Rumor mill has Arsenal, Newcastle, and Inter Milan all interested in Miguel Almiron, with offers north of $20 million. But I heard on Sirrius XM FC that if Atlanta were to sell, they can only use $650K to improve their starting 11. Is that true? They way they described it was this. Atlanta would get reimbursed the $8.5 million they spent to acquire Almiron via transfer last year, plus the amount of his cap hit. The remaining money would be split 70/30 between the club and MLS. Yet AUFC could only use $650,000 of the proceeds they receive from the sale in "allocation" money to improve their starting 11. But wouldn't they still have the DP slot vacated by Almiron and therefore be able to spend whatever they want on a comparable player? Thanks for any clarification you can offer as the payroll rules are hard to follow.
Basically Atl will get 650k in General Allocation Money, plus DP spot and Almiron's cap hit for roster. All other extra money Atl gets to keep and spend on other non roster things, IE training facility, infrastructure, whatever. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong)
Sounds right. There is the league vs team split. Then, when you sell a player you first need to recoup what you spent on him. Transfer+salary I believe. You can get up to 650k allocation money or whatever the current number is. That is General Allocation money. Can be used however you like on players. But don't let it expire. Is it 3 years? They will get the DP slot back. But remember DPs still count against the cap. So you can buy down a DPs cap hit. Or you can buy down another player to below DP status. Think of TAM level players. The more allocation money you got the better non DPs you get and the more depth you can afford I suppose. Everything they get after the allocation money can be used by the team however they want. Atlanta being brand spanking shiny new with awesome facilities may not have as many uses... But other teams could invest in training facilities, academy, coaches, etc. Or just use it for your next big transfer fee.
Ok, I feel better then. Won't be easy to find another player of Almiron's quality, but they'll have his DP slot and can at least make the attempt. What's to stop them from using the proceeds from the sale on another big transfer fee? If they have an open DP slot, they can spend whatever they want and just take the modest cap hit, right? Meanwhile, the sale would increase their allocation money and allow them to add depth in the rest of the roster. So, as much as I'd hate to lose Almiron, selling players like that might be the best way to build a real championship contender over time. Then again, I might still be misinterpreting all of this.
As far as I understand it, you and the others who've responded are correct. Also, there is nothing that would prevent Atlanta from spending a huge chunk of change on another transfer, if that player is a DP. The transfer fee for DPs doesn't count against the salary cap as i understand it currently. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, particularly on that last point.
I believe the current rule is that its a one-time hit s opposed to being stretched out over the life of the contract. So if a player is a DP only because his transfer fee added to his salary is over ~450K (i.e. his salary is less than ~450k) then he'll be a DP only for his first year.
Here are the rules in all their glory. https://www.mlssoccer.com/league/official-rules/mls-roster-rules-and-regulations How they described it is correct. > first they are reimbursed for the $8.5 million, which can be spent on transfer fees, DP salaries above the cap, non-player-salary soccer expenses. > They get 70% of the remaining fee > of which, $650k is allocation money > and the remainder which can be spent on transfer fees, DP salaries above the cap, non-player-salary soccer expenses. The one subtlety (which does not matter here) is that they don't get the $650k of allocation money until they earn back the initial transfer costs. This is to prevent teams from buying players and them selling at a loss to generate allocation money.
The problem with the rules is that they change. I once had a slight base of knowledge and then the next season happened with rule changes, and the following season and so on. You have to learn it, AND be on top pf your continuing education courses. Or do as I do, and allow the bigsoccer brain trust to explain it because I do not find it worth the time to keep straight.
Report: MLS to change how clubs profit from transfers Nicholas Mendola NBC Sports•Nov 8, 2017, 2:16 PM "Multiple league sources tell me MLS is set to approve a new rule this offseason that will allow teams to keep 100 percent of transfer fees for Homegrown Players. This incentivizes league owners to invest more in player development, and rewards the teams that do so successfully. Currently, MLS receives 25 percent of any Homegrown transfer."
This makes complete sense; as the costs incurred are solely on the team, the benefits should be as well. This will encourage more teams towards youth development.
wonder if teams will get even more allocation money from the sale of HGPs. Either way, at least they can put money back into the academy.
Whoopie. What really matters is the ability to spend the ROI off selling a player as you like. Good business should be rewarded, not penalized. Know what's an issue which makes zero sense? How the ~650K in allocation isn't tied to the transfer amount. For argument's sake, DCU could develop the next Mbappe or Dembele. Sell them to PSG or Barca for 140M. And they'll be rewarded with 650K in allocation. Meanwhile, NYRB could develop and sell....Matt Miazga and sell him to Cheslea for 5M. And they'll be rewarded with 650K in allocation. So, NYRB could develop and sell 5 Miazga level players, for 25M total, then be rewarded with ~3.2M in allocation. Or NE could develop 10 players each worth a meager 1M and sold for 1M each. But they'd get 6.5M in total allocation as it's 650K in allocation per transfer, not transfer amount. So there's more incentive to develop and sell five Omar Gonzalez's than there is to develop and sell an Mbappe or Dembele. The whole "at least they can reinvest in the academy" argument makes zero sense. It's dependent upon not develop legit talent. Pretend Philly actually developed and nurtured Pulisic and they sold him for 75M at 21. They could then put 650K of that into the roster and spend what, 74.4M on their academy(assuming the 100% rule goes thru)? Create La Masia part II so they can then develop another Pulisic for another 650K "injection" into the 1st team and pump another 74.4M into their academy? At best they could raid South America for a guy like Almiron, buy him for about 10M and hope to flip him later. But only 1 as you're just refilling a DP slot. And we're then back to square one with 650K in allocation and put the rest back into the academy. ATL could very well get 30M for Almiron. Now just a crazy thought here but imagine if they received 100% of that, put 5M into their academy which is more than double what the average academy here invests each year, then with the remaining 25M they pay 15M, 5M each for three highly rated South American 20 yr olds, then used the 10M remaining to pay their 1M/Y salaries. Two years later they sell them for 10-15M each. Then rinse and repeat while in the interim they'd turned Almiron into three players worth 10M+ on the global market who are exciting to watch. This would of course be in addition to a guy like Josef and other DP's but of course it ain't allowed. It's an entire avenue to revenue and incentive to develop which is currently cut off.
AMEN brother! Been preaching on here repeatedly that MLS needs to embrace the role of being a selling league; the farm system for top clubs in Europe. By selling one asset and acquiring 2, 3, or 5 new assets, you improve your team overall. That's how it's done everywhere in the world except for the clubs at the very top the global food chain. I'm fine with giving MLS a 30% cut so the rest of the league can benefit too. If 5-6 clubs sold players, every team in the league could see their allocation money double without doing a thing. But if you limit the selling club's allocation money to just $650K, AUFC would be cutting their own throats to sell Almiron. They can't be confident of replacing his skill at any price via the vacant DP slot. The only way a deal like that makes sense is if they can use the profits to improve the rest of the roster. So, either significantly raise the cap on allocation money or make it a percentage of the total sale as you said. Fortunately, it looks like MLS is at least considering a change here. Not sure if we'll have it in time for the upcoming transfer window, but at least they are evaluating it.
if it were so easy everyone would be doing it right now. It is not easy to develop most players. not even to Omar Gonzalez standards.
Per multiple league sources, it's my understanding that the rule allowing MLS teams to keep 100 percent of the transfer fees from the sale of Homegrown Players has been approved recently & will be implemented for 2018.— Kristian Dyer (@KristianRDyer) December 7, 2017