MLS/SUM: European free agency market for star players

Discussion in 'MLS: General' started by pc4th, Aug 31, 2007.

  1. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    NBA/NFL/MLB star players (the top 25 players in the world) regularly take advantage of free agency to get huge salary, but star soccer players (the top 25 players in the world) do not.

    MLS/SUM can benefit from this.

    Step 1. Create a big sports agency
    Step 2. Sign all the big star players (the world top 25 players)
    Step 3. Tell them to all play out their contracts/go on a Bosman.
    Step 4. Watch as their salary will increase by 50% and profit as their agents.

    Why would the star players' salary increase from $10 mil to $15 mil? The answer is simple. The elite European clubs (Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool, Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan, Juventus) won't have to pay $30-40 million in transfer fee. Generally, they have a net spending of $25-40 million each year.


    Let use Real Madrid as an example. This is their summer 2007 spending.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Madrid#2007.2F2008_transfers

    IN

    Pepe (€30M transfer from F.C. Porto)
    Arjen Robben (€36M transfer from Chelsea F.C)
    Royston Drenthe (€13M transfer from Feyenoord Rotterdam)
    Wesley Sneijder (€27M transfer from Ajax Amsterdam)
    Gabriel Heinze (€10M transfer from Manchester United)

    OUT
    8 MF Emerson (€5M transfer to AC Milan)
    11 DF Cicinho (€11M transfer to A.S. Roma)
    13 GK Diego López (€6M transfer to Villarreal)
    15 DF Raúl Bravo (€2,3M transfer to Olympiacos)
    24 DF Álvaro Mejía (€2M transfer to Real Murcia)
    — DF Carlos Diogo (€6M transfer to Zaragoza)

    Net transfer: 96.7 mil euro

    Imagine what the salary of the top 25 NBA/MLB players would be if the top NBA/MLB teams have to spend $120 million in transfer fee to acquire them.
     
  2. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    From 2001 to 2005. (haven't calculated 2006 and 2007 yet)
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=268786

    On average, these teams's net spending.

    Chelsea: -$83.7 million a year
    Real Madrid: -$41.67 million a year
    Manchester United: -$36 million a year
    Barcelona: -$25 million a year
    AC Milan: -$22 million a year


    The theory here is that in a free agency market like in American sports Chelsea would have $84 mil, Real would have $42 mil and Man U would have $36 million EXTRA each year from 2001 to 2005. Since the market is competitive, they would compete to sign the top 25 players in the world who are now free agents. Competition = big salary for the star players.

    One more thing, the top soccer clubs generate A LOT MORE REVENUE than the top baseball clubs.

    Kinda outdated info, but you get the idea.
    http://www.forbes.com/lists/results...ory1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=

    1 New York Yankees 264 --$315 for soccer

    2 Boston Red Sox 201 ---$287 mil for soccer

    3 New York Mets 180 ----$270 mil for soccer

    4 Seattle Mariners 173 ---$264 mil for soccer

    5 Chicago Cubs 170 ----$262 mil for soccer

    6 Philadelphia Phillies 167 ---$211 mil for soccer

    7 Los Angeles Dodgers 166 ---$206 mil for soccer

    8 Atlanta Braves 162 ----$203 mil for soccer


    Yet the top baseball players earn about 50% more than the top soccer players.

    Rank Player Salary Team
    1 Rodriguez, Alex $ 26,000,000 New York Yankees
    2 Bonds, Barry $ 22,000,000 San Francisco Giants
    3 Ramirez, Manny $ 22,000,000 Boston Red Sox
    4 Jeter, Derek $ 19,600,000 New York Yankees
    5 Mussina, Mike $ 19,000,000 New York Yankees
    6 Bagwell, Jeff $ 18,000,000 Houston Astros
    7 Clemens, Roger $ 18,000,000 Houston Astros
    8 Sosa, Sammy $ 17,000,000 Baltimore Orioles
    9 Piazza, Mike $ 16,071,429 New York Mets
    10 Jones, Chipper $ 16,061,802 Atlanta Braves
    11 Johnson, Randy $ 16,000,000 New York Yankees
    12 Brown, Kevin $ 15,714,286 New York Yankees
    13 Hampton, Mike $ 15,125,000 Atlanta Braves
    14 Park, Chan Ho $ 15,000,000 Texas Rangers

