This whole saga, in my opinion is related to and goes back to the Sermanni dismissal. Don't ask me to explain, it's just to me it's all one big ball of wax. That's how I feel. Let's go back to this article a year ago: http://www.soccerwire.com/news/othe...erans-how-internal-politics-still-rule-uswnt/
If it really means players are getting ready to make room for youngsters, then yes I'd be excited for the future. The USWNT had a strong history of players playing for as long as physically possible, though, so I'm wary... And even if they were going to make the way for youngsters, it's still a huge blow to the league to have a whole slew of the most popular players saying they won't play even after the WWC is over when fans have been expecting them. I hadn't thought about the contract issue, though, that's a good possibility. Still, this issue is something that should have been sorted out well before preseason began. Okay, two points: 1. Attendance will not go down - maybe a little bit in the first half of the year since it's simply year 3, but we saw the 2011 WWC caused a 50-100% boost (by team) in WPS attendances. The WWC is visibility, pure and simple. 2. USSF has already stated they have a four-year plan on using NWSL to help develop players starting from before they graduate college by letting U23s train with teams. This league isn't going anywhere soon.
Also, let's not forget that USWNT players that are allocated save the individual teams money (well, give them more freedom to spend more on the salaried players). If you're forced to replace them with a salaried player, that means lower average pay for all salaried players on a team. I mean, you aren't going to change existing contracts, but it potentially would hurt any rookies still looking for a spot on the team as teams try to plan on making their $200k cap go farther - or it just means you use unpaid amateurs as replacements. (And it makes it harder to attract internationals during the summer transfer window, too...) So if you lose all six in here: Kansas City would take the biggest hit in terms of % increase in salaried players, and some teams that might not even be using their full due to already-shoestring budgets (CHI and NJ) would be further stretched. I mean, if you're 32+ and/or you have a kid already, I can definitely understand wanting to retire. But PLEASE, the NWSL season only goes two months or so past the WWC, can you just do a "farewell tour" with your club team? Give the team and its fans what they were expecting.
Yes at this point it is all lip service (until it actually happens) that they will make way for the youngsters. However, the article above only hinted at 6 or so players leaving. There are still 20 or more players that will be playing. Another thing to keep in mind is there may be others that will retire from the national team but continue to play in NWSL.
I don't see how it will affect the teams salary this year. Keep in mind that they are already replacing these national team players with amatuers this year so if the NT players don't turn up, yes it will affect how competitive the team can be but I don't expect teams will be running to give contract to players to play for 1 or 2 months. Next year is a different story because now USSF can just reallocate new and younger players or better yet change the allocation system
What I would say is that we broaden the pool of "stars" to include more NWSL players and increase the opportunities for NWSL players to advance to the NT. I think that NT players are too secure in their privileged status -- and most NWSL players are underpaid and underprivileged. Note, for example, the very small number of players on the NT who advanced there because of their NWSL play. Several possible measures to enhance the NWSL's feasibility and increase the pool of competitors for the National Team occur to me. First, don't schedule National Team games during the NWSL season during the out years when there is no WC or Olympics. In 2014, the NT played 6 games during the NWSL season. With both NT and NWSL duties, the NT players are over-worked -- and the excessive number of games they are scheduled to play may detract from meeting their NWSL responsibilities. Second, make NWSL service an integral part of the National Team's soccer year. The USSF shouldn't pay a NT player from April to September if they don't play in the NWSL. If a player like Wambach chooses to play in Europe instead of the NWSL, that's fine, but she won't be getting an income from the USSF during that time. Third, after the NWSL season is over, schedule several friendly games for the NT -- and include on the roster as a matter of policy at least 3 or 4 outstanding NWSL players who have not previously been on the NT. Make sure they get significant minutes in matches -- also as a matter of policy. The long-term National Team players need to face more competition from young, upcoming players. Fourth, contemplate a touring all star team of non-NT NWSL players after the regular season is over to play against the top club or all star or national teams from Europe or Asia or Latin America. That would supplement salaries for NWSL players who arent selected to be on the NT, but have dreams of supporting themselves with a soccer career.
