Ideas for MLS League Design [Superthread] III

So, "no" on the reasonable enough thing? Good to know.

 

We're talking about bringing players into this League from other leagues, and you give me a document that doesn't explain, for instance, how players are brought in from other leagues

 

There is plenty there about the methods for bringing players in from other leagues. The point that you're missing is that paying transfer fees to domestic minor-league clubs is not one of them.

 

Yes, there is.

"Allocation money does not count against a club’s salary budget and can be used:

• To sign players new to MLS (that is, a player who did not play in MLS during the previous season)."

That document doesn't have any specific mention of transfer fees to buy players from Mexican clubs or the Bundesliga or the Danish 2nd division, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

So you mean to tell me that you could find no examples of rules that specifically allowed it, so it must not happen?

Something about "absensce of evidence" comes to mind

 

No, but the fact that players have been bought from those leagues and not the NASL or USL-Pro strongly suggests it, if you care to look honestly at it.

 

The correct spelling, among other things.

Okay, I'm done here. You guys think what you want, as if that matters.

 

Or, it supposes that {NA/U}SL players suck. Occam's Razor this and tell me which is more likely

 

Girls, girls, you're both pretty. You can both go to the prom.

 

I don't know that that's a fact. I very much doubt it is a "stated policy" as you claim. If it's a stated policy it should be stated somewhere.

 

Or they should call it something else.

 

Since 2000 and the transfer disaster of Luis Hernandez, MLS has transfered very few players. Here are the ones I know about...
Castillo
Caragilo
Kandji
Fernandez
Plata
Keane
Chara

So are you saying all of the available players in the world suck because MLS hasn't bought many? Certainly transferring a few players league-wide over 12 seasons shows that MLS is not very interested in transfers and its not just because there aren't good players on the market. They will do it on rare occasions, but I'd say something like 98-99% of players come in at no cost to the league, certainly that number would be much much lower in any other top 1st division. So I don't think the issue is just that D2 players suck, I think that MLS isn't really interested in transfers because they can obtain so many players for free. The DP rule has changed that up a bit and introduced some transfer fees rolled into salary contracts, but other than that MLS just isn't that interested at this point. Not as long as NCAA is doing the development for free and handing them players without fees.

 

But if the policy is "we seldom transfer", than there is no inherent issue with the way we transfer D>1 players.

 

Most of the really good available players in the world haven't been bought by MLS because MLS can't afford them, realistically. But domestically, and in the lower divisions (which is how this particular discussion started), they can afford them but either choose not to buy them or to just wait until they're available for free. In the case of a Kandji, Atlanta had an asset that they could have sold to a club in many other countries, so MLS apparently had to act. But not a lot of lower-division players have that convergence of ability and timing working to their advantages.

MLS will pay for something if it has to. They did lay out a bunch of cash at startup, I forget how much, but Sunil (I think) testified to it at trial. Even in 1995-1996 dollars, it was substantial.

 

From the trial way back when:

page 96

1 Q And so does that -- we've heard some discussion in this
2 case about transfer fees.
3 Is that another way of saying the cost of getting
4 the player to come play for MLS?
5 A Transfer fees would be one of the costs in player
6 acquisition. It could also about signing bonus, could, in
7 some cases, be agent fees, but those would be -- the two big
8 once would be signing bonuses for players and transfer fees.
9 Q You mentioned agent fees.
10 What are those?
11 A In certain cases, there might be an intermediary who
12 brings us, MLS, together with an international club, and
13 they get a fee, either a percentage or flat fee for helping
14 bring that transaction together.
15 Q Now, with respect to transfer fees, can you explain to
16 us how that works as far as the player coming to play for
17 MLS?
18 A If a player is under contract to another team and we
19 have some interest in them or he has an interest in coming
20
21 to the league, or his club has an interest in coming, a
22 couple of different things would have to happen, one of
23 which is we'd have to agree on essentially a fee for that
24 player being released from his contract.
25 Q You say "we."

page 97

1 Who is the "we"?
2 A MLS.
3 Q MLS would have to agree with whom?
4 A Would have to have two separate agreements. One is with
5 his current club to release him from his obligations to that
6 club, and also an agreement with the player.
7 Q If the player didn't want to transfer, could MLS compel
8 him to to be transferred from another club?
9 A Absolutely not.
10 Q Why would the player agree to the transfer?
11 MR. KESSLER: Objection, your Honor.
12 THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer it.
13 A A player would want to play in MLS would agree because
14 they it was in their best interest to do so, whether it was
15 financial or anything else.
16 They would be changing jobs.
17 Q And that might be to the player's advantage to change
18 jobs?
19 A I don't think any player would do it unless it was to
20 his advantage and in his best interest to do so.
21 Q
22 Q So when you paid paid a transfer fee to a player's
23 former club, was there a you in contract thule arrangement
24 entered into between MLS and the player?
25 A We had to have a KR*S contractual arrangement, sure.

