It was being discussed in the Robbie Keane thread because people assumed they were changing the rules for LA. The current rumor is that the cap hit for young DPs is going to be reduced.
I hope that is correct. If they change the rules for L.A. I may return my tickets and start watching something else.
I missed that. I guess that MLS will be doing what they do in the A-league, with the young marquee player.
the league's business is dynamic. "more" (and "better") players are available in the summer (by being out of contract or more readily/cheaply sold at this time of year during other league's off-season primary transfer window period). MLS (clearly) doesn't always know what it needs (in terms of roster rules and regulations) or when it needs it. it is a moving target, managing the business of the league and trying to grow/improve that business. DP amendments are necessary and fine (whatever they may be, and whenever they may be needed). if Keane (or any DP anywhere) helps his club find success (on and off the field) in the league (and especially on the field in a competition like the CCL), then administrative/operational changes that MLS makes (even mid-season) will be "more acceptable." (I hope the league opts to eventually, or soon, get rid of the silly and no longer all that precise "Designated" player label, and just go with the more honest "off-budget" label for these players.)
If the rule change is what people are suggesting, having it go into effect even a month earlier could have actually had an impact on teams in the transfer market. That is my point. And more specifically to me, the Sounders would have had more cap space to play with potentially giving them more options in the transfer window, granted they didn't make any moves as is:-/
fwiw, and if anyone is looking to see how a new "amendment" will work or alter the current rule/regulation, here's what the league has posted on the 2011 MLS Roster Rules up to this point in the season (to August 15, 2011), with respect to DPs. http://www.mlssoccer.com/2011-mls-roster-rules
absolutely. MLS can be a slow-moving single-entity of a business. they can be "late" with ideas or implementation. they (apparently) aren't really sure what they need within their own rules/regulations book for their own business. and they're likely to make amendments and operational changes at "weird" (and perhaps not incredibly all that well thought out) time, or at late moments when a "rule change" could have been "better" and "more helpful" earlier, for the overall business of the league.
It's possible the league only noticed something in the Robbie Keane DP deal that could cause a bit of controversy, and it wasn't noticed until now with this deal. Maybe also the reason for a possible amendment to the current MLS DP rules could be, the league wants the Galaxy to compete well in their run to the MLS Cup and also represent the MLS strongly in the CONCACAF Champions League and better RSL's run which didn't end well for the league. It's possible as well the league is becoming more serious about MLS clubs making more of a respectable showing in these competitions after a summer of International competitions where many MLS clubs were routed. Garber did say he wanted MLS clubs to start taking these non-league competitions more seriously and that's all the reason for a possible amendment to current DP rules.
My guess is the changes that are announced tomorrow were probably planned for in the off-season, but MLS is announcing it earlier to deflect any attention from people complaining about MLS bending the rule for LA. MLS will say it allows teams to prepare in the offseason better by announcing it now as opposed to after the season. I'm not opposed to what LA and MLS are doing in order to get Keane, I just hope that Chivas USA gets something out of the deal for taking on JPA in addition to LA paying his salary.
As long as the rules apply the same for everyone, I have no issue. If this is a change to make the Robbie Keane thing work, then I call BS.
If the rule is truly in regard to young DPs it may have more to do with the Adu deal than with Keane.
Even though the Robbie Keane deal was the last, and perhaps biggest signing in the summer window EVERY MLS teams transfer window just closed. Perhaps they learned a few things from the deals that brought in Frings, Keane, Kovermans, as well as Adu, and some of the lesser known DPs. I think 8 or 9 were signed in the window. People need to chill with the LA hatred, the Galaxy has always been the club that has pushed the envelope and dragged the "slow growth" crowd of owners into the era we are in today. Remember when they singned Hernandez? They had that stupid draft and gave up Mathis and Meyers to NY and Franchino to the Revs? Yea they totally bent the rules for LA on that one. The Galaxy had an opportunity to attract a visible player and they took it. Maybe if more clubs had reputations that were appealing to famous quality players they would be able to attract top end talent as well. I doubt Wayne Rooney is going to want to live in Columbus any time soon, Messi isn't going to come knocking on San Jose's door when he's 30. They might want to live in NYC or LA though. That's just how these things work.
So you're saying that it's the Galaxy's reputation that attracts these players..and then you go on to say it really has nothing to do with the Galaxy and everything to do with the city the teams play in. Strange few sentences there. Obviously it has to do with the cities, and as you stated "that's just how these things work"..as in, the clubs have NO control over it.
Obviously its a combination of the city and the club that creates the attraction and the reputation. Chivas USA for example isn't getting mentioned by players as a destination even though they play in the same exact place as the Galaxy.
in my view, those aren't exclusive conditions. the amendment(s) announced in August 2011 could be (in part) both "a change to make the Robbie Keane thing work" and be new regulations/rules that "apply the same for" every MLS team (and some conditional set of the "high-earning/off-budget type" league signings).
