RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
Red
NY
Post #1
Sunday December 22, 2013 5:56am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
My proposed Homegrown player rule change:

A player that is developed as a homegrown player in an MLS academy will not have their contract count against the MLS salary cap. The contract won't hit the cap when they enter the league in their first deal nor will it impact the cap in any future deal with that individual club. This would give an incentive for these young players to stay in the league knowing that they, as homegrowns, can make a substantial amount of money.

This rule would also give incentive to each and every team as these homegrown players would give them cap flexibility on their roster. Each franchise is already investing at least 1 million dollars to their academies each season.

MLS should also have a playing time rule for homegrown players under the age of 21. They would be forced to get a number of minutes with either the MLS or USL affiliate team. The homegrown player would than know that they will get playing time and will get paid.

Keep the generation adidas(GA)rule but just apply it to college based players. If a homegrown goes opts to leave the academy and go to college when age appropriate they forfeit the homegrown rule change. The GA can still apply to 2 players as is now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Grown_Player you can see the homegrown rule here as it stands now.

Red
NY
Post #2
Sunday December 22, 2013 6:02am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
my plan also gives incentive to the player to go through the professional ranks instead of the college system which can be seen as a detriment to the player.

Red
NY
Post #3
Sunday December 22, 2013 6:06am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
The only way MLS gets to the next level is by elevating the average American player. Liga MX has the exact same rule which forces each team to give their homegrowns a certain amount of pt. Plus it doesn't have to be at the MLS level, it can be at the USL pro level. As much as I like foreign talent this also makes foreign talent more prone to DP deals as the HG player with that individual team can make as much as he wants as his contract will not count against the cap. Its a win-win for all.

Red
NY
Post #4
Sunday December 22, 2013 6:17am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
The HG player under the age of 21 would be mandated to play X amount of minutes. Its nowhere near as imposing as the Liga MX under-23 rule as this rule just targets HG players not college players as they forfeit this right.

Red
NY
Post #5
Sunday December 22, 2013 6:36am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
we probably can even make a side rule that states homegrown players that move to another club will only have their new contract hit at 50% against the cap. If Yedlin was just released(hence paid his money) and he chooses to sign with another team his new contract could only hit the cap at 50%. still incentivizing the HG players and giving the teams more cap room.

Other teams still can try to get you if they want to pay you DP money after your contract is up. Regarding re-entry once your contract is up or they decline you that player can enter the market knowing that he will be just like any other player now that he is out of contract. If still under contract(trade) they can work a discount out. Perhaps even enter a HG trade(slot)...lets say 3 or 4 for ex-HG players that now play on another team.

there wouldn't be a HG player limit for the team developing the players. Perhaps a HG player limit(3-4 slots)for other teams if they want to trade. I'd love to see an all RB or SKC 11 with HG players from the area. If we ever really get to the point where our homegrowns can get 11 players onto the field....MLS has made it.

Red
NY
Post #6
Sunday December 22, 2013 6:48am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
I'm going to come up with a succinct version tomorrow and put it in an organized fashion and sent it to everyone I know. Please don't hate the multiple entries for this rule.

joey11
Post #7
Sunday December 22, 2013 7:57pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 278
although your rule(s) have some upside you need to remember this is the American market and unlike Europe we have "fickle" fans. As European fans get upset when team isn't playing well (example: Sunderland) they may protest players, managers or owners but they still show up to games. U S fans want to be entertained and see top talent. They don't all get the "development" aspect of the sport. So, mandating homegrown players get X pt and there are more talented players (foreign) on the bench you lose the fans (or supporters). An example would be the old NASL where they mandated something similar to what you are stating (excluding the salary cap issue) and people stopped going because they perceived (right or wrong) there was less talent hence less entertainment value. I know times have changed and the US viewer has grown in understanding of the game but that's the die-hard soccer fans. The average viewer still sees the game the same. The only way mandating pt for homegrown players would also require better educating the "average" sports viewer AND making homegrown players "household names" even if not stars yet. Ask someone to name a homegrown MLS player NOT on the national team and I bet you don't get many who can answer you. However ask that same sports fan to name a young NFL or NBA player and you'll get a long list. So, fairly good idea but I don't see it working in the US markets. (just my opinion)

dolcem
Post #8
Sunday December 22, 2013 9:06pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Rules like forced playing time will never work. However, your diagnosis is pretty accurate and I have been saying for a long time that the clubs need more incentives to use their homegrown players, especially making their salaries count less against the cap. I forgot what the rules are right now but from what I understand, players from academies can sign with any team. Also, the clubs need more than the incentive to just use these players, they need the incentive to DEVELOP them. The transfer money for MLS players goes straight to MLS but if that money (or a percentage of it) was given to the owners, they would have the incentive to play these homegrown players, turn them into polished products, and export them to top leagues in Europe where they can further improve and help out the national team. Domestic leagues that do this produce great national teams even if the level of play isn't that high (Argentina, Brazil, Holland, Portugal, and France all have this characteristic...and when you include Germany and Spain for their great record of developing youth talent, you have the best seven national teams in the world, contrasted with England, who despite having a great league have a horrible national team).

