2017 Roster Discussion

[Kjbert]

Awesome summary by JGarrettLieb - post of the day.

The league, monetarily, is probably 10 years ahead of where they thought they would be when the Seattles and Torontos of the world joined. The Academy system has been so mismanaged by most of the teams. Even the strong Academy sides like FC Dallas, NJRB and LA Galaxy are just starting to get rewarded. The squads who could really use the help, even the innovative ones like Philly, are years away from providing a consistent stream of replacement level talent to the Senior Team.

 

[LionNYC]

Even with TAM increases and signing better starting 11 players, the question still remains about depth. We're not going to have a TAM player on the bench to replace Chanot or Callens. Brillant is our current CB backup at 200K+ and there's nobody under him. MLS needs players like White, Lopez, Sweat, Stertzer all who earn less than 80K. If we had an academy (like the Red Bulls or FC Dallas do so well), we wouldn't need to sign these guys and could more their move to better starters.

You can't just focus on the top of the roster in terms of spending, you have to be diligent and smart and spent it wisely throughout to get talent across all the money you spend.

 

[Fantazma]

Awesome summary by JGarrettLieb - post of the day.

The league, monetarily, is probably 10 years ahead of where they thought they would be when the Seattles and Torontos of the world joined. The Academy system has been so mismanaged by most of the teams. Even the strong Academy sides like FC Dallas, NJRB and LA Galaxy are just starting to get rewarded. The squads who could really use the help, even the innovative ones like Philly, are years away from providing a consistent stream of replacement level talent to the Senior Team.

they have the whole set up completed Union---betheleham steel----reading united---(PDL)----and a whole academy system set up ....plus they drafted a lot last year ( or was it this year). i did expect them to be better place with earnie stewart up top

 

[Kjbert]

they have the whole set up completed Union---betheleham steel----reading united---(PDL)----and a whole academy system set up ....plus they drafted a lot last year ( or was it this year). i did expect them to be better place with earnie stewart up top

Correct. But it takes a lot of time. These clubs need players of quality now and they're just not ready yet. There is an argument to be made that you should bring through 16, 17 and 18 year olds like they do in Europe, but that doesn't always work out well developmentally. And frankly, there aren't enough 16, 17 or 18 year olds talented enough to take a job from Chris Pontius or Tommy McNamara right now.

 

[JGarrettLieb]

Correct. But it takes a lot of time. These clubs need players of quality now and they're just not ready yet. There is an argument to be made that you should bring through 16, 17 and 18 year olds like they do in Europe, but that doesn't always work out well developmentally. And frankly, there aren't enough 16, 17 or 18 year olds talented enough to take a job from Chris Pontius or Tommy McNamara right now.

We are actually a bit ahead of the game in that regard. We just brought up Sands and due to ownership and coaching we're much more likely to try and get something out of our youth system than say, Jason Kreis at Orlando.

 

[Marito]

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.

I wonder if part of the problem isn't pundits and people in positions of power who, being such boosters for the USMNT as they are, and having that team qualify for every single WC because CONCACAF, do not see the limitations that still exist in the talent pool, from the top to the bottom. Along those lines they would think that most of the current starting XI for the USMNT would deserve (from the standpoint of soccer ability and not jersey sales) a DP status and a 4 or 5 or 6 million a year salary in MLS. When in reality there's only 1 guy who deserves it and he is an 18 y.o project.

For example, Matt Doyle the other day was tweeting that he was tired of arguing with people (fools, he implied) who said the USMNT isn't a top20 national team, as if that were a self-evident truth. And he went on to cite WC statistics as proof. And I was thinking, oh gosh, so misguided by the habit of world domination in every other sport. Because in world soccer, in terms of National Teams, the real, perennial WC contenders are a tiny group (maybe 6 or 8), the pretenders who could but probably won't are maybe 10 or 12 (i.e. Colombia or Belgium), and they are clearly superior to the USMNT, and then there are 2 big bunches of "decent teams" and "minnows" with probably 50 or 60 members the first group, and 80 the second. Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, Ghana, Mexico, Sweden, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Hungary, etc etc. they are all about as powerful as the USMNT. Some a bit more some a bit less. The dollar value of their players in the transfer market is comparable. In those terms it is roughly the same to say the USMNT is the 18th team in the world or the 81st. This I firmly believe. But pundits in this country would go berserk fighting this notion.

