Just to add to your point, LA is an even better example in 2005. Steve Sampson had this team sneak into the playoffs as the 4th seed in the West, and the team with the worst record to make the playoffs that year, and they went on to win the whole thing.
MLS can't even get every teams a $4.5 mil cap. $10 mil cap is way way off. However, there are a few MLS teams that can spend $10 mil and still be in good shape. LA, TOR, SEA and NY (in new stadium). Seattle is projected to earn around $25-30 mil in revenue in 2009. What MLS needs to do is allow those teams to spend to a certain extent so they can increase their fan base (like Urawa in the J-league) and at the same time share revenue with the smaller teams. [luxury tax]. MLS is already sharing revenue league wise from national TV, national sponsorship, part of shirt sponsorship and 30% of ticket revenue It's not fair that a team that make $30 mil a year have the same $2.3 mil cap as a team that make 1/5 of that. Even in the NHL, the big teams can spend 40% more than the little teams and not revenue share a dime. And yes they have a salary cap.
I honestly think a modest raise in the cap ($3.5 million would be a good start) should be enough to start luring better talent; you could have all 20 senior players earning over $100,000 a year, in theory, while still having the flexibility to reward the best players. That kind of money could be enough to bring in young Latin American or African talent that might otherwise ignore the league.
Very true. However, lets remember that the demands up in Seattle dont necessitate a team that can blow away every other team in the league. They have a solid team now, but improved play next year would keep up with fan demand. That could be accomplished with a 4 mil cap on a 2.8 league-wide minimum. This, as well as the 2nd DP that Garber mentioned last week would adequately suffice for Seattle. Remember, Seattle is also strongly seeking a healthy dose international friendlies with soccer brand names. You want some level of competitiveness there too.To sum up for next yr: Seattle plays on 4 mil cap + 2DPs + 1 extra traded DP from low revenue team. TFC & LA (post-becks) is also capable of this scenario. The crowd at RBNY against DC is abysmal.
I noted in the other cap thread that some of the current payrolls aren't all that small -- Chicago's is about $5.2 million this year, including pro rated signing bonuses. The problem is about half of that is tied up in one designated player and is funded by the Fire, not MLS. If MLS wants better teams, as Garber says, they need to spend more money on the supporting cast IMO -- especially the top half of the starting 11.
How luxury tax/revenue sharing will help MLS small revenue teams. http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index....es&catid=59:organizational-reports&Itemid=137 $1 mil a year in luxury tax revenue for a team that earn around $7-9 mil a year will be a big deal.
While I hate to see teams win over and over again, I think in order for MLS to really grow and flourish with full stadiums we need to drop the cap. The cap should be 75% of the teams previous year revenue. That should be the cap. It would allow teams to spend much of the revenue they made the previous year while not bankrupting the team or the league. Really.. 75% of the Gals would be something like 27, 28 million? If my numbers are correct that would actually allow them to buy a team that would be competitve in the UEFA champions league, nevermind the CONCACAF Champions league. MLS would no longer be looked at as a joke league around the world and numbers like that might make the Club world cup more appealing to other teams if they could ever get that mess straight. Exactly.. Look at Regina(or was it Torrino) this weekend in Italy.. Any dog can have his day, if a team gets hot at the right time... Playofftime in the EPL, Fullham might have knocked ManU out.. Not to mention.. play for the tie and take your chances at shootouts. Anything can happen in the playoffs. Its why I love them.
The FAI League of Ireland uses 65% -- the only league I'm aware of that actually has implemented a cap like this -- and it does seem to work. Payrolls and crowds are pretty small though. I believe only four teams are fully professional this season, in part because of the payroll limits provided by the rule.
http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1110.../counterattack-mls-could-need-a-dominant-team No salary cap with luxury tax (like MLB) 14 12.07% No salary cap (like most soccer leagues) 20 17.24% ------------would lead to dominant team(s). However, I don't think MLS will go that route because in the past 14 years it has a hard cap and govern by a single entity model. Let's hope in the next CBA, the league will allow teams to spend about 25% more than the lowest team (and pay the luxury tax for this 25% luxury). So, a $2.8 mil cap would mean teams can spend up to $3.5 mil (25% over). However, they will pay luxury tax for going over.