page 98

1 Q When you say "other clubs," are you referring to MLS
2 clubs, US clubs or foreign clubs?
3 A We're referring to foreign clubs, and, in some cases,
4 with US clubs, but it was primarily international clubs
5 since the top players were playing abroad.
6 Q Now, are there any other kinds of transfer fees that are
7 referred to in the soccer world other than the transfer fees
8 you've just referred to?
9 A Some people use the terminology "transfer fees" to tribe
10 payments for what I view and what FIFA views as compensation
11 for training and development, which is different than in the
12 situation we just outlined.
13 Q When would there be an occurrence when there would be a
14 payment for compensation and development, as distinct from a
15 payment to release a player from his existing contractual
16 obligations?
17 A There are clubs and leagues in the world that have a
18 system where even after a player is finished with his
19 contract, the easiest way to think of it is with a young
20 player, when you think of that training and development, if
21 they've educated, if you will, or trained the player, a new
22 club has to pay some form of money or compensation to the
23 club that had that player under contract.
24 Q Is MLS.
25 Q Has MLS ever paid such a fee?

--------------------------------



8 How many players played in MLS during that first
9 three-year period?
10 Over 400, is that correct?
11 A Over 300. It may be over 400.
12 Q Over 400.
13 Okay. And you'd agree with me that seven out of
14 400 would be, fair to characterize, as a small amount?
15 A It's a small percentage.
16 Q Okay.
17 Now, with respect to the foreign players you spoke
18 about, people like Mr. Valderrama, who came in, all the
19 foreign players that MLS has brought in that you spoke about
20 on this list, non-American citizens, et cetera, they all
21 came in when they were already under contract to a foreign
22 club, and you paid a transfer fee to that foreign club,
23 right?
24 You didn't sign any of them as free agents after
25 their contracts expired, right?

2181
- GULATI -

1 A That's not correct.
2 Q Didn't MLS have a policy that it was not going to sign
3 any out-of-contract foreign players because it wouldn't pay
4 a transfer fee?
5 You don't recall that?
6 A No, I recall it very well. You're mischaracterizing the
7 statement.
8 MLS had a policy that it would not pay transfer
9 fees to clubs. We signed players that were free agents.
10 Q Okay.
11 Isn't it true -- name a foreign-league player who
12 you signed after his contract expired who was one of the
13 ones on this list you mentioned.
14 A Roberto Donadoni.
15 Q When did his contract expire?
16 A He was released by AC Milan.
17 Q They didn't want him?
18 A They released him from his contract to play in the
19 league, so suppose they terminated his contract.
20 Q You didn't pay a transfer fee for Mr. Donadoni?
21 A We did not.

2186

6 It's correct, isn't it, Mr. Gulati, that for the
7 players who played in Division I soccer overseas, foreign
8 nationals who played oversees in Division I soccer,
9 immediately before they came to MLS, that except maybe for
10 two or three players, one of whom was Mr. Donadoni, that MLS
11 paid a transfer fee because that player was still under
12 contract?
13 A The players that were under contract were not released.
14 We had to pay transfer fees. That's accurate.
15 Q My point is, there's only two or three players who fit
16 into the category of Division I foreign nationals who came
17 to MLS directly after playing out their contract overseas,
18 after it was expired?
19 A It's some subset of the group we just went through. I
20 don't know that it's two or three. If there's only
21 whatever, a dozen or 15 names, pretty quickly go through
22 those.
23 Q Right.
I still can't find where he testified how much they had to pay to get the US guys back, but I think I have it somewhere.

 

MLS should change it´s name to something like: Superligue/Superliga, add a rich company to sponsor to it...
Coca Cola, Google, BBVA compass, Citi, JP Morgan, etc + Superligue/Superliga

Then invite a mexican team from the north to participate (Santos, Juarez, Tijuana) all of them have money (don´t ask me where they get it) and experience in soccer, Mexico is a giant in the area, a mexican team will boost your league.
I would form a league with 20 teams in 2 zones: east and west, 15 US teams, 3 Canadian teams, 1 Mexican team, 1 Caribbean team (Puerto rico, American virgin islands) this could be filled with caribean and centroamerican stars from jamaica, trinidad and tobago, haiti, panama, honduras and a couple of american players.

