Bottom Line: Joe Roth doesn't spend as much on us as he could
by RalfZakuani on Jan 19, 2012 8:48 PM PST
Email
Print
Everything is hunky dory in Sounders land these days. We all love the team, our numbers are growing, and the stadium is full of life. We have such a "Democratic System" where we actually get a voice with the team! The GM is so transparent, gracious and fan friendly! We get to tell them if we want friendlies!
As rainbows sprout from Ziggy Schmidt's orifices and fireworks frame Fredy Montero, so content are we at the equilibrium of owner Joe Roth's scheme these days that Arlo White's departure is - quite correctly - the greatest, unexpected, tragic loop we could manage to spiral into this off season.
And Drew Carey! A comic. Host of the Price is Right. Who's Line is it Anyway? Drew Carey is the convienient face that the monolithic, mega-rich owner of our beloved, egalitarian commune experiment into the new sports world where the disheveled, yuppie Seattle masses graze alone side the rich and powerful capitalist owner - JOE ROTH - hides behind the shadows tending to his mediocre food servicve operations. Thank god the Sounders product is better than Mad Pizza. The Pizza Burgler Joe Roth! The Hollywood producer that Joe Roth is new exactly what he was doing to get some unthreatening, "my dick is so big" joke toting (YouTube it), Big Smile as a minority owner. As Joe Knows, appearances are everything.(I have absolutely no personal opinion of Joe Roth, and Drew Carey is a cool guy, but that's not the point here).
Is Joe Roth ripping us off? aka Just What Product Are You Selling Us, Businessman Joe Roth?
Premise 1:
- The Sounders make the most profit of any franchise.
Premise 2:
- The Sounders could afford 3 DP's who make significantly - perhaps extravagantly - larger amounts than our current DPs.
Premise 3:
- These players from premise 2 combined with the profits noted in premise 1 could revolutionze the Sounders and even MLS in ways Beckham never could.
If these three premises are true, and I challenge anyone to say - by in large - they are not, then the Sounders can afford European-class middling superstars. We can afford 3 of these men, types that can compete at the top level of the game. Freddy Ljunberg? Robbie Kean? Juan Pablo Angel? Please. We could afford Luis Suarez [sic]. With 3 such players on top of our non-DPs, it would be hard to see how we wouldn't ultimately be the best team in the MLS, unless you're the kind of observer that belives that picking Mauro Rosales types out of the scrap heap is a viable long-term strategy for finding valuable DP gemstones. Not just that, such a bulwark of talent would truly revolutionize the MLS and make it open to such competition, more so than any showpiece edition like Beckman's ultra-expensive layout ever could. Again, we're left with the realization that MLS owners will spend to increase profits but not the overall quality of the game. There's no need for them to step out on that limb, after all.
Los Angeles bought Beckham. Perhaps a waste of money from a Soccer perspective, but they demonstrated the capacity to afford ultra-expensive players. It wasn't a lark, it wasn't a novelty to bring DB over, it was a cold, hard business decision. It wouldn't be a pro-business decision for the Sounders to get 3 ultra-DPs, but the fact is it's something they could afford. Indeed, Sounders fans, we can afford players of such a high caliber that they currently don't even EXIST in the MLS. The fact such players don't currently compete in the MLS (because most all teams couldnt afford them) is the invisible, normative, common-sense-stupidity shield that this obvious fact - THAT SOUNDERS CAN AFFORD THEM - seems to just be hiding behind at all times.
The Sounders can afford to toss more - and not just a little more - to DPs.
The point of this post is absolutely not to denigrate the great things the Sounders franchise does. It is fan friendly. But it's all relative in the Sports World, and in our toddler years as a MLS franchise, let's not forget if it's a real democracy, we want a return on our investment consumate with what the team can reasonably afford.
From a purely economic viewpoint, as us giddy fans scream for more, our voice - YOU WILL HEAR US - is money to the ownership's pocket. LA could afford Beckham 5 years ago, and we can afford better, and more, now. If we sell out the seats, and have you on the precipice of a much bigger, more lucrative TV deal, we shouldn't be toyed with as if Alvaro Fernandez is the top end of what we can afford. (Love you Alvaro). I repeat again: The fact is we can afford players of such a high caliber that they currently don't even EXIST in the MLS. The fact such players don't currently compete in the MLS (because most all teams couldnt afford them) is the invisible, normative, common-sense-stupidity shield that this obvious fact - THAT SOUNDERS CAN AFFORD THEM - seems to just be hiding behind at all times.
