120 Fahrenheit: Why I Think a Strike by MLS Players Won’t Be Effective
March 12th, 2010 . 5:17 pm . By: Buzz CarrickThe players are thinking about striking. They’ve voted themselves either the power to hold a strike or they’ve voted to go ahead and strike, depending on who you believe. In my opinion it would be a bad idea for them to hold the strike cause it won’t work. Let me be clear, I think what they are asking for isn’t unreasonable. They are not getting some basic rights players world wide enjoy. I think they deserve most, if not all, of what they want. But that doesn’t mean a strike will work. The IssuesIn essence, if I understand it correctly from my sources, the players are after three things. (More salary and a higher cap are not one of them.) The first is guaranteed contracts. They want to still get paid if they get waived. Two, they want free agency inside MLS. And three they want to keep the players 10% if and when they are sold. Currently MLS makes players sign over the 10% to get a sale. As I say, none of those requests are unreasonable it doesn’t seem. Guarantees I have heard from sources that the league gave some concessions on the guaranteed contract thing, although I’m not sure what the exact details are. I don’t think it’s unilateral guarantees for everyone, but does include a change of guarantee dates and different terms for more veteran players. Even though none of us in the real world get guaranteed deals, most professional athletes do. MLS was also going to bump the cap some to raise player salaries to try and appease them, but that isn’t really a big player concern. The 10% This one on the surface seems only fair. You’d be pissed to if you didn’t get your money. For some reason this one gets the player leadership real fired up. Probably because they are the higher plaid players who would get a greater dollar value with the 10% because of the larger sale price they would bring. However if you’re a $30,000 would you really care about this issue? Do you want to strike so Landon Donovan can have another million when he’s sold? Another consideration is that in Central and South American most players rights are owned by agents and/or investors. The 10% in those cases goes to the agents and investors. Players from south of here are used to not getting this fee. It undermines the weight of this issue to the foreign contingent in MLS. Free Agency This one is the real kicker and the one MLS ownership isn’t going to give ground on. Do the players deserve to be free after their contract runs out? Of course they do. MLS will argue they are free to sign with any other league or team outside MLS, and to a point they are correct. Should players be able to move inside MLS? Sure they should. But it’s not going to happen. By allowing any level of free agency, MLS would be admitting they are not single entity. It would break the business model. Outside of maybe the LA Galaxy and Seattle, most of the league doesn’t yet make money. Loss of single entity would probably mean the end of MLS. MLS already won this legal battle against the MLSPA (being supported by the NFLPA), I doubt they will give in now. The best players might see is some sort of internal MLS auction for out of contract rights or some such. Some method that allows some movement, but keeps the contract and ownership of players with the league office. But anything that smacks of free agency and open movement is a non-starter. Why a Strike Won’t WorkNone of the above tells you why I think a strike is a bad move. It just lays the ground out for us in terms of the players demands. So why is it I believe a strike won’t work? 1. To many MLS players can’t afford it. Have these young guys making over $100k been saving their money? Can they sustain their lifestyle? How about guys under $100k, how long can they hold out? What if they have families and kids? How about the guys making $30k or less? Quite a few of them will have to get another job, and get one quickly, to survive. In a strike how many players will cross the lines either right away or within a short time frame? I bet it’s more than you would think. One NASL vet this week said that when there was a strike in his day, most of the Dallas Tornados crossed. (Texas is a right to work state) There have been reports that 2/3 of the NASL players voted to strike, and only 1/3 actually did strike. 2. Foreign Players know how good it is here in MLS. Wonderful facilities, a great place to live, the checks show up on time and the clear the bank, good education for kids, safe on and off the field, and a certain amount of anonymity. How many of them are willing to risk careers and/or having visas getting dropped to strike? (Would visas be at risk?) How many of them will ignore a strike and show up to play? A great many of them I would think. Being under contract they can’t just go to some other league Remember roughly 1/3 of FCD players, most of them foreign players, already voted to accept the first MLS offer, and that was before concessions. 3. Will the audience even notice? At this point it seem probable that MLS will say, “We’re playing. If you’re here you get paid.” The league already approved playing under the old CBA. If, as I predict, a large number of foreign players cross, and a bunch of “can’t afford it” players cross, the only ones missing with be the upper half of the American talent pool. MLS will just sign up another 10 or 15 Americans who would kill to get into MLS. You think it an accident Schellas Hyndman has about 10 of his mid-tier, ex-SMU guys in camp? You don’t think those guys would sign up in a heart beat to try and play in this league, strike or not? How much of a drop in play will there be? Not THAT much. Even if MLS has to field an entire new team of players, do you really think they will have any trouble? Don’t you think the league will just open up to foreign players for a season, bring in a massive haul of talent to prop up the teams. It might look like the NASL for a time. Now take a look at the MLS audience. How many of them are hard core soccer fans that are clamoring for more talent? 