USMNT Transfer Watch - Movers and Shakers

We pay players too much?

 

That's the current nonsense argument.

I'm old enough to remember when young players in MLS like Stuart Holden were making less than an assistant manager at TGI Friday's. He was on ~$35k.

So there's validity to the argument that players aren't moving to some European leagues because they can make higher salaries at home. Is that such a bad thing? This isn't some computer game. This isn't Football Manager. These players are trying to maximize their earning potential in what, for most of them, won't be a long career. They could get injured in their next game and it could all be over. We can all go find Miles Robinson's comments about why he chose to re-sign in MLS versus going to Europe.

Why would Brian Gutierrez move to Belgium?
People understand that Kellyn Acosta would be the highest paid player on the best team in Belgium (Union)? At least if capology is to be believed. That's the current financial situation of MLS versus Belgium. [I just picked Belgium, but folks could choose another league.]

People act as if this is a bad thing. As if the money flowing into MLS is hindering the national team. Not in any way. It means that every year that goes by the quality of player in MLS is increasing. Their ability to attract better and better foreign talent is increasing.

People act as if Mexico doesn't achieve more because Liga MX pays players well.
That's not it at all. They don't achieve more because they go to the World Cup and are regularly knocked out by Argentina. Same reason Japan doesn't achieve more. They advance well and are knocked out by a super power most of the time. They've never been past the round of 16 and Japanese players are scattered all over big European clubs.

It's as if it's a surprise to some people that money makes the world go round.

 

If we assume that players are harmed by staying in MLS, I'm not sure why we should blame MLS for being successful and paying good salaries instead of blaming teams from weak European leagues for not paying better.

 

relative to the market yes. of course we do.

look, i wish the game were more popular, i wish the league could make money anywhere other than the gate.

but cincy being able to pay miles 4 times what psv can means hes never going to play comp better than mls/concacaf. how is that not stunting his growth as a player?

you can start babbling about go ahead eagles and messi now if you want, but we/mls have backed ourselves into a corner. without getting to other factors (pro/rel, no comp other than concacaf leagues- where liga mx is just as insular and flawed as we are if you think weve even gotten to that level) american soccer players are financially motivated not to develop beyond mls. to a pretty overwhelming extent.

no one (with any sense) disagrees that mls has come an incredibly long way and is still improving in incremental ways- but for our most talented players mls is not enough. we arent at the level too many people want to pretend we are, and we certainly arent at some projected level we will be at 10 years from now that should be applied to arguments now.

if luna had chosen mex and played in liga mex absolutely no one would say hes just as well off there as he would be in spain, portugal, etc.

i fully expect him to move on, btw, as the very top players obviously still will move on in most cases- but its the second and third tier "best/highest potential" guys who are effected. its guys that arent obvious until they are 22, 23 at which time euro money goes way down widening the gap even further.

and with that gap the decision becomes about wildly incompatible off the pitch vs on the pitch reason, so yes- we actively incentivize happy, financially secure american players while stagnating growth of both them and the league (long term).

 

People VASTLY underestimate MLS' place in the world soccer market.

And if the training wheels come off post WC26, it'll be even more of a shock to their Eurosnob hearts.

 

im all for blaming euro leagues for a lot of things (underappreciating, and yes, underpaying american players to their own detriment), but saying anyone from galatassary to frankfurt should pay mcglynn a quarter of a million dollars a match because houston will is a deeply flawed argument.

and as ive said, its not even mostly a soccer argument.

 

Diego Luna future DP

 

Jack McGlynn gets paid in accordance with what a guy like him is paid in Europe.

He gets paid less than say..........Taylor Booth at Twente.

His contract expires relatively soon, right? He has a Euro passport, which will make him an attractive target for Euro clubs. It'll be interesting to see what happens with him. Which kinds of clubs will show an interest.

 

100%.

Jesus Ferreira was producing goal contributions for FCD circa 2022 at the level of DPs around the league. They extended him to a young DP contract.

Diego Luna is doing the same thing. He's contributing goal contributions at a DP level.

He's paid what? ~500k a year on his new contract?

He's worth double that to RSL. At least. Maybe three times that.

Once Euro interest comes like it should, they're going to have to give him a pay raise if they want to keep him happy.

 

well, i guess its really a question of which you want- the soccer or the market.

 

Luna signed a multi year contract that would place him in the 10 million + buying price. Very much limiting his potential to move. Would love to see it though.

 

Money makes the world go round.

