[/QUOTE] I understand that all this is poorly understood. Maybe you understand it. But MLS is like other American sports leagues. The Yankees cannot sign any 17 yo they want can they? How do Americans get into MLS? They get in by the Superdraft, HG deal, or Allocation List. Is there another way? I think for older players you can go through a waiver process too. Araujo got onto LAG through a waiver process. How did Clark get an MLS contract? Simple question. None of the above apply to him. Do you think MLS teams can sign any U21 American anytime they want? That is not how I understand things. Why is there a Superdraft if you can go out tomorrow and sign anyone you would want to draft? It has come out in the media that MLS HQ told Minnesota to stand down. Minny was asking for a ransom and were forced to take $75K. If that is true, it kind of sets a precedent on how much GAM you can get for a player in these circumstances.
Maybe. Clark is not an HG player so MLS is involved. They probably insisted on some kind of transfer fee.
An honor for a '87 who doesn't get discussed here much (born in Sierra Leone, but has been called American by his clubs): LA Galaxy II forward Augustine Williams has been voted the USL Championship’s Player of the Month for September / October after recording seven goals in eight games during the final stretch of the season to complete a career-best regular season and lead the Galaxy II to a second consecutive trip to the USL Championship Playoffs.
I also beat his parents by a decade by typing his YOB wrong in my previous post, which I can no longer edit. I'm on fire today!
There are actually rules about this. For example, the MLS Superdraft is ONLY for college players at this time. Generation Adidas contracts are for Non-Senior College Players. Neither is applicable to Clark. If the player isn't in college, then a team can sign any player to a contract per a set of rules. Things like the allocation list or discovery rights are for national team players (and some youth national team players) or foreign-based players. For someone like Clark, if he lives in an open homegrown territory, anyone can sign him. If he lives in a homegrown territory, if team that doesn't have his rights wants to sign him, they have to trade for those rights. Which is what RBNY did.
Source? I've read the entire MLS Roster Rules and they don't mention anything at all about that last part. Allocation list is for national team (level) players, and discovery rights are for players over 18 that nothing else applies to. Nothing at all is mentioned about a player under 18 to who doesn't qualify for a HG deal.
The only mechanism that works that NYRB traded for his homegrown rights, which were controlled by Minnesota. So in effect he's a homegrown signing. That's the mechanism. They're just not calling him that because well......................he's not a homegrown player for NYRB. There are examples of MLS clubs trading homegrown rights of players. By the way, last I saw....................a player only has to be with an organization for 150 days (not a year) in order to qualify as a homegrown signing. Caden has been with the NYRB organization for more than 150 days. https://www.themaneland.com/2019/1/...ng-major-league-soccers-homegrown-player-rule
Maybe, but I don't feel like the MLS was in a very strong position here to demand anything. Clark had an existing USL contract with (I'm assuming) a clause with him going to RB leipzig at 18. MLS could have thrown a fit and not allowed it, and Clark could have played some USL and gone and trained in europe for the r That's interesting, I had never seen the 150 days anywhere before. "Must have 150 days of attendance with the club in a year. Attendance days include training and games with the club’s academy.' It's unclear whether that means 150 days in attendance OR a year, or 150 days AND a year. Regardless, it definitely says "attendance" at the club, which I don't see how Caden Clark could have -- he signed MLS almost exactly 8 months after signing USL and they took over 4 months off between games for covid, not sure when exactly they returned to training. I suppose its possible he showed up there every single day it was allowed by covid and the 8 months were exactly when he hit 150 days of walking into the building. Maybe they signed him the exact day he was eligible under 150 days.
Eh. Borderline case in terms of number of days. Maybe the league blurred the line due to the unusual COVID period. To me there are all sorts of kinda similar examples of homegrown signings. Maybe not as borderline. I'll pull one out of my ass here. USYNTer Shaft Brewer. Left the FCD academy to train at Leipzig. Didn't sign a contract at Leipzig. Wanted to return to MLS, and signed with LAFC. By what mechanism did LAFC sign USYNTer Shaft Brewer? Not a discovery. Not an allocation. Not a draft. They traded for his homegrown rights from FC Dallas. Whether a player is actually training at a club or is just from their homegrown territory....................doesn't really matter. The MLS club still owns his "homegrown rights." So for instance, if SKC wants to sign Bailey Sparks from their SKCII team, they will have to trade for his "homegrown rights" from FCD. He didn't play for FCD's academy, he played at Solar. Doesn't matter. That's the mechanism by which they can sign him. SKC was awarded Josh Sargent's "homegrown rights" even though he never played for SKC. He could have signed for SKC if he wanted to play in MLS. If he told the league he'd only sign for NYRB, then his territorial rights would have been traded from SKC to NYRB. Same as just happened with Clark. In the past a player like Sargent would have entered the draft (Jozy Altidore or Michael Bradley or whomever). Very few go that route, rendering the draft almost a useless exercise.
