I would posit three things: 1) Like many a team, the Crew academy is sponsored by local corporations and consists of local kids. I don't care what you think Fartface McDouchnozzle is entitled to, those kids aren't one of them. If you don't believe me, ask Wil Trapp. Just don't stand to close to him when you do. 2) Your point about DP's would only be true if PSV had to keep paying their salaries after someone else took over the team. Otherwise, what intrinsic value is there? Is PSV going to suffer some serious economic damage if they have to go out and find a replacement for Jonathan Mensah? The whole point of a DP is that he's a more or less temporary employee, a hired gun. You don't own them, you just rent them. 3) Absolutely there is value in a 23 year old team but that value doesn't apply if you move the team 3000 miles away. I'll lay you 10-1 that not a single solitary Austin "fan" can name the starting lineup for the 2008 Cup winners or the former players in the Crew Ring of Honor. I can. Hundreds of other Crew fans can. Point being, that history is only of value where the team now resides. It isn't moveable and in any other place on Earth it's worthless rubbish. Furthermore - and this is the point you are studiously avoiding here - nobody is demanding that Precourt move his operating rights to Austin or anywhere else. It was Precourt's own choice, his own personal desire, to relocate. And if he had been given his way,if the lawsuit hadn't slowed him down until the money guys showed up and if Austin had laid down last January when he issued his first deadline and demanded Butler Shores, he'd already be gone. In which case, by HIS OWN CHOICE,he would have abandoned the Academy kids and the history you're so concerned about. He fully intended to give them all the finger as the vans pulled out of the MAPFRE parking lot. So how is it, exactly, that now that the league has put an expansion team in the place that he intended to abandon, he is now entitled to compensation for all the stuff that he planned on tossing away? Ridiculous.
My thoughts fwiw: Clark Hunt caused this mess. Precourt and Garber did not have a clue about Modell's law when the Crew were purchased. We still don't know Precourt's "real" intentions - does he want to set the team up in Austin and flip it?, is he a shill for someone else? MLS would be better off with San Antonio than Austin. However with possible cross-over games with Mexican teams, both are desirable. Garber is coming out of this mess with no damage to the league, and with a better franchise in Columbus. Assuming Miami is a go, MLS has 26 teams. Possible growth: Austin or San Antonio, Raleigh or Charlotte, Detroit, Phoenix or Las Vegas.
I would say that as outsiders, we don't know the terms of the deal, nor may we ever know. But, it seems likely that between the stadium, front office, and on-field operations, Precourt likely received some compensation from the transaction. While that compensation may not be as large as the Mega Millions jackpot, I would imagine it would have a zero or two more than my 401k account balance.
Not so sure...I have a narrower take. (Understand that IANAL.) If the deal falls through because of something either Precourt or MLS does, Modell is still in effect. If Haslam independent of MLS sinks the deal, to me, the Modell conditions will have been met. It gets tricky because we don't know anything about the behind the scenes talks between Haslam and MLS/Garber that Precourt wasn't involved with.
I was trying to allude to the potential of collusion without using the word. However, at present, as long as things are moving forward, which they appear to be, talk of potential shenanigans is premature. At this point, it appears everyone's intentions are honorable, regardless of how we perceive the honor of the parties involved.
You do bring up some good points. I am not concerned or worried about anything. Just trying to have a conversation. I have said multiple times I don't give a crap if AP gets anything. I just trying to talk through how it works. I agree that MLS set up does minimize some of the things a typical sports team owner would be owed since the league actually owns the team. For the 3rd time I am not trying to suggest AP should be paid some big payout. Just curious how it will all work. My point is more about the things a typical expansion owner has to spend money on that the new Crew owners will not have to spend as much on. There is also the damage that AP has caused to the relationship with locals that the new owners have to overcome so it may end up being a wash on what they save versus what they have to spend to clean up his mess. I have been very clear that I completely agree that AP is the villain in this scenario. None of what I brought up is ridiculous. It really doesn't matter what his intentions were or what he was "throwing away", there is value to a 23 year old team versus expansion. As I just pointed out there is baggage too. I think removing personal feelings of hatred make this an easier conversation. Otherwise it is just emotional reaction and not much fact.
