You think Nellie would have stayed if MLS agreed to sell him overseas? It's been a disturbing trend that MLS has gotten 0 dollars for some of their best players. Carlos Bocanegra, Clint Mathis, Zach Thorton, and now Nelsen have all brought in nothing for MLS when they leave. For a league that needs money, I love that he stayed and won a championship, but this can't be good for the league as a whole.
Once MLS has a track record the free transfer days will be over. Look at your list: Bocanegra - the real deal Thornton - the really out of shape Mathis - the real nutcase The big leagues are just now beginning to trust MLS talent.
I think there is more to consider than just the loss of a transfer fee in all this. When Nelsen becomes a success he instantly becomes an advertisement to young overseas players who are looking to break into pro-soccer. "If Nelsen can do it in MLS then I can do it to." More young talent to MLS. I think MLS did the right thing by not selling Ryan for what they thought was peanuts. It shows that MLS HQ actually wants to produce a quality product. This is more important to the future of this league than a few transfer fees.
And four or five guys over the past couple of years is going to reverse that? Oh, my. You do realize that the players themselves have to see a benefit to signing a new contract instead of waiting it out to go on a free? This is more complicated then MLS should just sell whenever they get an offer so they can make some money. Suggesting that the league sell just to make cash is silly.
I never said that four or five guys would reverse years of bleeding money. I support Leeds United who happen to be in a big debt as well. They have sold off their stadium, training grounds, players, and much more. Every little bit helps. I realize that it is a complicated procedure, but it's frustrating to hear about how the league needs new owners for money, etc. and then see some of the best players just leave without a cent. You don't find that frustrating at all? It's the fact that offers have been on the table. Mathis had plenty of offers before the World Cup. He may be stinkin' now, but the money was there and the league didn't pull the trigger. It's no secret England has been interested in Nelsen for a while now and vice versa. If you know a player will be leaving in a year, why not try to get something in return while you can?
What if teams said "We like him on a free transfer, but we won't pay a transfer fee"? Where does that leave Nellie and MLS? Sachin
That just means those Eruobastards want something for nothing like WWII (you may commence the flaming).
What team wouldn't like a player on a free transfer? If they are willing to wait instead of paying the money, you can't force them to pay up. But like I said, when offers are on the table (and I realize that I do not know what kind of offers were made for Nellie) it's frustrating when nothing gets worked out. That's all I'm saying. Monster - I don't think I deserve and other sarcastic comments when we disagree.
This is a two way street - you need to have someone willing to buy the player. There is a huge difference between paying $1M for a guy and getting him for a free. There is no incentive for a team to pay $1M when the player is publicly acknowledging (or their agent) they are looking overseas.
Sorry Mellon - but you do. You are making a ridiculously basic argument with nothing to back you up. Did MLS gamble and lose on a few of these players? Certainly. Did not caving into low ball offers enable them to get higher bids on other players? Certainly. The bids on Mathis were crap at the time. The MLS banked on him having a big WC and demanding top dollar for him. He got injured, fat, and went on a free - and he even had a hard time landing that. However, this set the precedent when ManU came looking for Howard, Fulham for Mcbride, DMB to PSV, and Reading for Convey. MLS had to take a stand and demand top dollar for players or else they would get nothing but "I'll give two euros and a bag of balls for your best player" from here until eternity. And you are completely blaming MLS for this - some of the blame needs to be placed at the feet of Mathis, Boca, and Nellie. They made no secret of their desire to go overseas when they were in the last year of their contract. What club in their right mind would pay for something now that will be free in three months?
Well I'm sorry too because I believe in respecting other posters. If they want to talk to me as if I'm some nitwit child that's great, I won't waste their time. We disagree and if someone wants to talk to me like an adult I'm all for it. But don't worry, until then I'll stop wasting everyone's time.
So, knowing that Nelsen was probably out the door, would you have rather sold him last year so that Major League Soccer can get cash for him, or would you have rather the league get nothing for him and DC United get a championship? Before you answer, let me tell ya that Nelsen's transfer isn't going to save this league if it's destined to fail, and not getting it isn't keeping this league from thriving in America if it's meant to.
I think what Mellon is saying is that MLS should have done w/ Nelsen what they did w/ Beasley and Convey--anticpated Euro interest and re-signed him to a new contract before this season.
I remember getting home after the game and you had just posted that image of the dude break dancin'. Just about pee'd my pants.
Hello - it takes two people to sign a contract. Nelsen did not want to sign a contract. Hell, when he came out of college he tried to go overseas - one of the reasons we got him was that other teams were scared off over Europe.
That's a different Mamadou Diallo. http://www.wldcup.com/news/2004Nov/20041118_27321_world_soccer.html