I don't know why you'd assume Clark had a clause in a USL contract to go to Leipzig. I also don't know what you think MLS was demanding? I'm sure this is very simple. Clark wanted to play soccer and have a path to Europe. The Red Bull Organization, which has a history of playing kids and has a clear path to both Austria and Europe gives him a path and sells him on a path, whether it's contractually included or not. The tryout occurs at USL either to try him out or because they both want to feel themselves out before paying for homegrown rights / committing on Clark's part. The kid is great; Red Bull is in. The kid says playing in MLS at a higher level for the next + more pay is great and Leipzig sounds awesome. All RB needs to do is pay $75k for the rights and it's all done... I guess I'm confused as why people think was confusing. As for the 150 days or 1 year or whatever, that's not required to be USL time; just in the organization. So it's also possible Clark was in NY for longer than he was playing for RB2. If he even signed a homegrown contract, which I don't know that he did.
Clark spent 0 (zero) days at the NYRB Academy. Clint, you understand this stuff. How was Cappis not able to sign with FCD? Could he have signed with NTFC and waited 150 attendance days? Once you move to Europe, then you come in like any American not subject to the Allocation List (not every American is on there; only USMNT players by some standard). I know there is a clue here with Araujo, who LAG had to release to waivers. Even if Clark can't sign an HG contract (because he was never in NYRB Academy, nor Minnesota actually), just the claim can stop MLS teams from signing him. Didn't Chicago stop Nashville from taking Gusman on loan from Celtic for that reason? I like that MLS stepped in and told Minnesota to back the F down. Even a mandated GAM cost would go a long way to making HG Territories superfluous. I think it important that all this teenage talent gets a place to play and the best place in North America for them is MLS. With Cannon's novel contract and now something here with Clark, we are seeing flexibility. We are seeing a commitment to being a "Selling League" and "Developing Players". Arguing that MLS isn't being more flexible and is not changing the rules over the past few years to make development and sales happen is just knee-jerk MLS bashing.
I read that as you have to be in the Academy and then spend 150 days with the club. Clark was signed directly to RB2 and never was in any MLS Academy at any time.
Cappis was from Houston. He could have signed with NTSC. But FCD would still have needed to acquire his homegrown territory rights from Houston in order to sign for the first team. In the Cappis case.................Houston wouldn't play ball. Refused to trade his rights to their biggest rival. So Cappis went to Europe instead. As a point of comparison, Chris Richards moved with Cappis to the FCD academy from the Houston Texans national title time. But he was deemed to be from Alabama, and not Houston. He wasn't from anybody's homegrown territory. So FCD could sign him to a homegrown contract after he'd spent the necessary time in their academy. Homegrown territory rights don't extend to the academies or the USL teams. But they do extend, for the moment anyway, to MLS signings.
I'm confused because you are essentially saying any MLS team can sign any non-college player at any time. But I look and top talent is playing in USL instead of MLS. Why isn't Gomez at an MLS team? Why did Kayo sign with Orange County? Why is Gallegos in San Antonio? Why does Carleton say he had to sign with Atlanta or stay amateur? Your version of, "Clark wanted to play so they signed him" doesn't line up with any of these previous examples. And I only listed a few. Josh Sargent had to sign with SKC or go to Europe. Never did anyone mention he was not in college so can sign anywhere in MLS. I kind of imagine every MLS team lining up to offer him a contract. But, that is the giveaway, as the entire point of Single Entity is to prevent intra-league bidding wars. So, your version is against the whole point of MLS. That is also confusing.
