Unlike the rest of the world ... the MLS is a single entity that employs the players. You all have to think of it from that perspective. The MLS is like "Sears" with each MLS club representing another "Sears" (corporate store). The players work for corporate and get assigned to one club (store) or another.
The so-called-clubs are nothing more that MLS teams that a particular MLS (LLC) member is allowed to operated. The players belong to the MLS and the MLS benefits ... otherwise the MLS would have folded long ago. Now, solidarity and training fees are an important first step to raising the economic incentive for the MLS and its clubs (aka MLS owned properties) to invest in players and sell those players to the "real" leagues abroad. This is good for US Soccer. Its a chink in the armor and a good first step.
The players have it wrong. The players think this is a zero sum game. Its not. We want US Soccer to step up to the plate and agree to manage solidarity and training fees, so far it hasn't because of the previous regime and the players. If the MLS is willing to buck the system then we may be looking at a slippery slope where the non-MLS club can also get a piece of the training and solidarity pie down the road.
The next important step won't be the pay-to-play clubs, but the 2nd and 3rd divisions. Once solidarity and training fees hit this group the real fireworks start and we will see a geniune market for young players, with real incentive to invest in these players.
It really is a good step in the right direction. The players are idiots for objecting to this. If the players were smart they would negotiate away some of the restrictions that are currently in place that allow the MLS to screw up the transfer timing (remember, the MLS' season is different than the rest of the world).
The so-called-clubs are nothing more that MLS teams that a particular MLS (LLC) member is allowed to operated. The players belong to the MLS and the MLS benefits ... otherwise the MLS would have folded long ago. Now, solidarity and training fees are an important first step to raising the economic incentive for the MLS and its clubs (aka MLS owned properties) to invest in players and sell those players to the "real" leagues abroad. This is good for US Soccer. Its a chink in the armor and a good first step.
The players have it wrong. The players think this is a zero sum game. Its not. We want US Soccer to step up to the plate and agree to manage solidarity and training fees, so far it hasn't because of the previous regime and the players. If the MLS is willing to buck the system then we may be looking at a slippery slope where the non-MLS club can also get a piece of the training and solidarity pie down the road.
The next important step won't be the pay-to-play clubs, but the 2nd and 3rd divisions. Once solidarity and training fees hit this group the real fireworks start and we will see a geniune market for young players, with real incentive to invest in these players.
It really is a good step in the right direction. The players are idiots for objecting to this. If the players were smart they would negotiate away some of the restrictions that are currently in place that allow the MLS to screw up the transfer timing (remember, the MLS' season is different than the rest of the world).
