Time is ripe for 4th DP per MLS team?

[Places boulder in front of shelter door]

No. Increase the cap a little more than 5% next CBA. Or, add another DP but make it the young DP exception.

 

The cap isn't going to be raised by a large margin until after the 2014 season when the TV contracts and the CBA are up. MLS should be able to negotiate much better TV deals at that time, especially with the potential of a 20th club (NY2) starting in either the 2015 or 2016 season.

MLS should be able to take another step forward at that time, and continue to build upon the current momentum it has.

 

What will raise the overall quality of play is raising the cap, not adding a 4th DP. I would hope the next bump is significant -- 25 to 30%. The average salary is currently around $163K, but that is skewed by the DPs. The median (half make more, half less) is somewhere around $80K.

Bigger salaries = better players. It's just that simple (but of course TV, ticket and merch sales must bring the revenue to support support any increase).

 

What's wrong with the current rules? 3 DPs isn't enough to buy championships these days, so we have to stretch it out to cater to the "pay to win" mentality? No thanks. Keep talent and payrolls as close as possible. The last thing we need is a handful of teams who can outspend all the rest and effectively buy their championships and decreasing parity in the league. Striving for the gross inequality in most other world leagues is not what MLS should be doing.

 

Adding a 4th cap exempt player would clear up more cap space to spend on the rest of the team. So it works either way.

I think I prefer the approach of incrementally increasing the number of cap exempt roster spots to bumping the salary cap, because a salary cap bump is more likely to get swallowed up by the current player pool the next time CBA is negotiated. When a DP/cap exempt player spot is added, you're (in theory) adding a "better" player from outside of the league bumping the current average MLS starter down the depth chart - eventually, hopefully, to the point where they are borderline starters/reserves.

 

DP's are not cap exempt.

A senior DP will chew up a max salary cap slot. This year that number is $350k. Only the salary above $350k is cap exempt.

If you have 4 senior DP players at $350k each that eats up $1.4 million of the cap.

Which further means if you want 4 senior DP's, you need to be ready to have just 4 players use nearly 50% of the $2,810,000 total salary cap.

With out a ton of allocation money, that is going to be pretty difficult to build a decent roster with what is left.

Here are the detailed roster rules for 2012.
http://www.mlssoccer.com/2012-mls-roster-rules

 

Ugh, well that's lame. I thought only the 3rd DP was a $350k cap hit for some reason. I think my wish is to see the DP thing evolve into it just being the highest paid 3 or however many players from the team's roster be cap exempt, sometimes I conflate that wish with what the rules actually are.

Well that $350k hit per DP is an arbitrary thing MLS can get rid of to bump up the salary space with out raising the cap then.

 

No more dps please. Let's just wait until 2014 and see what salary cap we end up with. Ultimately this league would be best served in managing salaries big enough to retain more young talent. Creating mechanisms for more multi million contracts doesn't help achieve that. Allowing for more $200000 to $500000 contracts would help us keep more of our homegrown talent

 

The salary cap in 2013 will be $2.95M
The salary cap in 2014 will be $3.1M

After that we need to wait for the new collective bargaining agreement to be ratified in 2014, hopefully juiced with a decent tv contract.

 

I like the idea of a fourth designated player...

It just gives clubs another option in how they choose to build and market. Some will use the 4th DP and some won't and trade it away for cash and/or players. It's already been proven you can win the Cup with or without so let's clubs make use this option if they wish.

I think bigger markets such as NY and LA would benefit at the gate both at home and away. I could see the Canadian clubs use this option to draw more Canadian soccer fans to their home matches as well.

But I agree, the Fourth DP should NOT be added UNLESS the overall MLS team payroll is increase by at least another $1,000,000, if not more.

The better TEAM product on the pitch would be to increase the MLS team payroll FIRST, then add the 4th DP.

I'm so encouraged though to see MLS development in such a short period of time! I hope to see both iniatives accomplished within the next couple of years.

 

I'd rather a tiered DP system. Something like

DP Level 1= 1M+ (3 spots)
DP level 2= 750k-999k(5 spots)
DP level 3= 335k-749K(7 spots)

Where you can use three DP level 1 spots, and no others.

Two DP level 1 spots, and in return be allowed 2 DP level 2 spots, but forgo right to pay above 999K for anyone

Use five DP level 2 spots, but not have any DP level 1 spots

Use two DP level 2 spots and three DP level 3 spots and not have any DP level 1 spots

and so on.....

These numbers aren't meant to be anything accurate but rather an idea. Exchange the right to DP level 1 spots for more level 2 or 3 spots. Maybe a club doesn't want to invest 1M+ in a single player but would rather get 4-5 guys in the DP level 3 salary range. Let that team forgo the right for DP level 1 spots for 5-7 DP level 3 spots. Maybe a team like NYRB buys two DP's for 1M+, but instead of only bringing in a single other DP to help the roster, they forgo the right to pay another DP 1M+ and instead exchange that 3rd DP level 1 spot for three DP level 3 spots.

Basically, you can do what we do now and possibly pay 3 DP's whatever they want and thats it for anything over 335K, or instead agree to not pay for the real expensive DP's and be allowed to bring in more DP's with a 749K limit. All this would need to be worked out more clearly, obviously, but I like the idea rather than just adding a 4th DP spot.

 

Hence MLS' tunnel-vision for NY2. People don't like to hear this, but NY2 adds value to their TV deal. It also gives the league another 3 DP spots in the NY market which is attractive to alot of the better players in the world who refuse to go anyplace but NY or LA. Funny thing is that apparently LA is trying to make a play for another DP. They wouldn't be doing that unless either Donovan was leaving or another DP was coming. Or it could be another Nesta-type deal where the mark accepts less than DP money. Not out of the realm.