 

[Fantazma]

I wonder if part of the problem isn't pundits and people in positions of power who, being such boosters for the USMNT as they are, and having that team qualify for every single WC because CONCACAF, do not see the limitations that still exist in the talent pool, from the top to the bottom. Along those lines they would think that most of the current starting XI for the USMNT would deserve (from the standpoint of soccer ability and not jersey sales) a DP status and a 4 or 5 or 6 million a year salary in MLS. When in reality there's only 1 guy who deserves it and he is an 18 y.o project.

For example, Matt Doyle the other day was tweeting that he was tired of arguing with people (fools, he implied) who said the USMNT isn't a top20 national team, as if that were a self-evident truth. And he went on to cite WC statistics as proof. And I was thinking, oh gosh, so misguided by the habit of world domination in every other sport. Because in world soccer, in terms of National Teams, the real, perennial WC contenders are a tiny group (maybe 6 or 8), the pretenders who could but probably won't are maybe 10 or 12 (i.e. Colombia or Belgium), and they are clearly superior to the USMNT, and then there are 2 big bunches of "decent teams" and "minnows" with probably 50 or 60 members the first group, and 80 the second. Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, Ghana, Mexico, Sweden, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Hungary, etc etc. they are all about as powerful as the USMNT. Some a bit more some a bit less. The dollar value of their players in the transfer market is comparable. In those terms it is roughly the same to say the USMNT is the 18th team in the world or the 81st. This I firmly believe. But pundits in this country would go berserk fighting this notion.

someone mentioned this in reddit i think ...there have been two failed olympic cycles meaning there arent many players 22-28 ish years old that fully have lots of playing time or good enough...so there is not that much to select from. that is why you are still relying on the "veterans" yet also putting wayyyy to much pressure on an 18yr old.

that 22-28 yrs old gap is hurting now as you done have that many reliable players from that age portion.

 

[JGarrettLieb]

I wonder if part of the problem isn't pundits and people in positions of power who, being such boosters for the USMNT as they are, and having that team qualify for every single WC because CONCACAF, do not see the limitations that still exist in the talent pool, from the top to the bottom. Along those lines they would think that most of the current starting XI for the USMNT would deserve (from the standpoint of soccer ability and not jersey sales) a DP status and a 4 or 5 or 6 million a year salary in MLS. When in reality there's only 1 guy who deserves it and he is an 18 y.o project.

For example, Matt Doyle the other day was tweeting that he was tired of arguing with people (fools, he implied) who said the USMNT isn't a top20 national team, as if that were a self-evident truth. And he went on to cite WC statistics as proof. And I was thinking, oh gosh, so misguided by the habit of world domination in every other sport. Because in world soccer, in terms of National Teams, the real, perennial WC contenders are a tiny group (maybe 6 or 8), the pretenders who could but probably won't are maybe 10 or 12 (i.e. Colombia or Belgium), and they are clearly superior to the USMNT, and then there are 2 big bunches of "decent teams" and "minnows" with probably 50 or 60 members the first group, and 80 the second. Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, Ghana, Mexico, Sweden, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Hungary, etc etc. they are all about as powerful as the USMNT. Some a bit more some a bit less. The dollar value of their players in the transfer market is comparable. In those terms it is roughly the same to say the USMNT is the 18th team in the world or the 81st. This I firmly believe. But pundits in this country would go berserk fighting this notion.

Problem number 1 with MLS wrt the USMNT: Since the creation of MLS the US player pool has gotten significantly wider, but not any deeper, and in fact may be shallower than at any other point in the modern game.

