The twitter verse updated this. They said the players for 7 teams (including NYCFC) voted against. The club itself supporter, just like the rest of the single entity owners.
Mls CBA 2015 Thread
- Thread starter franchise646
- Start date
I honestly think things played out exactly as expected (for better or for worse). While the terms of free agency for now are less than desirable, the cows are now out of the barn, which is a game changer and means over time they can/will be negotiated more favorably. A 5 year term plays into this favorably. The question will become whether: (i) the damage caused by a strike WITH ultimately/eventually a better deal would have been better for the league in the long term and short term than (ii) continued momentum without the damage of a strike WITH an incrementally positive deal with some obvious warts. I don't know what the answer is and it sounds like the players were on both sides of this. Time will tell.
so the feeling is that the players only got a little and not much compared to what existed before? therefore they lost?
I understand the fustigation, but the CBA is going to have to build on this. I say there are 3 things that the players need to be ready for the next fight.
1)Revenue sharing (40-45% of soccer driven revenue)
2)get the free agency numbers to 25/6
3)get min salary rised to $100k
1)Revenue sharing (40-45% of soccer driven revenue)
2)get the free agency numbers to 25/6
3)get min salary rised to $100k
Last edited:
Players lost because they gave up all leverage. There is no TV deal in 5 years. Even if TV doubles MLS viewership, the owners can spin that without an actual dollar amount from FOX/ESPN. They spinned they were broke this time even with the new expansion teams, TV contracts and new sponsorship deals. No new teams coming into the league in 5 years. Plus, since they didn't strike twice the owners are going to call their bluff.
They can hope new owners are more sympathic to them, but who knows? There is also no guarantee they will even have the fan support - lots of people supported them because no free agency and $35k were ridiculous, no longer the case. A lot of people think $60k is far even though it is nothing compared the money being generated by the league... especially when the majority of the players are closer to $60k than DP contracts.
If the players want to get things like revenue sharing and better terms next time they are going to have to vote Mix as their union president and let his dad handle the negotiation. Or at least someone who is going to fight until the bitter end and doesn't blink. They need to build up their war chest. They need to take legal actions if the opportunity arise (decertifying the union). They need to stay together. They need to do a lot better with social media and getting supporter groups to join them.
They can hope new owners are more sympathic to them, but who knows? There is also no guarantee they will even have the fan support - lots of people supported them because no free agency and $35k were ridiculous, no longer the case. A lot of people think $60k is far even though it is nothing compared the money being generated by the league... especially when the majority of the players are closer to $60k than DP contracts.
If the players want to get things like revenue sharing and better terms next time they are going to have to vote Mix as their union president and let his dad handle the negotiation. Or at least someone who is going to fight until the bitter end and doesn't blink. They need to build up their war chest. They need to take legal actions if the opportunity arise (decertifying the union). They need to stay together. They need to do a lot better with social media and getting supporter groups to join them.
Jay I agree but at least the barrier had been broken which is very important to mlspu and they got increased minimum wage and salary cap increasing. Overall I think the players got a good deal. The owners got a good deal too. I think a strike would have been catastrophic and I'm glad a deal was done. You don't sign the tv contracts and sponsorship deals and have a sold out citrus bowl with your two new most exciting teams in the league and then say....nah we are striking, or no deal, everything is postponed. If I was MLS I would be very careful not to piss off ESPN more so then any other partner. ESPN is the main reason the nhl is not where it was in the 90s and early 2000s. Once the nhl went away from espn and into other networks such as owl and I forgot the other channels no one watched. It did so much damage that the nhl still hasn't recovered from. A strike would have surely pissed off espn.
There might be... Those are going to be in the league roster rules, not the CBA. Supposedly there will be a whole of different player catergories coming. More rules!
? You do realize most pundits are saying new cap is $3.6 million. With guaranteed raises for minimum and vets, the $500k is already gone. If DP is still $387k, you'll see no growth in DP quality/price.
That's not true. What I read yesterday is that the guys receiving the raises more or less constitute the Roster Spots of 21-30 - meaning they don't count against the cap.
I LOVE the idea that
NYCFCFan10 throws out. It can't happen now because of the CBA I guess, but they should eliminate the DPs counting against the cap at all. The players would have to be all for it because it would free up anywhere from 400k to 1.2 M on all of these squads.
Well we don't know what DP hits or what counts yet. I think you are also minimizing the effect FA and vet salary increases will do. According to last published salaries Saunders, the starting goalie, makes below minimum and is considered a vet which allows him to leave for up to 200% his current salary. He isn't the only one. It will add up.
DPs will increase as the supply and demand for the spots goes up. Already more aging stars are trying to come over here to retire. Even younger guys stuck in places with high taxes, and inconsistent pay will want to come over here. As others have noticed, for all our problems, USA is still a top destination to live and raise kids.
So imagine a situation where all the teams are filled with really good DPs, and then Ronaldo wants to come here. Suddenly we will have 4 DPs. Then 5, then 6 DPs, plus some other convoluted roster exemptions, like "supermax DP" Now almost your whole starting XI is outside the cap. So what does the cap exist for? To keep teams from overpaying for american talent that has no other options. Ned Grabavoy is a nice player that many teams would like especially a few years ago. He also has a very limited market overseas. So they make a cap with a million loopholes to prevent teams from fighting over him and the few quality american players, of whom you need 12 on each team.
The cap is solely for the league to control the market on the american players.
So imagine a situation where all the teams are filled with really good DPs, and then Ronaldo wants to come here. Suddenly we will have 4 DPs. Then 5, then 6 DPs, plus some other convoluted roster exemptions, like "supermax DP" Now almost your whole starting XI is outside the cap. So what does the cap exist for? To keep teams from overpaying for american talent that has no other options. Ned Grabavoy is a nice player that many teams would like especially a few years ago. He also has a very limited market overseas. So they make a cap with a million loopholes to prevent teams from fighting over him and the few quality american players, of whom you need 12 on each team.
The cap is solely for the league to control the market on the american players.
Similar threads
