Modified UEFA Financial Fair Play + Revenue sharing

Potowmack said it. Private Companies can structure shareholder requirements and provisions however the blue hell they want. It's actually NOTHING like Apple, at all other than the fact that there are multiple "holders" ....

 

You're talking about something entirely different than changing a CBA. You're talking about the very structure of the business. I'm 100% sure that if 26 NHL teams wanted to start playing volleyball, the other 4 could stop them.

 

Ice volleyball, just what the winter Olympics need.

 

Hey, you get some of those girls in those shorts with the ice-gripping shoes the curlers wear. Put a little snow down....NO! I will not go down this road again!

 

Still haven't recovered all the pictures from the first time eh ?

 

The reason the EPL is not analagous to the NHL or MLS is simply because there are organizations that EPL needs to please. They need the FA to sanction them as D1, they need UEFA to agree (for CL slots). If financial fair play were to ever come to England, it will not grow from within, but from without.

That would, likely, never happen to the NHL or MLS

 

Well, the MLS needs to "please" the USSF doesn't it ? I mean for sanctioning as D1, for the CL slots from the SS and MLS Cup ....

 

I think MLS has a far greater chance of succeeding if barred from the CCL and USOC than the EPL has if they can't play in the FA Cup, Community Shield, Champions League, or UEFA Cup

 

I agree with that ...

... but lose that D1 sanctioning (not happening, but you know what I mean).

 

I doubt USSF would ever say no to MLS. Certainly, I doubt USSF would really care how MLS structured its internal finances. CONCACAF might be more meddlesome, though they haven't shown all that much interest in the inner workings of leagues.

 

See the post above yours. I agree, however there is (technicality degree of seriousness it might be at this juncture in time) an entity that the league must "please."

 

As long as CONCACAF still gets 4 USA/Mexico games a year; as long as they keep taking our money and building golden palaces to themselves in shitbag little islands, then no one is going to care one way or the other

 

It doesn't matter what any other entity requires for voting percentages to make organizational changes. MLS is a private company with its own set of internal bylaws. Perhaps the owners all agreed that certain organizational changes would be decided by a clairvoyant octopus, while other lesser decisions would be made by the reigning champion of the MLS Board of Governors NCAA March madness bracket challenge. It's pointless guessing.

However, some people do seem to understand correctly that however these decisions are ratified, it is based on how it benefits MLS and its individual members to meet long term goals and there are compromises involved. Some changes might solve one problem and create others. I am sure that no decisions are based on threads and polls on bigsoccer.

 

Yet there are the few and proud that post as though they are ...

 

I will guess 10.

Well I am not sure how voting rights work, AEG (or what ever they are called) has 2 votes right? how about stockholders that are not operators, like the dude that used to own Miami Fusion, does he have a vote on this, do only 1 type of stockholders vote?

 

Hey look, regurgitation !

 

That is one of the upsides of being in such a corrupt and useless confederation- they basically just leave MLS alone to do its own thing. It's sort of like my boss back when I was working maintenance at a country club during college. He would typically have a couple of drinks at lunch, then spend the afternoon with his mistress. Best boss I ever had

After the fiasco of the 2022 WC, I think it became apparent to MLS's owners that the league really just needs to look out for its own interests. Doing things to please USSF, CONCACAF and/or FIFA, beyond the minimun needed to make sure those organizations leave MLS alone, is pointless.

 

We have no clue. There's nothing educated about making that guess.

Rules among organizations differ.

If you are claiming that veto is not used by other organizations, you are wrong. The NHL uses it for many decisions, including revenue sharing. So does the NFL, including TV revenue sharing.

You didn't just suggest restructuring the cap; you suggested extreme increase in revenue sharing, which typically is much harder to do than just change the cap.
Not that it matters much, because we don't even know how many votes it takes to change the cap in MLS. Who knows, maybe it's not even about votes in MLS; possibly it's about shares and possibly early stockholders (who risked hundreds of millions on MLS when noone else would) have retained privileged voice in this regard.

Either way, it's a lot of pointless guessing.
The best you can look to do in the bigsoccer YBTD section is come up with something and explain why it makes sense from your personal perspective.
Arguing that it would get passed in MLS owners meeting is just monkey business.