http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/62437 MLS would grow much faster under a no salary cap (with luxury tax) model but I don't think the smaller revenue clubs would vote for that. No salary cap model will never be accepted by MLS owners. Why do you think the NHL shut down for 1 whole year for? The owners wanted a salary cap. Under the new CBA, let's hope MLS allow big revenue clubs to grow....while sharing revenue with the small revenue clubs. Win/win for the league as a whole. Spend 25% more but pay luxury tax. Let's hope there is a big increase in the salary cap too (from $2.3 mil to $3.3 mil?). Code: TEAM ATTENDANCE REPORT HOME GAMES ROAD GAMES DATES TOTAL AVERAGE DATES TOTAL AVERAGE Chicago Fire 4 43,991 10,998 4 58,145 14,536 Chivas USA 5 72,775 14,555 4 59,805 14,951 Colorado Rapids 3 33,110 11,037 4 53,335 13,334 Columbus Crew 4 53,050 13,263 4 60,684 15,171 FC Dallas 3 29,242 9,747 5 77,354 15,471 D.C. United 5 72,807 14,561 4 49,186 12,297 Houston Dynamo 4 65,187 16,297 3 30,883 10,294 Kansas City Wizards 4 36,769 9,192 5 85,740 17,148 Los Angeles Galaxy 4 79,045 19,761 4 73,222 18,306 New England Revolution 2 20,426 10,213 5 62,577 12,515 New York Red Bulls 4 39,315 9,829 5 95,041 19,008 Real Salt Lake 4 53,805 13,451 4 59,522 14,881 San Jose Earthquakes 5 55,140 11,028 3 43,802 14,601 Seattle Sounders FC 5 147,680 29,536 3 46,409 15,470 Toronto FC 5 100,899 20,180 4 47,536 11,884 MLS Totals 61 903,241 14,807 61 903,241 14,807 CLUB ATTENDANCE REPORT HOME GAMES ROAD GAMES DATES TOTAL AVERAGE DATES TOTAL AVERAGE Chicago Fire 15 255,511 17,034 15 264,652 17,643 Chivas USA 15 226,717 15,114 15 255,975 17,065 Colorado Rapids 15 204,884 13,659 15 220,131 14,675 Columbus Crew 15 219,332 14,622 15 227,115 15,141 FC Dallas 15 195,356 13,024 15 281,712 18,781 D.C. United 15 297,531 19,835 15 233,133 15,542 Houston Dynamo 15 254,083 16,939 15 214,773 14,318 Kansas City Wizards 15 160,286 10,686 15 237,319 15,821 Los Angeles Galaxy 15 390,132 26,009 15 421,978 28,132 New England Revolution 15 263,706 17,580 15 211,938 14,129 New York Red Bulls 15 238,925 15,928 15 234,331 15,622 Real Salt Lake 15 242,690 16,179 15 231,367 15,424 San Jose Earthquakes 15 205,695 13,713 15 210,563 14,038 Toronto FC 15 301,793 20,120 15 211,654 14,110 MLS Totals 210 3,456,641 16,460 210 3,456,641 16,460
Says who? Not saying its not possible, but I don't think its the sure thing you make it sound like. Except for the fans of the small clubs of course.
It's common sense that if MLS eliminate the hard cap and replace it with no salary cap but with luxury tax like MLB, it will grow much faster in revenue. How? Some teams will want to be the best and thus they sign better players in order to win more games. LA, NY, Tor, Sea and Vancouver come to mind. They can do a lot with $7-10 mil of salary budget. With success, they will increase their revenue at a much greater rate. If LA/NY/Seattle/Toronto are allowed to become the ManUtd/Chelsea/Liverpool/Arsenal of MLS, they will be the biggest clubs in the Americas (revenues of around $50 mil a year easily). They can share revenue with the smaller clubs of MLS. Seattle can average 40,000 a game if MLS lets Seattle spend. It is averaging nearly 30,000 right now. Toronto can expand BMO Field to 40,000 with grass and they will sold out their season if their team is really good (top 4 in MLS almost every year). Same with LA and NY. Small revenue clubs will not go bust like some NASL clubs did because of luxury tax revenue, and of course MLS share revenue: -30% of ticket revenue -100% of national TV revenue and national sponsorship -large part of shirt sponsorship NY/LA/TOR/SEA can do wonder to MLS overall revenue when each can spend around $10-12 mil a year on salary. ------------- p.s. It's nice to dream but MLS will not get rid of the salary cap. We will find out in like 8 months when the current CBA expires which direction MLS will take: continue with the hard cap or a more flexible cap where teams can spend more than another but pay luxury tax for it.
Also keep in mind that MLS wants to convert existing soccer fans into MLS fans. Garber stated that only 1 out of 3 soccer fans living in the USA watch MLS. Big clubs will make MLS better in international tournament and perceived quality of play. When some MLS clubs are as good as Mexican clubs, more and more will follow MLS.