It's business, not personal. MLS isn't run by cowards and making this a morality play doesn't help with understanding what is going on. Precourt screwed up, MLS found itself with a mess on its hands and tried to extricate itself the best it could. And here's the thing, MLS likely ended up better off after all of this. They now have a deep pockets owner in Columbus and will likely get a new stadium. None of this would have happened if Precourt didn't try to move. Expanding into Austin (I spelled it right this time ) is probably not in MLS's best interest, but it's hardly a done deal. If Precourt agrees to be bought out with some of the money from the Columbus expansion fee, how is this not a win for MLS?
Well, 1999. 16 years with the NFL, 20 years as Commissioner of MLS, but sure - he's "that NFL guy". Seriously, at what point is a 60+ year-old not identified based on who he worked for in his 20s and 30s, and gets credit for what he did in his 40s and 50s? Ironically, I get the reverse. People somehow think it's an insult to tell me "to stick to taking pictures" - ignoring my long careers in programming, editing, stagecraft, and radio. It is kind of funny to watch 20 somethings on Twitter complain about an "NFL guy" not being a "real soccer person" despite the fact that they were in grade school when that NFL guy took over MLS and prior to that had been living and working in Europe for NFL-E - and exposed to and working with "real football" people when those same complainers were in diapers. Being a soccer person isn't like being Jewish. Your mother didn't have to be a soccer person, you just have to like and follow soccer. That's it. It doesn't take decades of experience. And past experience isn't somehow disqualifying. Sheesh.
But there is tangible physical items that were going to be transferred from Columbus to Austin. A bag of balls, the ice tub, a file cabinet, etc. That stuff has value and now he's leaving it behind for the new owners. Yeah, all together maybe its only a couple of million but add in some intrinsic value (you can point out this or that that's meaningless, but in the end having a setup working operations versus starting over from scratch is an advantage) and its not nothing. I'm not saying that PSV deserves $50 million for what they're leaving behind, but its not just the loose change from my couch either.
Andy, it is not the time spent, it is the mentality and the way he operates. Soccer (world wide) is generally club based. Clubs got together & formed leagues. The clubs are the center of gravity. Their history. Their fans. Clubs do not move (MK Dons aside). In the NFL, it is about the league. Teams are just temporary locations. Their business strategy is to extort cities with threats to move if they do not give them what they want. The Columbus thing, and his obvious preference for NFL owners in the league, highlighted the sham that is Garber's club/community schtick. No amount of time in MLS will change him from an NFL guy because his modus operandi & mentality are NFL instead od soccer. Get it?
Are Turkish basketball leagues club based? Yes. English Rugby? Yes. German ice hockey? Yes. There's nothing magical about soccer that makes it club based. You're making a category error.
Just to reinforce my point, relocations by sports league since 1975 (43-44 years). 1) MLB: 1. 2005 Expos back to Washington. 1972 next most recent. 2) NBA: 7 since 1975. 3 in 2000s. 1978: Buffalo Braves to SD Clippers. 1979 Jazz: NO to RSL. 1984: SD Clippers to LA. 1985: KC Kings to Sac. Grizzlies: Van to Memphis (2001). Hornets: Charlotte to MO (2002). Sonics to OKC (2008). 4) NHL = 10. 5) NFL = 10. And the NFL is doing it while being the most successful league. The Colts, Browns, Raiders (Oakland), Oilers, etc were not struggling at the gate. Some of the NBA/NHL moves were needed.
The NFL had 10 moves but half of those were the Raiders (3 moves) and the Rams (2 moves). If you look at the NFL in 1975 it had 26 teams. 23 of those cities still have teams with 19 of them having no interruption. (I'm counting Oakland as having no team which isn't quite true yet.) Plus there are six cities that now have teams that didn't in 1975. I'm not saying that the moving around is good and there is certainly more moving around than in leagues around the world but fans of 26 current NFL teams got a team either by creation of a league, expansion, or a move (some of which were a long time ago like Detroit and Chicago) and the team has been there ever since.
