I was going to say that just a month ago, Grand Rapids had an article saying that they are supporting the GLPL. However, their site seems to be down. (Maybe the site was owned by the league, so Grand Rapids had to "vacate" the premises.) But as of yesterday evening, it was out. Here was the URL anyway: http://grandrapidsfc.com/an-open-letter-from-grfc-founder-matt-roberts/
Funny, Kenneth. At least Saginaw has some club soccer history: the original home of the (Mid-)Michigan Bucks! And will any of these GLPL teams try to enter the LHUSOC qualifying next year, by the way?
Saginaw was the first small Michigan town that came to mind. Saugatuck - visit Marro's and tell 'em I sent you - would have been second.
Grand Rapids web site is back up. URL I gave in post #27 (article dated August 19, 2015) has this: "We want to let everyone know that we are currently ... working to expand the Great Lakes Premier League so other cities can have teams of their own,..." Meaning that in a span of a month and a half, they went from expanding-the-GLPL to bolting altogether.
True that [were those helicopter shots?]. Funny that I didn't see any pictures of some big university that I've heard is in Ann Arbor.
http://www.greatlakespremierleague.com/expansion-info/ First time I remember seeing a salary limit for being classified a "semi-professional" team, from the GLPL Expansion page: "Semi-professional clubs may be considered with a per-game maximum of $1500 in roster salary, and $2000 max season salary per individual player. The protection of the eligibility of collegiate players will always be the highest priority in our league, and any semi-professional club must address this in their application materials."
Well, anybody who pays players is a professional club in the eyes of the NCAA, there's no "semi-pro" about it. "Semi-pro" is actually just a made-up term with no strict definition. There would be no protection of the eligibility of current NCAA student-athletes on a professional team, whether or not they follow some arbitrary salary limit set by the GLPL. 12.02.4 Professional Athletics Team. A professional team is any organized team that: (a) Provides any of its players more than actual and necessary expenses for participation on the team, except as otherwise permitted by NCAA legislation. Actual and necessary expenses are limited to the following, provided the value of these items is commensurate with the fair market value in the locality of the player(s) and is not excessive in nature: (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02) (1) Meals directly tied to competition and practice held in preparation for such competition; (2) Lodging directly tied to competition and practice held in preparation for such competition; (3) Apparel, equipment and supplies; (4) Coaching and instruction; (5) Health/medical insurance; (6) Transportation (expenses to and from practice competition, cost of transportation from home to training/ practice site at the beginning of the season and from training/practice site to home at the end of season); (7) Medical treatment and physical therapy; (8) Facility usage; (Revised: 4/24/03) (9) Entry fees; and (Revised: 4/24/03) (10) Other reasonable expenses; or (Adopted: 4/24/03, Revised: 10/28/04) (b) Declares itself to be professional (see Bylaw 12.2.3.2.4). (Revised: 8/8/02) 12.1.2 Amateur Status. An individual loses amateur status and thus shall not be eligible for intercollegiate competition in a particular sport if the individual: (a) Uses his or her athletics skill (directly or indirectly) for pay in any form in that sport; (b) Accepts a promise of pay even if such pay is to be received following completion of intercollegiate athletics participation; (c) Signs a contract or commitment of any kind to play professional athletics, regardless of its legal enforceability or any consideration received; (d) Receives, directly or indirectly, a salary, reimbursement of expenses or any other form of financial assistance from a professional sports organization based on athletics skill or participation, except as permitted by NCAA rules and regulations; (e) Competes on any professional athletics team per Bylaw 12.02.4, even if no pay or remuneration for expenses was received; (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02) (f) After initial full-time collegiate enrollment, enters into a professional draft (see Bylaw 12.2.4); or (Revised: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02, 4/24/03 effective 8/1/03 for student-athletes entering a collegiate institution on or after 8/1/03) (g) Enters into an agreement with an agent. (Adopted: 4/25/02 effective 8/1/02) Emphasis mine. Any team that pays any of its players more than reasonable expenses is a professional team in the eyes of the NCAA. Any student athlete who competes on such a team, whether or not they receive any pay or expenses, loses his or her eligibility. As for the other teams in the league who would play against such a team, there is no restriction and no violation: 12.2.3.1 Competition against Professionals. An individual may participate singly or as a member of an amateur team against professional athletes or professional teams. (Revised 8/24/07)
As someone who was involved in the writing of these rules, I can assure you the meaning is that the salary standard is for teams that do not include collegiate players in their rosters. It is explained to teams that join the league that no players may be paid on a roster that includes current student athletes and that they must be familiar with and follow all NCAA rules in order not to endanger their players' eligibility. And that salary standard is the same that the NPSL outlined in its rules in past years.
