The trouble is that Lalas evidently thinks the "business" of soccer is a one-way street, that somehow players and agents aren't involved in the business as anything but pawns and yes-men--that "product" will remain constant despite the unhappiness of the player. Nothing could be further than the truth. Ambition exists, both to make more money (10+ times more in Dempsey's case) and to be on a bigger stage. Why, if I'm Clint Dempsey, would I continue to throw my head into the mixer on low crosses if the league is trying to strong-arm me into either signing an extension or continuing to play for $80K as one of the top players in the league? That's just bad negotiating on MLS's part, and bad business as well. And worst of all, he uses Cory Gibbs' sleepwalking stint in MLS as an example of a player turning himself around to get ready for Europe again. Huh??? Greg "I've watched more MLS games than just about anyone else" Lalas must've missed dozens of Dallas games that year, because Gibbs was a perfect example of someone who didn't give a rat's ass about playing in the league--exactly the sort of player we're creating more of when we refuse to allow Dempsey, Joseph, et. al. to follow their dreams.
If I wanted it easy, I would just cite the "economic realities" of the game. MLS shares in that reality too, and what value they put in their players is just as valid, if not more so, than the value that European scouts given a cursory look place in them. I would reverse your characterization, and say MLS is not the YA pawn that Eurosnobs expect the league to be. And to simply say that players have ambitions just ignores the ambition that MLS presents both as a business and as a vehicle for soccer in America. What MLS hasn't done well, if it has tried to do it at all, is foster in its fans the greater dream of having a league that rivals those in Europe and South America. That kind of vision is not an impossible sell if Eurosnobs would just allow us a few players (a few, is that alright with you guys?) to help build the league.
Implying I'm a Eurosnob because I want to watch players who WANT to be playing in MLS is a bit of a logical Snake River Canyon. The other economic realities that you don't mention are that so-called "middle class" MLS players are paid far less than their quality would dictate. The exodus to Norway is a perfect example of this. MLS salaries across the board are simply not commensurate with the quality of the players it develops. The league is getting by on what on the world soccer market is practically wage slavery. This inevitably creates a bad work atmosphere, which inevitably effects the happiness of the players, which inevitably effects the quality of play on the field, which is what scouts see. What MLS is betting is that, by haggling for a few dollars more in transfer fees, it can somehow raise itself in the eyes of potential buyers of its players. It reminds me most of all of the "announced attendance" policy the league had for so long--that what the league said was true, that 15K really were there that night, even if you had an entire section to yourself. So Clint Dempsey is therefore worth $4M, $5M, $6M, etc. in transfer fees despite what the open market says. In this case, the hype machine is being fired up again and $1.5M is "scandalous", an "insult"--and this from the league that pays him $80K/year.
None of what you said is in keeping with your hopes and dreams characterization of players wanting to "be on a bigger stage." You can't argue salary if you think no amount of wages would sway a player like Dempsey to want to remain in MLS. Remember to stay on message next time. Here's a question: are Eurosnobs actively pushing players away from MLS? It's one thing for players to express an interest, it's another to say that it's an outrage that MLS hasn't already sent them via same-day shipping.
http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news;_y...slug=reu-chelseagallas&prov=reuters&type=lgns If MLS keeps being hard-asses, don't think this will never happen in MLS ... heck, with Twellman missing 2-3 sitters each game, it may be already happening.
Just to add to what I said in another thread: I don't see anything troubling about the article. In fact, I think it's a testament to the character of American MLS players over their European counterparts, and why they performed head and shoulders better than the YAs during the last World Cup.
Let's Fisk this guy, shall we? That was sort of, but not exactly, my argument on many Yanks Abroad threads (a royalty check and an apology, please, Greg). What I said was that going to Europe gives you an opportunity similar to going to Harvard academically. One could still half-ass his way around the globe, as been proven by a number of YAs. But the fact that an opportunity may exist for a player is a plus. As a side (footsitter) note, I don't see Lalas complaining about writing for SI.com whereas he could still be writing for some non-paying barely read web site or a blog. Somehow, it was OK for him to move into an upper echelon of the US sportswriting but not OK for the MLS players to want to play on a bigger stage and earn themselves larger paychecks. Oy, crikey. Yes and it's not like the Euros can just draft players without compensation ... oh, I forgot ... MLS does that. And Gooch and Donovan. Beasley, when played in close to his proper position, wasn't bad. Donovan was. Pope was too. No, of course, Dempsey isn't worth $1.5M. And how do we know that? $1.5M offer (from Charlton) was turned down and never increased. Send this guy an economics book, please. Two words - Ted Stepien. Or two more words - Dan Snyder. Or two more - Wayne Huizenga (one each for Jimmy Johnson and Dave Wannstedt). Two more words - Victor Kiam (OK, one can name a lot of multi-millionaire or billionaire owners who were totally incompetent in running successful sports franchises) Kia Joorabchian still owns Tevez's contract, both as an investor into the Corinthians and the ex/part-time owner of MIS. Moreover, the Tevez/Mascherano transfer is a pro-transfer argument - they duo wanted to go to Europe, stayed away from the Corinthians training camp and were moved. Players have that power. See William Gallas above. Dempsey was OK (he was bid $1.5M by Charlton, a club in danger of relegation each season in the Prem, not exactly similar to $50M offered for "El Nino" Torres or $25M paid for Sergio Aguero ... the last one without the WC match to his name). And no one, within a two month transfer window, bid a penny more. Jimmy Conrad was mediocre (bid $700K by Rosenborg). Donovan and Pope were awful. Mastroeni was awful for one game, excellent for 40 min in the next ... then promptly got himself sent off for an MLS quality tackle/red card. Not exactly a bright resume for the MLS folks. The way you get respect is having people demand your players. $1.5M, in this regard, is not really much of a respect. Now, when Bayern Munich, Atletico Madrid and a slew of other big clubs bid $25M for your 18-year olds like Aguero, that means that you've finally earned it. The problem is that MLS hasn't produced a talent with sublime skill of Aguero or Tevez. One can beat his chest and demand respect but the proof is in the pudding. What, Page 5 of newspapers' sports sections? If you think that a combined league payroll of ~ $30M is a lot of cash. Roman Abramovich may disagree. Convey $1.5M. Dempsey $1.5M. Eddie Johnson 1.5M. Twellman $1.2M. Joseph $1M. Can anyone see a trend here? I guess those with the money think that $1.5-1M is the fair market value for MLS players. Once the $3-5M bids begin to come in on a regular basis, Greg will probably think that MLS should ask for $10-15M. Meanwhile, it'll just let them go for free.
