I'm not sure I'd be too harsh on MNUFC for doing a one year experiment. I mean, look at us. We had Kreis for our first year (not even counting our first year players) and then totally changed things around and became a good team. Based on us I'm not going to be too upset about the Loons' first year even if they come in last.
NYCFC Players Wanted Thread
- Thread starter NYCFC_Dan
- Start date
Since I seem to have inadvertently started this, let me be clear. I never intended to criticize Minnesota. The fact that they had so little time to prepare is a very real obstacle. My point was simply that you can see the difference in how Atlanta in Minnesota spent even their non-DP money. That Minnesota has an excuse that it had little time to prepare is accurate but also irrelevant to the point I was making.
PS: not annoyed that anyone misunderstood; that just happens.
I wouldn't care if my team came in last in their inaugural season if they made a real effort to win but the cards were stacked against them (i.e. Bad available resources). That's how I feel about Kreis/Co - CFG wanted to win, but it was a perfect storm of Kreis being a horrible talent evaluator/coach & the various drafts, save for a few valid talents like Larin, were lacking even ball boys.... whatever, I wrote it off.
I would be absolutely livid if the plan was to tank the first year and save up league currency so that the second year would have better results. The anger would be two fold because the team duped me into thinking they gave a shit and also because my STH money was going towards watching a team that never was going to get the resources it needed.
Either way, still supports your support of the theory I put forth. More money, more options (problems).
I also have a vague recollection that if you keep your roster below a certain size, you get some extra GAM. Too lazy to look it up after a long day, however.
Not sure about squad size, perhaps, but fewer than 3 DPs gets you part of the paid luxury tax from the big spending teams.
I see what you're saying, but I'm not certain I would call waiting to see where to strategically sign your DPs and spend TAM/GAM as necessarily "tanking".
I do think there's an obvious correlation, but think it's smarter in the long-term to do so. Especially in MNUFC's case where they need to evaluate how their NASL players translate to MLS level. Figure that out, then plug the gaps
You seem to be only responding to my follow up post so there's more context to what I said earlier in the thread. I'm not saying they are definitely tanking the season, it's a big IF, and the evidence will be how they approach this next transfer window. The wait and see tactic could work if they're really aggressive with their next few moves, but if they aren't, then it lends credibility to the notion they were never serious about this season.
So I looked it up this morning. I did not see what I had recalled (maybe changed from a prior year, maybe just wrong).
I did see that if you only have 18 or 19 senior players instead of the usual 20, the league will impute a minimum salary charge for the 1-2 minimum players.
https://www.mlssoccer.com/league/official-rules/mls-roster-rules-and-regulations
Also, salaries are one of like 10 factors that go into a player's budget charge (e.g. transfer costs, bonuses, perks such as housing, etc.) and MLS reserves the right to adjust a player's budget charge whenever they want (e.g. to help a team get a big name player, or to work around a unique situation.)
It's still opaque af.
Note for
S
sbrylski - I am 99% confident housing assistance does not count towards the Cap charge
Everything you need to know about why it's generally pointless to try to track an MLS team's salary budget:
CBA Section 10.6
Thank you. Lots of discretion being used by MLS in the case of NYCFC and LA Galaxy then. I know for a fact that some of our guys in year 1 had a housing allowance that was not part of their budget charge.
This is when MLS is a joke. I agree with the need for some sort of a Cap in this league, but there are so many f'ing exceptions.
This is when MLS is a joke. I agree with the need for some sort of a Cap in this league, but there are so many f'ing exceptions.
Item #9 is kinda bushleague bullshit. They're charging the player for Visa/greencard help? That should be strictly on the team as an operating cost.
Interesting. I always used the CBA language to demonstrate that MLS can do whatever they want, but for obvious reasons never really had proof they use it. I would not be surprised at all if the internal policy is to "look the other way" on reasonable perks like an average apartment, but use the 10.6(b) provisions to catch any team trying to use bonuses as salary cap workarounds (e.g. buying a player a lambo and paying their $25,000 per month mortgage).
There's definitely a cost-of-living discrepancy between certain cities that creates an imbalance if the rules are enforced to the letter. The Players union would do well to also look the other way since what's good for a player one day could change the next with a trade.
I know you and I are in agreement on this one, as we've discussed it many times elsewhere. Tons of players all over the league getting benefits that don't show up in any of the "official" salary statements.
I've heard a few interviews with former players on pods and such, and in so many words, they tend to imply that a lot of the budget charge and MLSPU released salaries are total bs relative to what most players actually get.
I don't have a problem with it. Think of it this way, if the benefits aren't documented and their treatment isn't codified, teams have more discretion as to when and for whom they utilize non-cash comp. That fits nicely with MLS 's cost control strategy.
Similar threads