Spend the money this ultra-popular, blooming franchise is making on better players, got it Joe Roth? We love our current players, but we don't like that our support of the team translating to a lack of commensurate increase in investment. The fact we finished 2nd in MLS regular season, have great players, coaches, and fans, should never mean we don't deserve more from our ownership. I'm not suggesting the Sounders would be better off as the MLS 2011 version of ManCity - or even worse the Boston Red Sox - but we do have the best and most fans right?
FanPosts only represent the opinions of the poster, not of Sounder at Heart.
84 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ever hear of ROI?
Sure they COULD spend more… but if they spend $10MM/yr, will that improve the bottom line by some multiple of $10MM? Winning the MLS cup, the CCL, even the FIFA Club World Cup wouldn’t in and of itself offer you a good return on a $10MM investment.
So if I were them, I too would spend just the right amount to help the sport and the team grow, but not to splash cash.
Right, which is not even addressing the fact that the Sounders are already one of the top 2-3 teams in the league.
The “Throw Money at it” approach is rarely a recipe for long term success in ANY sport. The team has shown that they are not afraid to spend money to find and keep our best talents, and I, for one, don’t care HOW much money they spend as long as the team is successful and improving, which it CLEARLY is and has been. In this case, to complain about how much money the team spends is confusing the means ($) with the end (winning).
I laughed
But there’s a big difference between asking your team to spend $200 mil on one player (like Mariners fans have been asking), and asking your team to spend more than $5 mil on the entire roster.
I don’t think the Sounders should chase names, but they should chase talent (and they are). I’d argue paying a high cost DP adds talent to the roster, and that’s a positive.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady509
Cooking a roster
If a little salt is good, then more would be better. At some point the result becomes inedible. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.
Soccer is a team sport. The average MLS player salary is $100k. Beckham makes 75x that. This can create all kinds of problems in the locker room that a DP carrying 5x the average doesn’t.
The league is also set up to reward teams that help the league grow as a developmental pipeline. Soccer is a global market and MLS must navigate this reality along with the economics of soccer as a spectator sport in America. DPs like Freddy and Flaco are an important part of the puzzle.
by Abbott Smith on Jan 20, 2012 6:30 AM PST reply actions 7 recs
Eh...
While it’d be fun to see a big name player on the Sounders, I’d trade big names for wins any day. For a franchise that is just moving into its fourth year of existence in MLS, I am exceedingly pleased with its growth and accomplishments so far. I have the utmost confidence in Schmid/Henderson/Hanauer and expect the Sounders will win a Supporters Shield and/or MLS Cup sooner rather than later. In fact, I think a healthy Zakuani last year might’ve made the difference for the team.
So, maybe the organization can afford three massive contracts for big name DP’s but as was mentioned above the ROI on those contracts probably doesn’t get the team to even a break even point.
I like the team’s current strategy. It makes sense to me for a lot of reasons.
We could get Luis Suarez?
You really think that? If that’s the premise on which you’re building this, I think I’ve found the fatal flaw.
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Jan 20, 2012 9:30 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
That's what tipped you off? Suarez?
For me it was the crappy spelling and “premises” based on pure speculation.
by moyerLIVES on Jan 20, 2012 9:33 AM PST up reply actions 5 recs
well, yes, that too
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Jan 20, 2012 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
my name spelling alarm is ringing loudly....
Sigi Schmid, Freddy Ljungberg, Robbie Keane. Now with that out of the way.
Here’s the question, would a player like Henry, Beckham, Ballack, whoever etc. help us significantly more than a player like Montero, Alonso, Rosales? IMO they would probably help us a little, but not enough to warrant the salaries they will demand.
It’s not like the Sounders are just putting all the money they make in the bank and sitting on it. They have been spending tons of money on the academy, scouting, chartering flights (when they are allowed to do so), training facilities and other things like that which will give us another advantage in the long run.
