2017 Allocations

Kyle also has an issue with her green card right now so would require an international slot. Reportedly that is why Orlando did not try to retain her rights.

 

Well here's a ray of sunshine for the Spirit...I believe they have first pick in a UFI draft

 

Anyone heard if the US list is going to drop today?

 

Just realized... Everyone talking about Kyle being dropped, but how did Prince and Sheridan get added directly and not via the subsidization-draft process? I know they came up through the college draft, so by the time the list was released they were no longer "unattached", but isn't that a little... weaselly?

 

They weren't unattached...their rights were held when allocation was made.

 

Well, Beckie and Sonnett were allocated under the "old system" anyway. My point was I thought the "new system" applied to ALL new allocations, whether they would go through the draft or not.

 

That's exactly what I said - "they were no longer "unattached"". My gripe was that it suddenly seems to me like the draft is a weasel-around the new subsidization system.

 

That is a little bit hazy. Nothing specifically ever said about players who are draft eligible. Based on last year, assumption has been that if you are going through the draft then you go that way and then get allocated.

 

I mean, now that I think about it, the college draft order and the subsidization draft order are almost never going to be perfectly aligned, so I guess you have to assume that one takes precedence over the other. If the USI rules stated as such, that'd be fine, but as they're currently written they make it sound like all potentially-subsidized players would go through the official subsidization draft without accounting for the fact that potentially-subsidized college-draft-eligible players would throw a wrench in those plans.

Considering the "power" of allocated players, at least in the checkbook if not on the field, I personally would like to see the subsidization potential take precedence over the college draft. That is, the federations would identify draft-eligible players they'd be willing to subsidize, take that list to the teams, allow for the allocation draft, and any players that aren't picked up that way (though why would you turn down a top-level free player?) then go through the college draft without the potential of being subsidized later, at least for that season.

 

I think you are also forgetting that the Canadian allocations have an additional use that the US allocations don't have. And that is allowing a foreign player to play for a team without costing an international slot. So I think Canada feels far more inclined to allocate a young player right out of the draft to make sure that player has a fair chance at staying in the league and not being cut simply because the team doesn't have a free international slot. And if Prince and Sheridan hadn't been drafted, they wouldn't have been allocated.

 

Oh, I totally agree with you that Canada feels the need to allocate young players right off the bat. And I certainly haven't forgotten about the slots. But my point earlier was that if Canada sees an upcoming rookie as having the potential to be allocated, I feel like sending them through the college draft isn't the proper method when we have the whole subsidized-player-draft system in place. That is, if Canada were willing to allocate Prince and Sheridan, why not just tell that to the teams earlier on? If a team was going to draft them anyway at the NSCAA convention, they could've still picked them up in the proper subsidized-player-draft as well - unless of course a higher-ranked team wanted them more. Don't allocate "right out of the draft" (which undercuts the official subsidization method), allocate them before the draft instead.

 

You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. They weren't going around saying "these are the two players eligible for the draft that we want to allocate." They allocated Prince and Sheridan because they were drafted. If they had not been drafted, then they would not have been allocated.

 

I understand what you're saying just fine. What I'm saying is that those two players had to have been on the CSA's radar already - they're not going to just allocate players solely because they were drafted. And the first step of the subsidization draft is to identify potential subsidized players - i.e. players that are on the radar. If the CSA is willing to allocate someone, that's an investment for them. And they're not going to throw that to any player just because she got drafted - they'll only make that investment if they already saw a potential upside. Both of those players already had senior caps and were going to graduate this semester anyway - so there's no reason the CSA couldn't have started the wheels moving forward on the subsidization draft because just identifying a player as potentially subsidized has no drawback to the CSA - it's not a guarantee the player will be subsidized, assuming no team picks her up.

 

Well of course they were on their radar already. What I'm saying is if they went undrafted they would not have been allocated (and likely would have gone to play abroad). It's not Canada's job to figure out who will be drafted and preemptively allocate them.

I think you're reading too much into the term potential.

IMHO, the subsidization "draft" was created as a reaction to the returning USWNT players (that there's no question they will be allocated) so there would be some explanation as to where they end up. But by the time it was actually implemented they had all returned (and now teams are trying to take advantage of it to try to snag some USWNT player who forgoes graduating college). But if you look at the Equalizer article when it was announced they say "according to a league statement, resembles MLS’ method of distributing new players to the league." This is what they used when Clint Dempsey returned, and when Jermaine Jones joined the league.

So it was not meant as a replacement for the college draft for players with NT experience, but as a way to explain why someone like Christen Press went to Chicago or Meghan Klingenberg went to Boston.

 

I never said it was a replacement for the college draft - but I am saying that should be a subsection of it. Maybe I am reading too much into the word potential, but the way the rules are worded, it sounds like it's supposed to be a catch-all for all new allocations. IMO, that should include any potentially allocated players that are joining the pros for the first time. They're still new players to the league.

And my suggestion doesn't change that or imply that. If the CSA names them as potentially allocated, and no teams decide to take them in the subsidization draft, the CSA isn't on the hook to pay for them. As I said in my previous post, no harm done whatsoever.

Granted, if you do assume the "potential" is just a ploy and anyone in the draft is "unofficially officially already allocated", then my take does go right out the window. But I'm not convinced that's what is intended to happen.

 

I don't necessarily think the is how it works or at least there is an addendum. Using Prince as an example I think Houston knew that if they took her she would be allocated and similarly wouldn't have taken her without that guarantee. Houston doesn't have any open INT slots and I doubt they'd free one up to bring in Prince.

 

Well, I would certainly hope Houston did their due diligence!

I don't really think it's counter to what I'm saying. If Prince being allocated was important to them drafting her, then it is their responsibility to ask Canada. It is not Canada going to Houston saying they want to allocate her to them, so please draft her so that she doesn't have to go through the USI proccess and end up in Washington.

 

Ah, I see now that her mother was born in New Jersey. (And her father was born in Jamaica)

 

Was not the distribution process for unattached federal players put in place when there was talk of a possible new national federation joining the league?

 

There was talk of that, but there's been talk of that often. The impetus for the new method was more rumored to be tied to the potential of Pugh joining Portland.

 

Been over a month, still no sign of a list coming out.

Considering how silent everyone's been with the CBA talks, I would not be surprised if no "official" subsidization list ever comes out and players just in good faith trickle back to whatever teams last held their rights.