CBA Thread III: The sneakers don't seem that much cheaper

Probably nothing, but I've been gnawing on this from a different angle. Maybe the league ought to find a way to vest the players MLS.

One way might be for the league to offer some sort of profit sharing plan. If the league profits the plan gains money, and if not it doesn't. Vesting would benefit older players as well.

An interest in profits and the reality of profits might make the players be a little more realistic about the economics. Of course if the optimists are right, about league profits, then they don't lose anything.

Who knows, someday maybe they'll let the fans in by taking MLS public.

 

correction. the old structure hasn't stopped TFC or SSFC's growth YET or as far as you know. if the structure is changed to allow more team freedom who knows what kind of growth those teams might achieve.

great distance from a local MLS team only means instead of having a default team to be a fan of i need a compelling reason to be a fan of one in particular ... as was the case with Man Utd, Lyon and Ajax in my case ... which i have not experienced yet. maybe i will move to an MLS city some day (Portland?) or the kind experience they are producing in Seattle will lead me to eventually be a SSFC fan or maybe one of my favourite players like Ryan Giggs will end his career playing for DC United (yeah, right!) thus leading me to don the black and white (and red?). who knows. hasn't happened yet.

 

so you honestly think what SSFC did last year was normal? that what TFC and SSFC have done as expansion teams is just par for the MLS course?

i am no noob either and have followed the league since it's inception. nobody is suggesting that any ONE year will change everything. but it is hard to ignore that what has happened in Toronto and now Seattle is an exciting new phenomena for the MLS. one that it would be wise to embrace fully and run with or at least let those clubs who would like to run with and build off that new level of excitement do so.

 

That is just wishful thinking. The reality now is that the current model doesn't stop teams growth.

Or maybe you are simply not trying.

 

No, that isn't normal, and thats why we shouldn't dictate the way the league operates based solely on those 2 teams.

ok.. i'm done now, see ya tomorrow! (hoping to NOT found 300 more posts like past days)

 

EDIT: nevermind.

 

So, essentially..... nothing

Yes, I know, i did say that i was done. But I swear this is the last post for today

 

Shawn Mitchell with some fresh comments from Crew union rep William Hesmer...

http://blog.dispatch.com/crew/2010/02/laboring_on.shtml

 

Odd that he keeps using "lockout".

I'll remain unconvinced these guys truly want to blow up the league. Good negotiating tactic, but are conditions really so poor that the owner's alterations with perhaps a few more concessions are enough to make players walk?

If MLS folds that would do what, quadruple the number of Americans looking to play overseas? Once again, good luck finding a team in that kind of environment with the labor uncertainty hanging over any contract you and a club would agree to.

 

I'm not Montel Williams, Will.

 

No one has been able to sufficiently answer this question.

If it's the minimum that Bob Foose is talking about, and not the actual cap which will be determined later by the Board of Governors, then MLS should just come out and say "Bob Foose is wrong--he's giving out misleading information. That's only the minimum number that we were discussing. The actual cap is decided by the owners."

Foose probably knows his audience for Goff is fans--fans that want to see the cap rise at more than the rate of inflation.

So...if this really isn't the proposed salary cap, let's see the league respond and say that he's wrong and that it isn't.

 

The real question (to me) is if players are willing to prematurely end their careers if they can't reach an agreement. They keep trying to play a game of chicken where one side seems to hold all the cards. If it reaches a lockout, I'm not convinced that a significant percentage of players (say 40% or so) wouldn't cross the line in order to ensure that they still have a job.

 

I'm not sure it's necessary to engage that way. The leagues said that what they're saying is misleading. Foose says the league is giving false information.

How many more of those exchanges before they're not worthy of paying attention to? In just a few steps the discussion will look like a bigsoccer forum.

 

Do we have any idea how the vote would have to go down in order to get a strike approved by union membership? A simple majority? 2/3's? Something else?

To be honest, I have a hard time believing that 50% of the players would agree to strike and cut off their incomes (and possibly end their careers) just for the right to maybe someday be able to choice which specific MLS team to sign with. I'm not saying that those freedoms wouldn't be welcome, but is it worth the potential downside?

 

Yeah basically. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, most players don't have significantly better all around options. If I was 22 again and I had the choice of making 40k playing soccer, paying my own way in grad/law/med school (no athletic scholarships!), or working a full time "real" job, well its a no brainer. Hell, I pay for the pleasure of playing soccer now.

 

I posted that image because I don't really think he's missing any point, my gut reaction to his statements was that they were the most blatant and transparent bluff I've seen in this process.

 

I agree. It's hard to get a strike authorized when you insist you're not interested in more money. It's too hard for most of these guys to ever recover what they'll lose financially from a lengthy strike unless they win a significant boost in pay as a result.

Kenn's got a nice article he wrote about the NASL strike on his blog, and it collapsed quickly for many of the same reasons.

Link:

http://www.kenn.com/the_blog/?p=2838

 

I think at some level these guys have to know theres a clock that strikes midnight around age 35 or so. You don't just lose a season of pay. You lose a season of development, chance to impress European clubs, etc.

 

Fans of each team can do this little exercise....

If the Rapids players needed to job hunt...

Pickens - Maybe Scandinavia or USL, neither have a huge demand for a middling keeper
Ceus - out of soccer
Kimura - a gig in Japan
Baudet - retirement
Moor - about 50/50 he has a future without MLS
Palguta - out of soccer
Earls - back to Ireland
Murillo - back to Colombia
Holody - out of soccer
Borak - out of soccer
Dalby - out of soccer
Mastroeni - retirement
Larentowicz - about 50/50 on a foreign gig
Clark - bad time to recover from injury - out of soccer
Thompson - out of soccer
Smith - back to SPL
LaBrocca - out of soccer
Ballouchy - out of soccer
O'Brien - out of soccer
LaBeaux - out of soccer
Casey - Germany to bounce around 2nd division
Diz - back to 2nd div Argentina
Noonan - out of soccer
Schunk - out of soccer
Cummings - back to Jamaica
Akpan - Wall Street.

A lot of players could get the freedom they so desperately crave.

 

MLS clearly thinks as little of the public as they do of their employees.

 

This whole "MLS players can't play anywhere else" is just stupid.

There are tons of leagues that these guys could play in.

 

Some league have requirements you have to meet to get a work visa over there. While others may not be talented enough to get a contract in overseas league.