According to both ESPN’s Soccernet and SI.com, it’s starting to get to the point where the labour negotiations in MLS could be considered as “desperate”. Of course, the parties have used the recent major winter storms on the East Coast to extend the artificial deadline for a deal to this Thursday, February 25. Sadly, even the two extensions (the first one took the “deadline” from February 1 to the 12th) have not changed the issues.
The players have a basic issue with the lack of free agency in the league. MLS owners have said that the structure of the league cannot change to accomodate this type of request, but they’ve also said that they will not lock the players out. The players will be forced to strike, and for some of them, this could be financially devastating. The current CBA expires on March 25, so the storm clouds are certainly gathering.
The sad facts appear to be that the players will kill the league off if they try to break the owners. Whether Don Garber is a good exec, whether or not he knows ANYTHING about the game, he does know how to keep a league like this in business for over ten years. Given the allocation of sporting dollars in this country, that’s almost an astounding record. Now, clearly, the level of play in MLS is nowhere near the top leagues in the world, but the thing is, no one should expect it to be. Based on the economic structure that the league employs in terms of the league essentially controlling all the contracts and salaries, it’s managed to stay afloat when MANY other “secondary” American sports leagues have passed by the wayside (Arena football, women’s soccer, indoor soccer). I’m no great lover of MLS as a league, but I understand this current situation to be a clear case of the owners basically saying “we cannot and will not continue if you insist on free agency”. While some may percieve that as non-negotiations, in this current economy, they can hardly be blamed for taking that stance AND being so dreadfully honest.
I think those of us that love the game will take it in just about any form we can find it. While MLS may leave some things to be desired in terms of coaching and talent, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand it’s what we have and there are no better options because the sporting climate in this country is not ready yet for a bigtime NASL-style revival. Nor are there the dollars. While I sympathize with the players, they need to understand what they may be costing themselves. While it’s important for future players to perhaps have freedom of movement, the league simply cannot accomodate it at the moment, and thus, we need to find some type of solution and quickly. With the World Cup this summer, interest will be at an all time high as it usually is, and to have MLS disappear in the middle of that would be an absolute catastrophe.
Fix it, lads. Now.
I have to disagree with you somewhat…From what I have read online, it seems to me that the players are not insisting on free agency; rather they are insisting on player mobility and guaranteed contracts.
The one example I have seen referenced twice is that of Kevin Hartman. Kansas City Wizards declined his option, haven’t waived him, and haven’t negotiated a new deal. So essentially, Kevin Hartman is unemployed. The current MLS rules/CBA prevent him from working a deal with any other MLS team unless Kansas City agrees (and receives compensation?). And, if I understand it correctly, he cannot leave for another league/team without Kansas City getting some money for his rights (or Hartman waits until his option is over).
I don’t know whether Hartman is a lousy, good, or great goalkeeper with lots of other options or not But it really seems only logical and fair that if Kansas City is not paying him, he no longer works for them and he should be free to seek employment as a player elsewhere. I cannot see how this would be in anyway financially harmful to the league or any team.
I may be incorrect in some of the above statement, so please correct me if I am. However, I think the players are being more than reasonable.
If MLS cannot agree to this, the league is treating its players as chattel and only looking to maintain total control of a player’s career. If that is the MLS attitude, then perhaps the league should collapse.
Totally agree, if that’s what’s going on then that’s some BS. It’s one thing to not allow free agency, but if a player is removed from his team, then he should be allowed to pick up gainful employment and his former employer should get zero compensation.
Did you let Don Garber write that for you, or did you use your own words based on the owners’ press handouts?
“While I sympathize with the players …”
Uh, no you don’t.
“While it’s important for future players to perhaps have freedom of movement …”
Perhaps?
I’m not at all against people having dissenting opinions, in fact we enjoy it as it creates discussion. What I don’t like though is when someone just disses something and doesn’t share an opinion. I’d love to hear your actual thoughts on the situation.
OK, how’s this? Freedom of movement on our jobs is important to all workers. And no “perhaps” about it. If you want to take the owners’ side, fine, but don’t pretend you sympathize with the players just before you throw them under the bus.
I don’t disagree one iota with freedom of movement for workers.
What you have to understand is that IN MY OPINION, the players will kill a league that’s very fragile in terms of actual sustainability if they push for this in this economy. So in terms of wanting to see more soccer in this country, yes, right now I’m on the owners and league’s side. I think the league SHOULD be able to operate in an NFL-like fashion in the future, but when there are teams in MLS still playing their home matches in minor league baseball stadiums, now is not the time to rise up as a group and say “We want freedom and more money and this and that”.
This league will die, it’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it. They need to keep going the way things are now until the economy gets to the point where people don’t have to watch every single cent they have.
I absolutely agree that some sort of free-for-all free agency might cause the MLS to see teams overspend and collapse.
However, I would really like someone to explain how allowing Kevin Hartman (or any other player in this situation) to play for another team in the MLS or a team in another league is going to hurt the MLS in any way.
It’s probably true that there could be some form of free agency without the league collapsing in on itself, just not at the rate that the current group of players would hope for.
Look, the bottom line is that this needs to get sorted because this league cannot afford a load of bad publicity during a world cup year.
If you are right and the league can not survive without the players giving in to the owners’ demands, then it won’t be the players who killed the league, but the owners.
I’ve got one word for this situation, particularly with the Union being a new team this year:
Fuck.
As a Wizards fan who was admittedly unfamiliar with the Hartman situation, I agree that his case is a great study in what is wrong with the current structure. I also agree with Adam that the players cannot make a die-on-the-hill stand at this time. I think the best solution would be a 3-year patch to the CBA. That way the players don’t have to deal w/ this situation long-term and the league continues to operate with some certainty. Then, hopefully the economy improves and the players have more room to work with at that point.
I would also like to educate my fellow readers on KC’s stadium situation (referenced by minor-leage baseball park comment). KC played in the Chiefs’ (NFL) Arrowhead Stadium for 12 years. Capacity 78,000, this was a ridiculous arrangement that was expensive for the Wizards, made the crowds always look sorry (even the record 35,000 for LA in Becks’ first year didn’t fill the whole lower bowl), and created playing surface issues for both teams. While the plans were in the works to build a new stadium in Kansas City, MO, the Wizards lease expired and the Chiefs needed to begin a major reno to Arrowhead. The Wizards saved money by temporarily moving across the state line to Kansas City, KS and playing in a minor league baseball park w/ 12,000 capacity, and the Chiefs got uninterrupted off-season access to do their reno. The Wizards temporary home is near the NASCAR track and a 6 year old retail development that is wildly popular here in KC. The plans in Missouri fell through when the city and state couldn’t come up with the promised funds. In January, the Wizards reached an agreement with KC, KS to use leftover bond money from the retail development combined w/ new payroll taxes from new jobs promised by local healthcare IT company Cerner Corp. to fund a new stadium next door to the minor league ballpark. As retail and office space was part of the Missouri plan, the Wizards now have a better site that is already developed rather than a speculative site. Construction is already underway and the new digs will open in Summer 2011. So yes, technically the Wizards play in a minor league baseball park, but its a temporary situation that has benefited the club and provided access to a better long-term solution for a soccer-specific park. More on the KC Wizards than anyone here probably wanted, but I felt it was germane to the Soccer-in-America discussion.