This call for overpriced players just doesn’t make sense. Paying 3 player 10x, or more than, what their real value to MLS teams is does not benefit us a whole lot. Would it be cool? Sure it would be cool to sign a player that has a big name, but spending money like that is NOT going to make this team better. LA has thrown a lot of money at Beckham for very little return besides the last year and a half. The previous years he was either terrible or didn’t even play much.
by majora999 on Jan 20, 2012 9:31 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
There is no way we could afford Luis Suarez.
His transfer fee would be astronomical. Also, he (and any player capable of being a star in a top-tier European league) do not want to come here.
Come on man, the Sounders have won three trophies and are one of the best teams in the league after just three years at this level. Don’t be that guy.
by Aaron Campeau on Jan 20, 2012 10:55 AM PST reply actions 6 recs
So, lets play with the numbers
We get 4 million a year in jersey sponsorship.
We get ~10 million a year in ticket sales ((40K in seats X 17 games X $26 average seat)- SUM)
Shirt sales and TV deals probably add in another 2-3 million. So were talking ~17-20 million in revenue.
You gotta figure expenses of 10-12 million (just ballparking based on the revenue of other teams that seem to have money to spend.)
You figure Sounders probably have ~8 million in profit/reinvestment money.
So, yeah, for that money we could probably afford a Beckham, Donovan and Keene type trio. But you’re not getting Messi or Suarez for that kind of money. Heck, you couldn’t get Humberto Suazo for that kind of money.
In EA FIFA terms. Our guys are 78’s… with 8 million sprinkled in, we could upgrade to 82-83’s, but not 90-95’s. I’d like to see the FO put a little more money into the DP slots, but I’d also like to think that we are getting young undeveloped talent and trying to mature them into top talent. And then use the DP slots to keep them.
I'd rather the team take the money
and reinvest in new turf ever 2 years, better equipment at training grounds, cushier flights during travel, upgrades to locker rooms, increased investment in the academy system, etc.
Micro example: The first thing that Mark Cuban did as owner of the Mavericks is take the locker room and completely trick it out. Huge, top-of-the-line TVs everywhere, gigantic leather chairs for each locker, ridiculous perks for all of the players, etc. He wanted to show the players that had already made a commitment there that it was going to be an organization that treated its players right and expected the best from them.
I’d rather the team spend more money on scouting, facilities, and player services to create a culture of excellence and winning than on a bright shiny object in a market where the fans have already shown up.
That said, I agree with some of your premise: that this team could afford 1 Euro-class DP in his prime at any given time. I do think, however, that the organization is perhaps trying to reserve that bullet in the chamber for the first season that shows attendance starting to flag (evens lightly).
by Samuelson on Jan 20, 2012 3:39 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
MLS may restrict what the team does regarding flights
Seem to recall the subject came up during Casey Keller’s send off.
by Abbott Smith on Jan 20, 2012 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
I remember that too,
but I swear I’ve read that the LAGs borrowed the Laker’s plane for CCL matches. Ah, found a reference:
So I guess I’m wondering exactly what those restrictions are.
Four chartered legs per season
and the Sounders have used the Seahawks plane for theirs, maybe not all, but at least once.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
But those restrictions are only for MLS matches.
For CCL and USOC they can travel however they like. Soundera have flown charters for some and commercial for others. The USOC final in DC in 2009 was a charter and so was the crucial Comunicaciones away in 2011. I think in 2010 at least Marathon (Honduras) was a charter, not sure if any of the others were.
Those charters are for a single year of competitive play
They’ve basically been used for trips to Columbus and around non-MLS games.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
MLS can and does
probably flexing its single entity muscle
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
That is absurd
I assume you know it to be true then, but it is totally absurd. If the intent of the rule is to create parity in that no team can gain advantage by flying more charter flights, then restricting CCL travel makes no sense. In fact, since the Sounders have used their charter legs in CCL, it has put them in a DISadvantage in MLS since they have not been able to fly charter flights for MLS matches.
I remember back in 2009 there was talk about how they could charter the USOC final in DC because MLS regulations did not apply, but that talk might have been uninformed.