West conference
Vancouver (Canada)*
Seattle Sounders
San Jose
ChivasUSA
LA Galaxy
Salt Lake->change to Mexican team (Juarez, Tijuana) (Mexico)*
Colorado Rapids
FC Dallas
Portland/Kansas?
Houston Dynamo

East Conference
NY Cosmos?
Chicago Fire
Columbus Crew
DC United
Phily Union
Red bulls NY
New England Rev.
Toronto FC (Canada)*
Impact de Montreal (Canada)*
Caribbean team (Bahamas, Puerto rico, Virgin islands) CARIBBEAN*

Sell Television rights from some teams like Cosmos, chivasusa, RBNY to mexican network, china, central america, to get more money.
Designated players should be soccer stars between 17-31 years max. (neymar, pato, messi, hazard, dzeko, tevez, forlán)
DP should never be players of low level (Landín (sucks), albanian or macedonian players branko boskovic (c´mon Montenegro?) shalrie joseph form granada? are you serious?

 

ummm....what?

1. You want a league sponsor and a name change. OK, fine if the league sponsor pays a lot of cash, I'm on board. I don't know why you need a name change but whatever.

2. You want to get rid of RSL to put a team in Juarez or Tijuana. First, why do you want to get rid of one of our more successful clubs? Why do you think Mexico is going to let us expand south of the border? And since Tijuana already has a team, that means we would need to expand to Juarez. Which not only just had a team fail, but also has one of the highest murder rates on the planet. It is a war zone, and you want MLS to expand there? We have so many markets not on your list that are bigger than Juarez, why would we ever even consider them?

3. Caribbean team...OK, well my family is actually from VI and I have family from PR, so while for me that would be pretty amazing, but how on earth can you throw VI on an expansion list? There are 3 islands with about 50k each! Bahamas is a bunch of islands and only have about 500k. Way way too small. San Juan could work in theory if soccer was the #1 sport, but it isn't. The Islanders are doing OK, but baseball and basketball are both far more popular on the island. It just wouldn't work.

4. You want to sell international TV rights, well I'm sure MLS want to as well. The issue is finding a buyer.

5. DPs should be stars like neymar, pato, messi, hazard...HA! Those guys are going to leave the chance of playing at the biggest clubs in the world, in countries where soccer is #1, and they can play in the biggest competitions in the world, to come to MLS because why? Neymar is the only one not in Europe yet, but he'll be there soon enough. MLS would love those guys, but they don't want to come here in their prime. Do the best NBA players in their prime want to go play in China and leave the NBA where they can make lots of money, be superstars, and play around the best in the world?

6. DPs should never be of 'low level'. I agree DPs should be good players, but I don't see why the country of origin makes a difference. Joesph was one of the best players in the league for a long time.

 

I have an idea too.



My idea is better.

 

This is still the future for MLS….

REGIONAL PHASE
Pacific
1. LA Galaxy
2.SeattleSounders
3.VancouverWhitecaps
-
4.San JoseEarthquakes
5.PortlandTimbers
6. CD Chivas

Alternatives: Chivas may move toSan Diego,San Francisco, orRiverside

Heartland
1. SportingKansas City
2.RealSaltLake
3.ColoradoRapids
-
4.Phoenix*
5.Las Vegas*
6.Saint Louis*

Alternatives:Tulsa,OklahomaCity,Omaha, orEl Paso

Midwest
1.ColumbusCrew
2.ChicagoFire
3.TorontoFC
-
4.Minnesota*
5.Milwaukee*
6.Detroit*

Alternatives:Cleveland,Cincinnati,Dayton,Louisville,Indianapolis,Pittsburgh, orOttawa

North
1. DC United
2.PhiladelphiaUnion
3.New YorkRed Bulls
-
4.MontrealImpact
5.New EnglandRevolution
6.New York City*

Alternatives:Hartford,Rochester,Buffalo,Syracuse, orBaltimore

South
1. FC Dallas
2.HoustonDynamo
3.Atlanta*
-
4.Raleigh*
5.Orlando*
6.San Antonio*

Alternatives:Austin,Memphis,Charlotte,Tampa, Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Birmingham, Puerto Rico, Virginia Beach, Richmond, Knoxville, or New Orleans

Notes:
10 home/away games
top half promoted to premier
bottom half selected for classic

NATIONAL PHASE
Premier-Top 15
Classic-Bottom 15

Notes:
28 home/away games

PLAY-OFF PHASE
MLS Premier #1-7 advance
MLS Classic Champion advances as wild card.
3 games max. (in total=41 max total games)

Quarter-Finals
A. MLS-C #1 @ MLS-P #1
B. MLS-P #5 @ MLS-P #4

C. MLS-P #7 @ MLS-P #2
D. MLS-P #6 @ MLS-P#3

Semi-Finals
1. B @ A
2. D @ C

Final
1 v 2 @ top ranked team in national phase

Benefits of this system:
-More teams=more fans=better profits
-Increases national footprint.
-Promotes rivalries + decreases travel.
-Makes games more competitive as teams cannot lose focus.
-Fans get the excitement of a pro/rel system but with the American twist that teams get a clean slate each season....And under my suggestion, teams in the MLS Classic will still have a chance for a wild card spot in the play-offs.
-Reasonable # of games.

