How a new Designated Player rule will shape Major League Soccer
by Steve Davis on Dec 29, 2009 12:06 PM EST
Email
Print
Is a big-market, small-market divide ahead?
I wrote a piece for ESPN Soccernet that went up on Monday regarding Major League Soccer’s Designated Player rule. The so-called Beckham Rule was the league’s high-stakes experiment that permitted teams to pay extravagantly for one marquee highlight-maker, with only a portion of his compensation impacting the salary cap. It was assigned a three-year study period that has come and gone, and the league’s board of governors (mostly a fancy way of saying “owners”) is reassessing the rule.
Officially, it expires this week, but the ongoing Collective Bargaining talks will preempt any immediate action.
But here’s something you won’t see in the Soccernet piece: I talked to Real Salt Lake GM Garth Lagerwey about all this Sunday, and I’m on board with one of his really smart takes on the situation.
Lagerwey talked about how something bigger is riding on the impending choice of whether to add a second DP per club. In a way the league could be shifting, perhaps seismically, it's entire personality. How MLS operates and its overall perception could be impacted.
See, if clubs are afforded the right to a second DP (and perhaps even a third via trade), then we’ll start to see a big market-small market divide developing in MLS.
The well-bankrolled L.A. Galaxys and Red Bull
The bullish big spenders can afford to take the risk, paying grande on the front end and betting that they’ll spin gold on the back end. Meanwhile, the smaller and the spendthrift will be left to purchase economically. It won’t exactly be a situation like we see in Major League Baseball, where the Yankees and Red Sox and one or two others out-spend everyone, or an EPL-type deal where the Big Four habitually dominate via the checkbook, but it will move the MLS train down the tracks in that direction.
“I do think they are making a decision, do you want to have true parity, a la the NFL, or do you want to go into a big market-small market situation?” Lagerwey said.
Good question. We’ll see the answer begin to develop soon.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Surprising that Toronto
Isn’t on the list of teams wanting this. Nor Philly?
Chicago/Houston seem to teeter on the edge of big v small for revenues.
I think the league knows where PDX and YVR stand as well.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
... and I'll say it again:
Loosening the economic restrictions and moving towards the “have and have-not” world of MLB is another step towards relegation/promotion, something that should be considered as an evolutionary point at any rate.
I also want to point out that, despite the caterwauling from certain MLB quarters, it isn’t so bad in MLB. Sure, there is a big gulf from the Yankees down to the teams like the Marlins, but teams like the Twins, Rays, and A’s have had success despite small payrolls, and even the Marlins have stepped up to buy two World Series in the last 14 years.
It comes down to tight-fisted owners who won’t spend money (which is why you need a salary floor as much as a cap — another topic for another day) and if a tight-fisted owner won’t spend money, why should he stay in the first division?!
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
you make good points, Mal
I’d say the difference here is that soccer teams in this country 1) aren’t making money and, 2) have a terrible history of financial misery. So, I don’t know that I blame the owners for a take-it-slow approach. Like I said though, you make good points, and it’s a complex issue.
The MLS has done a lot right, so far...
… but its an evolutionary process, that’s how I see it, and these things I talk about are just that. I don’t see relegation promotion happening for 10 years — it will at least take the 2nd division USL/"new NASL mess to get sorted out and stable.
Ultimately, what I want is stability. It’s really easy for me, because my team, the Sounders, would certainly be one of the “have’s” in free economic system, but what good does it do me to love my team but have the League it plays in fall apart. The old NASL Sounders were well supported, and reasonably successful, and what good did that do?
I have my qualms with MLS (such as: playoffs- another rant for another day) but at least they got it right, and there is still a vibrant League operating, and I am thankful my Sounders [finally] got to be a part of it. There is still much room for this League to evolve… and what happens over the next few months may be one of those cataclysmic events that shapes it.
