With a strike almost impossible to avoid and both parties entrenched in their stance, who actually has a leg to stand on? While the MLS Players Union is asking for free agency, the league is talking about how much the owners are against it and that it would be bad for the league. But no one is bothering to tell fans why it would be bad and just how much it would hurt.
In the wake of Lampardgate, the Jones lottery, and the apparent placements of Bradley and Dempsey, the way fans view MLS has taken a nose dive. The rules apparently don't apply to Commissioner Garber and the league office anymore. Even rules set up by the league are broken when money comes on the line.
As the deadline nears, fans are anticipating a strike and the outlook for the players looks grim.
So what are the sides asking for?
As far as the players are concerned, free agency is about each player getting to choose their future and who they play for. Once their contract is up, why should a player be forced to stay where they were previously? No one wants to ride the bench when another club will give the opportunity to start. No player wants to stay with a losing team or management that refuses to work with him when another club has more to offer.
MLS is claiming that free agency will somehow turn the tables on the salary debate and start the spiral out of control. Free agency gives players the bargaining chip they need to demand raises in salaries which could sink the league.
What is being overlooked?
The MLSPU has repeatedly said they are aware of the potential salary issues and they are not asking for massive pay raises. The single entity structure can also be used to prevent salary uncontrolled salary hikes.
NASL, although smaller than MLS, is currently operating fairly efficiently with free agency and no salary cap. If MLS is the model for how soccer is run in America, why is NASL able to stay afloat without all the protections?
The Designated Player rule is a form of free agency for select players and is beneficial to the league. Teams are able to pay a single player almost the entire amount of the salary cap for the season with very few ill effects.
The Likely Outcome of Free Agency
Free agency has little to do with the salary cap, but everything to do with player movements. If MLS were to go fully into free agency and not change the salary cap at all, the biggest impact it would have is to the parity of the league. Small market clubs that don't have much to offer, clubs that are poorly managed, and clubs that don't scout or develop talent well will suffer. Players moving away freely will negatively impact certain clubs. Certain cities are less desirable to live in and clubs in those cities may have a harder time attracting players.
Although Chivas is gone, it is the prime example of a club that would have suffered from free agency. The team was the joke of MLS and it's incredible that players stayed at all. With full free agency, MLS may see several teams struggle as players leave. This can snowball into revenue losses as the product on the field deteriorates and fans stop coming to games. The worst possible outcome is another team closing up shop.
A team folding for these reasons may not be a bad thing though. Yes it is a setback, but one that is easily overcome. There are nearly a dozen cities competing to be one of the final four MLS cities planned by 2020. That leaves eight potential cities ready to fill the void if a team can't survive free agency.
The Worst Possible Scenario
If MLS is right and free agency turns into players asking for ever increasing pay raises, MLS will shortly be in for hard times and the possibly the permanent shut down of the league. There is no denying the logic they are using is sound, but exaggerated.
What's the Verdict?
The league is using scare tactics on the fans about a failing league and the potential disaster of money problems that are unfounded. The new TV deal with Fox and ESPN along with a deal with Sky Sports means an influx of cash. The season average for attendance is rising every year as the league grows. New teams are being founded with more season ticket members than the average single game attendance from the recent past.
MLS claiming that free agency will somehow sink the league into the depths of financial despair is the worst case scenario imaginable. It is an outcome that will only happen if the players forget the past and push for too much too quickly. It's also a scenario the players are aware of attempting to avoid.
When the league looks only at the money, their argument falls apart. The players aren't concerned about how much they make as much as they are about where they make it. If MLS was arguing about the parity of the league and the owners wanting to protect their legitimate shot at winning titles each and every year, then they would have a strong case. No one wants to play a game that is slanted against them from the start, but MLS hasn't made that claim.
NASL is making free agency work and the Designated Player rule is a model of it working in MLS. So why can't full free agency work in MLS as well?
Don Garber and MLS are once again refusing to loosen the reigns and are instead pushing their ideals for the league. How long are fans going to let the league dictate what soccer is in America? How long are they going to close the door on new and old ideas because they don't fit the mold of the current MLS leadership?