Every year MLS likes to destroy teams. It seems like every year players hop around and join other teams. At this rate, there is no stability in terms of teams. ONe year DC united is strong the next year it hits rock bottom. Or the next year, San jose is good only to suck the next year. I know about the salary cap and all but this is one thing that i hate about MLS. I don't know any other league in the world that has so many trades. Anyways please shout out and give your opinions.
I must object. First of all, San Jose did not suck last year. They were at the top of the table for most of the season. They lost momentum towards the end of the season and they just did not have that spark for the play-offs. Now as for all of the trades, that is mainly because of the salary cap.
You're right on the mark. It's ridiculous... and it does have to do mostly with the salary cap. In the pursuit of parity, MLS is undermining continuity, and destroying teams just as they begin to emerge as a real force. Neither of these, in my view, is good for the league. I think the league would be better off by having a couple of sexy teams, rather than 10 teams with 11 wins, 11 losses and 6 ties. And if we want to compete internationally, we must find a way to allow teams to maintain their core.
So three trades = destroying teams this year? DC traded three guys The Metros traded one The Fire looks like they will trade two Hardly "destroying." Six guys out of close to 200 get traded and the league is being destroyed? When those were the three worse teams in the league? This happens in the NFL, albeit through cuts and restructuring contracts. This happens in the NBA. If you have a cap, things happen. Teams are more prepared than they were in the past. The changes are minimal because they saw what happened to DC.
Futbolrey, I agree that its tragic the way MLS has to destroy teams every year. A new system has to be implemented eventually IMO. I think something that gives teams with better attendance a higher cap would be cool. Its sad to think that dynasties can last no longer than a couple season in MLS. When you're supporting your team and they've come out of their losing ways and started to win, you know they're going to suck again in a couple years, unless the situation was absolutely perfect which won't happen.
This would also force MLS and all the teams to do a better job marketing. And that could lead to many good things. Of course I doubt anything like this could be worked out. If so, not soon.
I would say it is. Pope has been such an integral part of the team. Same for Nowak in Chicago. Petke, while he ain't worth a piece of poop, has been what defines the Metros (poor saps.) Yeah, it would be nice to be able to hang on these players who don't to leave, who the management don't want to leave and the fans don't want them to leave. The league is only 7(?) years old and the only original player DC still has is Marco. That is sad . And it doesn't even lower the cost to the league because they still get paid; just for a different team.
I have to correct myself. This is a travesty. Four trades and eight guys. All on the worst three teams. As far as Pope and Nowak - each team has other max salary players. They made decisions in the front offices.
Its more about having to give up franchise players and there being no continuity than about destroying teams. Nowak is player that should retire wearing the Fire's jersey. Same goes for Pope with DC. Its sad that to fit under this cap we have to do that. I don't care if other sports here do it, it sucks!!! Plain and simple. If I moved to Germany for two years and got completely isolated from all MLS, I'd come back and everyone would have switched teams!!! I'm sure you can come back with some response to counter me, but it seems this way. I don't necassarily have a problem with trades, but I don't like franchise players moving around, especially when they don't want to. And I'm pretty sure that Pope wanted to stay with DC or if not, at least Europe. And Nowak wanted to stay in Chicago. And Petke wanted to stay in New Jersey. These players were all fan favorites for their respective teams. I like for there to be some continuity, and there isn't. For me, I can't wait until players are brought in through the TEAM instead of the league. I think that'll be a step in the right direction. Also, players sign with the TEAM, not the league. That will bring more individuality to the teams and not make it seem like ten twin generic teams. And like I've said before, I think it would be good if teams don't all have the exact amount of money. That brings more individuality to it as well. And will someone tell me how different sized caps based on the success in attendance wouldn't work so I can stop rambling about it?
Is there any chance you might actually do this? Please? I'm going to guess Mr. Monster is about to do that, so I'll yield the floor to the distinguished gentleman from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Because it destroys the whole purpose of having a salary cap at all. A cap is there for equality. The teams chose which people to move. I would venture to guess this might be the least movement in the off-season since the DC purge. Look at the waiver list. 26 guys were waived. Three were picked up. Hardly any names that fans will miss. Now eight guys have been moved. Eight out of nearly 200 (22 max roster spots x 10). Another two dozen may have their contracts not picked up and move or re-sign at a lower wage. So that's maybe 50 of 200 moved, half of them simply because they weren't good enough (the original waiver crew). So maybe 20-30 guys moved for reasons other than they just weren't needed. That's 10 percent of the league. And maybe some of them want to move. So maybe less than 10 percent of guys are moved without really asking for it. And not all of them will be gone, just on different teams. Guess what: that happens in Europe as well. If the EPL has 25-man senior rosters (give or take) are you trying to tell me there won't be a change of 50 players among the teams (either from team to team or a player leaving and a new one replaciing him) from year to year? Do things happen differently than in Europe? Sure, but players don't get sold to the highest bidder to pay off debts here. I'll take that tradeoff for eight guys being traded, half of whom might have welcomed the move.
