The new "Beckham Rule" -plus- Growing MLS

SoccerNet is reporting that MLS has approved the "Beckham Rule"

Teams that want to spend a lot of extra money are able to spend over the $2 million salary cap for one designated spot for a "star player." This player can be traded, etc.; but each team only gets one of these spots.

OK, so does Beckham go to LA? Does Ronaldo or Figo go to RBNY? Who will be the poor sap who ends up in Kansas City?

 

RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Who will be the poor sap that pays a hasbeen $2 million?

 

RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

I think Becks would be fantastic for MLS. But he needs to do it now while he still has a couple of good seasons left in him. It would have to be NY or LA. I can't really see him and Posh tooling around Kansas City.

I'd hate for MLS to become a retirement community for aging stars from the European leagues. To take advantage of this rule properly, MLS needs to use these "star" slots for great young players, not formerly-great old timers.

 

RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Im exited about this change for MLS. I think the big market clubs like New York and LA and maybe Toronto will go after big name players. The other smaller market clubs will go after good players but not the big name players or trade them.

 

Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Here's a question:
Could you stand to watch another Carlos Valderrama?

I dont think we're going to see many cases like Lothar Matteus.. though he didnt stick around long enough to make a real fool of himself, which shows the system generally works.

Another example, though it isnt quite 'apples and apples':
When John Harkes was brought to the Crew, I was against it... but I changed my mind when I saw how he organized the midfield when he was on, and how he mentored Kyle Martino.
When he left after the end of the season, Martino stopped developing.. and THAT is the value of getting in the right 'Aging Star'.

 

Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

great comment

 

RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

I think when Harkes left Martino stoped caring. He has gone to Holland for a trial, so hopefully he can rejuvenate his career.

 

RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

The latest opinion piece:

http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/6 ... 2&ATT=2737

My opinion, which I don't get paid for (wonder why?), is that I see mucho problems with this concept, which this article only begins to touch on.

1) Why would they do this unless they were at least a little desperate?

2) Why are they desperate?

3) Why not continue being a marginally decent training ground for up and coming U.S. players and a retirement venue for some of the better, aging players?

I think this is a move in the opposite direction of where MLS should go, for now. You can't have one primadonna on the team, for all the reasons stated in the above article and then some. And there is no way this will stop at just one player of this caliber on each team.

MLS must be worried, and that worries me about the fate of a league that is providing opportunity to hundreds of young American men.

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Most definitely a rhetorical question, but glad to know you're there to provide the obvious answer.

3 things I notice about the MLS:

1) They are not getting the amount of attention ( or respect) they think they need.

2) There is a whole gaggle of players getting ready to jump to Europe.

3) They are working on arguably gimmicky ideas to increase interest in the league.

Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm sure you think I am, but I don't think these are positive signs.

 

Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Its my opinion that no matter what MLS does you'll find a line of reasoning which allows you to bash the league and no matter what answers I give to your backhanded questions and comments you'll find fault in them. None the less I'll try.

1) why are they doing this? They are allowing teams to bring in more expensive players(players which a team could not bring in otherwise as they would not be able to stay under the cap). In some cases these players will be higher profile, players that casual fan will have heard of. This draws more attention to the team and brings people to the stadium.

Are they desperate? I don't know. I'm sure they'd love to get more butts in the seats and more headlines in the newspapers. Perhaps they are desperate to do this and this is how they plan to do this.

I should clarify something. As you know the league pays player salaries. This new rule says a team owner can bring in a higher payed player. A player who exceeds the leagues maximum salary($400k a year). The league will pay the first 400k of the players salary, the team owner must pay the rest.

So if Red Bull would like to bring in Ronaldo and agree to a salary of say 5mil a year they will have to pay Ronaldo 4.6 a year. That 4.6mil will not count against the cap. This rule simply provides an avenue for the owner to bring in a higher payed player if he wishes to do so.

Nothing says a owner must take advantage of this rule. I'm sure many will not as owners like Lamar Hunt probably don't want to spend the money. My guess is Redbull, LA, Chivas, perhaps Chicago, and Houston will sign a player under this rule. The others will ignore.

3) News flash PCB! the whole league is not going to be flooded with non American players all the sudden. Teams are allowed only TWO of these players and all limits on foreign players allowed stay in place. This will remain a league of American players. So if Ronaldo comes in to Redbull he will be replacing a foreign player not an American!

Also to say every player who makes more than 400k will be a primadona
is insane. The selection of what players will be brought in is totally up to the teams. I'm sure in many cases these players positives will rub off on their American MLS teammates.

