Cap constraint is the reason why Seattle is loaning out its DP Montero

http://seattletimes.com/html/soundersfcblog/2020064852_sounders_gm_we_would_only_move.html

Good news then. The Sounders will need to offload more talents to meet the cap.

Currently, 2 MLS teams have 3 DPs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Designated_Player_Rule

2010 Fredy Montero COL Seattle Sounders FC $756,000
2012 Mauro Rosales ARG Seattle Sounders FC $225,000
2012 Christian Tiffert GER Seattle Sounders FC $625,000



2011 Eric Hassli FRA Toronto FC $790,000
2011 Torsten Frings GER Toronto FC $2,413,667
2011 Danny Koevermans NED Toronto FC $1,563,323

Aren't they also loaning him out so that they can show off his skills and possibly sell him before his contract is up and they lose him without getting anything?

Would they loan out 1 of their best players if they are not under cap constraints?

As for showing off his skills, why can't he do that in MLS instead of the Columbia League? It's not like MLS doesn't have a proven track of records.

Clint Dempsey, Tim Howard, Tim Ream, Brian McBride, Jozy Altidore, Michael Bradley, Ryan Nelsen, Maurice Edu etc...

Cap constraints and moving out talents to make room for the cap has been part of MLS since day 1. Look at RSL.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...th-eight-in-major-roster-shake-up.html?pg=all

the cap is way too low for MLS to be a serious and/or competitive league ... everybody knows this. it is a joke that MLS teams have to blow up their teams every 3 years because the cap doesn't keep up with inflation or yearly salary increases.

It (the centrally-controlled "tight" budget constraints) is the joke that the owners continually allow (or have) to tell themselves to keep the league up and running.

In many ways MLS is a serious and competitive league.

And yes, a larger per-team budget and or more budget exemptions could help to make MLS rosters better and the league as a whole even more "serious and competitive (beyond its borders)."

Accepting that as a generalization, the league and individual owners need to ask themselves a cost benefit question. If the cap goes up by X dollars, will my revenue go up by X+ dollars? Some teams now are UNDER the cap, so it's not cap that constrains them, it's the economic calculus.

Agreed. And the league/owners likely are indeed asking themselves that cost-benefit question, or a version of it, quite regularly as they run their business(es).

And "the economic calculus" could/will be changing with the next round of TV/media partnership deals and/or CBA for MLS.

To the first question, possibly.

But he isn't going to just play in the Colombian league. He is going to play in Copa Libertadores against Some of the best teams in South America and Mexico.

And if the Sounders weren't receiving offers at the level where they value Montero, maybe they need to try something a little different to raise that value.

I also think the Sounders have all the pieces to replace Montero's production within the team already. Most notably with Zakuani becoming healthy again and Mario Martinez being able to be here for most of the year. He will be missing time due to call ups to Honduras. Throw in Tiffert being here from the start of the season. I think things will be just fine.

I also suspect the Sounders will be signing another DP. And if Montero comes back for 2014 it won't matter because Rosales will be gone then anyways.

i am not talking economic calculus. i am talking MLS teams top to bottom being clearly superiour to non-Mexican CONCACAF teams and i am talking MLS being on par with LigaMX.

MLS needs to be able to resign quality americans for 500-750K without making them DPs ... or even foreign gems for that matter. the turnover/roster churn in MLS is way to high. sure some of it is recycling sub 100K guys who probably have no business in the league anyway (lots of them american journeyman) but every year each team probably loses one really good player because they can't pay him what he is worth in world soccer because of the cap.

i have no problem with the league losing Geoff Camerons or Roger Espinozas to EPL teams ... I have a problem with MLS losing guys like Gabriel Gomez or guys to Scandanavian/Benelux/Etc leagues. a guy like Mix Diskerud should be able to come and play in MLS or Conor O'Brien or Steve Clark. No quality american should be playing in Denmark or Norway etc ... they should be playing in MLS for 250-500K replacing the 3-5 100Kish americans on every roster who have no business in an MLS of LigaMX quality.

along with a larger cap the league needs less strict domestic player rules. 8 per team is fine to develop the top level MNT pool talent, especially if the off budget or "reserves" roster (in a new integrated USLPro/MLS Reserves league) has mostly U24 american talent. i'd like to see them move to a 25 man roster with 8 "domestics" (trained/played at least 3 years as a youth/amateur/pro in North America before the age of 22) and a cap of at least 5M (3DPs with $500K cap hit, max salary 500K). with those sort of roster rules you wouldn't have the top ambitious teams like Seattle or RSL having to blow up their team every 3 years because of a too restrictive cap.

For someone who opens with that line, your post that follows sure does seem to concentrate a whole lot on the economic calculus and realities for MLS (domestically, regionally and globally) -- and how you'd like to change/"improve" those conditions and approaches.

