Commisso wants to fund the league himself. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/apr/30/rocco-commisso-nasl-investment-mls
If you had Rocco's money would you be doing this? Most of us, even though we love football, would pass. Rocco has never lacked passion; I can tell you from watching and talking to him at Cosmos' games how much he enjoyed owning the team. The offer to take this step is his attempt to grow football in the United States. He knows it will cost him a lot of money, there's no denying that; but he's willing to try. The ten year window sounds like a lot but I wonder if it is; growing clubs into financially stable organizations is very difficult as Indy11[with solid fan support] can attest. The road ahead for this league, call it what you will, will have many of the same bumps as the USL & NASL have endured over the years; how could it not? I like Rocco. I don't agree with everything he says but that's true of most of the folks involved with professional sports; but really like his passion and commitment for what he's doing. BTW correction, he not proposing to fund the league entirely himself; but certainly a very large portion.
I'd take it more seriously if there was anything like a plan. Right now he wants no oversight for 10 years and the USSF to restructure itself on the basis of pretty much nothing. Saying he would spend $250m of his own money doesn't actually commit him to anything.
More let me do it my way and tell you what to do. Let me guess, the USSF will tell him where to put it and with explicit instructions on how.
everything is open to negotiation... https://www.socceramerica.com/publi...sso-proposal-a-look-at-the-issues-the-pa.html The Commisso proposal: A look at the issues the parties are dancing around
With the egos involved I don't see much happening for a while. I do think some of Commisso's proposal are good; the ones dealing with SUM and conflicts of interest.
Commisso just wants his piece of the pie to line his pockets. Has nothing to do with the betterment of the sport.
Exactly what conflicts of interest are there with SUM? And I don't see any proposal from Commisso other than letting him - a team owner - buy out the SUM contract. If you could clarify your thinking on this matter, I'd appreciate it.
Here is the original link https://www.socceramerica.com/publi...sso-proposal-a-look-at-the-issues-the-pa.html
This article has an audio clip from Rocco's appearance on SiriusXN FC yesterday. https://www.twiceacosmo.com/2018/5/1/17307738/rocco-commisso-produces-half-billion-dollar-plan Also, if you have the SiriusXM FC app, Jason Davis interviewed Graham Parker today. Graham interviewed Rocco for The Guardian piece yesterday.
I didn't say Commisso had a conflict of interest. I was agreeing with his position that conflicts of interest should be eliminated.
So you're suggesting that every single board member of the USSF should be an independent director with no connection to any aspect of soccer in the United States? Or, put otherwise, no person who plays in, coaches in, referees in, invests in, organizes, or even supports a particular team should have a role in the governance of American soccer? Because that's what "eliminating" conflicts of interest would actually mean. Or maybe you mean that when a USSF director is in a potential conflict of interest, they should manage that conflict by announcing it and either gaining the rest of the board's consent to the existence of the potential conflict or recusing themselves from decisions that engage that conflict. Which is what they do now, just like the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit pointed out. Also, the USSF cannot be conflicted with itself. That's stupid, and people who say "the USSF is in a conflict of interest when it works with its members" do not understand what a conflict of interest is.
Yes. I understood what you said. I'm asking what conflicts of interest exist. If you think something should be eliminated, then you think it exists. I'm asking for you to explain exactly what conflict of interest actually exists.
I am just agreeing with Commisso in that I think if conflicts may exist they should be hopefully, if possible, eliminated. I think that Garber, if true, is part of SUM then he needs to drop from either MLS or SUM. If he is on the USSF board and with SUM then he needs to drop one.
In other words, you are in favor of change for the sake of change without taking the time to understand what that change would be, why it is needed, how it would be implemented, who will be affected by it, who will benefit from it, who will profit from it, and what the long and short term ramifications of such a change will be. Got it. Let's blow the whole thing up because an owner of a resurrected brand that fielded a team in a now defunct resurrected league doesn't like the way that soccer has (successfully) operated over the last twenty years following decades of failure because of some notion of "conflicts of interest," that said resurrected brand owner certainly must not have since both his team and his league are currently, for all intents and purposes, dead and have never been in a place to successfully operate at the division two level they were assigned, let alone the division one level they sought. Said owner of a resurrected brand offered a paltry sum of $250 million - not enough to purchase two actual division one MLS teams mind you - to operate an entire league and requested a decade or so to get things up and running. Yep, this guy definitely has no conflicts of interest in this whole affair. Better yet, why not scrap everyone in the USSF because they all have some level of conflict of interest as people who have been involved with the game on multiple levels. Let's dump their passion and experience and replace them with people who have absolutely no knowledge of soccer and no ties to sports presentation or broadcasting just to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest lurking behind the corners. Perhaps we can stage a walkout during an MLS broadcast and make speeches before Congress while we are at it.
One issue with this.. Commisso is not saying "if conflicts exist", he is saying conflicts DO exist AND they conspired to kill NASL..
Spoiler, because you're still not getting this: Potential conflicts do exist; sometimes they even turn into actual conflicts. When they do, those conflicts are managed. That's because we want people who have an interest in American soccer involved in the governance of American soccer. Bigger spoiler: Don Garber is openly and publicly involved in MLS and SUM and holds a position on the USSF Board. When the USSF has business dealings with SUM, or makes decisions that have specific impacts on MLS, he is in an actual conflict of interest. That's why he recuses himself from those decisions and the non-conflicted Board members make the decision. That's how governance works.