When nations spend money on soccer, that's where the players go.
When China started spending big money on players, that's where they went.
When they stopped, the players stopped.

Now its Saudi Arabia. They're spending money, the players are following it.

There's no difference with North America.

If a club in Europe wants Diego Luna, they're going to have to pay him more than RSL is willing to. The market will determine where he goes. He's paid $500k. Likely underpaid right now in the MLS market based on his contributions for RSL.

Another USMNTer likely underpaid right now based on his contributions? Brian White.

Ben Cremaschi signed a contract extension in the fall thru 2027. His new salary hasn't been disclosed yet. Inter Miami CF Signs Academy Product Benjamin Cremaschi to Contract Extension | Inter Miami CF

 

China were, and now Saudi Arabia are vast sums more than players earn in the top 5 leagues and the vast majority of players aren't following it. Salah was offered £1 million a week and turned it down. Messi would have made a much higher salary in Saudi than Miami.

I assume most people would take a better paid job, given the opportunity. It's human nature, not soccer specific. Money isn't the only factor, as the big stars that have snubbed China and Saudi Arabia have demonstrated but it's a big one.

Soccer teams tend to pay a premium for a domestic talent. But if Luna wants to play in us UCL one day he should probably find a club in Europe. If that's not his thing, and he just wants to play footy and earn good money he can stay in MLS. Hopefully within ten years there'll be a direct pipeline from MLS to the top 4 leagues.

 

Sure. Nobody is going to disagree with that.
...........but those clubs need to want him too.

If we start hearing concrete stories about offers being made for Luna, we can discuss the benefits/drawbacks of the moves. I've never heard anything but speculation about Diego. And it wasn't "Champions League clubs." With every goal he scores, he becomes more and more valuable to RSL. The pricetag keeps going up. If some Belgian club offers 2 million, they can forget it.

 

We know that talent goes where the money is. There are occasional exceptions, but it's true overall. Given that, why should we assume that leagues that can't afford our players would offer a better development environment? It seems to me that the list of clubs that can afford to pay non-teenaged US players is nicely aligned with the list of clubs that would be a better development environment for those players.

 

Usually those rumors come from a player's agents trying to create a buzz.

He has the same agent as Jack McGlynn.

 

I think with the recent development of players like Sands going to Germany and looking good immediately there is no longer a need to go to a lesser league for MLS players. That is now for very young players who aren't yet established. The slow MLS improvement has now reached the level of the secondary Euro leagues and teams in Europe have recognized that. So MLS is not harming players and is actually helping more by having improved to a level that many more of our players are playing at that secondary Euro level. In a few more years it will start biting at the heels of the big 4. Even now the worst teams in those leagues probably aren't as good as most MLS teams. It will be a long, long time until any MLS team can measure up to the very top teams but just look at attendance and payroll at the bottom of Italy and Spain and tell me those teams are vastly superior to MLS teams.

 

because competition is what develops players. pro/rel increases that. tiered-league competitions increases that. higher overall quality increases that. drastically higher level competions (cl, all the splintered euro leagues) increases that.

seb berhalter is never going to drop to lower levels within the life of his contract. that is less competition. hes never going to play higher level teams/players outside of possibly liga mx teams or the ccl (which is, what, two teams- and mls decided to give that to miami to bolster their image?). that is less competition. hes never going to play different styles of play (particularly against lower level comp)- thats less competition.

so when arguing competitive "levels" no- playing a couple of matches against grasshopper in the conference league isnt a game changer (and where the pay gap is justifiable even in a sporting sense), but what about the two against bologna and two more against metz? does anyone want to argue for far less chances, to play municipal or saprissa?

you could make an argument that a player on a top tier mls side gets a good bit closer to what a top third portugese side offers (though they represent one of the top, say, 6 sides themselves), but the fact is a guy at az faces more and higher competition in every aspect of the game. for every match against zwolle people want to talk about theres a match against, say, this years galaxy (zing!)...

i dont know how to better explain myself- this is bigsoccer, not bigfinancialsecurity. i absolutely understand that side of it, and im not trying to be some monster that says miles' kids shouldnt have health insurance if their dad doesnt make it abroad (or just breaks his leg)- but we are talking about the game. thats what this forum is.

and not for nothing, but the guys china and saudi arabia throw money at are proven, world class (adjacent, at least) players who have already gotten big deals in their career. comparing that to tying down very young players/chocking established, "top mls" players with money is non-sensical.