I don't care about the USMNT. I mean, I enjoy their games but I don't think MLS has to do anything to appease the USSF until the USSF starts adding to the salary pool.

the economic calculus of the owners and profit/loss is not my concern (except in that I don't want MLS to go all NASL Cosmos and go entirely bankrupt). even if MLS spent double on the salary cap the league wouldn't be in danger of folding, right now they are spending between 25-33% of revenue on wages which is pathetic.

my only concern is that MLS spend enough money to get and retain the best talent possible, that it not pander to being an American Soccer Employment Agency (ie no more guys in MLS like Tyson Wahl just because they are dirt cheap), and that MLS spend enough money and allow enough foreign talent to utilize that more money so that MLS squads have quality depth from 1-25 and are competitive with LigaMX which is impossible under a cap of $3M even with 3 DPs (or some might say especially with 3 DPs).

Again, your "concerns" are exactly (and need to be couched) within the "economic calculus of the owners and profit/loss."

I am not at all certain where you are getting your data (or if it is at all accurate) to make claims such as "even if MLS spent double on the salary cap the league wouldn't be in danger of folding" and "right now they are spending between 25-33% of revenue on wages" and I therefore can't agree with your analytical statements that follow from there.

And the league is still going through a few "start-up" and infrastructure costs at this point in its history, beyond the player wages items.

The cap, as it currently stands, is totally at odds with the league's "stated goal" of winning the CCL and appearing in the CWC. As the owners' mouthpiece, Garber shouldn't even mention it anymore, because it just sounds absurd.

RSL's near-miss, assisted by a kind draw though it was, is going to look like the lunar landing in a few years--an event from the past that is beyond our economic capabilities or willingness in the present.

Furthermore, the DP purchases made by some teams are ass-backward.

Instead of paying an aging/injured Torsten Frings $2.5M a year and getting him on a free transfer, BUY a South American player in his prime for $1.5M and pay him $1M a year the way the Mexican clubs do. Same expenditure, younger legs, more potential for longer tenure at the club, possible sell-on.

No issue with MLS set-up, it keeps teams competitive year after year --- the objective of the model is two-fold, keep cost manageable and to keep teams within parity. This let MLS build a growing domestic league stadiums, academies for domestic talent, competitive environment, overseas visibility to players and general managers.

Why the hell do you think the want a viable reserve/div2/loan system for MLS? It's sooo cheap. Team develop talent (i.e.: kids living at home), private owners play them, clubs pay staff (outside of MLS wages). This is why MLS opened up to academies (or better put keeping academy players).

MLS thinks that this combination AT THIS POINT in time will keep cost down and keep the league competitive - while improving domestic talent.

Cap will increase - when they can't provide compete on basic salary for the weakest domestic players. Otherwise, adding salary at this point is just a loss on MLS spreadsheet.

the % of Revenue on Salary calculation comes from A. a Sports Money program from early 2011 (ie data from 2010 season) that showed the average revenue per club in MLS adjusted for 2012 (ie considering attendance increases and new clubs since 2010) plus the published national TV money and B. the total compensation of roughly 90M from the MLSPA salary publication. the range is due to not 100% knowing the exact total league revenue only being able to estimate from what data has been published. but it is safe to say that it is well less than 33% and maybe even as low as 25%.

my contention that MLS could double the cap and not fold is from A. according to the same SportsMoney program the average team revenue was 2M higher than the average team expenditures so overall it seems the average team could handle 2M of the 3M needed to double the cap and still break even and B. an extra 1M in losses per year per team wouldn't put the league out of business given the level of losses the league sustained prior to now. and of course this also doesn't take into account any large increase in revenues like a new TV contract which would make doubling the cap to $6M even easier without risking league folding.

Here is the MLS record against non-Mexican CONCACAF teams in the last few years of CCL play:

2012-2013 (to date): 13 wins, 4 draws, 1 loss
2011-2012: 14 wins, 3 draws, 5 losses
2010-2011: 11 wins, 2 draws, 7 losses

Doesn't that already seem like a clear, and growing, superiority over non-Mexican CONCACAF teams? How much better do you want the MLS teams to have done in the current CCL?

I really think you're overstating the number of MLS-quality Americans playing in the Scandinavian leagues. Most of the 30-odd Americans playing in the Scando leagues are MLS draftees and washouts, or Scandinavian kids who happen to have an American passport. Maybe ten of them, tops, fit this narrative everyone seems to have of young kids who skipped the draft for a big payday.

Bringing back Alejandro Bedoya, Sean Cunningham, Charlie Davies, Josh Gatt, Clarence Goodson, Patrick Hopkins, Baggio Husidic, Kyle Luetkehans, Shawn Nicklaw, and Conor O'Brien is not going to revolutionize MLS. There are a few good players on that list--but bringing them back is not going to make a significant impact on league quality. And that's it; that's the sum total of "promising American kids who skipped MLS to sign in Scandinavia."

