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

[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!..

[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

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.

[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.

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...