Caps move players. DC has been forced to move too many players. They have to move people. DC has been totally incapable of keeping anything that resembles their original team. The cap sucks. And sadly, most of the original DC team is still in the league. How does that save the league money?
When did saving money league-wide ever be part of any argument? That's the most bizarre tangent I have ever seen.
DC's "Original Team": Jeff Agoos Richie Williams John Harkes Raul Diaz Arce Marco Etcheverry Tony Sanneh Mario Gori Clint Peay Steve Rammel Jeff Causey Eddie Pope Erik Imler Mark Simpson Shawn Medved David Vaudreuil Kris Kelderman John Maessner Jaime Moreno Brian Kamler Mike Huwiler Juan Berthy Suarez Said Fazlagic George Gelnovatch Thor Lee Sterling Wescott Ben Crawley Jesse Marsch
Because it is a single-entity deal. It doesn't matter how many teams have a profit or loss. At the end of the day it only matters if the league as a whole is losing or gaining money.
Jeff Agoos - in SJ Richie Williams - in NY John Harkes - in Col Raul Diaz Arce - in SC Marco Etcheverry - still on the team Tony Sanneh - cheap MLS lost him to Germany Mario Gori - selling drugs in NY Clint Peay - who cares Steve Rammel - retired Jeff Causey - retired Eddie Pope - in NY Erik Imler - no clue Mark Simpson - where is he? Shawn Medved - who? David Vaudreuil - in Chi Kris Kelderman - no clue John Maessner - bounced everywhere Jaime Moreno - in NY Brian Kamler - somewhere in MLS Mike Huwiler - no clue Juan Berthy Suarez - banned from the league Said Fazlagic - nobody knows where he is George Gelnovatch - please, he wasn't an original Thor Lee - mistakes were made Sterling Wescott - no clue Ben Crawley - just because you're from UVA doesn't make you good Jesse Marsch - in Chi (and he still sucks)
Dynasties are a thing of the past in all American professional sports, or at least will soon be. Look at the other 4 sports. The NFL has it's house in order moreso than Baseball, Hockey and Basketball, and with their cap, a team can literally go from near last to first in a year. From a marketing standpoint, it works because fan and sponsorship interest gets maintained in all cities. Baseball does not have a cap and has been trying to get rid of at least 2 teams. Plus about a 3rd of the teams in each league have no hope of contending for a playoff spot. Hockey doesn't have a cap and is about to go through a very difficult period. You may see 2 teams, Ottawa and Buffalo folded at the end of this year. Basketball has a cap and is relatively healthy. A cap is the only way to go in today's environment because it keeps the salary costs somewhat in check. And I think, in some ways, it makes for a better product in MLS because players have to constantly justify their positon. If you're a guy like Luis Hernandez, you better produce and justify the salary or you're soon gone. Or, you stay and take a big pay cut. If a player has any pride at all (unlike Luis) he'll give his all at all times which only makes for a better product for the fans.
Wow, the levels of cluelessness on this thread is reaching record heights. Where to begin, where to begin. Let's knock out the idea from the dolt who suggested letting teams who make more money spend more money. I believe NASL did that and it was one of the key factors in the league's demise. You really act as if any team in the league is running away from the others in terms of ticket and marketing revenue. If there was such a team, that team's marketing people would take the league equivalents of those jobs but since there really are no such examples this theory is moot. What's worse is that the person whose idea this was actuall thought they'd get some sympathy because their dynasty couldn't last. And even if we ran with this absurd idea, its not as if the best teams in MLS in terms of ticket and marketing revenue generate enough to impact their talent level with big-time signings. Now, about the "outrageous" turnover of players and teams in the league. Turnover is inevitable in sports, the thing is when you're ONLY a 10-team league it's kinda hard not to wind up dealing with the same teams. The suggestion that "every year" some team is being torn to shreds is just stupid. Two teams have had to undergo significant (and legitimate) cap reductions in the league's seven year history, D.C. two years ago and Chicago now. The recent moves by D.C. are not cap related, that's just the smokescreen the team is using in order to prevent fan backlash. Think about this. If D.C.'s recent moves were about salary would the team then have turned around and traded a player who cost them nothing (Mapp) for a player making considerable money (Kovalenko)? No. The fact is D.C. hadn't made the playoffs in two years and decided it was time for a change. Ray Hudson couldn't stand Jaime Moreno and the team had real concerns about Eddie Pope's injuries as well as issues with paying a defender $200 grand plus. Tey wanted the cap room to get a new guy in Kovalenko as well as a soon-to-be-named foreigner. That's what led to their deal with the Metros. As for Petke, give me a break with the fan favorite crap. He was a favorite of little girls who thought his bleached blond hair was cute. Meanwhile he's been busy getting toasted on bad goals for the past two seasons. The Metros overpaid for him and were more than happy to deal him for the package they got. If you're livid about D.C. making the trade then be mad at Ray Hudson, not MLS. Chicago is in a similar cap situation but Peter Nowak is simply the case of an older player who the team just couldn't afford to keep. They already have Beasley, Razov, Wolff, Armas, Bocanegra and Thornton. They can't keep everyone and pay them the raises that