I believe the MLS needs to look at the youth setup of the EPL and other leagues and challenge itself in some forward thinking. I know they have a "Single Entity" system as confusing to some as the infield fly rule and as devisive as the DH. But they must see that the MLS clubs need to be able to develop a strong youth system and still be able to keep who they develop. This would increase local visibility and also help develop American youth systems. A player could choose to come up the ranks and sign by his 18th birthday and be a young pro or go into the reserve or first team. Any player on the reserve or such team after his 18th B-Day would be subject to a draft to the MLS, but be able to be signed by the team who developed him. The reserve teams should play each other before each first team game.They could travel with the firsts and play that same day against the opposing reserves. We do this in Rugby A and B games and some C side games. While the young pros would play in local league matches. This would create a system where say Dc United could go and have a kid in the youth team who can sign or not, but play and then to decide to go onto college or sign with the team, he would not be able to jump ship to another team {other than College} without the original team getting paid. Thoughts anyone?
I definitely agree that this topic needs more focus. I believe, however, that MLS should implement, as a short term "introduce-it-next-season" type of solution, a simple expansion of the rosters. Like you said, play the regular game, and let the two club sides' reserves play each other. At least that wouldn't take a ton of effort, and the talent pool would be that much deeper and wider.
I was thinking about this the other day. What do players earn in the PSL? Could MLS field a reserve team and have them play a PSL schedule? Use your developmental players and benchwarmers as the core of the team and then sign another 12 players to PSL contracts to fill out the roster. Doing it this way they could keep costs way down by playing a regional PSL schedule (think bus trips vs. plane trips) and pay the additional players peanuts. Then if they thought allot of one of the guys on a PSL contract they could sign him and bring him up to the big team. I think this might work for teams that control their own stadiums since they could play the games in them without having to pay rent, but teams like DC would have some trouble.
Practically nothing. Certainly nothing close to a living wage, PSL players all need other jobs. An MLS team would dominate playing a PSL schedule (PSL teams also play PDL teams). It wouldn't even be close. The failed MLS developmental players have gone on to be strong A-league players - mixing these guys in with the talented DP's, P-40's, and veterans who can't get a spot would be ridiculous. I can't imagine an MLS team trying to pay its players even less than the 12000 developmental players make - forcing players to work second jobs during the season is not a way to either 1. look like a first-rate league or 2. give your players anything close to an optimal environment to develop. This would not be a problem. Reserve games could be played anywhere, for pretty much zero facilities cost. I like the idea of fielding reserve squads with developmental players. However, I don't think that the savings that a team gets from playing a PSL schedule would in any way compensate for the inferior competition. At some point, MLS teams are going to have reserve squads - I have trouble believing that the costs of sending an extra 10 players on road trips are truly that prohibitive, and I think they'd be recouped by improved development of players in an environment that PDL teams simply couldn't provide.
CHrisE, those are all good points. Look we both know MLS is not going to adopt anything we suggest on a message board, but I would like to come up with an idea that would at least be practical. If,, just for fun. So with that said I will try to work around the very real obstacles you put forth. PSL competition to weak? Then lets move it up to the A-league. And to make sure it's fair how about creating a third roster classification. Here would be the rules for each tier of roster classification with regards to salary and game eligibility: 1.) Regular 18 man roster: All current rules, must earn MLS minimum salary and so forth, but not eligible to play in reserve games. 2.) Developmental 6 man roster: All current rules, eligible to play in either MLS league games or reserve games. 3.) Reserve 12 man roster: A-league salary rules apply. MLS rights are owned by the MLS team but the player does not have an MLS contract (could sign with a team in another league at any time but not another MLS or USL team). Not eligible to play in regular MLS league matches unless signed to a regular or developmental contract. I'm thinking of these reserve players in terms of minor league baseball players not on the 40 man roster. As far as I know even the ones in triple A make so little they almost have to sleep in cardboard boxes. As long as it's understood they are our MLS equivalent of minor leaguers we should be able to avoid looking unprofessional. With the reserve team playing an A-league schedule then they should be earning A-league wages. I don't know if those are living or not. On a side note, does anyone know what your average A-league starter earns per year? Is it comparable to the $12,000 earned by our developmental players? The extra cost for any reserve system would probably be higher then $100,000 a year even if you go on the cheap. For teams with total revenue of around $6 million this has to be considered material. Even if every team gets a SSS and bumps total revenue up to $10 million it would still be a big deal. By bumping our MLS reserve teams up to the A-league hopefully this will keep travel costs to a minimum and the quality of competition adequate. This whole idea wouldn't work on the basis that it would require a level of cooperation, and perhaps a partnership, between the USL and MLS that is probably impossible. Additionally with only 16 A-league teams, even adding 10 MLS teams might not reduce travel costs enough to make it worthwhile. But regardless the idea is out there and I would love to hear suggestions on how to improve it.