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Dec 29, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Never going to happen
There will never be relegation in MLS. It simply isn’t going to happen. Look at this year that despite having two DP slots the New York Red Bulls finished dead last in the league, or that last year it would have been LA getting relegated(with 2 DP’s). There is no way AEG is going to agree with something like relegation no matter what, they haven’t invested the amount of money they have to see themselves playing the Austin Aztex all season long.
Yes teams have some level of success, but look at the last 10 World Series winners, 8 have been the big market mega teams (Yankees. Red Sox, Angels, Philly, Chicago) The small market teams (Arizona) once, and middle of the pack team(Florida) once. That is not the type of parity or league we want. The worst part of the EPL is the rock solid top 4, that dominate almost every year. Oh and those top teams in the EPL have huge amounts of debt.
its funny you mention that...
…because MLB really oughta scrap the obsolete AL-NL and go to a First and Second division structure. Don’t tell me it’ll never happen, I know…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Dec 30, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions
oh yeah and...
… so New York or LA would be protected from the drop because they spent their money foolishly. That’s not how meritocracy works… sports are supposed to be meritocracies…
Getting dropped might, just might, teach sports owners that throwing money around isn’t a panacea. Its funny how EVERY major North American major-league professional sport — except for Baseball — has economic restrictions in place, essentially to save the owners form their own reckless ways. I don’t have much sympathy for Red Bull and AEG spending carelessly and not building decent teams.
It reminds me of “no-fail” grading policies at places like Yale. It’s the “once you’re in, you’re protected” idea, that, frankly, isn’t all that democratic, and doesn’t make sense to me. The Franchise system protects teams from their own incompetency, and you get teams like the Clippers who don’t even TRY to compete. “The fear of the drop” would keep everyone honest, and promotion rewards lower-level clubs who are successful — The Sounders were the most successful USL club for a solid decade before they were granted “permission” to join the big-boys club.
But, this is largely just a debate for debate’s sake. I certainly agree that a “Big 4” scenario is undesirable… and the Yankees just disgust me…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Dec 30, 2009 4:01 PM EST up reply actions
Permission?
You mean until they had an owner willing to pony up the franchise fee? MLS expansion is about having a ownership group with money and little else. If someone in Seattle had shown up at MLS HQ with a 10 million dollar check the same day as Dave Checketts did, you would have had a team and likely Salt Lake wouldn’t. Oh wait no you wouldn’t have because then the whole catch was having a plan for a SSS (soccer specific stadium) and the money. As other cities got wind that MLS was willing to expand again, they started lining up and as long as each was willing to pay more than the last team, it was all good and eventually that SSS rule was let to slide and it became more about the money. Now the rage, according to “the Don” is that stadiums should be built downtown, yup so impressed is he with Seattle that the model has changed and playing in a NFL stadium is OK, and playing on turf is OK as long as you have bars around and someone to organize your supporters into a spectacle for TV.
I say go ask Joe Roth and Paul Allen if they are OK with the Sounders going back down to the USL after writing a check for $40,000,000. Gonna bet they both say no.
fine, then...
I retract my “permission” comment, I was just being snide, anyway! I would also say your last paragraph entirely misses the point of what I was saying, but then again you were waylaid by my choice of a single word.
I will reconstruct the offending sentence thusly:
The Sounders were the most successful USL club for a solid decade before joining the MLS.
Now re-read the comment in that context, placing emphasis on my last paragraph, a qualifying concession that was supposed to paint my comment in the appropriate hue, and re-respond…
...that's MISTER Keller to you!!!
by malcontentjake on Jan 4, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
Garth is one smart cookie
Listen there are really 3 guys who are responsible for RSL going from one of the worst teams in MLS their first 3 years to being in the final 4 teams each of the last two seasons. Bill Manning, Garth Lagerwey, and Jason Kreis, they all know the league and have built a great organization.
I only hope that some of the newcomers to the league (Allen, Red Bull, Chang) will step back and look at the real world of MLS, a niche sport in the US, the DP rule has a lot of room for improvement for sure, and since LA has been allowed 2 or 3 for the last 4 years I can understand the rest of the league wanting more lattitude. I am all in favor of each team getting a second DP, who counts a full $415,000 against the cap, but no discounts if teams want to bank on big dollar players then they should still have to follow the cap rules.
