Los Angeles Times - Saturday, June 18, 2005 MLS Owners Face Thinking Cap Time They want ways to pump up product, maybe even bending salary rules to get marquee players. http://www.latimes.com/sports/socce...la-headlines-sports-soccer&ctrack=2&cset=true Of particular interest - at least to me - were comments made in the sidebar story about the status of the New England Revolution, Kansas City Wizards and San Jose Earthquakes. New England Revolution: Stadium under consideration. Is Kraft seriously considering construction of a soccer-specific stadium, or just telling Major League Soccer brass - and Revs fans - what they want to hear? Kansas City Wizards: Sale pending, possible relocation. About what we've been led to believe was transpiring in Kansas City. A sale is apparently in the works, but at least one suitor is committed to keeping the team in the Greater Kansas City area. San Jose Earthquakes: Sale and relocation to Houston pending. This sounds ominous for fans of the Earthquakes who are counting on the team remaining in the Bay Area. Contrast this comment with that which was made about the Kansas City situation. So, the question is, how much of the information in the sidebar was given to Grahame L. Jones by MLS officials at and/or following Major League Soccer's recent Colorado summit meeting? How much of the information is idle speculation on Jones' part?
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-mls18jun18,1,852983.story?coll=la-headlines-sports Post a link instead, please.
This could be huge. We just had a bumpin' thread yesterday about whether AEG actually plans on spending the cash it would take to back some of its talk at the Metrostars-Lalas news conference.
My thoughts, for what they're worth (no real info, just what seems reasonable): New England: I really think he just put that b/c it would look stupid to write "No stadium plans at all" when every single other team has something regarding a stadium (even if it involves relocation to get one). An SSS may be getting considered, but if Kraft spent about one second on it that would likely be enough consideration. KC and San Jose: It is interesting that there is a difference in the wording for these two markets. "Sale pending, possible relocation" is exactly what we know about KC - local ownership group and Murstein have both bid, maybe more. On the other hand, "Sale and relocation to Houston pending" for the Quakes is an interesting choice of words. "Sale pending, possible relocation to Houston" would follow the 'pattern' he established with KC and would still bring up Houston in particular, but "sale and relocation to Houston pending" without a 'possible' in there makes their relocation sound like it may be already in the works. Could just be Jones' speculation, I suppose, if he has something against San Jose, but I don't understand why he'd word these differently unless he's either a) got inside info or b) not worried about such trivial wording issues.
I brought this up in the NE forum. Cause I'm not so sure what Jones has for his source on that one, I think he implies a little more action than Kraft is taking right now (and by action I mean a one-second thought).
I don't think MLS and AEG would have let that slip out. They know this is a huge controversial issue, not just with Earthquakes fans, but the national media. The media could jump on a relocation and take lots of the positive momentum away.
Good point - makes me think it was probably more Jones' speculation b/c MLS would be worried about negative press if there was a slip - but would the media really "jump" on something MLS-related, positive or negative? There is potential for it, but I doubt the national media would jump on it.
Yet, are we to believe that MLS and AEG are more than willing to risk the negative press that could arise from the public release of such statements as, "... they (MLS owners) agreed large markets such as Los Angeles and New York need more marquee players if they are to reach their potential"? I mean, how do you think that fans/press in markets such as Columbus, Colorado, Salt Lake City, Kansas City and San Jose feel about this? Particularly KC and SJ, where both teams are rumored to potentially be relocation candidates? I think Jones has a reason for the wording he used in describing the situations in KC and SJ... and I think the reason is inside info. I'm not saying that the scenarios couldn't change, but based on Jones' sidebar, I'd put money on the Wizards having a 50/50 chance of remaining in the KC area... with SJ being 75/25 on their way to Houston. Who knows: maybe MLS and AEG were counting on Jones running with the Earthquakes-to-Houston story as a means of ramping up pressure on interested ownership groups in the Bay Area? A "********-or-get-off-the-pot" ploy, so to speak. After all, news on the local stadium construction/ownership front in the Bay Area seems to have waned a bit when compared with efforts in KC. Perhaps the league and AEG are hoping that a bit of leaked news will roil the waters.
I don't tjink we need so much to "bend" the salary cap rules... Just raise it, to about 3 million or so per club with that 1.3 million or so increase to bring some very good player(s) from abroad, either American (ie YA) or foreign..