And now that I think about it, I cannot remember the Sounders taking more than four charter legs per season. In 2011 it was three legs (Seattle-Guatemala, Guatemala-New England, New England-Seattle) and I believe in 2010 it was four legs (Seattle-San Pedro Sula-Seattle and Seattle-Monterrey-Seattle). Actually some of those might have been from Dallas or Houston instead of Seattle, but you get the idea.
by AAAA on Jan 23, 2012 3:12 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
There is talk of loosening that rule for CCL
I don’t know that it is official yet.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
This seems like a silly rule.
Sounders 'til I die
by SounderJunkie on Jan 30, 2012 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
Funny story about Cuban's locker room remodel.
The NBA ruled that it could be a salary cap violation so he did the same thing for the visiting lockerroom. His players obviously get a greater benefit.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
by Dave Clark on Jan 20, 2012 4:46 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes we haven't spent like NYRB or LAG in salary
but 2 of our 3 dp’s required transfer fee’s of millions of dollars. I think that we are spending smartly. We have bought low and are set to sell high. We have been building our infrastructure with top of the line facilities, full time scout, top medical staff, analysis tools, etc. Hopefully we are building our coffers so we can swing for the fences every once and a while. Don’t think that just because we don’t have a past prime superstar we are cheap. We just spend it differently.
by Colin Johnson on Jan 21, 2012 1:20 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
How on earth
Are we convincing world class players to play in MLS? regardless of how highly we feel about our league, the reality is that the rest of the world doesn’t share our valuation of the level of play, amount of travel, etc. You’re also forgetting something that the people of Seattle are very reluctant to consider: we’re not in LA or New York. I can’t say for certain, but I’m assuming that Beckham or Henry wouldn’t have taken the same money to play in Columbus or Dallas, if he went there at all.
I really can’t argue with our strategy. Why bring in a player who makes 100x what the minimum salary guys are making and risk ruining the atmosphere in the locker room? At the end of the day, of course the ownership wants to make money. As long as I’m satisfied with the product on the field in all competitions (I am), the efforts to find new players (I definitely am), and our investment in facilities in youth (looking good), Joe Roth can build a yacht out of gold for all I care (I’d advise against it based on physics though).
Discussion
Many are poo-hooing it, but I think it is an important discussion to have. Somewhere between the teams with no money and THE team making the money, is where the Sounders are going to spend. It IS open to discussion if this IS a democracy on how much profit they should take from it. Not opposed to the ownership taking a ton of money, if spending that money gets us no more wins. BUT if they are going to pull a decade ago Mariner fiasco, maybe another story.
Anyway open for discussion in my opinion. They make a TON of money, in my opinion way more than listed above…..even if it were just what is listed above, that is a 20% return on their money.
Why should they NOT go after Forlan ? Maybe they did, there was a rumore…..If it is impossible, at least they tried.
ps. to connorb3, there are already World Class players playing in MLS. Maybe your cutoff is higher than mine, but quiet a few contributed to goals this weekend in the “toughtest league in the world”, while only on loan, many more could in my opinion.
How about this --
At least move up into the average $1M/yr range for each DP? That’s not Beckham money, and it doesn’t necessarily blow out team chemistry with all the guys who are making $75K/yr.
If you liberally assume they are pushing toward $500k/yr average now, then we’re only talking about adding another $1.5M to the DP budget. That clearly looks affordable.
I’m for a gradual move up the salary range, but at a little faster pace than what we’ve seen so far. DP salary opportunities should both attract proven players from better leagues (i.e., the Tagoe scenario) and show future rewards for young players who join club as non-DP and extend their stay (the Montero scenario). Attracting experienced trialists/free agents (the Rosales scenario) is the third opportunity. Similar to the 2nd scenario – this involves rewarding an existing player with DP money.
Of course, 3 DP spots doesn’t give much flexibility – one opening per year, maybe? So it is tough to pursue a DP philosophy that includes all three opportunity areas. Maybe the real question is — what do the Sounders do with their next DP opening? Reward an existing player or snag a new heavy-hitter? The answer will likely be driven by expiring contracts – Ozzie and Flaco? Don’t know how long they are signed for.
