Giovanni Dos Santos has officially signed a contract with the Los Angeles Galaxy and will be joining Major League Soccer. Dos Santos, who is only 25 and just coming into his prime, could easily be a huge counter to MLS’ “retirement league” moniker. There is little doubt that he will be nothing less than a boon to the league. The signing came after the new Targeted Allocation Money rule was implemented to give each MLS team an additional $100,000 in allocation money for the next five seasons. This rule change made it possible for the Galaxy to sign Dos Santos and avoid the three Designated Player restriction. With Steven Gerrard, Robbie Keane, and Omar Gonzalez all tagged as DPs, something had to change and the allocation money made it possible. In this case, it was Gonzalez, who saw his deal restructed, with the new allocation money going towards his contract.
Potential controversy
The rule change and the signing are not without their critics though. The timing of the rule change in relation to the signing gives the appearance of collusion and the rule being made for the signing. This will be denied by the league and many coaches and owners, but it’s hard to overlook the correlation between the two. In 2008, when David Beckham signed, there was controversy about MLS making rules to benefit the large market clubs. The results speak for themselves and no one can deny the results, but to continue to change rules midseason that directly benefit a team that has been shown favor before sheds a bad light on the integrity of the game. The Targeted Allocation Money rule was likely planned and implemented for the good of the league.
According to some, including this writer, the parity of league is the biggest draw for fans overseas. While other leagues are often determined by who can spend the most money, Major League Soccer is designed to give all teams a fair chance at winning each year. The Designated Player rule hindered that, but things eventually evened out. The rule was set with a three player cap to preserve the parity. The larger markets were inevitably the first to reach the cap while some teams have struggled to get two such players. The growing desire of marquee international players to come to America has brought an influx of Designated Players as well. As the large market teams max out on DPs, those players that are determined to play in MLS will have to look at different options. This would open up the market for smaller market clubs to make big splash signings. That’s how parity works when rules change. The large markets get a boost, then everyone catches up. But in this instance, MLS has changed the rules once again before the small markets have had a chance to catch up.
What should have been/be done differently?
Several things need to change in the future if MLS Commissioner Don Garber and MLS want to prevent having the integrity of the league in question. First off, rule changes like this need to be announced early and implemented during the offseason with enough time for all teams to plan and react. Had this rule been announced this summer, but not go into effect until the end of the 2015 season, there would be no appearance of bias or favoritism. Secondly, these types of rule changes have to stop occurring right before a big signing that is only possible because of the rule change. It is inevitable that two events that are linked and occur so closely together will be linked in the minds of fans. Finally, new rules need to directly benefit all teams equally and be documented clearly. If MLS is going to make a new rule change or violate standing rules, they need to apply the change to all teams. The Targeted Allocation Money has been applied equally to all teams, but in 2014, fans were shown the prime example of subjective rules. The signings of both Clint Dempsey (Seattle Sounders) and Michael Bradley (Toronto FC) were only possible with funds from the league. Neither team could afford the full transfer fee, so the league stepped in because they were too valuable to miss out on. But when the Philadelphia Union requested the same aid for Maurice Edu, it was denied. What makes this so frustrating is the fact that transfer fees are paid by the league at the league’s discretion and there are no clearly documented procedures for such cases.
The appearance that the league is playing favorites and picking and choosing where players are going has not subsided and the new Targeted Allocation Money rule has reinforced the belief many fans hold. While the benefit to the league will be seen by all, the loss of parity and potential championships for small market clubs leaves a bad taste in the mouths of fans. At what point in the MLS life cycle does the integrity of the game mean more than growing the league? How long will fans of small market clubs feel like they are battling both the limitations of their market and the league’s rules that appear to be designed to help the larger market teams?