The league aspires to be better than it currently is. This along with their academy rule, which brings along the young local talent you claim MLS is looking to ignore with this new rule, new stadiums, and new Champions Leauge with MFL teams is how they plan on doing it at the moment.

 

Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Spencer, no offense dude, but you should spend more time reading exactly what I write and thinking, instead of having your "everyone who does not praise the MLS, must hates it" tantrums. Just because I disagree with the direction MLS is heading, does not mean I'm bashing. Your old enough to know the difference by now.

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

I think it's a good sign and the right direction for MLS. They have been under a slow-growth model to this point. They are now ready to ramp it up a little.

The best way to build support for the league, in my opinion, is to put a better quality product on the field. The only way to put a better quality product on the field is to pay for it. I suspect the owners are more comfortable betting that extra money on a few proven stars from other leagues, rather than just jacking up the salary cap across the board. That will come later, assuming the "stars" have the desired impact on revenues.

A lot of things point in a positive direction for MLS: a new TV deal with ESPN (and ABC?); several fantastic new soccer-only stadiums, either already opened or opening soon; a post-World Cup bounce in soccer interest (they still talk about Zidane on PTI); and, fingers crossed, a new high-profile coach for the men's national team (are you listening, Klinsi?). I think MLS is doing the right thing by getting a bit more aggressive in growing their league.

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Thank you Heather, for a considerate questioning of my feelings about MLS.

I don't have the answers, just gut feelings and what I think are indicative decisions by the league. Fortunately or unfortunately, MLS does not exist in a vacuum, so it is compared to all professional Football leagues in the world. In the world presently there exist no less than 10 leagues of 16-20 teams that provide a higher level of football than the MLS can provide. As such, we see the better U.S. players gravitating to these leagues. However, we are seeing MORE U.S. players gravitating towards these leagues because there are more skilled and better players here in the U.S. than previously, and therefore more interest from these leagues in attaining players of such skill.

The MLS is working at molding and training better U.S. players, and I think that is not an unmarketable product. By resorting to questionably gimmicky ideas like bringing in big name, arguably past their prime players, I think you dilute the marketable product of the "Playas of Tomorrow". I don't ever recall seeing a promotion for MSL trying to attract crowds to come see the next big American export. To me, there is a niche there that is not only of value to the MLS, but to U.S. Soccer in general.

So in answer to your questions, I would like to see MLS go in the direction of becoming a "more than marginally decent training ground", becoming more competitive as the talent (mostly U.S.) becomes better, and THEN trying to transition into becoming a playground for the World's talented big names. To me, it appears with this "Beckham Rule" that they are trying to skip a step. And we all know, sometimes when you try to skip a step, you trip, and can hurt yourself.

Whirled Peas!!

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Another change:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story ... 46&cc=5901

My thoughts?...............What took them so long?

 

Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

So yeah I don't really hang on your every word. Guilty.

Your accusation doesn’t hold much water really. There are plenty of people on here who will often voice disagreement with the direction of the league. I don't go on a "tantrum" every time they make a post.

Perhaps its you who should take a step back and reread your own posts. I don't recall you ever having a single positive word about the league. You constantly post your cute little "MSL" abbreviation. I recall you labeling MLS players chumps, bloated Latin retirees, ect. Yet you never seem to have examples to back up your misguided broad brush false insults. It’s clear you look to pounce on the league anytime its possible.

Now this comes up. The league makes three steps forward in one week, steps applauded by basically everyone, except of course you, and you some how imply that this is evidence that the league is in finical jeopardy. I mean really even the guys on World Soccer Daily, notorious critics of MLS, are applauding the moves.

There is a difference between voicing well thought out opposition to the league and its decisions and launching off misguided cheap shot insults. I can differentiate between the two. No doubt you’ll again site my age as evidence that I’m off my rocker and therefore voiding all points I make. If you bring fact based arguments and solutions I'll be happy to have civil conversations about the issues.

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: "Beckham Rule" is a GO

Feel free to re-read my previous posts just above your last post, or any other posts on this subject, unless that is too much of an imposition. I'd argue my thoughts are much more well though out and connected than yours. You'll see that my opinon is not one of bashing, but of genuine concern. Concern for league? maybe. Concern for the players in the league? Most definitely.

Seriously, re-read my posts over the months regarding MSL/MLS, and then let's get back to your points. Truth is, you haven't gotten past getting you feelings hurt from one of my first posts on this subject. You practically admit it yourself.

Don't take it personally little bro. This is called a debate. All opinions are welcome. And you know what they say about opinions.