Lalas tells Ghana media that he wants to stay in Colorado but Columbus really wants him back I dont much care what the kid wants but if I'm Bez and the Raps want him that bad, fine; let them pay through the nose. Big time. Everybody is for sale at the right price. I think a million. bucks, at this point, is just a starting point. https://footballmadeinghana.com/201...ue-at-colorado-rapids-lalas-abubakar-reveals/
Dwight said Guzman is out of contract after this season, let’s hope the original post can edit his name out in just a few weeks.
I doubt it happens but if he plays sparingly and takes Clark’s role as the seldom used veteran it will be ok. I don’t think any fan wants this guy back but Porter thinks highly of him.
There's nothing wrong with my math, I'm just interpreting the rule differently than you. And the vagueness of the wording means that neither of us can really point to anything factual to back up our interpretation. I never said that transfer fees were excluded, and in fact pointed out that the rule specifically says they are (which refers to acquisition costs). But that same rule also specifically references acquisition and compensation costs separately. The example I gave was pretty simple: it assumes a $1 million transfer fee paid in year one, and a total of $1.5 million in compensation paid out in unequal amounts over three years, for an average of $500K per year. So the year by year salary budget amount includes the transfer fee in year one, and then the three year salary average for years two and three. My interpretation is that the reference to 'all amounts payable over the guaranteed contract term...' refers to the contract with the player. The transfer fee, the way I understand it, is a separate agreement between the club that wants to acquire a player's rights, and the club that holds those rights. The player's contract is a completely different thing. I see no reason why the rule would average out transfer fee costs. It would seem to deincentivize something the league is trying to bake into the rules; the acquisition of more, better, higher compensated talent by owners willing to make that investment. The only way I can imagine knowing the real rule would be hours spent digging through MLS acquisitions where fairly large fees were paid for a player in one year, making them a DP, and look for examples of where that player didn't count as one in following years, because his more modest salary was below the threshold, or was close enough to be bought down. Or corner Bez and get a 30 second lecture on the subject.
I cant be bothered to dive into the roster rules explanations, but I've always been under the impression that the transfer fee is like a one time hit (the players first year). So in the case of Valenzuela and Diaz, both 1 million dollar transfers, it's just that transfer fee that makes them YDPs. Their actually salaries are both only 300 something thousand (well under DP threshold). So after that initial year passes, they just become a normal 300k hit against the cap. I really dont know the specifics though and perhaps you guys are right about the transfer fee in cases where it might be paid in installments yearly or whatever. Those installments plus the players salary could keep the player as a DP for the length of that contract (300k salary + 300k??) but I kinda doubt this is the case with these guys. I would assume the Crew would just pay the transfer fee in full, up front. I'll be interested to see how it shakes out and I still really need for there to be a Tim Bezbachenko Roster Management Seminar I can attend.
Again, we have no way of knowing, but I wonder how common it is for transfer fees in MLS to be paid in installments over the course of years. I found an interesting article in GQ that talks about big name transfers involving huge fees, noting: Makes sense, but doesn't really apply to MLS, since our numbers are so much smaller. The DP-level max salary threshold for a Young Designated Player is separate from, and much lower, than a senior DP, but it still uses up a DP roster slot: Diaz turns 21 this December, meaning he'd count as a DP next season if his compensation is above $200K. Same goes for Valenzuela, who just turned 21 in August. Thing is, their salaries are modest enough that it'll be relatively easy to buy them down to below those thresholds (they can only be bought down to $150K) so that they don't take up DP roster spaces next year. Again, that assumes that some sort of averaged transfer fee isn't included in the equation. Fact is, through some sort of buy-down mechanism, they can't count as DPs next year or we'd be screwed in terms of signing any more DP-level players.
All that is nice, but it does not identify any rule language supporting the idea that transfer fees are included one year and excluded the next. Strike two.
