I wasn't 100% certain. It is a little concerning that a good number of MLS teams are giving up on their USL affiliates.
Don't know how Arriaga was rated as a prospect when he sign his deal, but he was at $56k in guaranteed compensation in 2019. Other HGs were further along in their contracts or on their 2nd contract. 2020 roster rules say roster spots 21-24 make at least $81,375 and mention the HG player subsidy. Roster spots 25-30 have to make at least $63,547. There is no mention of maximum salaries for the supplemental roster. "Homegrown Player Subsidy Homegrown Player(s) in Supplemental Roster slots 21-30 may earn in aggregate each year up to $125,000 above the Reserve Minimum Salary (if occupying slots 25-30) or Senior Minimum Salary (if occupying slots 21-24). Clubs may use up to $200,000 of their currently available Targeted Allocation Money to sign new Homegrown Players to their first MLS contract, subject to League review and approval. Targeted Allocation Money cannot be used on a Homegrown Player previously signed to MLS." Doesn't sound like you can sign multiple HGs each year at over $300k-ish. It'll be interesting to see 2021 data on HGs on their first contract.
On the topic of USL, there was an Athletic article or something talking about the Reserve league coming back. Don't know if the logic was USL is too competitive and not enough focus on development or not. I'm sure it has something to do with COVID, too. Keep a bigger pool of players together for training/travel and the reserves play each other while you're in town for the MLS game. I would love to hear a detailed discussion as to why or why not RSL wants to have the Monarchs in USL and/or have a Reserves team.
I think it’s a few things 1a. Money 1b. Better control of other contract terms (years, allowing trials/training in Europe periodically, agreement over what happens when an offer comes in from abroad, etc.). Distant 2, 3, 4, 5 is everything else. Money is not an insignificant component. Part of the money component is how it currently effects their family. With some, their family badly needs an extra 50k per year and you can leverage that against them with a USL offer. Some simply cannot say no to that. There are other players whose families don’t need that money so badly. The other big component of this is salary structure internally and externally. If you pay one kid one thing, a player who feels he’s as good is going to expect the same amount of money (or more). Externally, if Dewsnup feels he’s the best GK prospect in the country (objectively not a hot-take), why wouldn’t he ask for more than Brady, Slonina, D. Ochoa, E. Ochoa got? That’s how it works in all sports, even with the kids. This problem (on an internal level) created all sorts of issues at FC Dallas in their ‘01, ‘02, and ‘03 age groups. They erred in some of their initial decisions with the contracts they gave out, and then the next kids they negotiate with ask for similar money/terms. The 1B of the other terms of the deal cannot be ignored. MLS/USL are leagues that give very little power to players. This might happen in some other North American sports leagues, but not in other soccer leagues around the world. These players don’t want to be binded by a lengthy contract with multiple team option years. They also want to be able to train/trial in Europe to generate interest for an eventual move. The offseason component is more applicable to the ones who are playing regularly in MLS, but if you expect a good player to ever sign a USL deal, you have to allow them to head abroad for a trial for a few weeks mid season, if a team wants to bring them in. Some clubs will try to reprimand players for this and other clubs will allow it. This absolutely makes a big difference. The club has to work with the player. They have to be willing to sell if a reasonable offer comes in. Top players are not opposed to signing in USL, but there has to be something in it for them. It can’t be under the same power structure of most contracts in MLS/USL. As to the issue with Monarchs specifically, I think it comes from RSL’s general cheapness. They know there are college draftees/USL caliber players brought in from other countries who can eventually be MLS contributors in a year or two. It’s cheaper to develop them in the USL team than import that part of your roster for big transfer fees and salaries, like some of the wealthier MLS teams do. RSL also knows that there will still room in the team for players such as Ochoa, Dewsnup, Garcia to get minutes. There won’t however be room for Coronel, Nydegger, Conteh, Beavers, Lomeli, etc. There are significant drawbacks from these USL clubs that only play kids. These teams are awful. It’s a survival of the fittest environment. Some players really struggle week after week, and others are able to hold their own. There is no easing them into pro soccer in these teams. They are weaker, slower, smaller, less professional, and less tactically astute. There aren’t leaders in these teams. Even the best of these players suffer from playing in a really bad team that can never keep the ball and is always giving up goal scoring chances. My opinion is that both approaches have upsides and downsides. I think the best approach is something in the middle. I also would though allow academy players who aren’t signed to MLS/USL contracts to play regularly and I’d prioritize their development over some of the USL veterans without real upside. Some of these up and coming academy kids can contribute pretty well to the sporting success in this type of environment, and it goes a long way in eventual negotiations. These kids and advisors don’t come for the weird rules and structure of MLS. They want to be treated like any other player in another country around the world. All of this may be moot as MLS is going to institute a reserve league. USL wants to push these MLS reserve teams out of their league. They don’t think they add to the league. A few might stay, so maybe Real Monarchs competitiveness over the years will help in that regard. I haven’t seen or heard anything official yet though, but it’s expected for this year.