I think "reward" an existing player is a poor choice of a word
I would say it is a choice between keeping an existing player (by making them DP) or letting them go (by no longer being able to sign them for less than DP money) in favor of a new player.
I don’t know if we have anybody who is going to require DP money anytime soon. Perhaps Alonso.
Choice of words aside, you see the point?
DP money can be used to pay FMV for top players whose contracts are up for renewal, so they stay longer and stay happier. With limited slots, Sounders have to look out a year to expiring top player contracts.
Seems like I recall hearing Flaco had a 3 yr contract, so this may be his last year on contract. Alonso must be up soon. Not sure they do extensions in MLS, but even if his contract isn’t up, I’d argue he needs to be taken care of. MVP.
Yes, that was exactly what I was getting at
That DP money should not be used as a reward, but rather in a situation where it enables us to keep a pleyer here longer.
That only means we would be able to get a transfer fee for him
And of course we can reject unreasonable offers.
Remember, Friberg resigned just a few weeks before it was announced that he is going to Malmö.
Yes. What I was responding to is "Alonso must be up soon."
meaning his contract runs out in the near futre, which it isn’t because I know we resigned him last year (pretty sure through 2014). Obviously being under contract we would get a transfer fee if he moved right now. So that doesn’t mean Alonso won’t move, but that wasn’t what I was responding to.
You're correct - Alonso signed thru 2014
Found the report – re-upped this time last year.
Speculation on this site has been that Flaco may be up at end of this year, but that apparently is unconfirmed. But sounds reasonable to assume.
So the likelihood is that we’re choosing between signing Flaco to DP money later this year, or using the spot for someone else. Or we’re transferring him to Europe after he has an even better year this year than last.
Seems most likely the next DP spot opens with a transfer. Fans and club will want to fill that hole with quality, and the money will be there.
Unless we are not able to keep Alonso without making him a DP
Then we have to decide which three of the current DPs and him we are going to keep.
I hate to be a pedant, but it's re-signed.
Resigned is kind of the opposite.
by Aaron Campeau on Jan 24, 2012 11:05 AM PST up reply actions
yes that's true... should pay attention to that more...
I tend to always overlook hyphenated things…
There's no evidence they would not get a player like Forlan if one was available
We obviously do not know what goes on behind the scenes.
When it comes to DPs, the choice right now is whether they should get rid of one of Montero, Fernandez and Rosales in favor of a more expensive DP. In my opinion it would be one heck of a player to be worth the risk. The trio that we have now is working very well for us, but with any new player it would not be for sure how well they would fit the team. Switching any of the trio to any player that could realistically be available for the Sounders would be a risk. Maybe a risk worth taking, but a risk nevertheless.
"BUT if they are going to pull a decade ago Mariner fiasco, maybe another story."
The Mariners consistently ran one of the highest payrolls in baseball for the majority of the 2000s. They are an absolutely perfect example of spending money not correlating directly to winning.
by Aaron Campeau on Jan 23, 2012 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
zzz
Aaron don’t be the guy that throws anecdotes contrary to reality.
No one should argue that money in the right hands, to buy the right players, is a disadvantage.
by RalfZakuani on Jan 28, 2012 11:31 PM PST up reply actions
It is not contrary to reality to point out reality
by Aaron Campeau on Jan 30, 2012 11:37 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The Mariners were the first team to spend 100 million and lose 100 games
The Chicago Cubs regularly spend lots of money and have nothing to show for it. Spending as much money as they do is bankrupting leagues like the NBA and EPL.
guys
How are you trolling me pretending there’s not a correlation between payroll and winning in EVERY major sports league in the US, and every major soccer league in europe. Am I gettin clowned. :)
Well, it isn't true in any way for MLS
so that isn’t trolling, that’s just using data
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
For me the question isn't whether we should invest in 3 big DP's
It’s about showing financial transparency on behalf of the owners and FO to see exactly what we’re spending money on. Hanauer keeps talking about how little money they have left for the roster (I presume because they’re making Mauro the third DP), but most of us know next to nothing about our financial status.