Nope. As this article about Sargent's homegrown rights at the time indicates: https://www.thebluetestament.com/20...-city-claims-homegrown-rights-to-josh-sargent According to Sporting KC sources, Sargent could be signed to a Homegrown contract and then play in SKC’s Academy or for SKC’s USL team, the Swope Park Rangers. Once he met the time requirement he could then play for the Sporting Kansas City first team. So in essence a club could have traded for Sargent's homegrown rights, which are tradeable, and done the same thing. Had him play with their academy OR USL TEAM until the time requirements were met. The whole Caden Clark thing is confusing just because it doesn't make common sense. But according to the rules, there's nothing that doesn't line up with what we know about the league rules. So yes..........ANY PLAYER from ANY MLS club territory has a way of getting into MLS. The club of their choosing can trade for their homegrown rights and then they just need to meet time requirements. The clubs just have to play ball with each other. Bailey Sparks moved from Solar in Dallas to signing a contract with SKCII. He's from FCD's homegrown territory. All that has to happen for him to be signed by SKC to an MLS deal is that they need to trade something to FCD for his rights. It would be the exact same thing as the Caden Clark case. Will FCD play ball? I don't know. They don't have to just like Houston didn't play ball with Cappis. The whole phraseology of "a player has to spend a year in an academy before becoming homegrown eligible" exists from before the time of USL reserve teams. USL reserve teams count as time in an organization. What evidence do you want? Caden Clark is exhibit A.
That is how I understood things, thanks. Do you think the difference between Clark and Cappis is that in 2018, MLS didn't step in and tell Houston to let the kid go for $75K and in 2020, they did? I think that is improvement. People want to hate on MLS and say nothing has changed.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if someone is under 18, and they aren't in a homegrown territory, and not on a YNT, they are fair game. Or if they are in your homegrown territory. Because they wanted to go a European team at 18? MLS isn't interested in playing a guy who will leave for free at 18. These guys don't want their ability to move hindered by a transfer fee, and are willing to play at a low level until 18 to get that. I suspect this is a lot more complex, but he's under contract with SAFC. You'd have to start with asking Gallegos why he signed there. Homegrown territories. Carleton could have tried to force a trade of his rights -- there were instances of this before Carleton signed -- but I doubt he realized it was an actual possibility. Huh? Clark wanted to play there so they signed him in USL ... to sign him for MLS they had to compensate Minnesota, per the existing rules. Which they did. You said they changed the rules. I don't see any of that. As I said before, he was in SKC's homegrown territory. If he had been from North Carolina, like, say, Gianluca Busio, anyone can sign him. Sargent wasn't. What I said was this: For someone like Clark, if he lives in an open homegrown territory, anyone can sign him. This is MLS' rules. They actually do allow a bit of bidding if the player is not from a HG territory. And Clark could have gone anywhere ... as long as that team was willing to compensate Minnesota.
I think we are on the right track. I think the difference is that SKC and Houston wanted $500K in GAM or some large figure. Minnesota wanted the same (Williamson went for $200K I think), maybe more. But unlike previously, MLS stepped in and said, "Take $75K and be happy". Now, you have to think any player could move for $75K GAM. It is hard to tell if Clark spent 150 days or if the USL season ended. Which event triggered the move (could be both). But this might only be precedent for the rare player that has never been in an Academy or played on a U17 or above YNT.
Thanks for the long response. Maybe, "Change the Rules" is wrong. It is, "allowed the existing rules to be used with a set fee of $75K". Previously, HQ stayed out of it, not sure why, and let the team with the "rights" ask for whatever and allow the kid to play nowhere if it came to that. Maybe the rules didn't change. But something changed, for the better.
MLS makes it up as they go along. The lines are blurry. Maybe they decided that if we were in non-COVID times Clark would have made the 150 day mark in the USL I don't know what went on in the negotiations between Minnesota and NYRB. But think of the never-ending stupidity of the Houston Dynamo. They had two choices. 1) Get something for Chris Cappis, a player they had nothing to do with. 2) Get nothing for Chris Cappis, a player they had nothing to do with. The chose to get nothing for Chris Cappis. What was Minnesota doing? Probably a bunch of posturing and negotiating. Did MLS HQ intercede? I doubt it. Minnesota had a choice of getting something or getting nothing. Would they have liked to have gotten more? Of course, but what leverage did they have? He wasn't going to play for them. And if they refused to let NYRB sign Clark, then the kid would have played with NYRBII until heading to Europe at 18. Again...............they get nothing. So take $75k and be happy. And yes, proactive MLS clubs are starting to use their USL teams as a recruiting tool into their organization. SKC with Sparks is a really good example. They'll figure out homegrown rights when and if they have to.