    If the like of Yankees, RedSox, Dodgers, Mets, Braves, Giants have -$30 mil in net transfer spending each year, would these star players be getting the same salary?
     
  3. Placid Casual

    Placid Casual Member+

    Apr 2, 2004
    Bentley's Roof
  4. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/premiership/article2914328.ece
    Winners and losers as summer of big spending draws to close

    Just for the summer only, the EPL spent $900 million in transfer fee. Let's assume that they sold $300 mil and $200 mil were between EPL clubs. That leaves $400 million in net transfer.

    EPL summer 2007: $400 million transfer expense
    NBA/MLB: $0-$40 million transfer expense

    It is obvious that NBA/MLB have a lot more money to pay the elite players (top 25 players). Imagine NBA/MLB elite players salary when the league is making $400 million less each year.

     
  5. Taoism

    Taoism Member

    Apr 13, 2007
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    Didn't you start a thread like this in another forum a little while back, and got roundly shot down? Why start another?

    Cheers!
     
  6. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I know why many don't like it. It would be bad for the sport and the smaller teams. Clubs like PSV, Ajax, Benfica, Porto, San Paulo, Boca Juniors would lose out on much needed revenue streams if players like Robinho, Kaka, Messi, Robben, C. Ronaldo, Nani, all go on a free.

    I'm just pointing out that this system could be exploited for big profit. If MLS/SUM does it, maybe they can put some of that money back into MLS. I wonder why Simon Fuller haven't done it. He got the capital and the experience. He manages David Beckham who went on a free transfer. Ballack is another star player that went on a free transfer. But in order for this to work, an overwhelming majority of star players has to be free agents.
     
  7. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    LOL. Got roundly shot down? 81% agree with me.

    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=479909

    -----------------
    European mindset when it comes to sport is different from Americans.

    For star players only (top 25)
    European: transfer fee to team B, contract extension, transfer fee to team C, contract extension etc..
    American: play out the contract, be a free agent to get big salary.

    Imagine Cristiano Ronaldo, Messi, Ronaldinho, Kaka, Robben, Nani, Rooney all play out their current contract and don't sign any extension [the American way]. As free agents, these players could make big salary.

    $20 mil a year salary for 4 years (0 transfer fee) = $80 mil total cost
    $10 mil a year salary for 4 years ($40 mil transfer fee = $80 mil total cost

    Which one would you prefer if you're the star player? $20 mil a year salary or $10 mil?
     
  8. Taoism

    Taoism Member

    Apr 13, 2007
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    You already have a thread about this in another forum. Simply adding MLS onto your argument doesn't make it any better.

    I would suggest mod merge this thread back into the thread he already has 5 pages of in "The Beautiful Game" forum, and let the argument stew in that forum.

    Cheers!
     
  9. The_Drizzle

    The_Drizzle New Member

    May 17, 2006
    Kwassa Kwassa
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The problem is that you ask questions like "would MLS owners make a huge profit of [this]?" and the answer is almost undeniably yes, but just because people feel that it would be profitable doesn't mean they think it should be done.
     
  10. ButlerBob

    ButlerBob Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 13, 2001
    Evanston, IL
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Could they make money doing this probably. Would it be huge, probably not. Being an agent is a crap shoot. Your hoping that you've signed a player that is going to value of your client is going to go up. But a lot of things can happen to the player that makes their value go down. They get hurt, the break the law, they something stupid in the press. Also, your assuming that these top players are just waiting to drop the long term agents and jump on board. I doubt that someone like Ronaldinho is going to can his brother. Or why would they want to sign with a big company and be just a number. Or only thinking of it from the company side. Your going to need product to do well. And I'm guessing that it's not easy to sign all of the top players. That's probably why it's never happened before. Also, if they did this, why would they use it to under write MLS? That's just not a sound business model. You need your core business to survive on it own.