I don’t think we should, as fans, be able to veto things like transactions, etc. but since we essentially can vote out management how would we know if they’re doing a good job with the $ they have if we don’t even know what the $ they have is? I think it might be a good investment to get one fairly-large name DP (maybe not Suarez, but you get my drift). However I have no clue what this would cost us in terms of what we’re giving up.
I think while this post is a bit overly-simplistic, it does make a good point that we are raking in tons of $ and but we don’t know what it’s going toward. Good scouting, facilities, etc. are good investments, but one amazing DP could have a larger impact if we were to cut these things by 10%…you get my drift…
What sports businesses show that kind of financial transparency
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
Yes precisely...
Which do? Sports businesses are like that. And I have a problem with it too. And since the Sounder are my franchise, I have a problem with the Sounders in that regard.
On Luis Suarez
Suarez (or a player of his quality) would cost $50million+ in transfer fee. That is almost enough to start a new MLS franchise. His wages would be well more than the standard salary cap as well. How much money do people think our team makes? (Hint: nowhere near that much)
by Iam333 on Jan 24, 2012 9:25 AM PST via Android app reply actions
I'd rather donate $50M to fund NASL start-ups west of the Mississippi
(Provided the money was there, which it’s not.)
Nice to see I got the waters churning.
For those happy to marginalize me as a Lamar Neagle-obsessed troll, I take back the Suarez comment.
But you dont get it, we dont need Ljunberg and Kean for gods sake. We get a better player. Of course we can afford it. It’s ludicrous to think we couldn’t spend more for quality while maintaining chemistry.
How many arguments above summarily suggested that throwing money at players was necessarily like throwing gas onto a fire. So weird.
Ultimately you’re wrong if you think we couldn’t easily afford to spend more on better DPs that made the team better.
Could you provide evidence that supports this?
Ultimately you’re wrong if you think we couldn’t easily afford to spend more on better DPs that made the team better.
Please keep in mind this is MLS where the exact opposite has been true since the DP rule was put in place.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
the opposite has been true because
1) beckham was a business not a football decision
2) teams that can afford it (like the sounders, and perhaps few others) havent spent as much on more talented players yet
so im advocating the sounders do that.
my entire argument summed down to that.
Could we spend more, yes.
Have we spent well, absolutely. If you are upset about the Sounders spending their DP spots and cash on two league MVP caliber players and one of the best wingers in the league, then I have no counter argument. Our DPs are great. They may be able to be greater, but they are great.
by Iam333 on Jan 29, 2012 9:53 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
they may be able to be greater?
No they could be about 3-7 mil a year better. If you think you can’t find a player in the world – with chemistry – thats likeable – that appears at Sounders at Heart get togethers in a pub – that BETTER than our DPs, you trippin.
Could does not mean they should
The team could spend more money on it’s DPs. That has never been the question. The question is whether they should.
The Sounders FO has consistently looked to improve the quality of the roster using all of the tools at their disposal including the DP slots. Each season, the overall caliber and depth of the squad has improved and 2012 gives all appearances of continuing this trend.
The DP slots are not the only elements of what makes a roster work. There is more to roster management in the MLS than simply what works in the present. You are advocating for the team to make a splash that helps now, regardless of the cost. These costs are not strictly financial and to look at them this way is ignoring the big picture. The MLS is a developmental pipeline league. It is not the EPL, La Liga, the Bundesliga, the NFL, MLB, the NBA or the NHL. Players coming to this league view it in the context of the global market and teams within the MLS must view it in this context as well.
Are there potential DPs in the world that the Sounders could possibly afford who would make the team better? Yes. But they must make sense in the big picture, want to play here, be available to play here when the Sounders need them and fit into the long term health and development of the team. To claim that nothing else matters other than the fact that Mr. Roth and the minority owners could spend more money is shallow and simplistic.
by Abbott Smith on Jan 30, 2012 9:49 AM PST up reply actions 3 recs
Yes
Yes you are correct and there are literally hundreds of players that meet the requirements you put down that would have to fit in with the team bla bla bla.
Of course those other factors are relevant. OF COURSE we implicitly consider them when saying a more expensive player would be “better” int he first place.