Big thank you for posting a well thought out and detailed response. A couple follow ups, if I may: Re: Euro Trials - as of now, do you know of teams that build that into a players contract? I agree, especially for USL contracts or even MLS kids that are being loaned out to USL, this seems a no brainer. But the liability side of it would make lawyers FREAK. Re: USL Teams that only play kids - I can understand the struggles the teenage team would have against pro players. Asking for a full teenage team is something I've pitched in the past and realize the struggles that would come from it. Like you allude to, I think the best approach would be something similar to an Olympic squad with 2 or 3 "senior" players included with the rest having an age restriction (23 seems a bit too old in this regard, though). My issue, having seen it with the Monarchs, is that when there isn't something in place to push development, head coach's defer to the senior teams. Look at the Monarchs in 2019. Yes, there are a few younger guys, but that team was carried by older USL veteran/MLS experienced players. The championship was cool, but RSL got a 28 year old Mikel Chang out of it who should have been with the first team for the past few years, not just in 2020. Re: Reserve League - I'm not sure what the objective is here. Who is this to satisfy? All this seems to do is hurt both the area for MLS players to recover from injury / get minutes when out of form and decrease the overall level of play of USL. Who benefits from splitting out a reserve league?
On another topic: Doyle did an article about shopping lists for each Western Conference team. For RSL, besides the obvious with ownership, was... the obvious in a striker. It ended with this which peaked my interest: What I'm saying is that they need a veteran No. 9 that Juarez trusts to put out there as soon as the ball is kicked. Wilfried Bony is out of contract. Maybe he'd like it along the Wasatch?
I've heard of it with Philadelphia Union for a few of their younger players they've recently signed to contracts. I don't have a run through of every team, but there are some teams that want complete control, like they have with their other roster players. Some clubs don't react well to these players wanting terms that can get them to Europe as soon as possible (because thats the goal for all these players when they sign in USL/MLS). NYRB are a club I've heard are pretty flexible. Chicago has an agreement with one of their players where the player picked the terms, and the team agreed because they were told the player was leaving to Europe rather immediately if they didn't. Dallas has so many contradictory stances (which has turned into a rather large issue). This won't apply to all players. For instance, I don't think players such as Davis, Farnsworth, Coronel, Bellini could have too many trials lined up in Europe, and are at a level where there's an expectation that they'll be first team regulars by 18-19, and transferring after a few years. Thats only going to apply for the top players (like a Ochoa, Garcia, Dewsnup). These kids have realistic expectations to be gone by their early 20's, and transferred to Europe. Ricardo Pepi started on a USL contract, as did Efrain Alvarez. I don't think there's a stigma with USL contracts. I think it's a matter of what's in the contract. The players have to think there's a significant benefit for them in the long-term from signing. The independent USL teams think they benefit. They don't like playing against a team full of kids. They think it dilutes their league. They have a point, considering some of these games are very lopsided. At the same time, I think if anyone wanted to tune into a USL game or attend one, they'd want to see up and coming players who might be really good for their MLS team, in MLS, in Europe, for the USMNT in a few years. I don't think very many people are tuning into USL games to watch 28 year old journeymen. I think there are tradeoffs, but I do think USL benefits on the whole from it, so I don't think it's a good decision. I think another part of it might be that some MLS clubs want to have their reserve team players train and travel with the first team, and have a schedule that mirrors the MLS team (except they might play earlier in the day or in a smaller stadium). This is done in Mexico, for instance, from what I've been told, and it's been suggested as an approach for MLS. MLS has also started to take a lot of control over player development being in charge of the new academy league system (as opposed to USSF in the past), so the reserve affiliate part in their own reserve league as opposed to playing under the USL umbrella gives them even more control.
