Atlanta United's Bocanegra: 'We want to challenge for championships now' USL coaching moves: Anthony Pulis takes over at Saint Louis FC Save the Crew? Stadium proposal will at least spark discussion Soccer America Brad Friedel on how Mauricio Pochettino helped him become a coach uk news MLS Conference finals: The road to the play-offs SkySports Hamilton County still hopes to convince Major League Soccer to use Paul Brown Stadium Cincinnati NASL Struggles Have Massive Impact on Professional Soccer in Florida The Mane Land
Didn't read the 442 article about player movement.....but next CBA I hope the union steps up on this. Completely understand.why they really ddin't in the past. Wouldn't have been wise and they had more important fish to fry....like player benefits, minimum wage, etc. I get why MLS owners had all of the restrictions. They made sense at the time whether someone understands that or not. Well, time to loosen things up a bit. There has to be some give, and the movement/rights of youth players needs to be addressed. Time to start growing up in this department.
Hopefully the owners realize they got away with murder at the last collective bargaining session. Doubt it, but it would be nice to see MLS finally take off the training wheels.
I'm not sure they got away with murder. The main body of players had different priorities at the time. They got the benefits, and more security they were looking for, along with more jobs being added if I recall (makes the union happy). It made sense for the rank and file guy at that time considering the situation. Each can have his own bias on if it wasn't enough or to much, but it came off as reasonable for what it was IMO. I contended last time that we may easily see our first work stoppage this time around. I would still bet on it, even if it is just a week for the union to prove a point. If a key negotiating point, after all the bluster and rhetoric, turns out to be player movement and rights ownership, whether for returning players, or youth players, then it would show that the rank and file are feeling pretty good about their day to day situation. The youth player issue of course wouldn't be as big of a concern to the union unfortunately. That is mine. Folks need to remember, it was the bottom 2/3's who drove the approval votes. We are gonna see what number that is now.
Rank and file players want pay to increase steadily, but not so suddenly that the league becomes focused on getting green cards for Argentinians as rapidly as possible. As such, getting other rights like increased free agency should be a priority at the next negotiation.
How did they get away with murder? If your a player voting on a contract that involves you, what would you vote for? Much higher wages? Could cost you your job if the cap jumps substantially higher in one season. Free agency was the key and next round it's lowering the age and how you move, not if you can be a free agent. That's a win if your voting and 23 to 27 & get to vote again five years later. The minimum salary for senior roster players goes from 48,500 in 2014 when you're voting to 60,00 in 2015 & finishes at 70,250 in 2019. 22,00 raise over five years. Plus 8 more teams in the future that extends your career possibly or gives you a chance for more career paths in soccer. They won a lot if you ask me.
I also finally see the quality of the average young American improvong to the point where it makes sense for them. Some might argure that it is a CBA to early for that, and they are probably right, but I do feel that we are finally heading that way.
Like I said....personnal bias always shows through....even when you are convinced you aren’t being biased. For the time and situation the players did fine. This one will be fun. The other negotiations were pretty straight forward amd kind of obvious. There might be some real curve balls this time around. If I am a cycle to early, as some have suggested, very possible....then the next one will be rollicking IMO. There will be a new TV contract in place, and there will be quite a bit more money around. The young US homegrown player will be much improved, and I can’t see them standing for the staus quo at that point.
20k-seat stadium within Chicago city limits, eh? United Soccer League expansion team coming to North Side site proposed for Amazon's HQ2 Chicago Tribune A #USL club is headed to Chicago's North Side.#USL Story ↓https://t.co/T0rBI7AI6V pic.twitter.com/xwmBpCYoEg— USL Championship (@USLChampionship) November 21, 2017
They were smart for focusing on basic working conditions and whatever free agency they could since as I predicted, the ownership was going to bring add much more money themselves than the players could possibly negotiate. Strike was useless for union and still will be for the foreseeable future If NFL teams can easily field teams with replacement scab players, it is even easier digging up a bunch of soccer players. However, the wide availability of players is a double edged sword which is why the union instead needs to focus on work stoppages and slowdowns. In the long run, the more MLS has to compete in a world market, the less sense it makes for the league to try to squeeze a few buck from US players. It doesn't help the league of key players mope or act out because everyone know they are under paid or if US player refuse to do promotions or many other things the enhance the leagues brand.
So do you expect a wild cat strike if the rumors of a hug increase in TAM are true? Funny I missed all the rancor that came about from previous unilateral increases made by the owners. Seemed like many were really happy to see a lot of high priced players that often under performed existing players come in the league.
TAM applies under some narrow circumstances, was outside the CBA, and was created and expanded while roster size and the number of teams continued increase. So no.
"I think that the TAM funds should have simply been added to the salary budget and clubs should be allowed to spend them as they want to spend them within the context of how each club approaches building a team," What he's unhappy about is that the TAM mechanism to artificially keep a lot of salaries low instead of freeing teams to spend money how they want which could increase the salaries of more union members. Not sure how this relates to the people who somehow got it in their heads that players have been afraid of more money coming into the league and cluelessly keep repeating it against all evidence to the contrary. JasonMa since your a big repper of this type of thinking why don't you explain?
I may have legitimately misunderstood the crux of the debate here. What I would say is that the owners basically dangled similar money before the CBA was signed as a cap increase, but it wasn't an opportunity they followed up on, instead choosing free agency, even in a very, very limited form. The owners then allocated that money in a way that was specifically designed to go to new players rather than current ones, and this understandably irked the current ones. That makes sense, because the former carries risks that the latter doesn't. You may well be right that players are often not pragmatic enough to go home and think 'once they raise the salaries, will I still have a job?' Many of them are hyper-competitive, so they might think they'll make it just fine in the better league (some will even be right). But it isn't surprising that when offered a trade-off between some bennies that don't carry risk and some that do, the players took the former.
If you look at the salary curves - the place where MLS was most different from other US leagues was not at the low end, but instead at the 70 -95 percentile, right where TAM money is now being spent. Just because they increase the cap, it doesn't mean its going to get spent evenly or on guys at the low end. Your best way to increase those wages are to bargain for minimum wage. What players lacked compared to the non-native counterparts was leverage. If they didn't take the one deal their MLS team offered them they had to work on a different continent, while Europeans and South Americans could choose 50 or more teams within a reasonable flight home. So why negotiate what MLS is going to do anyway, when the thing you really want is leverage to get a less one sided deal. Now would, the players prefer MLS get rid of the all the goofy mechanisms to screw them, of course which is why you got the quotes you got in the ESPN article.