It's a sunk cost, we are spending it either way. You probably cut him even if you don't replace him, just for the flexibility.
Poll: Cut Mix or Josh (If It Comes to That)
- Thread starter mgarbowski
- Start date
It's a sunk cost, we are spending it either way. You probably cut him even if you don't replace him, just for the flexibility.
the remaining contract isn't a sunk cost. If we find someone to take him, we reduce that expenditure.
#notanaccountant
You going to change that description under your name when he's gone?
Was always in the Mix.
what about Mix for Florian Jungwirth?
http://www.espnfc.us/story/3047241/...ve-still-up-to-darmstadt-coach-torsten-frings
http://www.espnfc.us/story/3047241/...ve-still-up-to-darmstadt-coach-torsten-frings
Oh I see what you were saying. Hang onto him for a year and try to dump him again next year for a $750k savings of the $1.5 million cost it would take to cut him now.
If we can't dump him now though, what are the chances we dump him a year from now, after another presumably underutilized season on our roster?
Actually, it's a little different. Selling him is #1. Buyout is #2 (no cap hit). Loaning him and paying the difference is #3 (we pay the cap hit).
From a Cap perspective, there is no difference in buying him out or letting him go away. Unless we get a dollar more than his contract value, we don't receive any GAM. This is what happened with Omar Gonzales. He was making $1 Mil, was sold for less than that, and MLS kept all the money.
I do not believe that the team's Cap is charged for a player's team-covered portion of salary when Loaned out.
Given who his current coach is, I bet he's awfully good at handling the ball in the box.
Here's the way to do it. Let's say that he finds a club who will take him at $400K less per season than he is making now. We buy him out for a total of $800K ($400K x 2), and he signs the new agreement. He gets the same amount of money. The new club gets the right price. We get a cheaper buy out and have him off the books.
How can you buy someone else for less than the contract is worth? There's probably a buyout clause in the contract indicating that he has to be paid in full, or maybe even more. Like a buyout bonus. Mix has the greatest contract in MLS for a player.
I doubt it works that way, what you're describing is essentially how a Loan works. No team will pay a transfer fee for him, so Mix will have to be bought out in full to go away. The new team would get him on a free transfer. Mix will then have a new contract plus his severance.
If we loan Mix out and he has a great season and has transfer value after he is on the pitch we can get a piece of transfer fee. Same reasons we want to end the loan for Mata.
I did assume Mix doesn't have a sell-on transfer value right now. That is certainly the best case scenario for the team.
I did assume Mix doesn't have a sell-on transfer value right now. That is certainly the best case scenario for the team.
Agreed the value will be all over the place but it would just take him getting a trial at a few clubs abroad in the here and now (not tape) for 1 coach to decide he wants him.
Other argument against sunk cost. If the team is NOT planning on spending the Mix savings on more players and if they pay Mix off, then the team doesn't really reap any benefit while Mix gets to get paid in full and then double dip by signing another contract on his own. If there is animosity there as we believer there to be, that might not sit well with the team.
Related question, does the buyout have to happen during preseason? Or could they bide their time and then do this during the year to regain the remaining cap space?
Has to be during the offseason to save the cap space.
I believe, to get the cap benefit, it needs to happen prior to the season. As with all MLS rules, I could be wrong!
