This wonderfully constructed flowchart by Sports Illustrated's
Alexander Abnos of MLS player acquisition rules has been quite the talk of the soccer social media-sphere the last couple of days.
Stu Holden brought up a great question... why can't MLS teams just sign the players they want?
Well, it is a pretty simple answer really. Because MLS teams are not separate free market entities when it comes to players contracts. All player contracts are owned by the league.
These two objectives—free market competition and single-entity—are
basically diametrically opposed. Single-entity status allows MLS to fix
salaries league-wide by centralizing all contracts. When an MLS player
signs a deal, it's between the league and the player, rather than
between the player and a team. This means there is no real intra-league
competition between teams in signing players, since all MLS teams are
actually shared arms of a larger body. You sign your original contract
with MLS, and then you play where MLS tells you, or else leave the
league. That has been the extent of player movement.
Billy Haisley has done a
great job explaining why true Free Agency and open player acquisition rules can not exist within the MLS Single Entity Structure.
Why would the league want to do that? is the next logical question.
Pretty simple answer here too... to keep domestic player salaries as low as possible for profit maximization purposes. If there is no competition for players between the teams then the player has no leverage when it comes time to negotiate a new contract.
Is this legal?
Many say that this single entity structure exists on shaky ground. Including Elizabeth Cotignola (Follow her on Twitter
HERE) in her great pre-MLS CBA ratification article.
Evidence that the entities have engaged in any sort of
competition indicates that there is more than a single entity involved,
capable of an agreement or conspiracy for the purposes of Section 1. If
the defendants can be deemed to be competitors, their action cannot be
guided by a common conscience, and the single-entity exemption is
inapplicable.
In modern-day MLS, the league’s investor-operators do indeed have
divergent interests. Their teams are separate entities of independent
economic value. This was true even when Fraser was decided, of
course, but the disparities are noticeably more prevalent now than they
were then. This difference in value is the result of many different
factors – marketing, broadcast rights, corporate sponsors, stadia, the
ever-important results, and so on and so forth – but few would argue that the Designated Player is not paramount among these.
READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE HERE
You can also read more about the MLS Single Entity structure in this great primer
HERE.
We also still have not had clarification on whether
MLS's single entity structure violates the new FIFA 3rd Party Ownership rules.
So this is where we as a soccer nation stand today. The US Soccer Federation allowing MLS owners to conspire with each other to keep domestic players salaries as low as possible and likely breaking anti-trust laws while doing so.
Speak up and speak out for change at the USSF level ... use the
#ProRelForUSA hashtag on social media and
let others know you are ready for change!
