After being selected by Orlando, he was traded to DC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jairo_Arrieta#D.C._United
I'm sorry to hear about your mother. That being said, if MLS wants to be a 'big boy league', then they need to try and get in line with the real ones first. I think a lot of people are looking at this and saying it's one or the other, single entity status quo or a completely free market. There is a middle ground. For future reference, I'm putting the word 'faux' with freedom of movement from now on. Until I see a legit legal or logistical reason that players in MLS are signed with the league (like now), but the rules are changed so that the re-entry draft dies and free agents can go where they want, I think that's the ideal scenario. If a team cuts a player, or that player's contract expires, that team should hold no rights to him. It's just plain common sense. And the only players that get cut or run their contracts out are middle to low tier players. Not like we're talking about DP's here who can tilt the balance of the league. I really don't see how someone like SKC holding Herculez Gomez rights helps the league or the team. If anything it hurts because the league is missing out on a US international with ties to a community that MLS is desperate to break in to (different discussion). Players like Bedoya and Mix (until recently) have avoided MLS due to roster rules. Charlie Davies did the same before his car accident. Everything about the league is changing, accept the rules. It just feels so 90's still with dumb shit like this. League needs to evolve. Not give up total control, just a little.
There are plenty of opportunities in the NASL. Sure they don't pay as much--sometimes. But this is not uncommon to businesses in very specific fields. Mine is one of them. Technical editing is not a big field. Much of it is now outsourced overseas. If you are in aerospace, for another, you probably aren't going to get to choose to live in Boise. Seattle or LA? Much better chance. I also think the current waiver rules are not as you define them. When Dante got scr*wed it was one thing. Today? Not so much. The last CBA changed a lot of that. Guys getting cut do have the chance to catch on with another team. It may not be where they would prefer to go, sometimes. But that's real life. The real analogy in your scenario is "We don't need you in LA but they could use you in Seattle. Want a job with our company--go to Seattle." Happens every day in these United States. Athletes just think they are owed something different. If your team didn't want you at price X why should you be able to demand that the team you want picks you up for the same price. No, this is more about players wanting true free agency.
Why? Their model works in the US. 20 years of soccer have proved it. It ain't necessarily better because someone else does it differently. A "middle ground" may end up like being "a little pregnant". Again, I am not saying they are right. But I'm saying they are not going to yield lightly. Again, the contracts and terms are fairly clear. This is the way MLS works. The players are not required to sign a contract if they do not want to. Especially the players who were overseas. And again it it the league that holds the rights. An employer does have the right to tell you where you will work if you want to work for them. A smart employer will make accommodations. And they should keep their promises (and MLS learned their lesson with Caliguri). But they do not have to make accomodations. And from an owners perspective, what's in it for them?? Some act like the sole purpose of a business is to provide people jobs. That's a nice benefit, but it isn't their primary purpose. If it is, they probably will go bankrupt in short order. How does free agency benefit the owners? To have a deal, it has to benefit both sides.
The only way a team retains a players rights is if they offer a new contract with a increase in terms to the CBA. The increase depends on how many years a player has been in MLS. If a player is chosen in the re-entry draft they can still refuse to sign an MLS contract.
The dominant model has some major problems. Third-party ownership and inflation in transfer market prices, the ability of 'sugar-daddy' owners to spend unlimited sums (only partially mediated by Financial Fair Play)... There are a lot of things not to like there. With that being said, the MLS is far form perfect. If I had to make one complaint it would be that the rules are taking on a Byzantine complexity that foster a sense of arbitrariness on the part of the league suits. It often feels like they are just making it up as they go and changing the rules willy-nilly to suit the moment... The US has managed to isolate most of its professional sporting culture from the rest of the world pretty effectively for over a century now, so I'm not expecting that to change. We are just going to run soccer leagues our way, I guess.
No argument that MLS is far from perfect. Your complaint has been mine--no transparency. Heck they aren't even translucent. We don't call it Calvin Ball for nothing. But we also have a fairly stable league. And it's not like parts of our model haven't been adopted overseas. I well remember the uproar when numbers were assigned to players rather than to positions--and names were put on shirts in Europe.* Now it is normal. But the idea came from US sports (and was critiqued as such rabidly at the time). In other sports, European countries are moving away from Pro/Rel too. The DEL, for example, hasn't been pro/rel for some time, except on a voluntary basis. Too many teams went bankrupt trying to make the jump up. I think the KHL is the same way. I also prefer the fact that in the US there is no such thing as an "advance contract". You cannot sign with another team as a free agent until your contract runs out. It eliminates a big source of conflict of interest. My Gladbach team lost two different German cup matches, for example, to Bayern when Mathaeus and then Dante blew PKs in the shootout in games played after their transfers to Bayern were announced. Was it on the up and up? Likely--but it still smells bad. *For those who aren't aware of this, as we do have some younger fans here, numbers used to be assigned on a game by game basis--the starters knew they were starting if they found a shirt bearing 1-11 at their locker. I have old programs from the late 1970s where I wrote the number in by the starter's name, as the program only gave an alphabetical list of potential players.