And overwhelmingly those clubs were fomed ages ago before soccer became anything close to the professional industry we see today. Before there were layers of legal matters related to player and sponsor contracts, before there was an expectation of expansive travel, before there was intense pressure to foster a global brand for world wide TV deals. I would love to see most pro teams in the US move toward club-style ownership but the nature of the beast today drove investment, which attracts investors and partners who like control. We may not find it appealing because of things like this but that doesn't mean the notion is a) purely to blame or b) inherently evil. Further, the league focus is an extension of the same. Leagues give clubs homes. They supply steady amount of games, they coordinate officiating, they provide a chance to win something. For a club to seek riches and glory it needs a league, so it's not surprising there is a league-oriented perspective, as well. Again, this isn't necessarily wrong or evil, merely an aspect to be understood and managed in this day and age. Big time sports requires money, and as they say "Mo' money, mo' problems." So unless we want to give back all the money we need to work within the modern framework. Says I, anyway.
Let me come in in-between. The polite economics term is 'risk aversion'--but the upshot is that it does mean that while on the one hand, telling one of your owners to ******** off, even if your I/O agreement says you can do it, carries a serious risk, it also means on the other that businesses have to worry about their (PR) reputations, and sports leagues probably more than most. One can definitely look at this whole scenario and conclude that the water flowed through the path of least resistance between those two treacherous grounds.
No, I am not. Barca & Madrid rule the Spanish league. The English league is doing nothing the big six don't want it to. Etc. NFL = league is dominant. Soccer (most places) = clubs are dominant. Garber/MLS is a league dominant structure. The league owns the teams FFS. It does not get more obvious than that. Further, he is flooding MLS with NFL I/Os and has adopted their extortion/relocation methodology. Hence, he is an NFL guy.
Um, maybe I'm missing something, but I've seen nothing obvious about his preference for owners. I've seen the BoG accept expansion/purchase bids from NFL owners and its largely been shown to be the right decision, but I don't see how Don working in the NFL and now working in a league where there are a bunch of NFL owners makes it obvious he prefers them. Oh, I see, you're in the "Don Garber has all the power and the BoG works for him" camp. SMH
You just cited all the moves in U.S. leagues except for baseball. MLB teams don't move because they won't let them. MLB has an anti-trust exemption. The other leagues (NFL, NHL, NBA) don't have that. When the NFL tried to stop a team from relocating they lost. The team had the power in that situation. How is that showing that the league is dominant? Flooding MLS with NFL I/Os? Even if Garber has that power instead of the MLS Board of Governors I don't see it. The last 15 new MLS I/Os in reverse order: Nashville - some NFL investors but not the lead guy Cincinnati - non NFL owner Miami - non NFL LAFC - non NFL Minnesota - non NFL Atlanta - NFL owner NYCFC - non NFL Orlando non NFL Montreal - non NFL Vancouver - non NFL Portland - non NFL Philadelphia - non NFL Seattle - some NFL ownership San Jose - non NFL Toronto - non NFL Haslem in Columbus would make 4 unless I'm missing someone.
Not to sidetrack things, but Cleveland and Columbus are not really all that close to each other, right? Like at least a 2 hour drive? So if you're a Browns player, do you live in the city where you practice several days a week and go to Cleveland every other weekend, or do you live in your team's "home" city and make a long trek to practice several days a week? I remember when the Saints played a few "home" games in Baton Rouge and the players hated it. Likewise the Celtics used to play a couple of games in Hartford every year, and they viewed them as a couple more away games. It was a pain all the way around. I dunno how easy this would make it for the Browns to attract free agents. On the other hand, I can certainly see them wanting to stake out a presence in the middle-ground city, so that people there are inclined to be their fans and not the other team the same distance in the other direction. The Revs need to do this in Connecticut, and by having their games on TV there, they at least have a chance that people might go towards them instead of those 2 high-profile teams that spend more than the minimum wage on players and marketing. Oh the hell with it, who am I kidding? That'll never happen! Anyway, this Columbus Browns thing doesn't make sense. Maybe play a pre-season game at Ohio State or something, or have events, etc. but I dunno about a practice facility.
Tell that to Montreal I thought this was going to be more like a preseason training camp home (which NFL teams often have away from their home city) not an in-season center.
I think they are talking about the pre-season training camp in Columbus, not the regular season practice facility. Lots of NFL teams do their pre-season training away from the city where they normally play.