So you're stance is that Chivas USA could attract these players, if only their owners were not incompetent?
Teams should have the option of decoupling transfer fees and DP status. Teams should be able to cover transfer fees outside of salary from own pocket. Look at Diego Chara, he's a DP solely because of transfer fees i believe. His salary is only 42K. The 42K is the only thing that should work against the salary budget (and therefore non-DP), with the transfer fee being picked up by the club. This has more to do with younger up and coming players, not to take up DP status. It's in response, in my opinion, to Fabian Castillo, Diego Chara, and Freddy Adu acquisitions. Very little to do with Robbie Keane.
there are no shortage of players that only care about money. Specially players from outside of Europe. Look at Dayro Moreno, a good Colombian player who was going to be signed by Sporting Lisboa but chose Xolos of Tijuana by monetary reasons alone.
Look we all know that all this roster math, is because we have a cap in effect. And as the league gets more mature-stable-solvent, these rules will be consolidated until there is a hard cap of $X.XM My only problem is that there is this constant tug between what the league wants to market, players or franchises... All DP rules are for the former, all Cap rules for the latter. The NBA takes a player-model and the NFL takes a franchise-model. My big problem with the player-model, its 1) its expensive 2) its has a time stamp on it. See Michael Jordan. The other problem is that if the league does not like the image of the domestic talent, it will suppress it, see Allen Iverson. You also see the NFL venturing into this territory as well... However in a franchise-centric model, there is continuity for the fan base as an entity, a.k.a, solid stream of revenue, because you are catering to them - not those there for the spectacle. Its not to say there can't be both. But if you are not going to increase the Cap dramatically, you need to expand the Academy rules if you expand the DP rules, because this is the only talent leverage a "small-market" team might have against Uncle Phil's Precious out West. In an of itself, once Beckham is done playing, the DP rules will turn into Cap - he an only he is the outlier. Most "marquee" players total salaries probably don't come close to his.
Building on what has been written above, the whole concept of who a DP is needs to change. Saborio, Chara, Castillo, etc. should not be considered DP's. They are good players, but are not the big movers like Beckham and Henry- those who the rule was intended to attract. As we all know, they are DP's because of transfer fee alone (which lets face it, is a modest amount at best), and labeling them as DP's creates an outsized expectation for the player, team, and league that is not warranted. I hope the rule change allows a younger player with potential that is similar to an Andy Najar (who is not DP quality YET, but if brought into the league would be a DP beacuse there would be a transfer fee involved) to be brought into the league without DP status.
Yes, they are. At least the way I meant it, the rules applying equally would apply both forward and back in time. In plainer, more precise, English. If the Keane (or Adu, or any other deal) would have NOT been permitted under the rules at the time, and this 'rule change' is needed to make them legal, then that is BS. I know Columbus has been in negotiations to bring players in, and the deals didn't get done. I know other clubs (Chivas, for one) also tried and failed. If the new rules had been in effect, maybe those teams would have been able to get those deals done. Yet LA/Philly are allowed to break the rules (and help their teams) while other teams were not. THAT is the beef, if it turns out to be the case. Either you are running a legit league, or you are not. And in the past, Garber & Co have bent the rules for LA. That is fact. If doesn't make it OK if it is the new rule going forward for everyone, as the other teams who were playing by the existing rules have already been penalized. Now, if all the acquisitions have been perfectly legit under existing rules, then I have no beef.
That's my thinking, too. Some financing maneuvering was very much needed to get Adu to MLS. Perhaps the DP rule adjustment will be more about which costs column transfer fees go in now?
Ah, so this issue would make the league legit or not IYO? It's all in the eye of the beholder. DOesn't matter to most folks, outside a few BS geeks. There have been hundreds of threads on topics similar or close to "rule/money/transfer" issues. The "complaint/whine" is how it's gonna drive away the true hardcore fans .... "you'll see!!!!" Still waiting. This need to have placed in stone transparent rules is one that's been learned through mature sport business models in this country. MLS doesn't have the luxury to make changes at seasons end when the important period to get players is the summer. As has been pointed out, MLS is still evolving/growing and changing. The situation is fluid and different. These "slights" are no different than what happens everywhere else in soccer, where teams "tap up" players, steal other youth players for the most part, hoard local talent, set up fake jobs to get U18's eligible, use family/agents to disrupt, already try ways to get around the so called "new financial rules by FIFA", etc, etc, etc...you name it. The % of folks who get outraged is minimal. If it makes sense and improves the league, and is implemented moving forward then so be it. The whining about the past, and what's fair, what's legit (ha) and justice is simple, naive and driven by being over emotional for the most part.