Yes, this is what I was hoping for, dialouge, BUT my major point is the single entity, the MLS clubs must have a chance to raise up players like MAN U. did with the Neville Bros. , Becks ,and Scholes and Giggs. They should have a chance to sign these players and sell them, this is not a provision that could be altered, if not why would a team invest the time and money to search the world over and also we want them to poor money and time into local urban leagues and suburban leagues to raise up kids who wanted have the money to play in ODP and the such. whether they play in the A league or play in a NEW reserve league they must play that level with thier own cups. They could also have the Young Proffessionals U19 that would play PSL competion.
I would rather use the money to develop a youth system than a reserve league. Using local and regional college teams plus area semi-pro sides the Burn are having regular reserve matches this year and while the competition is lacking I think it is fairly good value for what it is - keeping players in shape and developing back of the roster players. I think this kind of grassroots effort is best served for the time being because the travel costs are significant. A youth system to work must allow the clubs to have some equity stake in the players they develop, which is the biggest challenge due to the single-entity framework and the importance the league places on parity. My near-term idea would be to have territorial veto chips in the draft. Arbitrary territorial lines could be drawn up (for instance 100 miles from the stadium the club plays in) for college and club players. So, for instance Adu in the draft last year, DC United holds his territorial rights and at the start of the first round could give up their territorial veto chip and 1st round pick in exchange for him. Each club could have two veto chips each draft, so while they have the option to retain the best players of their area they are not obligated to and no club could have a completely dominating youth system.
Sounds good, I want the Single Entity altered, to best serve League and Team. We need to keep things simple, the reserve league would keep the Coaches watching the games as well
I don't see how having youth teams effects single entity. As you say, MLS could just give teams the rights to any players they "find" and developed for a certain number of years. I don't see how single entity and youth systems have to be mutually exclusive. I think what we have to be careful with here is not diminishing the draft. The draft is one of the greatest advantages MLS has over other leagues because it ensures parity. Oh and I just realized I was unintentialy hijacking your thread, for that I apologize.
Beautiful, you just solved my biggest problem with this whole idea. I like this. But maybe instead of just a territorial restriction it might be safer to also limit a teams veto chips to players they developed in their youth system.
Shoot its just nice to get replys on this, BUT one point is the college game is not producing the future at this moment and with many believing it actually hinders players development due to style and technique. A player in the yout set up could play for a team, grow and develop, and if any team would show interest their must compensation given to his intial team.Yet he would be able to go on to collge or sign a pro contract{at anytime} they must sign before he is 18 or he would go into the draft.
Okay what is a VETO chip? My main thing here is to get teams with strong youth setups that they could invest into kids all the way through to firts team without the MLS staking total control.Yet to save Parity, must sign the kid b-4 his 18th b-day. This would help with youth soccer, kids would only need to take a bus from his home with a bag of stuff to his club to tryout in thier leages and camps. i want to see created that kind of system. My vision has already been stated but here goes, A kid could go threw from backyard to MLS with the same boys and coaches and surroundings, that also means his family would come with him and there families and there friends.
The problem with restricting it solely to the club's youth player is that it motivates the club to only care about their own team rather than nurturing the area youth leagues as a whole. It also motivates the club to hoard all the best players which could create a lot of ill will from probable ticket buyers to the senior side.
Yes true I thought that through, SO the team would also now invest time in the city and county rec leagues, Urban and suburban. And that is where my idea starts they would have a sponsorship setup with local buss. and Rec.leagues to promote players through to travel teams.
Well, as pointed out earlier, MLS probably doesn't check the soccer boards looking for ideas. I think it would be hard to attach a young player to a team, especially if the player wants to keep amateur statis and possibly play in college. But you could make some kind of contract for training between the club and the kid and his parents. A player is trained by a youth residency program connected to a MLS club. If the player is offered a professional contract with the affiliated club, and signs it, then all training expenses are forgiven. If the original club declines to sign the player, then he is free and clear to sign with anybody, no cost. But if the player is offered a contract and wants to sign with another professional club--MLS or other, then that club, or the player and his parents, has to compensate the original club for a set amount of training expenses. Players can attend college but still owe youth training expenses for a certain number of years. A player that never signs a professional contract will never have to pay training expenses. Since players are not paid directly, then I don't see any problem with this for college eligibility. Comments?
WELL THEMLS NEEDS TO HEAD THE BRAINS OF THESE HERE BOARDS! But they wont so we continue, yes I agree with your statements and keeping youth players options open for college is my intention.Although I would not them owing money to the club, that the chance both will have to take, although the option is there that the MLS team could own the right to draft them first in the colleg draft.
I couldn't read what you typed. Between the spelling and the grammar, or lack there-of, I'm not entirely sure what you meant. First of all. It isn't - despite what John Harkes says - "The MLS".