young stars inevitably get. This is not unheard of in sports You only need look at Jerry Rice and soon Emmitt Smith to see examples of this. As for Chicago's overall cap situation, they simply had to pay for acquiring and collecting an absurd amount of talent and now all that talent just won't fit under the cap. They'll lose some players but to say Chicago has been torn apart is ridiculous. They lost Kovalenko, Nowak and likely Stoitchkov and maybe Wolff and they'll still be as talented a team as there is. A popular misconception is that the league is behind these trades. It isn't. The league sets the guidelines and the teams must respond to them and it is the coaches and GMs that are cooking these deals up. MLS officials are not in some office throwing darts at a board. If anything the league has become less and less involved in such stuff, especially foreign player scouting. And finally, the idea of having a few sexy teams while allowing other teams to suck is idiotic. The league is too small and weak to afford to neglect any of its cities. The league is trying to GROW, not shrink. This is why having the cap isn't a bad thing (Although raising it to $2 mil and upping the roster size wouldn't hurt) and why it isn't wrong for teams that have too much talent should spread the wealth. It may sound like communism to some but it is what will assure the long-term health of the league. People need to stop whining about what they think is wrong and be grateful that there will be a year eight.
Yes. The league doesn't consider the fact that players like Pope and Nowak have built up a connection with the team and the community in which that team exists. Is Pope supposed to close down his foundation in DC and move it to New Jersey? Should Nowak sever his ties to the Chicago Polish community and recreate those ties in Foxboro? The salary cap is a joke, and is arbitarily enforced anyway (I mean, how is it that LA has never been forced to get rid of Cobi Jones?) and everyone who follows the league knows it's a complete fabrication. The league is shooting itself in the foot by getting rid of players who draw fans to the games. How many Polish-American fans will Chicago lose because they were forced to get rid of Nowak? Stupid stupid move by the MLS front office.
EXACTLY! The current salary cap is a joke, it is unrealistic not to expect a small raise. The salary cap has not been raised for a few years. Raising it to $2 mil ($100k each year of the last three years in which it was not raised) would probably have enabled Chicago to keep Nowak and DC United to keep Pope. Fan loyalty=priceless
To fill out the whereabouts of DCU almuni: Gori was playing for Pittsburgh in the A-league. Peay retired due to a knee injury Simpson is the goal keeper coach at DCU Kamler plays for NE Gelnovitch is the coach of UVA There's no question that DC has had its roster dismantled over the years. Every year there have been cap-related trades that removed effective players from the line up. Generally DC has done everything it could to keep the core (Moreno, Pope, Etcheverry) in place and when that group, surrounded by role players, could not make the playoffs in three successive years, management decided to go in a different direction. I agree that this year's activity on the DC trade front is part cap (they wouldn't give up Pope if there were no salary cap), but trades would have happened to some degree simply because the team has not succeeded with its core players. My beef with the trades is that turnover kills continuity on the field and undermines the league's marketing efforts. I've got a pile of Eddie Pope bobblehead dolls from the end of last season. He was a figure head (like Novak was in Chicago). Now he's gone. And when the roster gets overhauled year after year, the team loses its identity. It's important to maintain some continuity so fans can identify with their teams. At DC games these days, people tend to cheer the introduction of ex DC players visiting on the opposing teams and it seems like there are a handful of such players being cheered every game (excluding players that have left the league, this includes Kamler, Agoos, Llamosa, Williams, Harkes, Moreno, Marsh, Mapp, Denton, Presthus, Perez, Lisi, Ziadie, Armstrong, Talley, and Albright). It makes MLS look like a game of musical chairs.
How did the league front office do these things? That's just absurd. Teams made decisions, unpopular ones, but local ones. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean orders were sent down from above to move certain players. DC could have traded Marco, but no one wanted him. Chicago could have traded Razov, but they probably feel he'll be around longer than Nowak. But they made different decisions. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they are fishy. If it were so orchestrated by the league, why did the Pope/Petke/Moreno/Williams deal take so long to finalize? If the league forced the Fire to trade Nowak, why did it come down to the last minute? People need to take a step back emotionally, stop feeling like they need to be consulted on business matters and see it for what it's worth - some teams who are struggling doing what they can to shake up the mix and meet the salary cap. I don't like everything the league does, but a prominent players get traded and released in every sport.
I agree, but if the stories that the league drastically cut losses last year are true, I think it's fiscally sound to keep the cap down for another year and see if they can continue to trim the losses. A rise would be nice, but I'd prefer league stability over a token rise which would just get eaten up in a year with raises and delay getting rid of top-drawer players until 2004.