2017 Roster Discussion
- Thread starter NYCFCfan
- Start date
An even more cynical point of view might be that the teams are investing just enough in their academies to sell tickets and gain fans. Academies are for building lifelong fans of the team instead of actually producing major talents.
Cynical NYCFC Forums is sometimes the best NYCFC Forums
So I was watching the DC game from earlier in the year because my recency bias was telling me that Mata and Sweat are around the same with Mata barely edging him out. I was wrong it's not even close. Mata's link up play from left back is unreal and would be a waste to use him starting at winger because of this. But I want Sweat starting in the playoffs because a backline needs chemistry and I think Mata is a great super sub.
From a purely business perspective it's a huge help.
You can game the MLS system and save money by bringing in home grown players for one.
But the biggest plus is the fact that if one of those kids catches the eye of a big european team every 5 years you more than cover your costs with transfer fees.
I don't know if the math adds up on that, at least using the figures SKC used ($5 Million Per Year). You can certainly game the MLS Salary Cap system - we agree there. But what if you're never close to the Cap anyway? What if it's about limiting your financial exposure? Lots of these owners are either in hunker down mode or recoup prior losses mode. They're making money for the first time in 20 years. I would argue half of the MLS owners are this woman:
That's true. The GAM from a transfer is limited to $650,000, but a team gets 2/3 of the fee on the full amount and can plow that back into the academy.
If Academies cost $5 Million a year to run, that means over the course of a decade, you've laid out $50 Million to train kids. No MLS team is recouping $50 Million in transfer fees.
Unless, of course, SKC is bullshitting their fans.
Unless, of course, SKC is bullshitting their fans.
It'd wouldn't be hard for an spreadsheet wiz to do the basic math on an academy's cost. Coaches X salary + a few support staff, travel for players, equipment, jerseys are sponsored, field/infrastructure maintenance. What else? Most travel is local/regional except for tournaments (2-3 year?). Now maybe with 10 teams it starts to add up, but there should be some overlap on costs.
yea lots of academies cost alot....but I also think it may take into account the investment input by the construction of the actual facilities.
How much do they think they're paying their academy coaches, $1m each?
I could see $1-2M a year to run when you count all the teams, travel, support staff, coaches etc. But there is zero chance these teams are burning $5M a year and seeing zero to very little return.
That's what I'm thinking. That $5 Million number seems absurd. Maybe $500-$750k on staff, another $250k on travel and another $500k on equipment and maintenance.
That being said, it's stil pretty much a sunk cost until MLS becomes a selling league. $20 Million over 10 years into your Academy, even factoring in the cheap labor of a Homegrown labor (use Tyler Adams or James Sands as an example) and you're still in the hole unless you're Seattle and have the ability to sell on a DeAndre Yedlin and Jordan Morris every few years
From what I remember its $5mm to do it really well and $1mm to do it passably.
$5mm a year gets you a setup like Ajax or another world class development academy. $1mm gets you what we have in the US right now. Think about it this way, the total spend on academies last year in MLS was below $30mm and its clear that the current academy system is not capable of consistently international quality players.
Also I think you're hilariously understating the staff pay requirement, especially if you want really high end talent that is capable of developing kids into what they should be.
Not sure this would make a huge difference, but you would also need to factor in that once academies are churning out quality players, not only the transfer fees that would be coming in, but the reduced amount of transfer fees going out, since there would be more quality players staying within teams and within the league.
On the face of it, yes, that makes sense, but since transfer fees hurt you against the Cap, you don't see a lot of transfer fees in MLS. The lack of transfer fees combined with the cheap labor certainly eats into the cost, but MLS Academies just aren't profitable. It's a sunk cost.
The reason NYCFC and NJRB spend the money to invest in the Academy is because 1) They can afford it and 2) They want to develop City Players or RedBull Players.
Sure there aren't many transfer fees within MLS, but that's because other assets are traded such as other players, GAM/TAM, or international spots. And there are often transfer fees paid when signing players from other leagues. I only expect this to increase as the league introduces more TAM/GAM and the salary cap increases. Teams will not be able to compete by only signing those players available on frees.
MLS Academies definitely aren't profitable at the moment. But they could be 10 years or so down the road if they really get their acts together. Lets just take a look at our academy at the moment. Sands and Gio could command quite a hefty transfer fee. Or they could become very talented players on our roster in which we did not have to pay a transfer fee for. Additionally, 10 years down the road, I think its reasonable to expect the quality of the academies to increase and more talented players to become available for the roster or to be sold.
The best prospects for years have been avoiding MLS teams. I think that sigma is getting lifted. In 10 years, IDK if the next Pulisic goes to Europe as early as he did.
How about this.... Academies provide free training for all players involved. Up through age 15 they play without a contract, but to continue with any MLS academy from 16+ they have to sign an academy contract with the $$ going in to escrow if they don't jump to the 1st team (thus maintaining their NCAA eligibility) and if they're good enough for 1st team action they are bumped up on HG contracts (with maybe a distinction between a roster contract and developmental contract not part of top 28).
Players don't have to sign, but if that's the case they need to find another club to wait out their ability to sign overseas if they don't have a passport. That other club likely won't be anywhere near as good or have the same talent since it isn't already tied to the academies. Obviously some fish will swim away, but the majority may relish having an escrow account building for being a regular HS student and training with the academy. Of course, all of this has to follow the current federal laws regarding how many hours a week sub-18 kids can "work." 23 hours I think.
Players don't have to sign, but if that's the case they need to find another club to wait out their ability to sign overseas if they don't have a passport. That other club likely won't be anywhere near as good or have the same talent since it isn't already tied to the academies. Obviously some fish will swim away, but the majority may relish having an escrow account building for being a regular HS student and training with the academy. Of course, all of this has to follow the current federal laws regarding how many hours a week sub-18 kids can "work." 23 hours I think.
I agree with everything you are saying. The problem is that the buying leagues are all in Europe and it is borderline impossible to get a work permit unless you go over there young.
Similar threads