To much of anything is a bad thing. To much parity or disparity are equally bad. Right now there is simply to much parity. There is no team to hate. No team that can make advances on the international level. Etc. Every team in MLS is so equivalent right now that every game is like watching the same 11 guys in different shirts.
I agree with this, but we won't see team owners investing in big money players and big salary figures, or will the MLS let this happen until EVERY team has their own stadium and is earning revenue, and not taking a loss.... some teams still are, for instance DC United.
You are much more opimistic about the possibility of instant growth than I am. Another 5 million in salary cap isn't going to allow Seattle/LA/TFC/etc. to bring in the Ronaldo's and Rooney's of the world. There the only type of players that will instantly move the attendance needle like Beckham did. Since that's not going to happen, where's the 50 million in revenue going to come from? Meanwhile those teams that can't compete are going to lose ground in the revenue as their fans stop coming. Sure, they'll recover that in revenue sharing, but that means the additional money that the bigger teams are bringing in ais being used to offset the losses of the smaller teams, which reduces the amount of increase for the league as a whole. You make statements like increasing the salary cap is a sure thing and a win win for everyone, but if that were really the case wouldn't they have already done it? Anschutz, Hunt and Kraft didn't become billionares by being stupid.
No, it wont bring us these big players, the DP rule will, and on top the extra millions we can compete with the best up and coming youth that is looked over in europe, which we can scoop from all of south america. I am sure many guys would love to come from all over there for 400-700k salaries, we'd be competing with mexico who has many great talents in their league jsut because of money.
But if that's the case, how is it common sense that increasing the cap will increase revenue, up to 50 million for some teams? Better players means better soccer, but that's not going to happen overnight. The only way to increase revenue overnight is to bring EPL/La Liga/Bundasliga/Seire A level soccer in, which MLS can't do on a 7-10 million dollar cap. Even if they did decide to spend the $$$ it would take, most of the players wouldn't be interested.
I don't understand how someone could say that increasing the payroll of teams would not increase the quality on the pitch. It is a pretty simple statement, incerase payroll by 7 million, will increase the level of quality by 7 million, obviously that will not buy you C. Ronaldo or Messi, I don't think anybody is. But it will buy your more depth and a little more quality. That depth is ESSENTIAL for teams to get serious about winning on the international level. And if every team added a 2-3 800k/yr type players, they whole league would improve in quality to a level that would be noticeable. Certainly not to the level of other top leagues, but better than it currently is, and that should drive more people to the stadium. The same amount as if Barca or Chelsea were in town? no. but again, that isn't what the league would be paying for either.
Have you seen average attendance numbers of LA from prior winning years? LA needs a better product to go from 21k to 27k all the time. With what they have on the field now, i wouldnt be surprised if they are drawing 16k next year. How do you get a better product when players on that team are probably doing minimum wage? As for fans of teams that cant compete with higher spending teams, the fans will come to see the more-popular opposing side...just the way Bay area Bosox fans fill up Oakland coliseum when those two teams play.
Let's assume that LA/Tor/Sea/NY has $8 mil player budget and they spend it on five $1 mil players, they still have $3 mil to spend on the other 15 players. $8 mil player budget would allow these teams to be as good as many Mexican teams. A DP like Beckham is only a good idea if the team is competitive (among the best 4 in MLS). I believe it's better money to spend $6 mil on six $1 mil player than on one player. It will even have more impact on attendance because the team will be a must-see. LA with 6 great players ($1 mil each) will be more attractive to the fans than a LA with Beckham. Give Seattle the ability to spend $8-10 mil on salary and it will give MLS the first $50 mil revenue team within a few years. LA Galaxy generated $36 mil revenue in 2008 according to Forbes. Seattle is now selling out 30,000+ a game. With a winning team and talents from $8-10 mil player budget, the attendance can only increase. 45,000 average attendance is doable. With a sucky/mediocre team, Seattle will do a LA and drop below 20,000. It's not like fans are coming out in great numbers to see winning teams anyway (see Chivas). Even the defending champs are averaging less than 13,400 from its 4 home games. If MLS lose 10,000 total a game from these few teams but gain 20,000 total a game from Seattle/NY/LA/Seattle/Vancouver, it will be a net gain for the league. Code: TEAM ATTENDANCE REPORT HOME GAMES ROAD GAMES DATES TOTAL AVERAGE DATES TOTAL AVERAGE Chicago Fire 4 43,991 10,998 4 58,145 14,536 Chivas USA 5 72,775 14,555 4 59,805 14,951 Colorado Rapids 3 33,110 11,037 4 53,335 13,334 Columbus Crew 4 53,050 13,263 4 60,684 15,171 p.s. Having a few really good clubs will only help MLS with fan perception (converting existing soccer fans), international competition like CCL, higher TV rating/revenue, merchandise, sponsorship. MLS have a chance to make Seattle and Toronto a 'major' player in their market (40,000+ attendance), give them the tools to do it.
Here's the J-league figure for player salary for 2009 http://www.japanesesoccer.net/wordpress/?p=1912 (1) Urawa Reds - 1,250,000,000 Yen = $12.5 mil (2) Gamba Osaka - 1,050,000,000 Yen = $10.5 mil (3) Kashima Antlers - 830,000,000 Yen = $8.3 mil (4) Vissel Kobe - 730,000,000 Yen = $7.3 mil (5) Kyoto Sanga FC - 700,000,000 Yen = $7 mil (6) Oita Trinita - 650,000,000 Yen (7) Jubilo Iwata - 640,000,000 Yen (8) Kawasaki Frontale - 620,000,000 Yen (9) Kashiwa Reysol - 610,000,000 Yen (10) Shimizu S-Pulse - 590,000,000 Yen (11) Nagoya Grampus - 580,000,000 Yen (12) FC Tokyo - 560,000,000 Yen (13) Yokohama F Marinos - 520,000,000 Yen (14) Omiya Ardija and Sanfrecce Hiroshima - 510,000,000 Yen (16) JEF Utd Chiba - 480,000,000 Yen (17) Albirex Niigata - 360,000,000 Yen = $3.6 mil (18) Yamagata Montedio - 250,000,000 Yen = $2.5 mil Code: 2008 2007 increase/decrease --------------------------------------------------------------- 01. Urawa Reds 47,609 46,667 +942 02. Albirex Niigata 34,490 38,276 -3,786 03. FC Tokyo 25,716 25,290 +426 04. Yokohama F. Marinos 23,682 24,039 -357 05. Oita Trinita 20,322 19,759 +563 06. Kashima Antlers 19,714 16,239 +3,475 07. Kawasaki Frontale 17,565 17,338 +227 08. Shimizu S-Pulse 16,599 15,952 +647 09. Nagoya Grampus 16,555 15,585 +970 10. Gamba Osaka 16,128 17,439 -1,311 11. Jubilo Iwata 15,465 16,359 -894 12. Tokyo Verdy 14,837 7,327 +7,510 13. Consadole Sapporo 14,547 12,112 +2,435 14. JEF United Chiba 14,084 14,149 -65 15. Kyoto Sanga F.C. 13,687 6,629 +7,058 16. Vissel Kobe 12,981 12,460 +521 17. Kashiwa Reysol 12,308 12,967 -659 18. Omiya Ardija 10,714 11,741 -1,027 --------------------------------------------------------------- Total 19,278 19,081 +197 Where would the J-league be today if it has a hard cap of $2.5 mil five years ago? Nowhere near where it is today. Right now, it's the best league in Asia and its teams won the last 2 AFC Champions League. If MLS have no salary cap (with luxury tax), I wouldn't be surprised if the attendance would look something like this (assuming increase capacity for LA/Tor/NY) LA: 40,000 NY: 40,000 Seattle: 40,000 Toronto: 40,000 Vancouver: 35,000 . . . . -----12,000 -----11,000 -----10,000 I believe more 75% of soccer fans living in the US will follow MLS if it's as good as the J-league or Mexican FMF. Converting the other 2 out of 3 soccer fans is MLS #1 priority.
There's the key. If MLS spends an extra 5 million on 4-5 teams a year, thats an extra 20-25 million a year. If its going to take a few years to get 50 million in revenue (not profit) per team how are they ever going to make money on this move before deciding they're throwing good money after bad? And if I grant that fans will show up in small markets for the 4-5 super clubs, what about the other 10-12 home games?
Exactly. This guy gets it. Its about the quality of players we have on the field, mexico has a higher quality of player on their squads, yet we can outbid them on any ONE player because of the DP rule, Imagine if we had a higher salary cap, we no doubt could out bid them on many of their middle players getting paid medium salaries.. For Example: Joaquin Botero, a player from Bolivia, he is the leading goal scorer for Bolivia and all of south america in the conmebol qualifiers with 8 goals and a hat trick on argentina. Houston Dynamo tried to negotiate to get him for their squad as their goal scorer, he was asking something around 400k+, THATS IT! Houston couldnt pay it because how salaries work in this league, anything over is it 400? That a player is considered DP right? But he ended up going to the MEXICAN SECOND DIVISION!!!! For like something like 400ishk yearly salary over there. Mexican Sec. Division squads can even get better players than MLS.