"I thought you would find this article [in the Boston Globe, registration req. but free] interesting: I love how Dell'Apa points out that the Revolution and Dempsey have no control over the transfer negotiations and it all comes from MLS HQ. This stubbornness by MLS will just cause bitterness and they will end up getting nothing for Dempsey because his play will suffer because he does not care (thus lowering his value) or he will just wait out his contract.
"If MLS were a true business they would sell their talent when it peaks and use the proceeds to reinvest in their “product”, thus creating a wider pool of quality players. This wider pool of quality players would improve play and make it easier to sell their good players."
We agree, Christopher. One note: Dell'Apa insinuates that MLS received an offer of "$2m" for Dempsey — the offer was actually a bit higher than that, In other news, Demspey remains in the market, but a move is unlikely until January.
Ok, so taking into account the article you linked to regarding the poverty level wages of most MLS talent and the games that the MLS folks are playing with Dempsey, if you are a marginal talent a college scholarship appears preferable to the MLS. If you are a solid prospect, why not just try to hook up in Europe with a team in a low division or in a 2nd tier nation and hope you get picked up for big money? Either way seems preferable to MLS.
Jamie, I believe we need to get more players over to Europe. Our National team and the MLS will benefit greatly by this. I thought Dempsey was one of the few shining stars for the US during the WC and am not surprised by the offers for his services. The article seems to criticize the single-entity structure of the MLS and one could argue that maybe the time has come to loosen the reins of that management style. However, the way Eurpoe handles transfers is different than the US sports market--I don't claim to understand it enough to make a good discussion here-but it makes since that the MLS protect its young league from the ravages of Eurpoe or Chelski like ownership. So, while I'd like to see more player movement across the pond. I would still give the MLS a little leeway on its protectionist stance (not too much though, they need to get some policcies in place soon).
They should let Dempsey go, but this issue is a complicated one and not easily answered away. If we complain about quality of play, you cannot totally begrudge the league if it wants to keep hold of its best players, especially if they are Americans and are marketable. Will America accept being a feeder league when many Europhiles seem only interested in the big Euro club tours?
I understand what you are saying about quality of play but it takes money to develop talent and depth. You need to invest in the long-term in order to have success. MLS seems very short-sighted. I found the most troubling part of the article, the fact that the players want these transfer fees to go back into the talent (salaries, develpment, etc) but that is not where the money ends up.
Heck, even if they took the transfer fees to bring over aging talent like Beckham at least it would help increase attendance and enable them to invest in development.
Until MLS decides to invest in developing a wider pool of players both foreign and domestic, they will continue to operate in this vicious circle.
Last edited by irishimpact on August 22nd at 2:05 PM.
If we bring over tired European talent (Beckham, et al.), what does that do for interest in MLS after a year or two?
I understand the idea that some of the better MLS players need to play in Europe to sharpen their skills for the national team, but what does losing talent do for growth of MLS itself? I cannot be persuaded that these Americans, if successful in Europe (not Landon PrimaDonnovan), would return to MLS until they become tired talent (see my note on Beckham). I am quite torn about this issue and don't have an answer that would help the MLS.
If we bring over tired European talent (Beckham, et al.), what does that do for interest in MLS after a year or two?
I understand the idea that some of the better MLS players need to play in Europe to sharpen their skills for the national team, but what does losing talent do for growth of MLS itself? I cannot be persuaded that these Americans, if successful in Europe (not Landon PrimaDonnovan), would return to MLS until they become tired talent (see my note on Beckham). I am quite torn about this issue and don't have an answer that would help the MLS.
Jamie,
What is the deal with MLS and the transfer market? Are they just stupid? You have two players who want to go to Europe are getting very good offers and MLS won't let them go?? That is ridiculous, they are going to lose Dempsey after next year no matter what (oh and by the way if I were him I would be the same way). And Johnson's value is falling faster than anyone's. They should realize the young US very good players aren't going to sign with the MLS if this is the way they are going to be treated. I have written MLS with no response of course.
I am the senior soccer writer here at Fox Sports as well a regular contributor to many, many newspapers and magazines.
If you like what I write, then please buy my book "Love And Blood" from Harcourt, now available.
Sign up for Jamie Trecker's Rather Unobtrusive Mailing List by sending us an email at jamie.trecker @gmail.com,
This blog's rules: You may attack people's ideas, but you may not attack them personally. Violators will have their comments deleted and be banned from posting on this blog.
