Sports stats



MLS Major League Soccer

Guest editorial: MLS players should strike

by Dennis Justice
March 18, 2010 - Major League Soccer (MLS)


Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones made some recent comments about the negotiations between the NFL and their players union, and was heavily fined by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, despite the comments being a full season before the current collective bargaining agreement expires. Yes, Jones is a very powerful owner in the NFL. Yes, he does pay players very well and insists on top-notch facilities. But Goodell had to exert his authority. The NFL needed one voice and they cannot afford having owners spouting off comments that would be far more inflammatory than Jones' comments when the negotiations are at the critical level next year. I wonder when Major League Soccer is going to clamp down on owners spouting off and belittling the players union, or is their Commissioner Don Garber really a $3 million secretary?

For the record, I have never supported a players union in any professional sport. That is, until now. I completely support the MLS players union and believe if they do not win some sort of free agency they should go on strike next Monday. Guaranteed contracts are subject to negotiation. But the MLS having an effective reserve clause in their league is inexplicable to casual American sports fans, and does artificially repress wages, so the players have every right to demand for some sort of free agency within the league.

It is not uncommon for owners of any sport to cry poverty, and it rings hollower with MLS owners. They can afford "Euro-divas" like David Beckham, who is injury-prone and tried to get out of his mega-million dollar contract to stay at AC Milan (eventually he got an extended loan), but cannot pay players who are based in America or otherwise based in CONCACAF a decent wage. (The median pay is only $88,000, and that factors in Beckham's salary.) It also rings hollow considering some of the same owners want to invest $millions and buy English soccer teams. (I wonder if any of those English fans, who generally hate the Glazer family's mismanagement of Manchester United's finances, would want a MLS owner running any of their teams?)

Whether some die-hard soccer fans want to hear this, whether the MLS really grows or even survives depends on casual sports fans. Colin Cowherd made a comment two weeks ago on espnradio (paraphrasing), "The NFL gets the casual sports fans. The NHL gets the die-hards. Which league is doing better?" He's exactly right. TVG, America's top horse racing network, has admitted they engineer their broadcasts to cater to not just die-hard horse racing fans who just want to see the races, but bettors of any sport. Die-hards cannot carry the MLS forever.

The point is American sports fans have been spoon-fed the line for years that the reason the MLS isn't like other leagues is they are "too young." The MLS players union five years ago caved on serious concessions on issues like free agency under this line. However, recent comments by Tim Leiweke, who represents the L.A. Galaxy's ownership, made it very clear that free agency is not about to happen in MLS (from Reuters):

"Even if it means that we go a year without soccer, so be it...We went a long time without soccer in this country and we're not going to give up our belief in a system that works. We are unanimous within the owners. We will wait as long as it takes. We will never, ever agree to change the system."

The key word is "never." So arguments of "the economy is too bad" and "the league is too young" can be thrown out like the red herrings they are forever. They would have made this statement during the big economic boom after World War II. So even a compromise of keeping the current deal for say three years, and gradually put in some reasonable player exchange rights in the later years, is out of the question to them. I'm sure Commissioner Garber is going to issue that fine to Leiweke for his brash comments any moment now. (You can insert cricket sounds here...)

Did these guys ever hear of Curt Flood? Do they not know that American sports fans don't have to be die-hards to know that players in second-tier leagues are making more than some American "star" players in MLS? They know intuitively this is not a "major" soccer league in the world, and Americans do not support a developmental league for long. This is not England, who is lucky to have a hockey league. This is the United States of America. We understand that while corporations are formed to try to live forever, players get exactly one chance at a career. There's a reason a lot of Americans support leagues in other countries, and the national team, but not MLS.

Also, never changing the system also means never adapting. Ultimate Fighting Championship had to adapt out of necessity. Otherwise, the negative parts of the sport would have brought UFC down. UFC was almost dead 10 years ago, now they are the hottest growing sport in America, so I don't want to hear the MLS is "too young" for anything. Give Dana White credit, he had a company bought out for $3 million, and turned around the entire sport. I mention UFC because their revenues in just 10 years rival MLS and I'm pretty sure they're making a profit. Because they learned how to adapt, albeit from necessity, they know how to adapt for new ideas for growth and are willing to do so. That is why UFC is more relevant to American sports fans than the MLS is. Go to a sports bar that is not near a MLS city and tell me if you're more likely to see shirts supporting MLS teams, or UFC fighters? The UFC is winning casual sports fans, MLS is not.

Where is the innovation from MLS when it would actually work? They should have known trying to "Americanize" the game itself wasn't a good idea. The fact they wasted millions of dollars marketing a league in the early days with ridiculous concepts like countdown clocks and shootouts isn't the fault of the players. What the MLS could do however is be innovative in other ways, yet they refuse to make serious changes. Many soccer fans around the world are screaming for instant replay, especially after France got away with a blatant handball that led to the winning goal to their World Cup Qualification. MLS could have been the innovators and offered some sort of instant replay (something every "major" league in America and even some college sports have in some form). Heck, even "poor" rugby league has instant replay, used if there's any doubt of a try. MLS won't do it, even if it would be of help for other leagues to see what would work and what wouldn't.