Thanks for that clarification! Of course, then you have the small issue of pro teams and amateurs competing in the same league, which is not an NCAA issue but would seem to cause competitive balance issues. Because there is really no reason to pay players other than to get (ostensibly) higher-quality players. And professionals should beat amateurs most of the time in a league situation (as opposed to a one-off Cup situation).
At $2k max per player per season, and a total payroll of $15,000 (assuming a 10-game league season), I can't imagine you are drawing the best players. Just making it worth their while to miss work for a midweek away game or something. I don't know much about the number of NPSL clubs paying players, but you would have to imagine that the "B" teams for the pro clubs (Cosmos, for example) have their guys earning something.
And it is all a bit of a moot point in the GLPL as no one there, to my knowledge, is paying anyone. It's hard enough at that level to cover a coach's salary. The rule was added as there was a team interested in joining that wanted to pay players and the model of the NPSL pay scale was used to control that.
I didn't say "best players." The "best players" are always going to go to the highest leagues at which they can play and will follow the money. But you should get better players than a team whose inducement is $0, and you should get the best players in the Great Lakes Premier League. But in a theoretical league in which some teams pay $0 and some teams pay $15,000, the teams that pay $15,000 are either ( a ) bidding against themselves and just paying players they could get for far less than that (or nothing at all) or ( b ) going to have a competitive advantage because they will have (again, theoretically) professional-grade players while their opponents have amateurs. That, again, assumes rational actors who don't just incur unnecessary expenses and who actually use the funds on players with resumes. And, as you mention, it's moot (for now) because existing teams aren't paying players. But if a team that wanted to pay players wanted to join the league, the others voting on that are going to say, "Sure, we'll gladly compete against a team of pros because what can you get for $15,000?" That "just the tip" point of view makes no sense to me. I had heard that Tony Bakker's Charleston Battery of the late 90s would have made money but he insisted on playing hundreds of thousands of dollars in player wages because he wanted to win the league. I don't know that anyone would be vain enough to think you get anything out of winning the GLPL, but someone could certainly try. And even $100 a game is a better inducement than $0 a game, even if it pales in comparison to what other players in other leagues get.
It would make sense to see the Muskegon Risers take GRFC's place in the GLPL. Solid organization. Had a chance to see them last year when I was back in the hometown.
Effectively, GRFC's place in the league was taken by Ole SC, a grass roots club from the city's south west side (they will play in the suburb of Wyoming). The club has heavy roots in the Latino demographic of the city. Hoping there's a city derby as a friendly!
profitable... http://www.mlive.com/sports/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2017/07/investment_in_afc_ann_arbor_pa.html AFC Ann Arbor's attendance has hovered around just over 1,000 spectators per game all three seasons, but the team's popularity has grown in other ways, Saeed said. The Mighty Oak's membership sales have increased from 200 in year one to 300 this year. Sponsorships have climbed each year by about 30 percent and are expected to be responsible for about 50 percent of the team's operating budget in 2018, according to Saeed. In summary, the team is on pace for its first profitable season in program history, Amrine said, although he insists that is not why any of the owners are involved. Amrine estimates operating budgets in the NPSL fall between $60,000 and $500,000 per year, with Detroit City FC having an operating budget that exceeded $1 million this year, according to Crain's Detroit Business. The Mighty Oak's budget of about $250,000 is still on the higher side for the league, Saeed said. "We have been very close to breaking even," Amrine said. "This year, I think we will be profitable. It is a business start-up, so money always goes in the first few years. Now we are at a point where we know what we can bring in, how much we can spend. "But we are not in it to make a big profit. This is a cool thing for the community. We all love being involved in it. It is fun to say you own a soccer team. That is the reward in it."
I wish that there were more than just 1 or 2 samples of operating costs with actual laid out examples. The Stockade's gift of their finances has been a boon for someone like myself, who is leading a charge to start a team. The minimum amount to start a team (last we heard) was $50,000 for the first year. That is the amount needed in an account, but after franchise fees & first year fees it's more like $30,000. Find the right amount to ask for sponsorships is a key, at least in my opinion.
I have reached out a several clubs and to several entities at the league office. I think the past few weeks with the playoffs have made it much tougher to get anyone to reply. Hopefully next week I can get someone to respond with some helpful information. Some franchises have responded, but I'd like to get the actual information from the league first so that we can ensure our application will be in order as soon as possible.