You have this 180 degrees backward. DPs are players with salary budget charges of over 530k. Even if their salaries are WAY over 530k, the count as 530k vs the cap. If a DP happens to be of a certain age, his budget charge is lower than 530k. The DP threshold is the same, it is the budget charge that changes. Your statutory interpretation skills are off today. This is why we know some sort of acquisition fee must be included. FFS, by your "interpretation" Artur is a DP, he is 23 and makes 360k.
And where is there language that implies that transfer fees are averaged over a player's contract? Especially if the transfer fee wouldn't even be a part of the player's contract and compensation; it goes to his former team? I'm saying they're included in the year (or years, if paid out in installments) they're paid. They're not "excluded" in following years because they've already been fully accounted for. Nothing I'm seeing the rules implies that's not the case. As I said above, when I read that the salary budget hit is calculated as an average of "all amounts payable over the guaranteed contract term..." I interpret that as referring to the amounts that included IN the contract with the player, for his salary, signing bonus, and whatever else might be included that goes into his direct compensation from MLS and the club. His transfer fee is not part of his "guaranteed contract" so, by my reading, isn't included in the multi-year average. Though, of course, transfer fees are added to that compensation average when he's signed in the year(s) they're paid. I'm assuming Diaz's entire $1 million fee was paid to his former club by the Crew this year, but in truth, I have no idea if that's the case and the MLSPA numbers don't get into those details. Look, we're arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Who the hell knows? MLS releases a simplified version of its roster rules which contain all sorts of generalities, gaps and contradictions. I'm sure Bez (who's a trained lawyer) and the other clubs have the unabridged version. In general, I'm okay with not having all of the details (I mean, it's a long off-season; we have to talk about something). I just wish (1) that over time MLS would move to a structure that got rid of the smoke and mirrors and (2) that the tiny handful of people who cover the club and have access to the FO asked a few of these questions, because Bez seems willing enough to answer them when asked.
There's no need to make young, moderately paid players DPs unless they make more than $530K. If the team does declare a young player a YDP, then it benefits from a reduced charge against the salary budget. So a team could have several 22 year olds making $400K with none of them being DPs.
Within 4 weeks we will see the start of this roster transition. Would be nice if we heard more news on the subject. It seems like nobody ask the Crew FO pertinent questions.
MLS cup final is Nov 10. Expansion draft is a few days after that with teams not in the final having to submit their lists before the cup. Then come waiver, re-entry drafts, etc. There are some 1 day trade windows in there too. So a month from now we'll know who the team exercised options on, who was protected or taken, and who is gone. We might have some additions from within MLS too.
Good explanation. I get what you are saying. And this may be what is happening in practice, but I still disagree that that is what it says. The only other workable theory is that transfer fees are just excluded altogether, and we are making a voluntary designation one year (but not the next) to save cap space. This theory also violates the plain language of the rule IMHO. Here is chapter & verse: Direct quote: "The Designated Player Rule allows clubs to acquire up to three players whose total compensation and acquisition costs exceed the Maximum Salary Budget Charge," This seems to say transfer fees are included in DP calculations (thus my theory violates the plain language). So clearly one cannot drink the wine in front of me. It also pretty definitively throws water on your "young guys making 200k are DPs" theory. >530k. So one clearly cannot drink the wine in front of you. "A player's Salary Budget Charge, and therefore Designated Player status, is determined by averaging all amounts payable over the guaranteed contract term excluding option years." Read together, I do not see how transfer fees are a part of the DP calculation in the first quote, but not the second. DP status is determined by salary budget charge, which is the average of all amounts payable over the guaranteed term. So how does a guy whose compensation is less than 530k qualify one year but not the next? Again, the plain language is pretty clear. If transfer fees are not included in all amounts payable, OK. But then they are not part of the salary budget charge, which is the thing that determines DP status. So the fee could not put them over, at all, because it is not part of the salary budget charge. Excluding the fee also seems to clearly violate the first quote. Again, you clearly cannot drink the wine in front of me. On the other hand, if the fee is