but have to settle for an inferior player despite him having played 17 games for them, because a loan to get rid of someone not working out expired without the option being taken.

[ag futbol]

I could be wrong, but I believe the reason this loan is possible is that his wage is half that reported. His $6.25M includes an annual guaranteed bonus of $3M that isn't part of his wage structure.

So Bologna would only be picking up half, or $3.12M, and MLSE would likely still be paying him the $3M.

Either way, we don't get DP spot relief as we have to leave a slot for him to return to. The only way to get his DP slot is to pay out the entire contract or have it paid in a trade.

So we better hope the rules changes or this is going to be a handicapping factor.

There is an inter-owner debate going on right now apparently about how to change the rules to allow more free spending.

One of the major issues is that teams they're negotiating with now have them over a barrel in situations like Fede, where a team wants roster space, to get rid of a player or make a roster compliant. Ibarra would be another good example.

They want him on Atlanta but have to settle for an inferior player despite him having played 17 games for them, because a loan to get rid of someone not working out expired without the option being taken.

I mean, in Ibarra’s case the solution is pretty simple: don’t allow teams to sign more u22 imitative players then there are spots, even if some of them are on loan.

They really just need to simplify things. They are creating a lot of administrative burden on teams and needless requirements by having all these buckets under which you can spend.

[jloome]

^

?

'Clubs may trade a Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player, remain responsible for some or all future out of pocket costs, and shed the Designated Player or U22 Initiative Player slot designation under the following limitations:

• Up to one Designated Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Up to one U22 Initiative Player traded per year (two total “active” at any given time)
• Player may only be traded beginning in his second MLS season
• Roster Slot Designation (Designated Player or U22 Initiative) must be held by one of the two trading teams'

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/2023-...nd-regulations

Those are trades, not loans, and that refers to inter MLS, which is why the last line says one of the two trading teams must hold the player's DP slot. I'm not saying the citation is wrong, just unclear.

As Bologna can't "hold a DP spot", it would suggest we have to do so.

Didn't Ibarra have to move because he was an U22 initiative, and the guy coming back was an u22 DP?

Also, I recall Nashville didn't get cap relief from Ake Lobe when they sent him back to Mexico on loan. But that may have been just in year one, maybe they got it this year (or just bought him out.)

What MLSE might do is loan him now, then sell him to Bologna in the offseason for a token sum after paying out his remaining bonuses, giving them a free slot and a remaining buy out. Of course, that means the club eats at least $6M in extra bonus money.

Given the window ends in 10 days I'm surprised we haven't used the mid-season Diomande yet.

[SenorDingDong]

I could be wrong, but I believe the reason this loan is possible is that his wage is half that reported. His $6.25M includes an annual guaranteed bonus of $3M that isn't part of his wage structure.

So Bologna would only be picking up half, or $3.12M, and MLSE would likely still be paying him the $3M.

Either way, we don't get DP spot relief as we have to leave a slot for him to return to. The only way to get his DP slot is to pay out the entire contract or have it paid in a trade.

So we better hope the rules changes or this is going to be a handicapping factor.

There is an inter-owner debate going on right now apparently about how to change the rules to allow more free spending.

One of the major issues is that teams they're negotiating with now have them over a barrel in situations like Fede, where a team wants roster space, to get rid of a player or make a roster compliant. Ibarra would be another good example.

They want him on Atlanta but have to settle for an inferior player despite him having played 17 games for them, because a loan to get rid of someone not working out expired without the option being taken.

It makes zero sense for us to loan him.

Either go completely or stay. Probably why this hasn't progressed.