My god, what is your aversion to spending money on better players? Better as in “make our team better” as in we win more necessarily not as in your strange idea of “Better” as in more expensive but actually bad.
by RalfZakuani on Jan 31, 2012 8:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
No aversion
I have no problem with any team spending money wisely. My problem is that your argument appears to be based on the concept that the Sounders FO isn’t looking for better players because they are cheap.
What specific players do you want the Sounders to sign? And remember that Seattle as a destination doesn’t have the international cache of LA or NY. There are many top internationals who won’t play in America if they aren’t playing for LA or NY.
Make your case for specific players that you think the team should sign instead of Fredy, Flaco and Mauro and then we can have an intelligent conversation. Otherwise you are simply chasing phantoms.
Even if NOTHING mentioned above was true, I wouldn't be complaining about Joe Roth.
In fact, I will NEVER complain about any Seattle team ownership. And the reason should be apparent to any Seattle sports fan.
As long as they own a team in Seattle, they DON’T own a team in Oklahoma City, or Milwaukee, or Tampa Bay, or Anaheim.
I’d rather have a crap Seattle Mariners than to have no team at all. I’d MUCH prefer the Sonics had only won 20 games the last 5 years than to watch them be great somewhere else. The Seahawks have been great with a great owner, but that’s often the exception rather than the rule.
The Sounders have only been the most successful expansion team ever and begun to create a worldwide brand. I honestly don’t care if we could spend money (unless bringing in Messi is feasable). Because without that ownership group that took a chance on one of the most overlooked cities around, we wouldn’t have Sounder at Heart, or Gorilla FC, or Rave Green, or March to the Match, or any of that. Even if our ownership group was a bunch of Japanese video game makers, we’d still have our team.
by Agent_J on Jan 30, 2012 3:04 PM PST reply actions 5 recs
Clay Bennett was a Seattle team owner at one point
I think he deserved complaints. The attitude you’re talking about is what enables owners to put crappy teams out on the field because “hey, at least we have a team!”
I would guess 90% of the time moving a team is about nothing more than leveraging a community to spend taxpayer money on facilities. That’s what the Sonic situation was about, and that’s what kept the Mariners and Seahawks in town in the 90s.
Ownership doesn’t keep teams in a city. Taxpayers and season ticket holders do. I’m not about to put millionaire and billionaire businessmen up on a pedestal just because they own a team.*
*-Please note that this is a general feeling of mine in sports, and not to be confused with the fact I’ve been very happy with Sounders ownership/management since they have arrived in MLS.
Writer: CougCenter Twitterer: @Grady509
Im Sorry
I am completely unclear on how this simple turn of phrase can’t just be accepted as a reality.
Are the Real Madrids and Yankees of the world good because players selflessly flock there to put on the Jersey at a Discount price?
In any sporting league money equates to players equates to talent equates to wins.
Obviously it is only one component, but in Sigi and a supporting succesfull cast we have the rest.
Indeed, my ENTIRE argument IS that no one in the MLS has done this. You simply can’t tell me we dont want better players. And if more money buys better players Im so confused at what the issue is here. Do you not think better players tend to command a higher salary?
MLS vs MLB vs La Liga
Real Madrid and the NY Yankees can spend whatever they want on every player on their roster. This is a considerably different management problem than the MLS where a team can spend whatever it wants on only 3 players, the DPs. The other 15 players on the Senior roster must fit into the remaining 1.8 million dollars of the team’s payroll after the salary cap hit of the 3 DPs. Paying a star player 10 million dollars when his team mates all make 2 million is very different than paying a star player 10 million dollars to play on a team where everyone else makes 100K. And pretending that this is irrelevant is wishful thinking at best.
No one is saying that the Sounders shouldn’t invest in quality. But your expectation for an MLS franchise to operate in the same context as an MLB or La Liga franchise is unrealistic. I would love to see the league raise the overall salary cap. I would love to see the league change some of the rules regarding how much a team can spend on how the teams travel. Soccer in North America travels distances that dwarf most of the European leagues. I drove from near Valencia to Madrid in the early morning, toured three major art museums and was back home the same day. The only two teams that I could do that with in the MLS are Portland and Vancouver. This impacts players deciding to come play in the US. To think that it doesn’t is fantasy.
