Good. Then we'll have depth on the Injured Reserve.
2017 Roster Discussion
- Thread starter NYCFCfan
- Start date
I think you're being sarcastic, one extra TAM leads to ONE maybe TWO players.
Question on Moralez - he makes $2 Million per year. Could we use new TAM to get him down below DP threshold? Is his guaranteed cap hit of $2 Million inclusive of any transfer fee?
There used to be a cap on maximum salary TAM could reduce - not sure if it's still there.
A team will get more bang for its buck to have every starting player avg around 300k+ augmenting the 3 DPs than to have essentially 4DPs and a bunch of 150-200K guys.
I don't understand when you ask questions like this. You've been clear that you have insider knowledge, and have been adamant that the next DP will be Maxi Moralez, not Villa, Lampard or pirlo. If that is the case, who cares if we buy down Maxi?
First of all, I don't know what stick got up your ass in the last 9 months but you went from being an awesome poster to a Negative Nancy.
Secondly, the reason you buy down Maxi is to get him under the DP threshold to get two more DPs. Isn't that a no-brainer?
It was a legit question. If the next DP is going to Maxi Moralez the 2nd, why not just use TAM on Maxi 2?
You cannot buy down a player on a salary that is larger than $1mm with TAM. And DP that is bought down with TAM must be replaced, in that transfer window, with a DP that is on a higher salary than the TAM player he is replacing.
Also I totally agree with Ulrich here, TAM's purpose was to strengthen the middle of the roster, and it probably provides more marginal utility to the team overall to have the non DP team average salary move from around $150k to $300k than simply adding another DP.
While the increase in TAM is likely going to result in more US players being overpaid relative to their skill level, we shouldn't forget that the soccer player market is a truly international one and that the $300k per year salary point starts getting us a lot of good players from the better second tier leagues.
While true having this as a league aspiration just make me sad. Because MLS.
I disagree. The entire point of TAM is to prevent this from happening.
The salary cap is going to be right around $4 million next year. TAM is going to be $2 million. If a player isn't paid more than the max (~$500k), they aren't eligible for TAM. Put another way, a player in this category is negotiating their salary with a team that effectively has $4 million in cap room. A player who may qualify for TAM is negotiating their salary with a team that effectively has a $6 million cap.
MLS is scaling salaries up, but targeted at players who are actually worth it on the international stage.
2015
Cap - $3,490,000
TAM - $500,000 (12.5% of the total)
Total - $3,990,000
2018
Cap ~ $4,000,000; up 14.6% from 2015
TAM - $2,000,000 (33% of the total); up 300%
Total - $6,000,000; up 50.4%
EDIT: By the way, $6MM divided by 20 players equals $300,000. Let's say a team maxes out their TAM spending and signs three reasonably priced DPs at an average of $2.5MM each ($2MM net each, or $6MM net of total spending), that is $12MM total and an average salary of $600,000. That isn't even counting any GAM spending.
So let's say the league average spending is $400k-$600k per player. It's probably safe to assume we still have higher wage inequality, but we are in the midst of slingshotting past Liga MX in average player wages. I can't find a number more recent than 2014, when they were at about $350k, but we have almost completely closed the gap and are only getting started.
Last edited:
16 years ago MLS folded for nearly 24 hours. And the league contracted to 10 teams, 7 of which were owned by one man.
http://www.espnfc.com/major-league-...y-folded-in-2001-fc-dallas-president-dan-hunt
NYCFC and Orlando became the 19th and 20th active teams.
In the intervening time, the Chicago stadium deal went from best in the league to the worst.
The standard of play was immensely elevated.
And MLS clubs finally started to make enough money to actually implement a European style academy system.
The reason the height of the current ambition is so low is that the point at which this entire experiment began was monumentally lower. More importantly MLS is the third most popular league of the fifth most popular sport in the US, just going by TV ratings, and despite that it grows in popularity every year. And that low ranking has allowed MLS to become just about the best non European league there is; MLS takes that title when it starts beating Liga MX, which will be rather soon if the new salaries are anything to go by.
In short, chill dude, we're growing a hell of a lot faster than the competition. I'd liken MLS to a 15 or 16 year old boy, you can see the potential there but he still needs to put on a lot of muscle and go through an awkward stage or two.
I totally get all that, and disagree with none of it. And I *can* see the potential down the road.
It's just that you're asking me to be patient and I don't wanna. So there.