Sorry Busy times, I was trying to be funny, guess it failed, you said you disagreed with me but you were not sure. What is it you disagreed with, the heading of my next to last post or the content? And I believe Harkes is wrong, but I am not sure...
Originally Posted by papa surf WELL THEMLS NEEDS TO HEAD THE BRAINS OF THESE HERE BOARDS! I am thinking you meant heed, and not head, thus confusion.
Like US Pro-40 Select 1999-2000? Well, not exactly. You're talking about each team having actual reserve sides in the A-League? You're overthinking. So you're talking about 30 guys total. And there are no A-League salary "rules" per se. Teams pay what they can get guys for. This is somewhat similar to what existed under the old MLS/USL agreement, but MLS teams didn't use it too often to send guys down to get seasoning, much less send 12 guys down (or have control of 12 guys). They would occasionally poach a guy if they needed depth for a match in which they were short-handed, and I've seen an A-League team ask for help from an MLS team, who sent them a couple of players for a match or two. You're still talking about MLS shelling out a whole lot more in player costs (I mean, relatively). No, I think Triple-A players do okay. I would think they do better than the guys making $24k on an MLS minimum salary, living three to an apartment. The lower minors, especially the independent minors, those guys make zip and often live with host families. But they're young. Depends on where you are. Varies depending on team, but if you're in the A-League and you can get $2,000-$2,500 a month and an apartment during the season, you're probably about right. Some guys earn a lot more, some a lot less. A-League travel costs aren't insignificant. Now, if you're talking about adding 10 more teams to it, that would help, I guess. But you need a hell of a lot more infrastructure to run an actual "team" than just what you pay the players. Somebody has to be the administration for a team, even a reserve team. Are they going to play all of their matches on the road? Then you need a place to play, and people to advertise, and sell tickets and things. Playing all of their games on the road sucked for the US Pro-40 guys, though they were talented enough to make the playoffs one year. If not, you can't just play A-League games in the local park. They used to have an agreement. MLS teams had a few "affiliates" but it wasn't in the baseball sense. They had first dibs on calling up players from that team, and could send players down there. But it didn't happen that often, and both sides felt the compensation issue (for when they signed a guy off an A-League team) was all off - MLS teams thought they were having to pay too much, A-League teams thought they were being gypped. I don't think MLS is in a position to control enough players to make reserve sides feasible at the moment. We are going to have to realize that the "club" system like in Europe isn't here yet, though some teams are trying to get some sort of vertical integration going with their Y-League teams and loose affiliations with PDL clubs. But there's no "sign a guy at 14 to a youth contract and move him up through the ranks at your club until he's in the first team" situation. I don't know that there ever will be. If, say, the Galaxy was going to play the Revs, and the Galaxy Reserves played the Revs Reserves (say that one three times fast) at 4 before the Galaxy and Revs played at 7:30, maybe. But then you're talking about the Galaxy flying at least 16 more guys with them to New England, and putting them up, and feeding them, with the very real possibility there will be no revenue generated to offset that expense. There's no way to pay for a true reserve system except by largesse, I don't think. You'd just have to look at it as an investment in player development, and while many here are just sure that would pay off in the long run, I'm not sure we can really tell that it would be the best way, given the different systems here in the US. I'd rather be able to take 6 guys and send them to a close A-League team (if there is one...that's the other problem) where I could monitor them and call them up when necessary. But, then you run into other problems with the team chemistry at the A-League level, poaching a guy they might need for an important match so he can sit the bench for you. There's no good way I can see that it can be done right now. You could have reserve teams. You could have them train with you and keep an eye on them. It's when you go about trying to figure out how they're going to play actual games that it starts to break down.
NO! It will not break down when it comes to playing the reserve games, The reserve would travel with the team and play before the main game or the night before. The cost to sign players could be supplemented with team housing and family support. local sponsorship monies. It can work, we dont need to "MUCK IT UP". It is very simple, Ive looked at the Baseball thing and also compared our Baseball setups to the EPL. They are very much alike, except in Baseball MLB owns the players and the Rights to move the Farm teams around.Also the point again is to keep it simple or you will miss it. The small example is Rugby in America, {Not the Super League but club level} We always travel and try to take our reserve{B Side and C side if possible} sides. They would play after the first match in order, I will go to Harrisburg this weekend with a team From Aberdeen, and I will get a B game. So the money is there somewhere.
Okay. Soon as you dig it up, let us know, okay? I guess MLS teams can travel with the "Buy one, and your friend flies for free" arrangement on Hooters Air or something.
Yeah your right I know the money isnt there as of yet, but my original Thread topic was MLS must move forward hard in this direction, and begin to challenge the single entity. Not remove the League ruling but alter it more in favor of this. The whole point is to get as close as we can to raising up players outside of the college game and get them playing in a Pro system asap. I see that I am a new guy and all but, it seems to make sense on a local level as well, they wouldnt have to travel at first, but would play in a new cup, league or comp. with the A league.