Your original post has over 70 responses at this point but no recommendations. Stop for a moment and ask yourself why. Many people come to this site because we enjoy having detailed discussions about how the Sounders approach the game we love. I am thrilled that you care enough to join the conversation. But in order to be taken seriously, you have to step up to the plate and substantiate your arguments with something more than a simple Socratic argument:
The Sounders could spend more money on players. Better players cost more money. Therefore the Sounders are fielding a product that is less than what the fans deserve.
This is the gist of your argument and it is being treated as Sophomoric because it is Sophomoric.
by Abbott Smith on Feb 1, 2012 8:52 AM PST up reply actions 5 recs
Repeating this truism for top sports leagues
still does not make it true for MLS, the NBA-D, AAA baseball, etc
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
explain
this platitude is equally applicable to a league. just because no team has found the right mix doesnt mean a 3 DPs couldnt be found that meet all your requirements of players who want to be here, could make the team better in terms of chemistry despite the strange gap that would indeed be created between them and the rest of the club etc,.
the fact that no one has thumbed up my little argument in your little group think club is unexpected and not at – even one bit- a reason in itself for me to change my opinion, thanks.
Here I am saying joe roth is a cheapskate being told I jump to conclusions without valid premise, and you’re breaking out the ‘sophmoric because its not thumbed up and, well, its sophmoric’ line. Nice adjective and trolling but i’ve yet to understand why better players couldnt be found that gel with the MLS model.
Outside of the top leagues
the leagues where top talent want to play the majority of their career, there is no relationship between spending and success. The reason this is true is because of dynamics related to income levels of various team members, the larger impact of the training element of coaching and the fact that high spenders in low revenue leagues are forced to have huge roster churn because there is no way to afford the sport.
Could Seattle have a more expensive 3rd DP than Mauro Rosales? Sure. Would they immediately be better? There’s no evidence that is true. There is also no evidence that a player would be willing to come to Seattle from a top European league at an age where they can be part of a multi-year championship window.
Without the history of spending equaling success in MLS the burden of proof resides on you, and you have yet to offer any beyond the point of “it works in top leagues.” Considering MLS is not a top league I find that argument quite lacking.
Also, please don’t lump me in with others. The following comment shows a lack of understanding of the foundation of this site, which is community.
you’re breaking out the ‘sophmoric because its not thumbed up and, well, its sophmoric’ line
I did not do this. I haven’t come close to it. I’ve asked you to find facts or theory that support you emotionally packed opinion. You have yet to do so.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
Apologies for that I was addressing reply to the message above you regarding the quoted language.
I agree there is no evidence that a more expensive DP could be found that would come here, want to come here, and would have enough chemistry, despite being way better than his peers, to make the team successful. There is no evidence of this because the MLS is a young league and no one has tried this, but this is exactly what I’m proposing.
There is however the obvious evidence that out there, what we do have to go on, that money buys better players. Perhaps somehow this can just be an honest difference of opinion, but if I was the Sounders GM I would like to think that in a world full of soccer players, the fact that money CAN buy talent, the young nature of the league, and hopefully as deep or deeper pockets than any MLS team, I would naturally try to find just such a player. And if you think based on the Ljunberg experience and that fact no one else in the MLS has recruited this type of player, that it can’t be done, I would simply, honestly, estimate that it can be done. And the Sounders can do it because they have money, and fan support translates to money. And we should be asking these questions of ownership.
You know I always though there was kind of a conflict of interest that Hanauer is an owner and the GM. What is his share of ownership? Obviously he want’s to make the team and brand good, having a vested interest in both aspects of the team, but when the same person is deciding how much personal wealth to lay on the line and also what’s in the best interests of the team between being good, better than good, and legendary, I’m not comfy with that.
It is a GM’s job to find just the type of unique talent that would want to play in this league, for the money, that could make the team better given the difficult fact of the rift this necessarily creates in talent level, etc. It’s not hard. Just because it hasn’t been done and the Sounders are great doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try it. And Im especially confused at the outrage such a simple suggestion creates. I dont owe a damned thing to Joe Roth if he is spending a smaller share of his take than other teams on us.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