#team50goingOn12
I was more making reference to the fact that in-between American players, players actually worth a >$500k salary that count as native for the leagues purposes, will receive a pay bump that is likely in excess of the typical salary value we assign to non international players aka roughly $50-$75k. Or rather, the TAM increase has changed the price of an international slot.
To my mind what this rather large increase in TAM has effectively done is increase the scarcity of international spots. With the large increase in available funds for mid tier teams that would only avail themselves of one or two DP's, those teams are now much more capable of using money to fill out their international roster spots. This increases both external and internal demand for roster spots., thus increasing the value of that mid tier American player.
I call that overpaid because those mid tier American, at least for the purposes of MLS roster rules, players will likely be making more here, by a substantial margin, than they would anywhere else. I should have been more precise in calling it an increase in value due to a change in the international roster spot market, but I'm not feeling particularly charitable to the American player base at the moment.
Sorry, I'm still a little lost.
You're saying that with TAM increases, international signings will be better, which makes international spots more valuable, and therefore Americans are more valuable as they will free up international spots?
However, as long as there is a salary cap, the value of Americans in dollars literally can't increase. They may be more important to roster construction (e.g. whichever teams have the best non-TAM and non-DP Americans is likely to be better elsewhere too), but so long as TAM can't be spent on Americans below the salary threshold, I would argue this increases the value of an academy system, which is definitely a good thing.
When did I say the next DP would be paid $2 Million? Don't confuse the salary of Maxi Moralez with the profile of a Maxi Moralez
Whether an American player gets paid more is a function of whether there is competition for his services. There is not competition within MLS because there is no free agency. So, the American players who will get paid more will be those that are either good enough to get an overseas work permit or who can work overseas because of a dual passport. The former are a pretty small group by definition, and the later aren't that many either.
You are right I believe on the top end. That being said, one of the criticisms of MLS for a long time has been about the salary floor and American players not making much. With expnasion and international slots, there are a guaranteed 200 jobs for Americans. Do we believe there are 200 quality Americans in MLS right now? I don't think so. That drives up the salary for a Tommy McNamara or Jason Hernandez. It keeps a Khiry Shelton on the roster too
OK. You tend to be cryptic when you report your inside scoop. Your question made me think I has misunderstood what you said previously, and I asked for clarification.
If you want to know why my desire to be an awesome poster has gone down, its because the responses I have gotten recently, to simple innocuous questions and comments, have been vitriolic.
I think that's true in that those with the most leverage will gain the most, but I do think if you increase the amount the league will spend on salary for domestic players then salaries for such players will increase generally, although not evenly. If you increase the money supply without also increasing the supply or quality of goods and services, then prices go up. Especially here where unspent cap (or GAM/TAM dollars) does not go into ownership pockets. Some of it can be carried over for the next year, but it cannot just be deposited in the bank.
That was a mistake baseball make with its transfer payments from clubs with big payrolls to the ones at the bottom. There was no requirement the low payroll clubs actually spend the money on increasing their payroll, and some were just happy to make a profit out of having bad low paid players.
By being more important to roster construction their value increases. Or more specifically the Americans who are worth $250k-$750k in wages have their value increased. Remember you can buy down someone to an effective cap hit of $150k if you want to. But because #MLS the value of American players on the low end of the scale is also fixed because the whole cap business only really applies to the senior roster, there are fixed wages for players on the supplemental roster that don't count against the cap.
Alexi Lalas, troll that he is, made a good point. There is probably enough money in the American soccer system to have clubs spend between $15-$20mm a year on their rosters, between the league given money and revenue streams that clubs are privy to themselves. Of course doing that would make our system look a lot more like the European one where wages consume a gigantic proportion of the overall yearly budget for a lot of clubs. Whereas MLS basically made the decision to say, hey we need to build out the physical infrastructure and pay off a lot of stadium debt. Something European clubs don't have to do. But I digress.
The main Alexi Lalas good point was that we probably have the money to start straight up beating Mexican teams next year, but how are you going to fill that system out with Americans? Or in his words "how many teams can you fill will guys who are really worth $1mm a year? One team, maybe two." Then what about the $500k-$1mm guys, maybe another 2-3 teams. The current design of MLS does not really let it grow faster than the overall pool of US talent. And the constant expansion of MLS is putting a serious strain on that talent pool to maintain quality and keep up numbers.
If we sold TPFKAU tomorrow, he straight up starts for most any team in the bottom half of the league. Thats not an inditement of the league, thats an incitement of the US player pool. I mean look at the cast of clowns we had in year one; reasonable number of them are still playing in MLS. Thats a damn problem.
Similar threads