    I think you have way too much time on your hands. :D
     
  11. flippin269

    flippin269 Member+

    Aug 3, 2003
    Houston
    Club:
    Houston Dynamo
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Of course MLB players are going to get higher pay than most soccer players. Where else can they go in the baseball world to make that kind of money? Baseball people see MLB as the only major league. Soccer has, like, how many leagues with multiple teams capable of signing a multi-million dollar contract?

    Not only that, but unlike MLB, money doesn't neccesarily buy championships in soccer, and soccer clubs know that. If you don't believe me, ask Chelsea...
     
  12. SideshowBob

    SideshowBob Member

    Jan 12, 2007
    Northern VA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You do realize that the Yankees, with their gazillion dollar payroll, haven't won a world series in 7 years, right?

    Money doesn't buy championships in any sport. But it can always buy competativeness in pretty much any sport.
     
  13. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Your argument is flawed. More competition (more elite soccer teams) = better salary for the star soccer players. But we are not seeing that. Why? HUGE TRANSFER EXPENSE.

    Would the Yankees/RedSox/Dodgers/Mets/Braves afford $20-25 million salary for one player when they have $40 million LESS EACH YEAR?

    Hypothetical:

    Yankees/RedSox/Dodgers player budget: $150 million
    Transfer fee: $40 mil
    PLAYER PAYROLL: $110 mil

    Having only $110 mil instead of $150 million, the star baseball players salary would decrease by a lot.
     
  14. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Maybe by 27%.

    I don't think anyone denies that if clubs had more money to spend on salaries then salaries would be higher - as an idea it's not exactly up there with quantum mechanics - but there's little reason to expect clubs around the world to suddenly adopt the US approach of paying the top stars proportionally far more than the rest, especially when you don't have salary cap pressure squeezing those bottom salaries of players with no alternative.
     
  15. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You are right about their value going down. There are risks involved like injury. But big salary is the upside. 50% pay raise is worth the risk.

    Top players don't have to fire their agents. How about getting these agents on board?
    Imagine all the top players' agents forming an agency of their own. Tell their clients to all play out their contract (no extension). It would have the same effect. Need mass exodus of top players on free.

    ------------
    American sports: the player pays the agent
    European soccer: the club pays the agent (the agent gets a cut of a transfer fee). Thus, the agent has an incentive when his client go on a big transfer fee.
     
  16. WestHamUtdFC

    WestHamUtdFC Member

    Aug 15, 2007
    St. Louis
    Club:
    West Ham United FC
    why would u want players to make more money........ as much as i love sports.....thats all they do..... they make more money than the vast majority of people....... i know its hard to live on 25 million... and 40 milllions would allow to live a better life, but who cares the system has been working hasn it?
     
  17. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Salary cap pressure also squeeze the top player salary too. It squeezes everybody.
    If there is no salary cap in NFL/NHL/NBA, the top players would earn a lot more. Teams want to win and they will compete to sign the best players. That is why the baseball player union fought tooth and nail to not have a salary cap. NHL players union did that too (went on strike for 1 year).

    In European soccer, with no salary cap, it is to the top player's advantage. Real Madrid just paid $50 million for Robben. Imagine Robben salary on a free transfer.

    $10 mil a year salary x 4 years ($50 mil transfer fee) = $90 mil total cost
    $20 mil a year salary x 4 years ($0 mil transfer fee) = $80 mil total cost.
     
  18. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't want them to make more money. Though it might seem I'm advocating it.

    I'm just pointing out that the current system can be exploited for big gains.