 

Sorry, but that soooo isn't the future of the MLS.

 

Not sure if this idea has been floated.
Once MLS gets a 20th team, merge with NASL so that NASL teams fall under the single-entity (still 2nd division). Then, work towards expanding NASL to 16-18 teams (they already have cities that want MLS teams like Minneapolis, Atlanta, Tampa, Ft. Lauderdale, Ottawa, etc. Expand to places like Charlotte, Phoenix, Vegas, San Diego, St. Louis, Orlando, etc).

Build up NASL infrastructure (this will take some time) so that stadiums are at least 10K in seating, easily expandable over an offseason to say, 13-15K, with the ability to expand over some time to 20K. Could also put money into marketing the events to attract bigger crowds.

Once NASL has a good number of teams and good infrastructure, introduce promotion-relegation. I know there will have to still be changes to the single-entity rules, but if that can be hammered out, this could work. Have bottom 2 MLS teams relegated to NASL, and have top NASL team promoted, with the next 4 teams in a playoff for the second promotion spot.

Keep playoffs to determine MLS Cup Champion, but limit it to Top 8. 10-team conferences, 4 from each conference. Give CCL group stage entry to MLS Cup champion and Supporter's Shield winner, and CCL play-in entry to US Open Cup winner and Supporter's Shield runner-up. If a team has two titles (i.e. MLS Cup and Supporter's Shield), spot goes to MLS Cup runner-up. If there are still only 3 spots filled, then go down Supporter's Shield rankings.

Also, introduce a 3-week summer break. The summer break would coincide with international tournaments (World Cup, Gold Cup, Euros) and qualifiers. Teams with players on national teams would then minimize the time they have without their stars. Half the teams would have their stars back after the break (maybe miss 1 or 2 games for rest or leaving early for camp). Teams whose players make knockout rounds would miss a bit more, but the numbers would fall as the tournaments went on. Besides, having a Cup winner come back would be a great marketing tool for a team.

Interested in hearing ya'lls thoughts...

 

An alternative to my 30-team league: a 27 team league, split into 3 divisions of 9 teams. Playing each team in-division 2x + each team outside of the division once = 16 + 18 = 34 regular season games. In the words of Shep Messing, "whoooooooa." That's exactly how many games we have now.

With 10 teams (10 out of 27 is a good number), division winners + 7 wild cards or top 2 + 4 wild cards would make the playoffs (I prefer the first option; it is a national league despite having a regional feel under this format and should be treated as such). The seeding could be a straight 1-10 or something like the NBA/NHL, giving priority to the division champions. Once again, I prefer the NBA format, which wouldn't give the top 3 seeds to division champions, but guarantee them a top 5 seed.

So just like that, we have semi-blanaced 34-game formats for 24 teams and for 27 teams. And while 27 is a weird number of teams, the 3 division format is something that could work long term.

 

it's not only a cornerstone of revenue but it's also a way to develop better soccer players which would increase our talent pool for the national side.

One of the reasons our lower leagues are so unstable is because MLS doesn't act like a traditional D1. Like you said, everywhere else in the world D1 purchase players from lower divisions.

So what's the reason for MLS not doing this?

And what to make of the sinister ploy where MLS teams can put a "discovery claim" on a player that is out of contract from a lower division team, and by doing so somehow own the rights to that player (if he ever wishes to play in the MLS), without the consent of that player.

 

you lost me at single-entity. MLS cannot prevent free agency forever. There's no reason for MLS to have its Stalin-esque grip on every D1 team. Sooner or later we're going to have to see a real proper league.

as far as pro/rel its up to USSF not MLS. I would love to see it but its going to take awhile.

It's been shown how it can work. You simply have a trigger where once D2 teams meet the standards, for example 3/4 of them have SSS, then it would trigger pro/rel. If they never meet them then it doesn't trigger pro/rel. This is the only argument that puts to rest the argument that pro/rel wouldn't work. If it wouldn't work then the naysayers have nothing to worry about.

Honestly though I don't think MLS LLC is going to change their ways anytime soon. We're much more likely to see a rival league in the next 10 years that is structured properly and doesn't offend the masses than see MLS LLC stop doing terrible things to the beautiful game.

 

Really? There are a group of investors out there willing to spend $3 billion or so to get a rival league up and running?