part of the salary budget charge, which is what determines DP status, then it gets averaged. The salary budget charge = average if amounts payable. If it isn't getting averaged, it is not part of the salary budget charge, and thus cannot affect DP status, because that determined by the salary budget charge. Thus one clearly cannot drink the wine in front of you. The practice & what the rules say are fundamentally incompatible. Your attempt is a good one to try to construe the rule in a way that conforms to what they are doing. But it still violates the plain language of the rule. It is either a violation of the rules as written, or the rules as written on the site do not reflect the actual rules (I will go with B). ----------------------------- In terms of making 200k & being a DP. Here is the Young DP Section preceded by the end of the DP section: "In 2019, a Designated Player who is at least 24 years old during the League Year will carry the Maximum Salary Budget Charge ($530,000) unless the player joins his club after the opening of the Secondary Transfer Window, in which case his budget charge will be $265,000. Young Designated Player A Designated Player who is 23 years old (or younger than the age of 23) during the League Year (the age of the player is determined by year - not date - of birth) will carry the following Young Designated Player Salary Budget Charge: Ages 20 and younger: $150,000 Ages 21-23: $200,000 If such a Designated Player joins the club after the opening of the Secondary Transfer Window, he will carry the Mid-Season Young Designated Player Salary Budget Charge of $150,000 regardless of age." So, nothing about a lower DP threshold for young DPs, just different budget charges for age & when acquired: 24+ before 2nd window = 530k 24+ & after 2nd window = 265k 21-23 before 2nd window = 200k 20 before 2nd wondow = 150k 20-23 after 2nd = 150k ----------- End of Transmission. I will self destruct if I try to post on this again.
Reportedly MLS has decided to discontinue the combine. They will hold a much less formal evaluation thing of some sort at the College Cup for about 40 players including underclassmen who have not declared. Apparently ,somehow, undergrads can submit their names and if 2 MLS teams express interest they will then be offered MLS contracts. But the combine is dead. Good riddence
Since the two events are intertwined, the real question is: why didn't they do it at the same time. For 20+ years now they've all attended the combine then gone straight to the NSCAA convention and held the draft, with all those fresh evaluations in their hot little hands. Maybe they see it as a big PR deal that kicks off the season or something. Maybe it will have some utility when everybody has a USL team to stock, but otherwise, it's a waste. Whatever function it serves you could do just as easily over the phone. The reason the NFL and NBA drafts are such big media extravaganzas- aside that is from their millions of fans - is that people know who the players are and want to see who goes where. In most drafts, if MLS fans didn't read a few summaries and mock drafts, they'd have no idea who a single guy was. And in most cases, it's not worth the time finding out.
Just wait till I get going. Cincy put out their roster decisions today. First team to do so. We cannot be too far behind.
And they're still stuck with Adi's contract. The situation is so screwed up that Adi has filed a complaint with the Major League Soccer Players’ Association alleging unfair treatment from the club and said he would need assurances from Nijkamp and Jans that things would be different for him to want to stay in Cincinnati. Still, the problem remains: the club would either have to buy out his contract or trade or transfer him to another club, unless the two parties agree to mutually terminate the contract. And since nobody else is likely to want this colossal bust on their roster either, and he's due a ton of money, FCC may have little choice but to just pay him off.
One of the things I expect in the next MLS CBA would be 2 way contracts between MLS and USL. The USL recently unionized and I bet their members would like to become MLSPA members.
They released the info last week i mentioned in the 2019 roster thread . They wasted no time but amazingly we already know who were keeping and letting go according to Porter but we are keep the info tight to the vest for now
I think it would make things a lot smoother as every team eventually has a USL team and players in the bottom of MLS teams can be moved around since we don’t have the reserve league
That makes sense, as you never know what offers might be made before that point. If someone knows you don't want a player, the value drops.
The Whitecaps announced theirs yesterday, too. So, yeah, I'd have to assume the other non-playoff clubs will be doing so in the coming days. I'm sure it's helpful for the players to know their futures. But I do kind of wonder what advantage teams have in announcing this stuff before they are required to. Rosters are still frozen until Nov. 11 (i.e., teams can't sign or trade for any players in-league until then).