Oh and another great article on soccernet.espn.go.com, keep up the great work Steve.
You can't compare the NFL to any other American sports league...
The reason that the NFL works is that nearly all of their games are played on the same day and they have 1 TV deal. Splitting the TV money from 1 deal evenly is what allows for parity. That doesn’t happen in any other American sporting leagues. If the NFL had regionalized TV rights like every other sport, then it would not have the parity that it does.
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
NFL is on 5 different networks
Fox
CBS
NBC (Sunday Night)
ESPN (Monday Night)
NFL Network (Thursday Night)
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Yeah but I was referring to how the contracts are done nationally with the league, not locally based on market.
So the big market teams get as much of the NATIONAL contract that the small market teams do. As opposed to each team negotiating their own local contract, like with every other American sports league.
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
so should MLS
I think MLS should deal with TV the same way as the NFL, in fact they should include the World Cup and all other rights that they own as part of their deal with national broadcast partners. That would greatly increase the coverage and the revenue.
There are networks out there looking for programming, and getting on a network that would treat the sport better than ESPN is one of my biggest wishlist items.
itll never happen because...
no broadcast network is going to hire multiple teams of broadcasters in order to cover every game and air them in the various markets simultaneously.
that is why until the mls becomes a culturally relevant monster like the EPL (don’t hold your breath) it won’t be able to have that kind of coverage.
the mls is going to be forced to stick with their local coverage plan which will put more money in the pockets of the bigger markets.
At USC we're not snobs, we're just better than you.
Funny thing about Seattle
It isn’t a big market.
#14
Yet, for the Mariners and Sounders (local tv deals) it is.
I am not a Supporter
I am not a Fan
I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I have mixed feelings about this
My thoughts are for MLS to ultimately be one of the top leagues in the world the level of the average player in the league has to improve. I suppose a few roster slots taken by DPs would do that.
The salary cap will have to increase. But I’m wondering if it’s more important for it to go to shoring up the min salary and being used to keep players like Holden from going over seas.
My thoughts are the new CBA should be short term (maybe 3 years) and incremental, increase the cap a bit, maybe reduce the amount the DP costs against the cap, and if things go great the next three years then that’s the time to really start opening up and reward the players.
I’m just a little nervous that this is being done before a really key time in U.S. Soccer history. If the USMNT does well a the world cup this year and gets more people excited about the U.S. game, and Philly, Portland, Vancouver, and Montreal all live up to their potential and draw sell outs, and RBNY turns things around, then I think we’re going to start to have it going on here. If the USMNT get knocked out the first round when they are favored to do much better, I could see it engendering cynicism about the U.S. game. If MLS over extends itself now, and then folks start souring on the U.S. game, it may not be pretty.
I Agree
The average quality needs to go up.
However they make that happen.
If they have to separate into upper tier and lower tier leagues, then so be it, the goal should be to have a World Class league American sports fans are accustomed to and expect.
Patience
is the key, I feel.
The cap will have to be loosened at some point in the future, for good or ill, simply to achieve some measure of parity with other national leagues, but there’s no point forcing hte baby to run when it’s just starting to learn to walk, surely?
There’s no shame in a rule that saves owners from themselves; they’re often folks who have made their fortunes taking personal risks; fine in finance, but not too clever if you’re looking to build a league in the long term. Look how long the English Leagues had a salary cap: the FA was formed in 1863 but the maximum wage wasn’t abolished until 1961!
Big/Little Okay b/c of Playoffs
Having a few big dogs is okay in my book. We need a few teams that can compete at a higher level. Will this leave the rest in the dust? I dont think so. MLS has the great equalizer, its call MLS playoffs. The big teams may dominate the regular season, but in the playoffs its anyones game (See RSL and NYRB).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
