Discussion in 'MLS: News & Analysis' started by cpwilson80, Sep 5, 2006.
Wahl is superior to that hack of a journalist Trecker.
Somebody remember this for the next time that someone foolishly says that owners have no control over their teams in the single-entity model.
Somebody remember this when Eddie Johnson leaves MLS on a free-transfer.
This is more the exception than the rule, as trades like Peguero have shown that the league holds final say.
The difference here was a new ownership group who had not yet been annouced.
That's quite a reason to comply - especially when it's the red headed step child. MLS would have been foolish to do anything that pissed off OnGoal before the deal was annouced, as that deal helped everyone in MLS.
I forgot to add that Wahl is amongst the elite soccer writers in the US. This was more good stuff.
He can't leave on a free until after the 2008 season.
However, under the terms of his new deal, he can buy out his own contract for $4 million starting in January 2007 and become a free agent. Of course, he's not going to spend that money unless some team comes a-callin', offering him that money in return.
And right now, it doesn't appear that they are.
If the Peguero is the rule and not the exception, why do we only hear about Peguero?
On the other hand, I can name at least five players without trying at all, who are where they are because of ownership involvement.
It seems to me that you're getting "exception" and "rule" mixed up.
this, for me, sums up a lot of the issues in the debate:
Hopefully Dempsey, Joseph and Johnson stay healthy, remain productive, and get good offers come January. Time will tell.
I'll bet that's exactly what Real Sociedad was offering. Why else was it a loan with a sale option?
Knowing this little nugget, the whole thing suddenly makes more sense.
1. The loan-> sale makes sense for RS because they can try out EJ and see if he's worth $4M. $4M is alot of cash for clubs outside the EPL and outside the CL, so they'd want to take EJ out for a test drive.
2. It makes sense that the owners nixed the deal, because to them it looks like RS takes away EJ during the stretch drive and playoffs for a free, extended, injury risking tryout.
To the league that's a good deal, given the Jan 2007 out clause. To the club, it's not.
And you're basing this supposition on what exactly?
It was a loan with a view to a sale. Such deals, so far as I know, always specify the sale price before the loan takes place. Given this clause, why would the sale price be higher (from RS' perspective) or lower (from MLS' perspective)?
well, MLS was never guaranteed the $4 million buyout, so from their perspective they could settle for less, and still consider it profitable.
That is absolutely not the case. The Investor/Operators for their respective teams have the primary/final say in player signings and transfers.
The very fact it happened at all tells you that the decision rests with the league. I think the new ownership position stands up as extenuating circumstances, and the reason why EJ is still here.
A few things on this...
Loans of top players are usually paid - think of them more as rentals than loans. Some are in the $m per year as loaners. Only youngsters are usually free loans, with or without wage contributions from the receiving team.
Injuries are, however, always a risk.
Also, they wouldn't necessarily have to buy out at $4m, my understanding is that this would be an option for EJ to release himself from the contract - any free agreed between MLS and the prospective club would supercede this and could be accepted....even if it were $100.
EJ might never exercise the buyout clause, so if MLS gets $3 million (just to pull a number out of the hat) right now, they might go for it, since they're making an educated guess that the $4 million might not ever be coming from EJ.
If EJ would have gone to Real Sociedad and bomb then his value would be zero! Im glad the Wizards owners nix this deal. I dont understand why MLS would consider a loan because there is no guaranteed EJ will be successful. The only option for MLS is selling and try to get as much as they can guaranteed.
I'm glad all four of the mentioned players are not going overseas. In regards to Johnson, we only have to look at Ben Olsen to see what can happen on a loan to buy deal. Fortunately, Olsen recovered. Dempsy and Jospeh are a little trickier because they don't make much money. I would guess those guys are gone after their contracts expire unless MLS offers up big cash pretty soon.
Somebody remind Knave that owners are free to make their own decisions, good and bad.
Galarcep's ESPN.com article about MLS transfers from Sept 1
While MLS might have initiated the conversation, apparently NYRB had no problem with the move. JPP wasn't taken against NYRB's will, despite what good copy that story makes.
That's my kind of rebuttle and I'll stand firmly corrected.
Where's my thumbs up icon?
Good, apparently NYRB have got some sense....$800k for Peg was a good price.
If I am not mistaken Red Bull didn't want to trade JPP.
But he's gone.
EDIT: Skip it, U already answered to this..
If RBNY is really receiving 250K of the 800K transfer fee for Peguero, that's appalling. Teams usually receive about 20% of the transfer fee. The Crew would certainly liked to have received nearly a third of the fee for McBride, John, and Friedel.
To be honest, I normally think your posting is (looking for the right word) crude or not the most objective, and don't particularly agree with your viewpoints.
However, kudos for this, as I would say to any poster. I'll be back later with some rep when it allows me later.
The league does? Really? So it was just a coincidence that there were transfer rumors about him that only came true a few days after Bruce Arena got the gig?