My thoughts on this interview with Pablo. First, to be forthright, I wasn’t completely negative upon learning he was coming to RSL. My attitude is more “It is what is is... maybe it will work out”. The guy has a reputation and there is something to be said for that. In the posted interview he emphasized the following: 1) that a change in culture is the priority. I agree. My response is, “Can this truly happen without a change of the Head Coach?” My answer is “No”, but we will see. 2) defensive set pieces must improve. With this, I agree. I think this is coachable. 3) the build up is strong, but the finishing is weak. I think we all agree with the latter half of this analysis. It’s not coachable. It can only be improved through the acquisition of better talent. So, Pablo can help by infusing a competitive attitude. He can help to coach a better defense on set pieces. He can’t do s*** about improving our finishing...which is the major deficiency of the Senior team.
With our lousy finish last year, the SuperDraft is perhaps relevant in ways it often hasn't been over the years. We have the 7th, 34th, 61st, and 84th pick (the latter because the draft is down to three rounds, and any team owning a fourth from a past trade gets a compensatory pick). The draft is on 21 January at noon Mountain. The Draft Tracker is here. Top Ten prospects are listed here. Full list of eligible player is here. I expect we'll make a first round pick and then skip the others, unless it is seen as a way to add Monarchs players.
I went through a lot of those in Disney a couple years ago. They'd pretty much tell you to grab two or three since one would die before your slushie was gone
I have no idea what to make of the draft. We haven't picked well, but haven't had many high draft picks. The two from last year played with the Monarchs, but weren't retained. Beltran was the best high pick. Brown from 2019 is still with the Monarchs. Holness was 5th in 2016. Should have taken Roldan in 2015 instead of trading him. Otherwise we've picked late/made poor selections. Almost have have had better luck in later rounds. I'd be surprised if we pick more than two players and I doubt either makes the first team.
For the most part it's a waste of time, that's what I make of it. Also, with draft on Thurs, and MLS still planning for an early March start date, we typically see teams reporting to camp at end of Jan. How confident does the current squad make you (see league sites projects starting XI below)? To me this is a non-playoff team (again) without significant changes. https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2021...news-latest-moves-and-projected-lineups-every Projected XI (4-3-3, right to left): Putna; Herrera, Glad, Silva, Toia; Everton Luiz, Kreilach; Ramirez, Rusnak, Meram; Rubin
It could be a playoff team if all but 4 teams in the West make the playoffs. If it’s a regular season, probably not. Unless you expect other teams to suck just a little more. Then, they might squeak in the playoffs. A really good question though is, “is this a playoff lineup with Freddy as a head Coach?” Answer: He’ll no. Could an actual MLS or better level head coach get this lineup in the playoffs? Without a doubt. Yes.
This is a non-playoff team, or maybe sneak in the last spot or two if other teams blow it. Weaknesses: - Silva and Toia ?ramirez? - Kreilach/Rusnak issue not resolved - No MLS-elite scoring threat. - no MLS-elite playmaker, unless maybe Rusnak can step up like he did after Cassar was let go. For some reason, Meram has always seemed like a 60min player when he starts, or 30min game finisher. And Ochoa needs to get minutes this year. At least 5games. It ain’t like Putna is in the USMNT pipeline. We need to raise his value, either as a franchise player are as a big sale.