I tend to agree. Jones probably gets guys lower down in AEG, MLS, etc to talk. He probably can find out what's going on in exchange for promising to not publish it. But then he can put forward tables like this. But that's enough conspiracy talk. I take the latest SSV release as very bad news, but again since so much is private, we can only guess. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question about what option this site was I'm not so sure government privately committing to SSS deals is what we want. The backlash risk seems too big to me. I like the SLC approach better. But I guess there's no time for that. My big question is "Will AEG/HSG sell to local ownership without a SSS deal in place or some kind of binding commitment to deliver one?" Said a little awkwardly but I think I made my point. But then again I guess no other city than Rochester has a SSS deal and there's isn't for a fully major league building yet anyways. I don't think MLS is counting on Jones here or they'd have given him info to present in a more direct way.
I tend to agree with you on this. The salary cap is insanely low now. It makes it hard to go after players that are woth anything especially in South America. I would target up and coming South Americans that would spice up the level of play through their skill level. I think its more about getting better foreign players that would push many of the fringe American players in the league out. A raise the floor type approach. If you could replace a Chris Leitch type player with a better South American I think that would do wonders for the level of play. But if Billionaires want to throw their money at Euro stars and it doesnt bankrupt the league be my guest.
I think if you ask Sam, he'll tell you that the reality is a much, much higher percentage of 50/50 that the wizards will stay in KC.
Fair enough. My point is that while it now appears that the Wizards are at least as likely to stay in KC as they are to move (and probably, more likely to stay put), the Earthquakes are likely on the move to another market.
Folks, let's not forget that the salary cap is a labor relations issue. Any change in maximum or minimum salary would have to be negotiated with the MLSPA. perhaps it is not as easy as we think.
probably true but I'm not if the cap # itself is part of the CBA. Anyways if MLS wanted to raise any salary limit I doubt the players would object. Maybe some borderline starters would be unhappy cause they could get dropped for expensive imports, but I doubt the MLSPU would say no to any increase.
I was thinking of a scenario where the owners say "the cap is increased to $5 mill, but the minimum salary stays the same". You can see the MLSPA possibly objecting to that.
we learned today that Lamar Hunt has Rob Stone's phone #. Stone said that Hunt has 2 real bids (local & outsider who'd move the team). Nothing really new there. Stone seemed to push the rumor of Club America-Houston-Quakes.
let's have a little faith in the owners. i HOPE they've learned something. they're only gonna pay $35 million for someone if they absolutely CONVINCED they can get that money back in merchandising and/or in long term exposure. even with Beckham, i'm not sure there's anyone out there that they can be confident in to do that. i agree with you though, i think they should look for more mid-level guys. i mean, you can get some very good African players just by offering a bit more money. if MLS can get some younger SA or African players to come over here, contribute, and have overall good experiences, that raises the credibility of MLS world-wide. b/c right now MLS is viewed as a retirement league. we just really need to focus on getting a better quality product out there ... people will notice, and people will come. again, the biggest mistake MLS made in the 10 years is underestimate the soccer-savvyness of the American populace. the founders didn't think most Americans could tell the difference between a 1st and 2nd tier league, but they were wrong.
I think the one thing many of us dont consider when we talk about all of this is the fact that Phil Anschutz has more money than GOD and if his one vice in life is the sport of soccer and he could care less if he loses 25 million a year on soccer then all bets are off. Much like Roman Abromavich. If he decides he wants David Beckham to come over here and play for Metro well then its going to happen. I was hanging out with some Costa Rican fans at the Nats game in Salt Lake and their whole view on the MLS was much different than most of ours in the USA. They think MLS will eventually be THE destination for every premier player in North, Central and South America. They know MLS has billionaire owners and its all a matter of them making the committment and going for it. They were telling me the players would rather play in America than Europe for reasons like being closer to home and all the ethnic populations in the USA.
Ok, well my command of the rules is not that great..... Thanks for clarifying.... So taking it as a theory: a 3 million, 3.5 million cap per team would make MLS clubs among the better paying clubs in the hemisphere, save for clubs from the MFL, and a few clubs in Brazil.... Of course, not as great as many clubs in EPL, Bundesliga, La Liga... BUt it would make this league jump a good two, three steps above from where we are, make us more competitive (in the market, that is) Of course, if Andrulis keeps coaching, even 10 million to spend won't mean a darn thing But 3 million,3.5 million is not such a huge risk....if you are an investor, one could always try it for a year or two, see how it works.....
This is the downside of trying to get the exposure with Beckham and a current level of play. You may have a lot more people tuning in to check out the league ... and just as quickly tuning it out if they happen to fall upon a Colorado-Columbus snooze-fest. Getting its coaching and talent improved mus be done at least simultaneously with the big name recruits.
Part of me wonders if all this isn't a little posturing for future owners and/or Vergara/Cue. A little bit of "this isn't an owner's starter kit" for people kicking the tires. I think they will make changes, but I just think some of it is rhetoric to make sure people who are on the outside looking in realize that this is a long-term commitment and not a toy.