10%? How many are suburbanites with kids or casual fans that are just enjoying a game or two? 90%? Of the hard core how many will show up and support no matter who is in the kit? How many fans of the team now can’t even name more than 2 or 3 players? How many will still come with their rec team, their school group, or their family outing? Most of them I’d think. I bet MLS has zero trouble fielding teams and playing their season and I bet hardly anyone will notice. I’ll even go further and bet that half the audience at any given MLS opener won’t even know there is a strike going on. 4. The monetary impact of a MLS strike doesn’t carry enough weight. In the NFL when the players strike the owners lose millions. In MLS everyone is already losing money. The league isn’t being propped up by massive TV ratings. A dip in the needle of ratings won’t mean squat. Even if it did make a difference, what’s one loss compared to another. If the losses get big enough the league will just go away. It’s not like the owners are going to be crying over the lost cash. They already are losing cash. There is no financial incentive for the owners to give in. They lose money already, and giving in will break the business model. They’ll just shut it down before that happens. Or as I said, they’ll just play with a little less talent. 5. It’s a World Cup Year. There is a small segment that eventually will cross because they need to be playing to make their World Cup team. You think a foreign coach will give a darn about MLS if they guy isn’t playing? If MLS won’t let Donovan or Beckham stay in Europe, will they want to be sitting here in the states? (Will MLS play that kind of hardball?) What if you’re a fringe guy? You think a Robbie Rogers, Jonathan Bornstein, or Sacha Kljestan wants to be not playing? Sure guys can stay in shape, but shape is not game form. You think Bob Bradley will pick guys out of game form? Not a chance. MLS players trying to make their various World Cup squads could very well be the first players crossing. ConclusionSo that’s it why I think a strike is a bad idea. I just don’t think the MLS Players have enough leverage. Striking won’t hurt the owners enough and the fans for the most part won’t even notice. The ball as they say is in the players court. It’s going to be interesting to watch, that’s for sure. 28 Comments Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI Leave a comment |
regarding the free agency — forget what it means for power and control of the single entity over the teams. But just answer this question: how the heck would it function in practice????
Free agency in every other league is predicated on the fact that the teams themselves are independent entities. Players “sign” contracts with the individual independent teams. Unless the league suddenly radically changes the whole way it functions, and gives away the trademarks to teams that it owns, and completely hands over all central power to the teams, you just cannot have real free agency.
How would a player know he’s getting an authentic “bid” from his services when no matter which team he is free to go to, he will still have to sign a deal with MLS. He can’t “sign” with Chicago if he choose to go to Chicago. He signs with MLS. MLS can’t bid against itself — that would raise major ethical questions. MLS could say “oh yeah, Chicago wants you for 50K and NYRB wants your for 40K, which would you like?” Meanwhile, it’s MLS just making up numbers when really they could afford 200K and 170K based on the teams respective cap room.
i think your World Cup argument goes both ways though.. I do not think the league can afford to have a strike during the world cup. They want to use the World Cup as a jump start to the second half of the season. Also if they want to land one of the upcoming World Cups in the USA a strike would be detrimental for that..
Also what I can not understand is that if lets say someone who was just drafted into the MLS and they own his rights for four years. They get cut from the team one year in. They can not seek work in the USA if that happens… They must look abroad which by the way would be impossible because he does not have the experience that euro teams would look for.
Saying that I am not sure i strike is the best option either… i just think that the league is out of touch with reality..
GREAT post, Buzz. I think you nailed this thing shut. I’m so tired of the Chicken Littles out there thinking a strike and a league shutdown is imminent. It just doesn’t comport with the facts on the ground.
I’ll add another element you almost touched on in Point 1. The economy and job market both still suck and may for some time to come. Wait until these American players wade out into the job market. Woebetide!
Here’s something I wrote along the same lines at Match Fit USA:
http://www.matchfitusa.com/2010/03/mls-cba-mediator.html
great read. thanks buzz
On the free agency, Buzz, why isn’t a system like how they determined who got Luis Gil palatable? If I read things correctly, the two teams he wanted to go to submitted sealed trade bids and KC picked the one they liked best.