 

Pro/rel can be dismissed out of hand. Players don't benefit from playing in an irrationally-organized system, and for every Sargent who might see his level of competition rise with promotion there's a Tolkin who might see it decline with relegation.

If "tiered-league competitions" means playing in top-heavy leagues, then I disagree that it provides more competition than MLS. I think a parity league (where every game is played against teams in the same ballpark) is a better environment than one where you play scrubs week-to-week and Ajax/Rangers/whomever a few times each year. I agree that "higher overall quality" would increase competition, but I don't agree that broke European teams necessarily provide that.

CL play is a big deal and obviously a higher level of competition, but how many clubs are there who often/regularly qualify for it but can't afford to pay competitive salaries? There are undoubtedly some, but are those actually places we want our players to go? Not me -- if an established MLS player (with the salary to match) wants to sign elsewhere, I want him going to a top ~75 club in Europe.

 

Our retired players that have played in Europe and to Mexico have told people what the difference is. You lose to a rival you don't go out in public. I recently listened to Eric Wynalda on the 'Tactical Manager podcast talking about the bonuses they got for starting and winning and the competition in the club it created. An MLS team loses ohh well there is always next year. Some say part of tthe reason Messi came to the US instead of Saudi was the level of anominity he could have in the states. In Europe everyone knows the players on the local team. And if a big name USMNT player like Pulisic comes back and gets a DP contract he would never get benched. He could have a month of bad form. In Europe you can get benched. Even big names get benched Leao got benched at Milan for poor form.

 

1923038603581501824 is not a valid tweet id

Tolkin not expected to get loaned out and wants to stay with Kiel to help them get promoted back.

 

Are you sure it is?

For one, it's pretty clear PSV could pay Miles what Cincinnati is paying him -- in fact, Miles is only paid $1.6M.

PSV only wanted Miles on a deal. If they thought Miles was going to be a starter or be someone they could resell, they would have upped their offer. Miles was 26-27 when he made this decision and not great with the ball.

A decision that, if he hadn't been offered that by Cincinnati, probably would have been offered in Mexico or maybe even a Russian team. But he's also not some 22 year old budding star with massive upside. He was a mid-20s guy coming off what was a terrible injury who chose to get paid. I hate to tell you, MLS or no, he's making that same decision.

Ahh, yes, there's a completely viable argument that Miles' day to day games at Cincinnati are more challenging than at PSV, but we will handwave it away.

I just watched Malik Tillman's second goal from yesterday and I've never, ever seen someone so wide open in the box in MLS. Or frankly, college soccer. It was inexplicably bad defense, in many ways worse than a centerback simply falling down. Those games are a joke. He wouldn't even see an attacker all game. If you think Malik is getting better playing that game, I have a bridge to sell you. If anything, it develops the bad habit we see in Malik -- passive game waiting for someone to set him up for something incredibly easy. No wonder he sucked against T&T -- they actually bodied him.

Champions League is nice, but that's a very small subset of both games AND teams that make it.

And yet, the list of players who have apparently chosen to stay despite real offers is exceedingly small and tend to be very flawed players in some ways. Miles lacks real ball skills and got hurt at the wrong time. Walker Zimmerman developed late and tried to go over but didn't find any real interest. Jesus Ferreira is an odd tweener who doesn't have size for the bigger leagues at his position.

So who is staying to an "overwhelming" amount. If there's real interest for Luna, I bet he heads over. The younger players will.

Like who?

Again, who has offers to teams that play in Top 5 leagues or play Champions League or are younger players with higher potential that haven't gone.

The list is so very short. We're talking about guys like Paxten or Tanner in second tier and guys like Tolkin in third tier ... and yet, all gone.

And the younger ones that have stayed so far ... is it a poor developmental choice for Diego Luna to be the offensive centerpiece of his team? He could be playing in Europe, but he wouldn't be the MAN in Europe. What about Sebastian Berhalter? Dude is starting and a key player for a team about to play for a continental championship.

But PLEASE! Belgian League games please!

No, this isn't stagnating the growth of the league long term. I have no idea how you think the league is going to grow massively reducing payrolls. What league in the history of time has grown by lowering the quality of their product?

I mean, really, did you really think this comment through?

And whether or not this is really stagnating Miles Robinson in particular, long term it's incredibly stupid to arrest the growth of your national league in terms of long term development. It's that growth that funds academies, that provides a career path for players. That creates fans on gameday.