It would be nice if more people would understand this. The European leagues have a lot to dislike. They hold these yearly SoccerEx conventions where Don Garber is always a featured guest and everybody is envious about a lot of what MLS does. And we should. Oikophobia is rampant in American soccer culture and, frankly, I don't think there's much question that with a lot of people it's a primary motivation to get into soccer. None of my business and don't much care. Whatever. But a lot of people let this response blind them to the parts of the US sports model which is not only best for the US but very possibly best, period. Either way, there's just no question that the MLS and US system, whatever the positives and negatives, has produced a viable soccer league where none existed and where, frankly, many many people insisted it could not ever exist. Those who want to come along now, 20 years later, and say, essentially "Nice job guys, now all you need to do to REALLY succeed is to dump everything that got us here because I've got a better way" (cough*Ted Westervelt*cough) deserve to be regarded with a great deal of skepticism
I saw this on the the MLS news thread , it's very interesting to see how many minutes these guys get.
A division among the owners. Saputo complained about TFC's free spending ways and Leiweke fires back. Says TFC will have $50 mil in revenue this year and he doesn't want to count the mints on pillows. http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/1...saputo-mlse-chief-tim-leiweke-in-war-of-words
God, that article wanted to make me vomit. But I'm with Saputo to a point - regardless of whether TFC wins or not this year, it's ridiculous when you have one team spending $70m on players and other teams who are making do with 1/10th or less of that.
Law of Averages (especially when augmented by money) demand that won't stay that way forever. This notion that it's ok for teams to outspend us by a significant margin because they haven't won anything "yet" is an asinine response. Shall we show pictures of "Trophies the Crew have won since clubs started spending tens of millions on players"? That'll be just as bare as the one above - and these pre-season trophies don't count.
How many years did they participate in the Disney Pro Soccer Classic and never won it, they only had to play 2 teams to win the Canadian Championship. Any tournament with more than 2 teams they can't win it. Hell NYRB has even won the Disney tournament.
The Philly reporter gives a good run down of Discovey Claims and "bona fide" offers and how teams can keep players rights. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...-deal-for-defender-Steven-Vitoria.html?update
MLS Could Retain Single-Entity & Offer Free Agency by Steven Bank at American Soccer Now. The author, a UCLA law professor, describes a potential analog to MLS in the University of California system which operates as a single entity - one university with ten campuses - but has a form of stipulated "free agency" where campuses can offer specific salary increases - 8%, in their case - to lure faculty from one UC campus to another. But if a faculty member receives a legitimate offer from outside the UC system, any campus is allowed to offer compensation to compete, even if it's greater than the 8% limit. In the one situation, it's two (or more) campuses competing against each other for faculty but the salary increase is limited. In the other situation, it's the UC system (one or more campuses) competing against an outside university.
That is a little skewed. TFC have 3 high priced players making roughly $20M in annual salary combined. All high quality players, difference makers. But the beauty of the DP rule limits the difference that spending can make by keeping it only on those 3 guys. Roster building is so important in this league. Having low paid guys who can ball makes the real difference. We barely had 1 DP last year and none of the big spenders played us off the field. Saputo has no one to blame but himself and his GM.
You can't fault TFC for being profitable. Maybe Saputo should just invest more into the team and his fans wouldn't be running out the door.
I dont want to see the DP limit change. Keep the playing field some what balanced. Raise the cap but also put a minimum spending amount as well. I think this new CBA needs to really clarify how players are transferred from USL Teams to the first teams.
Oh, wow... you've cracked the code. Just spend all the money to win. Quick, someone tell the Yankees. As zman said, TFC has inflated their salary budget by dropping huge contracts on three players. Good for them. They are allowed to pay their DPs however much they want. Does that mean they'll be 10 times better because Altidore is making more than what some teams might spend on 10 roster spots? Is a $6 million Bradley any better or worse than a $10 or $10 billion Bradley, or is he the same player regardless of the amount on his paycheck? Sure, it's great for TFC to have three very, very talented players. I'd gladly take them if they wanted to come join our merry little squad. But three players does not a team make. Look at what TFC has accomplished by signing three (Four? Et tu, Gilberto?) DPs. They've managed to lock up more than a third of their budget into three positions. Now they get to fill out 17 roster spots with the leftovers. Have fun with that. Injuries? Call-ups? Let's test that depth. This league is still very much about putting together a good team, not just bringing in three superstars. Why has LA been so successful in the DP era? Is it because they've dumped money into a few player? Or maybe because they have a great coach/GM, a supportive ownership group, and good scouting? I dunno. Let's ask NYRB, TFC, and Seattle. As for your comment regarding how many trophies we've won since clubs started spending tens of millions on players... with this being the first year a team is spending so much, I guess we'll have to find out.