Problem 2: the MLS academies are still all fairly new and incomplete at best, new and underfunded at worst. I remember reading an article about how the SKC owner said in order tor really do a youth program well I need to probably spend $5mm a year, but I really don't see the competitive advantage that would stem from that, especially considering that spending the much would be just about my starting team's salaries. I think that article was circa 2014.

The problem is that MLS has only gotten "big time" enough to support youth spending in literally the last year or two. Hell one can make the argument that MLS isn't really there yet in terms of dollars to support a top class youth setup.

I feel like the US soccer pundits have this meme where MLS solves all problems but did not want to either A, do the journalism to see the underlying cracks in that reality, or B did the journalism and didn't report on it. Its like the entire US soccer media is one big glad-handing country club that will happily kick you out if you don't toe the party line.

/rant

In regards to our place in the world rankings, yeah I generally agree. There is no way anyone on the USMNT breaks onto a genuine World Cup contender's team, in Germany Christian Pulisic might be called as a bench warmer since he shows so much potential.

Does it really matter that historically the USMNT gets out of the group stages at an unprecedented rate? No it doesn't, because there was never any real shot at us going further than that.

Its like the US soccer media looks at a series of lucky breaks as successes instead of the failures they really were.

The US has a class A problem with player development, and I'm not really sure its been getting better, or if kids like Pulisic occur in spite of the system.

 

[Christopher Jee]

Problem number 1 with MLS wrt the USMNT: Since the creation of MLS the US player pool has gotten significantly wider, but not any deeper, and in fact may be shallower than at any other point in the modern game.

Problem 2: the MLS academies are still all fairly new and incomplete at best, new and underfunded at worst. I remember reading an article about how the SKC owner said in order tor really do a youth program well I need to probably spend $5mm a year, but I really don't see the competitive advantage that would stem from that, especially considering that spending the much would be just about my starting team's salaries. I think that article was circa 2014.

The problem is that MLS has only gotten "big time" enough to support youth spending in literally the last year or two. Hell one can make the argument that MLS isn't really there yet in terms of dollars to support a top class youth setup.

I feel like the US soccer pundits have this meme where MLS solves all problems but did not want to either A, do the journalism to see the underlying cracks in that reality, or B did the journalism and didn't report on it. Its like the entire US soccer media is one big glad-handing country club that will happily kick you out if you don't toe the party line.

/rant

In regards to our place in the world rankings, yeah I generally agree. There is no way anyone on the USMNT breaks onto a genuine World Cup contender's team, in Germany Christian Pulisic might be called as a bench warmer since he shows so much potential.

Does it really matter that historically the USMNT gets out of the group stages at an unprecedented rate? No it doesn't, because there was never any real shot at us going further than that.

Its like the US soccer media looks at a series of lucky breaks as successes instead of the failures they really were.

The US has a class A problem with player development, and I'm not really sure its been getting better, or if kids like Pulisic occur in spite of the system.

I have started to try and get my head around it and it is bizarre. Feels like somebody with vision and leadership skills has to make something happen top-down to fix the system, but I am an absolute neophyte when it comes to US soccer.

 

[Ulrich]

I have started to try and get my head around it and it is bizarre. Feels like somebody with vision and leadership skills has to make something happen top-down to fix the system, but I am an absolute neophyte when it comes to US soccer.

That's ok, all the professionals getting paid big bucks are also neophytes. Maybe not Reyna (in this instance) since our academy seems to be working but late to the game. Didn't he run the USSoccer development program so he has a roadmap already?

 

[Midas Mulligan]

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.

You can still sit by me if you want.

 

[Fantazma]

That's ok, all the professionals getting paid big bucks are also neophytes. Maybe not Reyna (in this instance) since our academy seems to be working but late to the game. Didn't he run the USSoccer development program so he has a roadmap already?

he did and but maybe they abandoned it i assume once he left for nycfc

there was a whole pdf on it ( i may have it somewhere in my old drives) i knew a few youth coach volunteers that loved it and felt reyna had "the right idea" in terms of developement...think lots of ball on ground stuff

 

[Midas Mulligan]

Didn't he run the USSoccer development program so he has a roadmap already?