Should we go back to a pure pay to play system? Should we go back to anyone that's not making it in "Europe" working two jobs? Should we go back to any player who isn't good by the European recruiting sweet spot -- like say, Sebastian Berhalter breaking out right now or Diego Luna -- that they should be incentivized to quit the sport like we used to have?

Should we go back to the days -- not that long ago -- of all these young players who aren't good enough to make it immediately to go over to Europe and try to make it through their academies? That hit rate is AMAZING. Sebastian Soto, Uly Llanez, Alex Mendez, who's that one dude from DC United who went to Orange County and then to Germany?

It's a world market. It's far better for MLS to be good than to be bad. Each player will make their own decision -- and that's a decision, btw, that should also inform you about what their priorities are and how that affects their likelihood to improve, anyway. If you really think that you can only improve in Yurrip, and Miles takes more money over that, then do you think Miles had the mindset to make a leap anyway? He clearly isn't prioritizing that.

This just isn't that hard. You aren't going to have a league that is successful enough to support player development, good enough to challenge players when there, well paying enough to have young people view it as a viable career path, good enough to create new fans and yet straddle that perfect line that USMNT fans have that they shouldn't pay any American anything so they are incentivized to play for peanuts as long as it is in Yurrip.

 

It's too bad Tolkin took the big MLS bucks to stay in New York. Damn MLS.

 

Kiel was arguably not the best landing spot for Tolkin, but he unequivocally made the right decision to transfer to Europe. It was overdue. He'd proven all he could.

Now he's shown he can play well in a top 4 league. The loan/sale offers will be there. It's a matter of if they'll be accepted. Regardless of diplomacy, if he wants to progress, rather than regress, as well as play for the USMNT in the WC, he'll have to accept 1 of those offers. Kiel already said they're getting them or they'll be accepted on their part because he's a record transfer.

 

youre right that pro/rel shouldnt be a part of this (though its an important factor), but id say because its never going to happen here. what youre talking about is the unspoken part of this- once players make the move (to whatever level) its on them. no one, and definitely not me, is saying move to leeds and bam- better player. im saying leeds is a better opportunity to grow and develop. thats on the individual player.

and while it may be a statistical wash (ive never really put any thought into that), i dont believe its as uniform as youre saying. busio and tesserman went to venezia with busio the more celebrated player at the time, but as i posted at the time (not to pat myself on the back), it was a good chance at development for both- but moreso for tesserman. he gets a year of serie a under his belt (pretty clearly above his level at the time), drops down with that experience, has a year of development while helping the team right back up- or in his case a move to lyon. busio has, i would say, marginally improved but overall id say thats just the vagaries of going to a yo-yo team. its a much more precarious bet on yourself, if you will.

tolkin is closer in age/profile to busio, but i think he was pretty clearly one of their better players. i wouldnt be surprised if hes signed by a bottom third, possibly mid table bund side...but i guess i wouldnt be surprised if he wasnt. but you cant measure development over 6 months (especially given the injuries tolkin had), its a little longer game than that- though we are also talking about potential over current level with most of these guys. so its still tbd- he could be the "next" tesserman, on a really promising trajectory which still depends on him as a player, or he could be the next mihailovic, who couldnt get close to the pitch in holland and mls was waiting with a stack of cash for a league-proven, american player. who exactly lost out there?

by tiered-com i meant multi-league nations, i dont know why i put it in such a dumb way. but the fa cup for colaship players, for example. wright, morris, etc dont only get colaship level comp- they get at least a handful of prem matches. that adds up. obviously we have the open cup, but mls is- and will always be- the top level so its not an opportunity to play better competition. does that make sense?

and that goes along with your point about cl- there are a few different ways teams face better comp than simply their league level. that can range from a leeds playing a dozen matches against prem comp over the course of a season, or celtic (which i ran down earlier) in the cl who faced a dozen top tier teams. no one is going to argue the current/recent spl over mls, but no team in mls faced even close to the level (and pretty significant number of matches) as celtic did.

its not apples-to-apples and its not one size fits all. none of this is. all we can do is go with the overarching philosophies at play- in my case development via competitive level/opportunity being "the" goal. i respect the arguments youre making. its the clowns who think its as simple (or even about the sport) as bigger contracts having any relation to (much less being the determining factor) quality.

cause theyre not even arguing that cole bassett can live here and be financially well off and hopefully slide right into a commentating gig at 32: no. freaking. duh. they are extrapolating that out to "mls is just as good as bottom half france/super lig" and thats both very arguable and two entirely different goods.