Once MLS teams have the incentive to sign, develop, and sell their homegrown talent, they will do so (follow the money). If the incentives are strong enough, they might change their style of play so that they can better develop young talent. One of the biggest problems with American soccer is that at all levels we play with outdated, English, route one tactics that are clearly ineffective for player development (compare England and Scotland to, say, Holland and Portugal). We're getting good at sending good athletes and hustlers over to the EPL, which is a big accomplishment, but until we change our style of play we won't produce the creative, attacking quality that every team needs (at least one or two players) at the highest level, unless we get lucky with one of our guys that goes to a European youth academy at a young age.
GET A CLUB TEAM
Red
NY
Post #9
Sunday December 22, 2013 11:10pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
The mandate would only apply to homegrowns under the age of 21. They could exercise that mandate in either MLS or USL.

What this does it give
1. more flexibility in the salary cap as homegrowns don't hit the cap. How big would it be to have an extra 200 or 300k in cap space for the CCL. It would increase in time as wages for star homegrowns improve.
2. understanding to homegrowns that they can get big $ and not go overseas, hence keeping someone like Villarreal in the US.
3. Somewhat force players to go pro instead of through the detrimental college system.
4. Gives young players mandatory playing time. The goal is not to improve just the Yedlins but the Matt Kassels who had nowhere to go and play and hence improve the average American player. This is crucial to improving MLS. The mandate wouldn't be excessive.
5. American players that come up through the academy/homegrowns would never have their salary hit against the team that groomed them. This would make more room to invest in potential foreign DP's as the best American players likely will stay with their parent club. If not they can always become a DP at another club.

This rule would keep young players in the league. They would recognize that they can make big $ and get quality game time.

acahmed14
Post #10
Monday December 23, 2013 12:54am

Joined Apr 2013
Total Posts: 33
i thought the mls only took 25% of money made off of players sold ? also i thought there was already some kind of rule about homegrowns and the salary cap is there not ? and if there is what is it ?

Red
NY
Post #11
Monday December 23, 2013 12:59am

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
MLS teams can sign as many homegrowns per season but only 2 players a year to a generation adidas contract. My new rule would apply GA just to college players and not have the salary on a homegrown have any impact on the MLS salary cap.

dolcem
Post #12
Monday December 23, 2013 10:19am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
At the same time though this will only work if the salary cap remains low compared to what owners are expected to spend (in other words, if they raise the cap and allow more DP's and stuff like that, owners have less incentive to worry as much about picking salary-cap free players since they might not even reach the cap, which is the case with many NFL teams). But yeah, I definitely agree with the salary cap idea and it's something I've been saying for a long time.

The other thing though that we need to change is whether or not these guys actually continue to develop after they become MLS starters (developing from MLS to European level, that is). Of course giving teams incentives to sign their homegrown talent is very important since it promotes the growth of the academy system (something we desperately need), but we also have to consider about the next stage in their development, as a young professional soccer player (18-22, 17 or 16 for the prodigies)-the stage that determines whether or not they end up as MLS players or something better. This is completely determined by the MLS' style of play. The only way I could see that changing (aside from the coaches all getting together and picking a style to emulate or something like that, which I highly doubt) is by giving teams financial incentive to play a brand of soccer that will develop some of these young players. Perhaps giving the owners the proceeds from the transfer or something like that...maybe cap room or draft picks or something like that too. After all, the MLS is the one selling the player so they should at least compensate the team if they do.
GET A CLUB TEAM
MSantoine
Post #13
Monday December 23, 2013 5:09pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
You cant force teams to play youngsters. Its a terrible idea. Unlike USMNT (only real goal is World cup, once every 4 years) MLS teams have to do whats best for that season in MLS, US Open, & possibly CCL. Once every team is partnered with a USL team the playing time will take care of itself as USL will become U21 plus some random veterans throw in.

The thing they definitely should do is make it so the team keeps all future transfer money (or can trade percentage of transfer money) and has autonomous say on whether it agrees to a transfer. This would mean if NE wanted to transfer Fargundez to La Liga for 4 million than MLS cant say no. This right here would be the biggest incentive for MLS teams to develop players. Knowing they can sell them for profit when they want to, not when MLS wants to.

Red
NY
Post #14
Monday December 23, 2013 8:06pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 417
Liga MX has a rule where they have to play their players under the age of 23 a certain amount of minutes. My rule would be less obtrusive as it only impacts the homegrowns and they don't even have to play those minutes in MLS....they could play in the USL.

But if you want to take the minutes rule out you can. Below is the IMPORTANT part of my rule:

We can just keep in the salary not hitting the cap. Imagine if Yedlin gets the point where he wants a 7 figure contract. Seattle can give it to him and he would not hit the cap as a DP. Thus MLS can use his DP spot on another DP increasing the quality of the team.

It also impacts players to not go the college route. They know that if they go to MLS they can make a lot more money as a homegrown rather then as a player coming out of college.


With Jesse Marsch and David Wagner at the helms of teams in the top flight, YA will cover their exploits this season.
RECENT POSTS
YA Transfer Tracker
Yanks Face Relegation in England
Tale of Two Young Yanks in Europe
Wagner Nears Premier League Goal