Another great blog on this issue: https://oldchristeen.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/the-uswnt-nswl-and-abby-wambach/
OK, I have a question about the "rules." If WNY needs Abby's roster spot to carry 20 players who actually want to play, how do they get it? a)waive Abby? b) USSF un-allocates her? c)trade her or her rights for ___what? d)does WNY get the roster spot automatically because she has refused to play? There is popular sentiment that whatever part of her salary is attributed to playing in NWSL as an allocated player should be withheld. I agree. That is consistent with choice b) un -allocating her and subsequently WNY should be compensated for the loss of an allocated player. I am convinced the right thing for USSF to do is to publicly rescind her allocated status and dock her pay. Such an action has the faint odor of integrity for the organization. It may also be a warning shot for other NTs who may be considering the same thing. Actions have consequences.
USWNT players are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. They can only do what that agreement allows.
You offer a true statement that contains no information. You seem to be implying that a WNT player can refuse her obligations under the contract and somehow that player is protected from consequences? Maybe that was not your intent. In my experience, I have not encountered a (legitimate) contract that does not afford relief to one party if the other party fails to meet its obligations under the contract.
I ask this above but no one answered. Do we know if Wambach and others signed contracts this year? Yes USSF releases list of allocated players but do we know the details of that contract? For all we know some of these players may not even have signed it
My memory or impression was that the allocated US players have two contracts: one for the WNT and another for the league/club. Is it possible that a player had not yet signed the league contact for this year? Even if a player did and then decided not to play (and not agree to play for any other team or league), how can the league/club make that player show up? One WNT player, I know her and her family well, told me that at the start of the league she had agreed to play for her club for three years. That comment and statements here or on Equalizer about contracts, made me think allocated players had originally signed contracts for different time periods.
The point is... we don't know what's in the CBA and we don't know what the obligations are in that contract.
Because '15 and '16 are the big paycheck years for the WNT players (bonuses for the team qualifying for WC or Olympics, for being named to those rosters, for how team does in those events, post tournaments tours, etc.) I have hard time believing many, if any, players besides maybe the obvious one Boxx will retire after this year. Even Rampone is her family's sole salary earner. Maybe someone who does not make the WC roster and expects not to be signed for '16, but if a player makes the WC roster, the practice has been to give her a contact for the Olympic year.
Fair enough. So let me ask the same question from the POV of NWSL roster rules (which was my original intent). So, putting aside the CBA. Does losing Abby mean WNY can fill her roster spot or is that spot somehow frozen because she is an allocated player?
The commissioner discusses expansion http://equalizersoccer.com/2015/03/19/nwsl-expansion-six-cities-exclusive-commissioner-jeff-plush/
Rampone on her post WC plans http://equalizersoccer.com/2015/03/19/christie-rampone-back-injury-nwsl-world-cup-plans/
Great interview with Evan Davis of Howler magazine about the Abby Wambach club retirement. Sarah Gehrke & Stephanie Roche r also guests. http://www.howlermagazine.com/podcasts/
- timing is a problem because of effect on Flash...after allocation & draft - why US players r NT first instead of club first - weird relationship between NWSL & USSoccer - more on Heinrichs & Gulati than Ellis
For the mainstay USWNT players, the USWNT IS their club team. They play in the NWSL because they have to. That's why they form a "clique". The pay is so good that once they get on the team, it's hard getting them out. That's why it's difficult for young talent to break in. These old hens want to play till retirement age. Ridiculous. The USWNT is run so backasswords as compared to the USMNT. What Abby is doing would never fly with Klinnsman and the men. Just ask Landon Donavon. I blame it all on the CBA. There should never be a contract for the national team. You play good for your club team, you get called up to the national team, game by game basis. - just like the men.