So if a guy has completed his deal or reaches a certain time period and wants to remain in MLS, why can’t the league sign him for a number, tell teams who want him to submit compensation requests to his original team and have them pick the best?
The league still controls the contract and the mechanism. Or is it possible the league has floated options like this where it’s not real free agency, but the players have drawn their line in the sand and refuse to budge?
Why would loosing the rights to a player when waiving him kill single entity? You could retain single entity by, after waiving a player, the contract is null and void with MLS; in order for another MLS team to sign that player, they would have to get the league to resign the player, then go through the standard allocation/discovery process. That would retain the single-entity concept but also keep clubs from holding a waived player hostage.
Interesting on the foreign player split. I read somewhere else that the high paid American players might not want true competition ie rosters that don’t have foreign player limits. MLS has done American players a big favor and could easily change that.
Jason you are right about waived players. Buzz is talking about new contracts Players like Hartman and Van de Burg.
Buzz how hard is it for guys to get visas to play here? I have read that players in Argentina last year where not getting paid, how many would jump ship for a steady pay check even for a year, can you break a contract when a team does not pay you?
buzz (ok that’s weird) There are probably some systems that might work. Something like a bid from teams. The league may have made some kind of concession, but we dont know.
Jason, because any free agency “inside” the league would mean the league wasn’t one company or one entity. And you described it exactly how it is now, except for the any team part. The player is free to leave, the league has to re-sign them. They just cant change teams in MLS.
International transfers from south american can be complicated. Often the player isn’t owned by the team but rather agents or investors. So getting paid or now they cant really move.
Bob has already picked the WC team and LD, Pearce & Bornstein are the only ones going from MLS so the strike has no impact that.
Interesting read, Buzz. Very good points. I wonder if the union knows all this.
I don’t disagree with many of the points the players make. But the fact is that a strike now would be terrible for soccer. Perhaps a better time would be the next time negotiations roll around. But not now. And if the players are smart, they recognize that. They can hang their hat on getting some improvements. And they can focus on a strategy for a bigger impact in four years, when the threat of strike is more real because perhaps at that point in time, with the league on more solid footing, a strike would not be the end all.
But not now. It sucks for the players, but it’s the reality.
Great post Buzz. Really made your points well and clarified a lot of the issues.
Re: free agency, it would be great if the players could move within MLS. I feel for the young guys making less than 30k who can’t even go to another team in the US. Their rights should be released upon being cut. That aspect of MLS is really weird.
Revsfan that is not quite accurate. They can go to other leagues in the US if their contract is up. I would like to see either a lottery like when a low level player returns to the US or allocations like when high level US player returns/comes. The problem is salary. Would teams get chances at different salary levels?
Good read.
Can someone explain why when a coaches contract is up he is able to negotiate with any team inside MLS, but when a players contract is up he is not. In my mind if a coach is able to do this, and they are, doesn’t this show that the league isn’t one entity.
Buzz,
Great read with some interesting points. I agree with your assertion that a strike is unlikely, but something else to consider.
If there is a strike, what does the league do about some of the fixed costs that they already have? They can’t just press the pause button with their lender or other costs (unless they’ve purchased insurance against it).
While they would save some money by not having to pay the players, the strike would also eliminate gameday and other ancillary income. Sure, the players would be hurting as well, but I think that you’re underestimating the potential pain on the league’s side.
The analysis is based on the assumption that most players will choose to be scabs and those who refuse will be replaced by scabs. I, for one, will neither attend an MLS game, nor watch it on TV, if the teams are composed of scabs.
I agree with don, i won’t waste my time on scabs. i can always watch european soccer on fox. if i want to watch 3rd and 4th tier players, i can go watch a high school team. But 25-30 bucks a ticket x4 plus food? you have to be joking….
But you’ll gladly watch or attend an MLS game if the teams are composed of guys who didn’t think enough of you to play for your team? Okay, got it.
BTW, Buzz, yes, only 143 players honored the NASL strike. History lesson here: http://www.kenn.com/the_blog/?p=2838 (Shameless plug)
There is a big difference between feeling that the players deserve what they ask for (they do) and the owners saying it would be foolish of them to break their business model to accommodate them (it would be).
The only leverage the players have right now will only serve to kill their own careers. Take the deal on the table, and amend the contract to 2 years. Once 3 more teams are in place with stadiums to fill, you’ll have far more to worry ownership with.
