Comments on: Does USL-1 Need a Salary Cap?

By: DJ

DJ — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:44:32 +0000

Missing from this discussion is any consideration of what the players are actually making. Anyone have any ballpark idea how much the Addlerys and Sebrangos make, and how much the workaday reserves make? I’m guessing that they aren’t making enough for us to have a salary cap discussion with a straight face. For most players, the USL supplies a part-time income.

The MLS structure may help the league’s long-term survival, but the $40 million franchise fee creates an unhealthy barrier to growth. The EPL may have serious problems, but it’s in a country with hundreds of professional clubs. For soccer to work in America, we have to develop a similar grassroots culture. We need to make it easier, not harder, for fledgling clubs to get off the ground.

By: Jack

Jack — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:11:41 +0000

USL-1 should look at the college football conferences where the money garnered by teams at competitions (ie bowl games in the case of college football) is split say 50% to the team in the competition and the other 50% is split equally amongst the rest of the teams in the conference. This may help the league’s viability. The owner’s and players of the teams winning the money may be resistant to this idea but if teams start to fold or fan interest starts to wane and the league folds then where will these owner’s and players be…the MLS? possibly.

By: xyooj

xyooj — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:29:07 +0000

nothing against the salary cap, just that it’s not a market economy !!
just like any other jobs out there, if you don’t like the pay then don’t take the job.

it would be nice to have a promotional system for the entire US soccer industry, where the good teams/clubs go to the top and the bad teams go to the bottom.

America supposed to be the land of free enterprises, market economy….but why have all these little leagues each by themselves (i.e. MLS, MISL, NPL, USL1, USL2, etc…)—just pathetic

the cream will raise to the top…..why create a protective system?????

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 12:48:37 +0000

Hey Mexican Football…………..maybe CONCACAF is the one who blew it with the strange away goals rule.

By: Mexican Football

Mexican Football — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 12:36:59 +0000

Hey Islanders fan, it’s not a lock for Atlante. The Cement Machine is pissed off and they will be seeking to crush Atlante in Cancun. The 2nd leg will be very exciting, so tune in.

Sorry your Islanders choked in the semifinals. They were a man up most of the game and 2 goals up on the series, yet they still shit the bed. Very pathetic. Gaudette blew it. Islanders suck.

By: Vnice

Vnice — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:40:37 +0000

I, personally, just would be happy to have a local club to support. Seriously, that’s all I really ask for. Unfortunately, I live in Vegas…no local club.

I don’t understand people who “support” clubs that aren’t anywhere close to related to them. Like, what the fuck connection do you have to West Ham anyway, guy from New Haven, CT?

Instead of cheering for the death of MLS or USL, let’s try to discuss this rationally and constructively. After all, American soccer needs both leagues.

By: Lars

Lars — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:47:53 +0000

The MLS posts losses of 20 million but there is no way they’re actually losing that much money. They may, in fact, be breaking even if they’ve done their accounting properly…

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:16:23 +0000

…what does that even mean? The NFL is the most lucrative sports league in the world. The MLS is a league who owes its very existence to the fact that Alan Rothenberg was both its principal backer and the president of the USSF at the time the federation was considering bids to create a first division, where the owners are “investor-operators,” and which has a marketing arm that only channels a little less than sixty percent (13m out of at least 23m) of its revenues into the clubs themselves when the league as a whole is posting losses of 20 million annually. There’s no comparison.

By: kyle

kyle — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:02:23 +0000

MLS will probably still be around in 5 years, but if the quality of the league is still crap whats the point?

By: mike

mike — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:43:11 +0000

U.S.L is the league that will not be around in 5 years not MLS, I dont think I should have to explain why, because its pretty obvious, saying that the U.S.L is going to outlast the MLS is like saying the arena football league is going to outlast the NFL