    Potential Winners: Top players and their agents.
    Potential Losers: Selling clubs who make surplus on the transfers of top players (PSV, Ajax, Porto, Benfica, Boca Juniors, San Paulo etc...) Also, the top elite clubs would lose out. They have to wait 2-3 years for the top players to play out their contract.

    What about the sport? The smaller clubs would hang on to their top players for 2-3 years longer. They would compete better with the elite clubs.

    I'm surprised that nobody has done it already. I know Ballack and Beckham both went on free, but in order for this to work, you need the top 25 players in the world going on free en mass.
     
  19. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Did it ever occur to you that the reason why players in pro basketball make so much more is because

    1. There is so much less talent available in those sports that talent is just more expensive in baseball and basketball?

    2. A single player is simply not worth as much to any teams success the way a 30 point a game scorer is in the NBA or a 40 homer a year guy is in MLB.

    I think the main reason you keep creating these threads is you lack a basic understanding of the forces at work in most professional sports and that includes the international soccer world.
     
  20. pc4th

    pc4th New Member

    Jun 14, 2003
    North Poll
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    LOL. Pro basketballers make a lot of money because.

    1. Salary cap is like $70 million a year
    2. Only 12 players roster.
    3. Your point about the available talent is good. But it is not a major reason why.

    If the top 5 NBA teams have $40 million LESS EACH YEAR, they wouldn't pay the top players so much.

    Can you imagine the like of Real Madrid, Chelsea, Man U, Liverpool, AC Milan having ZERO TRANSFER FEES? They get all their players on free. They have $50 million EXTRA each year. They will spend them on players.
     
  21. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    yes, but there's no reason at all to assume, as you do, that it'd all be spent on top players.

    Please at least try and give some thought to why US sports have a widely skewed salary structure compared to the flatter one typical in soccer. For a start, try to think why US sports need to have a minumum salary and soccer (elsewhere) doesn't.

    Think back to the days when the cap (of any sport) was about 75% of what it is now. Were the salaries of the top players all massively reduced, but everyone else the same as now, or were salaries 25% lower across the board.

    Think back to the days of the premiership, when available money for salaries was perhaps 1/5th of what's available now. Has this 500% increase in the available money primarily gone to the top players? If not, why not?


    Take a hypothetical example. The average first team player at a premiership team is on, for arguement's sake £25,000 a week. Imagine they sign a player worth £6 million on a three year deal, but they get him on a free. Rather than paying him £30,000 a week, they decide that as they have an extra £2 million per year of his contract, they'll pay that money to him as salary instead. So you end up with a team on £25,000 a week, with one player, who isn't head and shoulders above them, on £65,000 a week.

    When those other players' contracts are up for renewal, what effect do you think that one player's salary will have on negotiations?
     
  22. leg_breaker

    leg_breaker Member

    Dec 23, 2005
    Agents make money when players are transferred. If players were seeing out their entire contracts, there wouldn't be as many transfers, so agents would make less money. This whole idea is garbage, as if the top 25 players are all going to sit there and run out their contracts.
     
  23. Rommul

    Rommul Member

    Aug 26, 2003
    NYC
    Fine now lets use YOUR ideas and expand them broadly.

    Teams like United have about twice as many players and spend more than twice as much as NBA teams.

    Why don't soccer stars make as much under these conditions?
     
  24. akindele12

    akindele12 Member

    Jun 16, 2007
    Silver Spring, MD
    A lot of players also get a cut of the transfer fee.
     
  25. RichardL

    RichardL BigSoccer Supporter

    May 2, 2001
    Berkshire
    Club:
    Reading FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    players usually get a signing on fee, but that's never a "cut" of the transfer fee, as the transfer fee always goes to the selling club.

    Some players might have it in their contracts that they get a % of any future fee, but such clauses aren't that commonly offered as it encourages players to leave.
     

Share This Page