I hope not.

I have started to try and get my head around it and it is bizarre. Feels like somebody with vision and leadership skills has to make something happen top-down to fix the system, but I am an absolute neophyte when it comes to US soccer.

I think the recognition that it has to be done by clubs is pretty critical, and it least we've gotten to that point now.

USSF and their residency programs would never be enough. Had its time and place, but not anymore and I'm glad it's gone. There's just no economic incentive for a federation to be great at it on its own. And that causes problems, like ABMOD having a job where he can keep one of the best 16 year mids in the world at home instead of taking him to the u17 WC.

Anyone else get a huge kick out of Travis Clark calling this out on Twitter? It was glorious and deserved. I do not care for Richie Williams.

 

[EganSoccerWords]

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?

I am not being sarcastic at all. You can only buy a TAM player down to 150k. That means for 2 million in TAM we could get 5 players spending 500-600k (150k budget charge/350k-450k TAM) in salary and transfer fees for each player.

If Maxi is making over million, we can not use TAM on him unless the change the TAM rules.

For next season, we really have most of our starters. Jack, Villa, Ring, Maxi, Chanot, Callens, Matarrita, Johnson are definite starters. We really only have three question marks: RB, LW, CM. Herrera starts at CM if he is back. You can make an arguement that we don't need a starter at LW with the combo of Lewis/Wallace. One of those spots will be taken by Pirlo's replacement at DP.

 

[NYdoesitEZ]

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.

This is becoming a chicken and egg debate. A point can be made that in order to increase the talent pool, fast, the money need to be dangled in front of parents who help the talented kids to make the decision of which sport to pick. Yes if we increase the pay the talent currently does not match, but the overpay will be self correcting because it will attract and form a larger bottom part of talent pyramid that will feed the top of the talent pyramid. The bigger we can build the bottom of the pyramid faster, the bigger and faster we can get the top of the pyramid pool. It's that simple. One can't have a static view. Need to remember the long term cause and effect of pay. You can't sacrifice the results in pursuit of a smooth transition process. If there is temporary dislocation or imbalance, the market will correct itself and reach new equilibrium. We are in the robber Barron state of US soccer, growth should come at the expense of everything else. Let chaise reign supreme!

 

[Kjbert]

Hot take: Unless you have money to piss away (Toronto, NYCFC, LA Galaxy) OR unless you bring in foreign kids (FC Dallas), it is stupid to invest a lot of money in your Academy.

Unless MLS clubs can sell their young talent, why the hell would they be incentivized to spend the money necessary to train these kids? I don't know if it really costs the SKC owner $5 Million a year to run an Academy, but unless he can sell kids on for a fee, what's the incentive? When you factor in the training costs, even a kid making $100k a year is a net loser on the balance sheet.

The solution is to let someone else train them and overpay them like we do with guys like RJ Allen and Tommy McNamara.

 

[Gotham Gator]

I think MLS clubs have strong incentive to invest in their academies. There are two ways to get outside the salary cap and give your team an advantage. One is to pay max dollar for DPs. The other is to fill out your roster with academy guys who don't count against the salary cap.

 

[Ulrich]

I think MLS clubs have strong incentive to invest in their academies. There are two ways to get outside the salary cap and give your team an advantage. One is to pay max dollar for DPs. The other is to fill out your roster with academy guys who don't count against the salary cap.

Third way- transfer signed academy players and feed the bigger leagues.

 

[Gotham Gator]

Third way- transfer signed academy players and feed the bigger leagues.

Yes. Forgot that one, but it underscores the original point. Grow your own players and then harvest.

 

[Kjbert]

I think MLS clubs have strong incentive to invest in their academies. There are two ways to get outside the salary cap and give your team an advantage. One is to pay max dollar for DPs. The other is to fill out your roster with academy guys who don't count against the salary cap.

That's if your goal is to skirt the rules. What if your goal is to spend the LEAST amount of money possible, like the Krafts?