You were the one who was all cotton candy and follow your dreams. Are you backtracking from your own statements?
You've been reduced to parroting my one phrase about following dreams (which, by the way, includes $$$ as much as anything else) because you're losing this argument so badly. The league gets offered in transfer fees exactly what the market dictates, and bringing the emotion of disrespect into it the way Lalas does is nonsense. You can't argue that not selling Dempsey is good business for MLS while simultaneously claiming that Charlton's board are not engaged in the same business every other team is. Unless there are a dozen other secret offers out there, $1.5M is the standing bid. The only proof that it's an insult is if someone else follows up with a substantially larger bid, not "hey, you disrespectin' my league!" It's not as if Charlton isn't competing on the world market, or that other teams aren't allowed to put in bids. In other words, Lalas allows himself to claim it's "just business" when applied to MLS's refusal to sell, but NOT when it comes to the open market offers for Dempsey, where dark, disrespecting, insulting forces are at work. Does not compute.
I think you've missed the fact that MLS did not sell those players for those amounts. To set fair market value, the sale has to go through. So, your "trend" talk about market value is laughable. If I offer you $10 for your car, does that set its market value?
The market is set by the buyer AND the seller. The seller will not take $1.5 million for Clint Dempsey. Whether anybody else will offer more or not, the reality is that the seller values Dempsey above the $1.5 million pricetag that was offered. In Real Estate terms, MLS is not a particularly motivated seller here. It may very well be that the entity to which Clint Dempsey represents the most value is to MLS. Under such a scenario the market would dictate that indeed MLS would value him higher than any potential buyer. I'm clueless as to why fans of this league want to see the league sell players when doing so provides virtually no tangible benefit to them as fans of the league. I know why Dempsey wants to leave, I know why the Yanks Abroad board wants him to leave, I could even understand it (though disagree) with the USMNT regulars wanting him to leave. But "MLS N&A?" What exactly are the benefits here?
Dempsey has obviously burned all his bridges with MLS, so he's either gone this year or next. At least if he leaves this year MLS will get something in return -- $2 million or so would be nice (and fair).
Stop making sense. The problem is that most people think the market value is only set by what they are willing to pay. Part of the market value is what MLS decides his value to MLS is in keeping him as opposed to selling him. Why does everyone just conveniently ignore that? There is a number that converges between reasonable value to potential buyer/reasonable value to potential seller. THAT number is his market value. The first offer on the table is not market value.
A year and change is a long time, particularly in soccer terms. MLS may feel the mere selling of one its best players in the middle of the season for $1.5 million costs them $1.5 million dollars more than simply letting him leave on a free in 14 months. The fact that they turned it down seems to indicate that they do. And the whole point is the $1.5 million does nothing for anyone here not related to an Anschutz or Kraft. Considering the actual Anschutz and Kraft don't seemed to be too enthralled with it, I'm having a hard time figuring out just who that $1.5 million is supposed to help? If MLS ownership doesn't want this money, why the hell should MLS fans want the sale?
I fail to see this whole angle of MLS missing out on money. The league has billionaire owners who a million bucks here or there is nothing more then a tax write off. It's pretty clear they aren't interested in losing talented American players unless it is a significant offer. What is there to get upset about? Obviously the owners aren't losing sleep over this.
I think there's a major additional fallacy at work here in the Lalas piece: --Any league is somehow weak or not worthy of respect if most of the traffic is outbound. He uses the straw man of an "assertion" that MLS should be a developmental league, rather than just looking at salary opportunities in Europe and recognizing a player's natural desire to make more money. "The assertion that MLS should be a developmental league is a vicious circular, a chicken-and-egg kind of thing that actually hinders the league's efforts rather than earn it the respect people think it would receive from selling players to big clubs." Tell that to the Argentines, the Brazilians, the Portuguese, the French, the Dutch, etc. Doesn't seem to interest them in the least. Why should anyone care if MLS does sell more than it buys? Again, why is a natural process of gravitating to a league that pays higher salaries evidence of "simplistic thinking", as Lalas would have? It's evidence of an open market. And what exactly are the "league's efforts" that this vicious cycle hinders? He never explains.
It does interest them, but for the most part, they don't have a choice: sell players or eventually go bankrupt. It's different for say Ajax or PSV, but then: a) They've pretty much maxed out what they can make from soccer at the moment. b) They are also huge buyers in the market as well. They sure as hell don't sell their best players for $1.5 million. $15 million maybe. MLS doesn't have either of those situations. It's light years away from maxing out its potential revenues and at the same time is in zero danger of having a debt-crippled bankruptcy. When Horowitz left the league, that was the last we've seen of owners with any sort of financial worries.