Jack Harrison to Manchester City - Official
- Thread starter Kjbert
- Start date
It should be $750k + 5% of the total transfer fee. So a $5 million sale nets $1 million in GAM, and a $20 million sale nets $1.75 million in GAM. That way it will naturally scale as the league sells better players.
D
dummyrun
Guest
Right idea but 5% is way too low. Imagine selling a player for $25m and then not being able to buy down a $3m DP to replace him.
Besides, increasing the GAM limit doesn't really help a team whose DP slots are full unless you also lift the restriction that you can only buy down 50% of a player's budget charge with GAM.
Jagmandeeep
Registered
While the transfer GAM for a player sold is still low. It's a start.
In terms of the homegrown 100% rule change. Does this mean a HG player sold for 5 mil, will award the team 5 mil to use on the roster?
In terms of the homegrown 100% rule change. Does this mean a HG player sold for 5 mil, will award the team 5 mil to use on the roster?
Seven
Registered
No, it just means 5M goes to the team, only 750k of which they could use for the roster. Previously it was 75% went to the team, and 25% went to MLS
No.
There is a difference between a team getting the money and how a team is permitted to use that money. Only the portion of a transfer fee that is received in GAM makes any improvement in a team's salary profile.
This is part of that solidarity payment stuff. If you develop a kid, you keep all of the money
We might be giants.
So, Harrison may be staying in New York this season after all. Would much prefer it that way. All out roster push for the 2018 MLS Cup then a sale in the winter where we get 2/3 since the r/MLS community is saying we'd only get 1/2 now since he's a SuperDraft pick (even though we didn't pick him...)
If no to 1 definitely no to 2. Even if yes to 1 probably still some no to 2, it will just be a matter of how he handles and channels the disappointment.
The words "feel they can offer Harrison what he wants in the medium term" might mean just what it suggests. Jack is more focused on getting good playing time and improving in the next year or two, and we can give that to him. If it comes with more money, all the better.
Hopefully, it is true and Jack is happy in the Big Apple for another year.
Hopefully, it is true and Jack is happy in the Big Apple for another year.
I've never believed that a trade somehow washes clean the fact that he was a Superdraft pick in 2016 (much less a trade within minutes of the pick itself).
Chicago couldn't have traded to us more than it actually held.
Why? What’s the difference if we traded for him then or a week later? A year later?
We didn’t draft him. We gave up assets to acquire him.
Gotham Gator - to be clear, I’m not disagreeing with your decision. I’m disagreeing with your logic.
It’s like being a little pregnant. Either the rule is interpreted as an MLS acquisition via draft or it isn’t. If the latter, milliseconds or millennia shouldn’t matter.
It’s like being a little pregnant. Either the rule is interpreted as an MLS acquisition via draft or it isn’t. If the latter, milliseconds or millennia shouldn’t matter.
Drafees are drafted at inception.
You mean conception? Because if they have Leo involved in the draft, I may watch next year.
I have an irrational love of that man. Probably because he too likes to get fat and buy donuts at the same Dunkin’ I used to visit when I lived in Nikita.
ETA: nolita
Last edited:
