Article by Matt Lichtenstadter
MLS salary structure and cap rules are a bit arcane. With so many acronyms: GAM, TAM, DP, GA, HGP and others there probably isn’t much press on, your head will spin trying to make heads and tails of it all. But there is something that is easy to see when you cut through the red tape of these acronyms: MLS spending is increasing. Teams like Atlanta, Seattle, LAFC, the Galaxy and others have been lifting everyone else up with them as they have spent, which forced other teams to try and keep up. There has been more of a have and have-not system developing in the league in recent years because of this.
However, Paul Tenorio of the Athletic reports that the league is kicking around the idea of eliminating the third DP slot, or limiting it to a $1.5 million number. This would be a stark reversal of recent trends for a still expanding league, and a bad one at that. MLS is better because of teams like Atlanta, LAFC and Toronto FC pushing the envelope because they can and wish to, not because of teams that have steadfastly refused to spend, which there are still more of than the big spenders in this league.
MLS continues to talk a big game when it comes to not only expansion but being one of the best leagues in the world by 2022, which is only four years away. Limiting spending is not a way to achieve that goal. MLS teams are tantalizingly close to seriously being on par with their neighbors to the south in Liga MX on the pitch and in spending capacity but axing one of the major avenues of investing in the roster will be a massive step backwards.
Consider how many clubs have either made big sales outward or certainly have the potential to in the coming transfer windows. The list of players that could be sold for seven or eight digittransfer fees is large. Eliminating a DP slot, or severely limiting what could be spent on it, means that most of these transfer fees would either go into the league or owner’s coffers. That’s not what the league has been touting when it says it wants to be one of the best leagues in the world.
Imagine the Vancouver Whitecaps only being able to invest a quarter of the massive transfer fee they received for Alphonso Davies on their roster. Imagine the Red Bulls not being able to invest a good chunk of the Tyler Adams transfer fee on their roster. Imagine Atlanta United being only able to invest a quarter of the gold mine they may be sitting on in Miguel Almiron and Josef Martinez transfer fees, all because one of the major avenues of using that money, either on existing or new players, is now gone.
Remember the talk of the haves and have-nots in MLS? The have-nots are starting to look desperately behind the teams in the front office, on the field and in the stands compared to the big guns, and they’re being a bit embarrassed. They would want to rein in spending simply because they don’t want to be lapped by Arthur Blank, the cadre of LAFC owners and the two biggest media companies in Canada. You can even be blunt enough to call them a relic of a previous era in MLS when no one spent because no one could. Even as the league has changed, these owners have stood firm while their clubs have suffered, and the league has left them behind.
MLS is not the league it was a decade ago, or 15 years ago. The league’s renaissance has been pushed forward by ambitious clubs with plans, investment and accountability and those that haven’t are lost in the lurch. Don Garber has to keep everyone happy, especially considering the giant expansion fees that five more ownership groups will pay to get in MLS will be lining the coffers of all of these owners, perhaps only to burn a hole in the pocket of the frugal few who might radically tighten the league’s purse strings for fear of being red faced with embarrassment as the new boys run circles around their product.
To justify this decision, MLS owners may say that it helps invest more money in the middle of the roster than at the top, but with less money in the entire system, the only thing it changes is not the middle of the Chicago Fire’s roster, but instead the whole of the clubs who can push the envelope out the furthest in terms of spending. It will mean the best of clubs are driven back closer to the pack of teams set in a world that no longer exists in MLS.
Some clubs may say that the money that would have been used on DP’s can now go into club infrastructure, like academies, etc. But the biggest clubs who spend the most are already going to spend the most on those facilities and infrastructure anyway, rendering the point moot.
MLS is already a league dominated by parity, even with spending disparities beginning to dominate the league. LA Galaxy are always big spenders, but their last two years have been disastrous. The New York Red Bulls aren’t exactly splurging on Carlos Vela, but their structure, academy and connections have allowed them to be the best team in MLS over the last five years despite that. Some of the league’s most consistent teams; Portland, Sporting Kansas City and FC Dallas are not LAFC level spenders but manage to be some of the best clubs in the league by investing smartly in some areas not necessarily on the field. The clubs that would be making this decision don’t invest anywhere, and would drag everyone down with them.
When some of these lesser clubs do try to invest, they fail because they don’t have the infrastructure necessary to make wiser investments because they don’t spend to begin with. And thus begins a defeatist cycle of not spending, then spending in a rush and making bad investments only to return to a point of not spending again because when they did, it failed. Those clubs should not dictate the future of a league that is better not because of them, but because of teams that forced them to change what they are doing to survive.
Necessity is the mother of invention, not regression. Eliminating the third DP would stunt the league’s growth completely for almost childishly stupid reasons. MLS will only grow if the league’s lesser likes are dragged out of their old ways because they are forced to, because on their own volition, it’s clear they don’t want to move forward, they only want to drag everyone else backwards so they can compete while not doing anything of note.
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and in MLS, the league is only as strong as its weakest clubs. They should not be the ones dictating the league’s future because they’re embarrassed at how the new clubs have made them look foolish. If the third DP slot is eliminated, the weakest links would break the chain of growth in a league that is constantly growing for no real reason at all.
Everyone would suffer as a result.
