Would PV have trusted him in the 10 or 8 spot? I think this is one of those credit where due things. We all liked Blessing. He was fun. But to play him instead of FelipeG or Roger? Bradley tried him out there the year he arrived, then moved him full time to the midfield in 2018. He is the player who convinced LAFC they didn't need Fielhalber or Ngyuen. Well spotted, well done.
Players protected in the 2017 expansion draft over Blessing included Mr. Lobato, the always broken Jimmy Medranda, James Musa (I think he played more for SPR than SKC). Put that decision right up there with Fontas over Opara (recently ranked as a top 10 MLS player...player, not defender) and signing Croizet to DP contract as some of the many reasons that 2019 happened.
It's been a long time, but I thought there were serious mitigating factors that required players like Lobato and Musa to be protected over Blessing. I guess I just recall that their hands were more tied with that expansion draft than normal.
I seem to recall that the "mistake" at the time was getting Blessing his green card too quickly. As a result, unlike Lobato and Musa, he no longer counted as an international player.
It wasn't an either/or with Lobato and Musa both were internationals and had to be protected (along with Salloi) to give us our 3 internationals. As aletheist pointed out, the "mistake" came with him getting his green card days before the expansion draft. As for Medranda, I'll point out that the 2017 season was when he played in 33 of 34 games, starting 24 of them and playing over 2000 minutes, mostly at left back where everyone seemed set to call him the starter going forward.
good for that next round of expansion fees... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ets-record-setting-700-million-plus-valuation
It also puts the Pulido (ahPbl&j) purchase into perspective. In 2007, Toronto's fee was something like $10m. so I'm guessing the ongoal purchase was in that neighborhood as well. the club value today (according to Forbes) is $325m. Evebn without an estimated +$35m in revenue a year for the club, the owners are making bank on the team now. Good for them, I say. When they bought in, the survival of soccer in KC and MLS wasn't quite set in stone. But also good for them for realizing that, dealing with the infrastructure issues we needed, and now spending on players. Given the pace of growth, I don't think $10m-$15m a year will be an outlier.
so exactly when do the players start seeing the benefit in some rising salaries? Would love to the see the minimum starting salary rise to at least $125K.
Well, the new CBA will push minimums up to over $100M, so we're getting close on our own. But your answer lies with the next media deal. The CBA carves a chunk out of any media rights increase for player salaries, so if the league lands a really solid one, then the players are gonna be directly benefiting.
smh...it's just not right: the minimum salary for senior players will rise to $109,200 by 2024, from $70,250 last season...a full third of the league, 238 players, earned less than $100,000.
I'd think that's why the owners have caved pretty consistently on raising the floor in recent years. I guess I look back to the early days, when players in the bottom tier of the roster were in no way making a living wage. They're now all making a living wage. At the bottom of the pay range, they do have a choice. They could choose to earn $56k as a supplemantal player in 2019 MLS or look to USL or abroad (and they can probably find something pretty similar). I know the rapid rise in club values means the man is getting rich. but considering the early years were will they or won't they survive for another year, and that was case for a long time, they've done a decent job of catch up. Freeman on $82k last year doesn't seem unfair. neither does Lindsay on $88k. Busio on $92 is a bit low, but the math on him is being done overseas, and SKC has to react or lose him.
problem is...this has not really changed all much in the past decade and it just has to change...the man is INDEED getting rich and players should not have to struggle.
Has it not? A decade back, weren't the lowest pay players still around $18k-$20k? It was total crap. The players I knew made ends meet by living three or four to an apartment and being pay to play youth coaches. That was an unsustainable development model. This model, the low pay players can make rent and afford groceries, at least. I know a lot of local players where I live now, who don't cover expenses but still can't give up the game. Granted, they're a step below making MLS rosters, maybe two, but even in the second division here, $100k plus a year isn't guaranteed at the low end. MLS 2024 is doubling the low end, and it's already just about at the median household income in the US I think what we've seen with the CBAs going smoothly is that the players think they've been getting better and better deals, and support the direction. Granted, the players negotiating those deals aren't thinking foremost about the low end.
You’re absolutely correct that in the last decade it’s changed. I was still underemployed when the team was at CAB and I still remember making more than the supplemental roster players and even the reserves. The players don’t have to be youth coaches in the evenings now (at least in KC) to make ends meet. They can also afford a place on their own if they really wanted to. But that’s cost of living thing
The only really problematic part of this point is that is more than a decade ago. At first glance my thinking was, "that recently?" Sigh.
I mean, the long and short of it is that during the second half of the league's life span, they went from embarrassing, unlivable wages for even regular squad players to easily paying enough for anyone on the roster to support themselves with no other job requirements. Could they pay everyone more? Sure, and if the media deal is anything but a huge bust, that $100M+ minimum salary will jump even further than outlined in the CBA deal. This is the trajectory we want to see. There was an article recently, I think in the Athletic, where they interviewed guys like Wondo and a few others about their early days in the league. Yeah, the pay might not be world class yet, but let's not discount the highly dramatic improvements made at all levels of the salary field.
These aren't shocking notions, but Minnesota and Colorado are both looking really strong. Add them to Seattle and LAFC and Dallas, and the west, again, is a beast. Colorado look pretty complete and far more dangerous than last year, and Minnesota has put together a really nice side. they're both quite fun to watch this year. Top 3 in the west is a very tough ask in 2020
Didn't want to start a new thread, but our game in San Jose on the 21st may not be taking place. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/news/Pages/order-health-officer-03092020.aspx
At least we have company. The Italian PM statement, with the Juve reaction: PM: We also have more stringent measures in mind for sporting events. Serie A and all sporting tournaments in general are suspended. All the fans must accept that. There is no reason for these competitions to continue.” Juve: For now, given that European competition falls outside the government's remit, it seems Champions League games involving Italian teams will go ahead. At last check, Juve’s last 16 clash against Lyon will be played Tuesday 17 March, albeit behind closed doors. A question on this for MLS: If games are going to go ahead, and i assume most will, does the new CBA put a cap on the numberr of charter flights teams can have, or does it raise the floor and allow for more. This would seem to be the classic case of better safe than sorry.
Yes the new CBA allows more, and I'd expect them to be used more on locations where it's been worse (Seattle, San Jose).
Yewah, sorry I was being lazy. I found this: The new CBA, which lasts through the 2024 MLS reason, requires all clubs to use charter flights for at least eight legs of travel in 2020, with the number of required legs increasing to 16 by 2024. which says to me that the club can decide to charter every single flight, given the "at least" notion. I think in the past there has been a cap, right, no more than type of language? Maybe I'm wrong on that. The piece talks about how Kraft is considering buying an airplane for the Revs, but it's only 17 league trips, with playoffs and ccl max can't be more than 25 a year. The rich guy magazines I was skimming on this suggest charters are a better buy until you go beyond 200 flight hours a year, and that would be the top end, with a run to the CCL final. Not sure where I'm going with this, just wondering.
Apparently they’re now talking of not counting flights during this outbreak against totals. Also told by a source that, as of last night, MLS was considering not counting charters taken due to coronavirus concerns toward the total of 8 chartered legs all teams must fly in 2020.More context on that in this piece: https://t.co/fSWA4MK3er— Sam Stejskal (@samstejskal) March 10, 2020