In fact, why do we call the league "Major League Soccer?" In political terms, a "RINO" stands for "Republican In Name Only." This league is more likely "MINO," or "Major In Name Only." By what criteria do they call themselves "major?" They are not the top league in CONCACAF (that would be Mexico's league). They do not grant free agency like is offered to major soccer leagues around the world, and major sports leagues in America. They have no system of instant replay like every major sports league in America. Heck, having owners speak over the Commissioner unpunished happens in disorganized minor leagues, not a supposedly "major" sports league.

A serious major league would have a serious minor league system to grow the sport across the country. (No, a reserve league in the same MLS venues does not count.) Nearly every major league has some sort of minor league system. (The NFL is the only exception unless you count college football.) MLS can be blamed as much as anyone for the serious mess which is America's second-tier. If they insist on being a "closed" league (meaning not having promotion and relegation like every major soccer league in the world), they have no excuse for not having a plan with a known timeline to get a minor league team affiliated for each MLS team. That is, if the owners are about growing the sport like they claim, and not just looking to sell off their share the first chance they get.

I propose a name change. Rename the league the "EDL" or "European Developmental League" since it basically is anyway. American soccer fans are mostly stating our top player Landon Donovan is better off staying in Everton (a mid-table English Premier League club) than the L.A. Galaxy, the supposed flagship of MLS. A caller on "Fox Football Fone-In" on Fox Soccer Channel last Monday suggested rising American talent Charlie Davies should play in France rather than in America. Rename the league something else, but do NOT call yourselves "major" anything right now because it borders on fraud.

If this league wants to be taken seriously, then at least market the league as a "league of opportunity" and do something really innovative: Team bonuses for wins. Not ties. Wins. (Any draws, the money is carried over to the MLS Cup Final.) Imagine how suddenly more competitive the games are in mid-season. Every game literally matters. This would revolutionize the sport overnight. Casual American sports fans may not understand an offside trap, but they will understand that if their home team wins the players get paid more. It works. Look at NASCAR. Look at the PGA. We will support a sport where the best players get paid more. Offer up a set amount from league dues (or maybe if you got a league name sponsor a large portion of those proceeds) for this. It would make getting a league name sponsor (maybe a Google or some other big company) on board to pony up a few million bucks for this. It'd be great publicity for any company behind this idea.

Ultimately, if the players do not get some sort of free agency now, they never will and frankly should disband the union as worthless. Those few young athletes who would choose soccer over more lucrative sports will not be playing in America if they have any intelligence. Since we now know the MLS never intended free agency as part of a natural evolution of their league and can disregard the economy excuses, the players have no real choice but to strike on Monday if the owners don't change their minds and come up with some compromise. And I won't blame them. Not one bit.

There is a lot more on the line than just the future of MLS. The World Cup bids are going to be awarded in December for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup. Looking at the candidate countries, it is hard to imagine FIFA will not pick a European country three World Cups in a row, so Europe is bound to win the 2018 World Cup (England, Portugal/Spain, or Russia). It seems to me that the real contenders for 2022 are the United States and Australia. Australia has never gotten to hold the event, but they obviously can host the World Cup, they did such a good job with the Olympics, and their only real issue is conflicts with other sports which are workable. More importantly, they promised they will eventually go to a promotion and relegation system (or "open" system), leaving the United States as having the last "closed" system. That means they are committing to expanding to a second-tier system to make that possible in 12 years. We better realize from the example of the Chicago Olympic bid that just because we're the United States doesn't mean squat. If we have serious labor strife, no way will FIFA pick the United States.

MLS was born out of a promise for the United States Soccer Federation to start a professional soccer league in America to win our World Cup before. Clearly we have to show we're willing to grow and change our league to win it again. If we're going to remain a closed league, we better not have a prolonged work stoppage, and lay out a serious timeline for expanding MLS to have a serious second-tier if we're going to beat Australia. (Although I think if we added a specific timeline to where we would sell of the minor league teams 10 years afterwards and have a real promotion and relegation system, it would almost certainly put us over the top. And pro/rel would be 20 years away anyway, plenty of time to get the owners with the right mentality for it. But having a serious timeline for a second-tier minor league is an absolute minimum.)

As General Patton once said, "pressure makes diamonds." The MLS can do this if they're motivated enough. When you say you will never change the system, it means you are not flexible and not willing to grow, and your league will die of atrophy soon anyway. Players, don't give up on this one. It's the owners who are "pot-committed." Their early blunders are neither your fault nor your problem. Even if the league went under, there will be a league that replaces it that will treat the players with some basic rights. As the Klingon proverb goes, "a boy is a man when he can hold a knife." Don't let this league call itself "major" until it acts like it really is.

---

Justice runs wncsport.com, a regional sports website.

Check out the Major League Soccer Statistics



Major League Soccer Stories from March 18, 2010


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer(s), and do not necessarily reflect the thoughts or opinions of OurSports Central or its staff.


Sports Statistics from the Stats Crew
OurSports Central