Well, of course you would. They'd just blow up their $5 million roster instead of their $4 million roster, like they do now.

Also, it seems very likely that--ignoring the clear illegality of your "domestic" designation--increasing the number of international slots from eight to 17, which is essentially what you're proposing, would result in more American players skipping MLS for Scandinavia, not fewer. Reducing labor demand reduces wages, and what you're proposing is to reduce the labor demand for American domestic players.

No real news here.

Of course cap constraints are involved in the Sounders decision to loan out Montero.

It's the same reason that FC Dallas dropped Kevin Hartman, and nobody has picked him up.

The Galaxy have been so good over the last couple of years, because they have some capologists over there that get it right. They manage to get the right mix of highly priced DPs/veterans and cheap homegrown/drafted players.

THe consistently good clubs like the Dynamo have a "next man up"philosophy. If they lose a Stuart Holden and Geoff Cameron because they can't compete with the wages being offered in Europe, they replace the players in an intelligent way. They draft well, they "train up" the players, and they keep progressing...................

The cap is just a fact of life in this league. Of course it prevents MLS from competing effectively with the major leagues in this hemisphere. Enough of the owners are interested in reigning in the spending that it's not going to be raised significantly over the next few years. Every time the CBA is close to expiring, there are posters here that think several "rogue" owners will break away from the pack and demand larger caps and more free agency.................and what we've learned is that is completely false. The owners continue to be unified in favor of single entity with caps on spending.

The goal of MLS isn't to "not fold", it's to make money. It's really easy to spend other people's money.

you mis-read my statement. i said MLS teams TOP TO BOTTOM being clearly superiour to ALL non-Mexican CONCACAF teams .. as in even lowly NER should be clearly superiour to the best Honduran team. that is not the case right now. sure our top 4 teams are better than non-mexican CONCACAF teams but that isn't the level the MLS should aspire to.

i would absolutely rather have Conor O'Brien in MLS at 500K (if necessary) than that 90K american journeyman on every roster. that makes the team better. same goes for Mix Diskerud or Terence Boyd or any dozens of other players playing in non-elite leagues abroad. at least enough for 1-2 players per MLS team ... americans who would be paid more and replace the likes of Nathan Sturgis or Ty Harden or Tom Heineman. it isn't just about paying players more it is about paying BETTER players MORE. and make no mistake there are 3-5 american journeyman on EVERY MLS team that could be replaced by either A. a better american playing in non-elite leagues/clubs abroad or B. a better foreign player if the team had more money to pay them more.

A. the current cap is not even $3M nor $4M ... that is a huge difference (33% actually).

B. sure even if the cap is $5-6M you'd still have teams going right up to the cap ... the difference is instead of having to not re-sign a Gabriel Gomez for $500K and instead have to go with some 100K scrub american journeyman you'd have much more flexibility and you'd have less roster churn with the higher cap and even when you got priced out of the market for a guy your ability to replace them with equivalent quality would be higher.

Really? Then how do you explain the fact that MLS teams have been posting consistently better records every year of the CCL in its current format?

actually the goal of MLS is to be a "top league in the world by 2022". never heard them say their goal was profits first and foremost.

which is why i am pointing out the hypocrisy. you are right of course, their main goal is PROFITS even tho they never come right out and say it and this lip service nonsense about "top league" is just that nonsense. nobody who is serious about being a top anything spends only 33% of revenues on wages.

because the cap has gone up by over 1M over the past 4 years (including the new CBA) and the "dirt cheap talent" from the college draft and from HGP is getting moderately better as the result of the USSFDA and MLS academies pumping better talent into the college system (and sometimes into their own first teams).

but has MLS won it yet? oh, no they haven't ... when push comes to shove the LigaMX teams pull out their biggest guns and soundly beat MLS competition when they need to.

given how well MLS does now compared to LigaMX teams given the huge salary disparity I don't expect MLS will even need to equal the LigaMX teams salary per team to be equal to them ... but they need to spend more than they do now. a 2 to 1 disparity and I think MLS would be toe to toe with LigaMX ... but right now the disparity is more 3 or 4 to 1. and much of the MLS salary is not in quality depth across all 1-20 players but concentrated in 1-3 players per team which might help in one off games but doesn't really raise the overall top to bottom quality of play in the league.

No one forced them to sign Christian Tiffert!

p.s. I do agree in principle though... the cap needs to grow more quickly. at least 10% a year for a while rather than whatever low % it has been growing recently. Or if they make DPs count a little bit less against the cap that would work too.

At some level, increasing the cap would just lead SOME teams to just make bigger and more mistakes.