I think that is mostly what the draft has become in this era. I'd guess maybe only a third of 1st rounders last year signed with senior club. Two or three earned significant playing time, for me Daryl Dike was the clear standout in last half of the season. If I'm remembering right, he even picked up player of the month honors at some point.
Check out some info on the new RSL Handbook. https://www.rslsoapbox.com/2021/1/18/22237358/the-rsl-way-guiding-vision-mission https://kslsports.com/451244/the-rs...ed-on-cultural-developments-continued-growth/ Link to the club page: https://www.rsl.com/rsl-way
Also, everyone that can, listen to the Allocation Disorder from 1/18 on The Athletic. I thought I was middle of the road in regards to the CBA discussions, but I'm firmly on the side of the players on this one. They gave up a bunch already last summer, they shouldn't have to give up more.
I both get this (The RSL Way thing) and absolutely don't, at the same time. Without a new owner, this seems really... weird. Had a new ownership come in and used this as their way of saying what they're about and how they're going to do this, great. As is? Um... ok? It feels like a ******** you to DLH, which I fully support. Otherwise, the actions of the team in the past few months contradict a large majority of what this document says its about.
If you are on an RSL temporary management team with no FOR SURE new owner on the near horizon and the season started... wouldn't you want to redefine what the culture is? This is not only a natural step and an essential step, but one that new owners can embrace and potentially add to as a way to personalize. I see nothing to complain about here. Glad that new management is actively working to address culture issues that sunk the boat.
One correction: This isn't new management. These guys are all the same as they were before. Kimball is the only one you could call "new". I feel its a bit of the cart before the horse in execution. nothing in it is damning. in fact, it is really good stuff. It's just so weird with how it is being executed. Think of a startup saying what their culture is without a CEO/Founder. It feels a lot like that
With the draft Thursday, RSL has pick #7 which isn't a terrible spot. As Doyle points out here, some good draft picks have happened in years past, it is just a less important tool to build a team. So RSL could/should look to leverage this to make the team better. The hard part, as you look at the draft order and the "needs" of the teams in front of us, is that the talent we are looking to obtain is going to be picked off quickly. Draft Order and need: Austin - MF & Overall Depth FCC - Winger & LB HOU: CB & GK DC: CB & LB ATL: CB & GK cRp: FW & LB RSL: CB & RB The draft has proven to be a decent place to find a CB, which is great for RSL. The problem is that three of the six teams ahead of us are also in need of that spot. The SBI draft board lists a lot of CBs, so there might still be talent there when we pick. However, in a bit of irony, all of the mock drafts I've seen have us picking a forward. So... who knows.
So with the 7th pick, RSL should get someone that can contribute in the near future, but I'm afraid they don't have enough talent evaluators right now to find that player. Plus, the 2020 season didn't go to plan, so you're projecting even more based on 2019 data. Also, RSL has 27 of 30 roster spots filled and 3 international spots to use. From the sound of it, they have enough GAM/TAM to bring in at least one guy on the Everton/Kreilach level. There's also the new U-23 stuff where the player doesn't count towards your budget and RSL is looking at a 19 y/o player. I would much rather use the remaining spots on higher level talent (really what the team is lacking) than a draft pick. However, if you take someone that high, how do you convince them to sign with the Monarchs? One name that's intriguing is Kizza, a top striker that didn't play in 2020 as he was kicked off the team. No details as to what happened, but this team needs more attacking talent up top. I really don't want to see a winger drafted. Take best player, but I'm not sure it makes sense to take anyone to help with the backline, already have lots of youth. I'd be fine with taking multiple players in this draft if we didn't have Morgan, Portillo and Schmitt on the roster.