Season Tickets are cheap. The park is nice place to hang out on a Summer evening. I’ve never really cared who was on the pitch. It’s always been a revolving door here in Dallas (with both good players and bad). Just enjoy whatever 11 they run out (SMU wearing hoops?). None of these guys are going to get rich playing the game here anyway (LD being the exception).
Your comments might apply to many teams in MLS, but they certainly do not apply here in Seattle. Sounders fans are pasionate, knowledgable, and numerous. That means: we DO care whose on the field. We Sounders fans know the MLS is sub-standard but we tolerate with the expectation that it will improve (and to see the handful of Kellers and Ljunbergs in the league). Any further dropoff in talent and we will not watch! Also, Sounders owners are making LOTS of cash. Haven’t seen numbers, but 36,000 per game (almost EVERY ticket is sold already this year) plus huge tv ratins = lots of cash! A strike will definitely hurt here.
Chris,
PC Cobb is a wanker, obviously on anti-depressants ;- ). I could not disagree with him more.
I DO care about FC Dallas winning games! I absolutely do care about the quality of the players on the pitch, and the quality of Major League Soccer in general. We need to care for it to continuously improve.
MLS is a better league now then what it was in 1996, and I would hope for it to be equal to second tier Europe in 20 years. The ongoing quality of a league is directly correlated with the number of passionate fans that support it, because it takes money to make a quality league happen.
You want a nice summer day PC Cobb? Then please go on a picnic. I am serious about my footie. I expect FCD to go deep into the play-offs this year, and am looking forward to the season.
A strike would really crush MLS during a World Cup year, as revenues are certainly going to go WAY up this season from 2009 in all markets. Considering the economy we’ve gone through in 2008-2009 and what could be a great year for American Soccer, both sides just have way to much to lose.
Here is the deal: If the players go on strike, I will ask for my season ticket money back. I might buy one or two tickets to see the scrub amateurs bat the ball back and forth, but I am not shelling out Section 106 money to watch a pick-up game.
Robert,
Like it or not you need fans like Chris attending games at PHP and other MLS Stadiums across the land to keep this league going. Do you think everyone who attends a baseball game with their family during the summer is a die hard fan? Hardly, and that’s America’s Pasttime, not a niche sport that is 6th at best on the depth chart behind football, baseball, basketball, hockey and I am guessing PGA Golf. Without fans like Chris, there would be no league or teams for you and I to enjoy and support. Obviously it would benefit MLS and soccer in America in the longrun for more knowledgeable fans to become the majority, but at the moment casual and serious fans are both required.
^^^
I agree! More fans like Chris. ;- )
Yes Kevin, the league needs every fan it can get, I just don’t have a nonchalant attitude about a player strike, nor about watching union scabs knocking the ball around in their place…especially not for the top dollar I paid for my seats.
Lastly, I could not allow the Sounder’s fan to take the footie high road on us. I had to show a little FCD pride. ;- )
Oh i totally agree with that!
Chris, no offense, but you came off as a little bit of a snob in your post. I don’t think it was intended at all…but a subtle tone was there. Hey I am guessing most of us support an EPL, La Liga or Serie A team in addition to our domestic teams. Even if not, most knowledgeable fans know where MLS currently stands in the grand scheme. Doesn’t make any less fun to follow even if it’s not as easy on the eyes. There is no need to act like MLS is beneath you and that you are doing the league a favor. I will say that I am really happy for all of soccer in the US that the Sounders have been such a huge success. I will also admit that I am a little jealous and would love to have the same atmosphere in Dallas. I am also glad to hear that the Sounders are more than a novel attraction given that sales are strong for 2010 as well.
Robert and Chris, I definitely both agree with you that it would be hard to support a scabbed together team. But I am of two minds, would I rather have the league succeed? Or show some sort of solidarity towards the current players by not attending games because I do agree that their wants are totally within reason?
I hope something can get resolved and soon because ultimately I think a strike can do more harm than good for everybody, the players included.
Lastly to Buzz, great article and I couldn’t agree more with the points you bring up. Let’s all hope this comes to a resolution and 2010 can be the start of something good for FCD, not the season that no one cared about, or worse, the season MLD started to die.
Finally a voice of reason. Trust me. You would rather have the league succeed. The players are wrong. The league is too young for this. I watched the NASL fail. That sucked. If the MLS fails then you’d better renew your passport if you want to see live soccer. If the players strike, go to the games with a smile and support the shirt. You’d think that would be a no brainer.