 

L.A gets to have a Designated Pony also.

 

I would be thrilled with any or all of the following:

1. Increase cap in next CBA by 10% or more every year.
2. MLS reserve teams operate like MLB's AAA or NHL's EHL system. (Will really help develop young players)
3. Allow clubs to go over cap by paying dollar per dollar cap overage penalty. Money goes into allocation fund allowing clubs to pay transfers/bonuses for overseas players.
4. Allow unlimited DPs with max salary hit similar to current system, with club paying difference in salary to DPs. (Alternatively, allow clubs to trade DP spots.)
5. Allow clubs to re-sign one "franchise player" per year exempt from salary cap. Idea is for clubs who have developed young and coming stars to resign those players and not go over the cap. Call it the Tony Sanneh rule. I suggest that only one player be given this tag and an age limit (say 25 years old) also be applied.

 

All this would essentially almost triple the 'salary cap'.
-Increase cap
-Over cap penalty
-pay more players and expenses related to fielding a full reserve team
-Unlimited DPs
-One player uncapped
Not saying all this shouldn't happen but we need to be careful to make all these changes at once without slow and steady growth. Also emphasis on your DP allowances will essentially take money away from youth infrastructure that currently doesn't exist. At some point soon I would like to see instead of paying R.Marquez 5 mill for 3 seasons or F.Lampard 20 mill for 2 is to take that 35 mill and invest in a true integrated youth development systems. That will have a huge impact for the next 20 yrs not a splash for 2 or 3 yrs.

 

Because the EPL and La Liga are so unsuccessful?

Yeah I get it, Americans love parity or at least the pretense of parity but these arguments dealing in absolutes are misguided.
Firstly there is no reason to assume a 4th DP rule would lead to gross inequality in the league, none at all.
Secondly having successful and storied franchises is not necessarily a bad thing, the success of the EPL and La Liga with its glamour clubs should make that perfectly obvious. In fact it could be argued that having no continuity and a different winner of MLS cup every year is a negative since there is no top dog to beat and no classic underdog stories.

Of course as with all things the truth, the answer, lies somewhere in the middle.
MLS parity model is essentially a good one but there have already been concessions and modifications in recognition of the fact that it needs to raise the quality of play in order to grow the product further.
Now sure you don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater and have a free for all in MLS like the EPL (even if that model has its own merits as well as pitfalls) but by the same token you don't want to value a vague ideal and notion of parity over growth.
It is all about balance - maintaining some control on spending yet allowing the league to improve by allowing successful and ambitious franchises room to invest in quality players.
Why should an ambitious franchise that wishes to improve their product be prevented from doing so because of a restriction on spending dictated by owners with little to no interest in improving their team for the benefit of their supporters or league as a whole?
That is what you are talking about if you put parity as a first priority - it has a negative drag on MLS as a product as a whole.

So while I agree a 4th DP rule may not be best for the league right now the argument against it should not be based on an ideal of maintaining parity but rather taken in the context of why MLS is/was a parity league to begin with. That is to say that parity is simply a symptom of the necessity of a wage cap rather than an ideal the league was ever striving for.
The reality is that if the owners thought it profitable and safe to do so they would do away with the wage cap ( or vague notions of a parity league) in the blink of an eye.

I think a league wide rise on the pay cap is the better option for the moment though just so long as it is large enough to make a discernible difference to the quality of play and help grow the league.
It may well be prudent to extend the DP rule further in the future though.

 

I said I would be happy with any of these changes. Thrilled if, somehow, all were implemented.

 

Would you call La Liga successful or the 2 horses in that race?

 

both.

 

No American's like it when their teams kick the crap out of every other team and we can thump our chests and look down on everyone else... just like everyone else.

The Texas Premier League, La Liga California, Serie A New England, The Rust Belt Bundesliga, and the SEC would all likely be wildly popular with small towns in each region getting to see the Goliaths coming to play there hometown team. The whole thing would culminate in a North American Champions League with Canada and Mexico; it'd be huge, it'd make so much money you wouldn't believe it. Oh but yeah let's come back to reality none of that is going to happen.

So what do you plan to do in the Untied States when your small market teams, that are hundreds of miles from these super clubs, go out of business because they have no season ticket holders and go out of business? Our other major leagues don't promote parity out of charity they do it because if they didn't there would be no one to play followed by no league.

You can't look to Europe for the model for what MLS should do you have to look at the leagues that work here not there.

 

I contend thatif all were implemented now it would hurt the league by increasing expenses astronomically without direct correlation to increase of revenues. Which is what happened to kill NASL. It would also divert needed youth investment taking a short term view of the league instead of what benefits MLS long term. On its surface we all would say yeah! let's do it all, without really thinking it through. If someone came up to you and asked if you wanted a million dollars would you say yes right? Then after accepting you realize you have to pay it back in a year with 30% interest.
It sounds like a good idea but it really isn't in the long run. We can't keep thinking that if we only increase the salary cap by leaps and bounds it will solve every issue the league has.

 

Easy solution:
If a team goes over the salary cap, they pay a dollar to the league for every dollar they spend over the cap number. That money is then distributed to the other teams in the league. For the sake of argument, assume that the cap is $3mil/year. A team such as LA--in addition to the DPs already on the books--decides that they want to bring in more players to the tune of $3million more per year. LA will actually be paying $6million for that extra $3million in salary, and that $3million is then divided into 18 shares and spread throughout the league.

 

HSG