04/23/24
August 26, 2003
Russian Smertin joins Roman revolution.: Chelski at it again eh? £3.5 million for the 28 year old mid-fielder from Bordeaux isn't bad. Oh, they also picked up this Crespo fella at £18 million from Inter Milan.
WC, I don't think you want to be meeting any Russian gangsters, not if you value your kneecaps! These signings make nine (9!) top-level new players for Chelski since last season, so where are they all going to play? They payed something like GBP30M in the last two weeks for two top strikers alone (Mutu, Crespo) so what about Jimmy Floyd? Should Liverpool make a last minute play to sign a new striker?
posted by billsaysthis at 05:18 PM on August 26, 2003
If you stripped Chelski of his "connections" would he equate to Mark Cuban?
Do euro football clubs have salary caps, or any spending restrictions?
Bear with me, I'm going somewhere with this...
posted by lilnemo at 05:25 PM on August 26, 2003
In a word, no, lilnemo. They can spend as much as they have. If this team can pull together, I don't see how anyone can beat them. But I can't see how they can pull together with so many quality players not playing.
posted by sauril at 05:57 PM on August 26, 2003
Which brings me to the point of my prior comment. If MLS teams have to wait for MLS (the league) to shell out the cash for "Good" (read European) players, how can we possibly expect them to be as good as Euro Clubs?
It's an unreasonable expectation. Of course footballers won't play for MLS, they want to go where the cash is!
Just for fun lets say each MLS team could sign its own players with an outside governing authority such as FIFA giving the go ahead in contract matters instead of a conglomerate as the MLS has. Would the MLS be as good as a Euro-Club if say, the L.A. Galaxy could sign van Nistelrooy, Ronaldo, or Beckham so long as FIFA and their respective teams okayed the buyout (A la the NBA)?
This is the essential crutch of the MLS. It's hard to take seriously here in the States (and apparently abroad) without quality players. But they can't afford quality players without the wide exposure (and money) that quality players bring. Allowing the league to mandate rosters is ridiculous. I may be off base here. Knowledgeable parties feel free to step in and elaborate. posted by lilnemo at 06:13 PM on August 26, 2003
While I agree with what you're saying, there's the great big counter-argument that used to be called the NASL.
posted by sauril at 06:16 PM on August 26, 2003
Excellent point sauril. Here's a link for those interested in more info on NASL.
posted by lilnemo at 06:42 PM on August 26, 2003
So you started a thread about the EPL to talk about the MLS? ;-) I think I'm right in saying that 3rd Division English clubs are now working under a salary-capping regime (based on % of turnover I think). Maybe the 2nd Division too. It makes a lot of sense, but it'll never be applied to the Premiership though it might make the 1st Division.
posted by squealy at 07:32 PM on August 26, 2003
NASL is right. Plus, I actually think the MLS execs are onto something with their whole cautious financial plan and in the long run they will have large salary budgets. This is America, after all, and we do everything bigger, eventually.
posted by billsaysthis at 09:41 PM on August 26, 2003
Salary capping is in force in the third division, but that will be extended soon into the second and first divisions. Players wages should not exceed 60% of turnover, and total wages (including coach, manager, trainer) shouldn't exceed 75%. See here for more details.
posted by BigCalm at 02:55 AM on August 27, 2003
The NASL managed to get a lot of good European players because at the time, European football was not very good at generating income. Wages for even the top players were quite manageable. Even if MLS got rid of SEM, it's clubs would not be able to afford the sort of talent that the NASL was able to attract.
posted by salmacis at 04:37 AM on August 27, 2003
I RTFA that BigCalm linked, but I'm still not sure what "turnover" is. I'm guessing it means gross revenues. If so, wouldn't that figure vary from team to team, making the salary cap different for each team? Is there a players union which would oppose any sort of salary cap (a la the recent MLB situation)?
posted by mbd1 at 09:37 AM on August 27, 2003
Yes, the salary cap varies from team to team mbd1. What's important is to keep them from going out of business if at all possible. There is a Players' Union but I think they're being realistic about things for a change.
posted by squealy at 10:23 AM on August 27, 2003
Well, looks like Chelsea has just turned around and loaned Smertin to Portsmouth for the rest of the season. Apparently, Ranieri wants him to get "more first-team experience." A 28-yr-old captain of the Russian international team who just came from a top French team ... needs more first-team experience. Or let's just say: keep an expensive player playing first-team football without paying his wages. Wow. Portsmouth is looking stronger by the week.
posted by worldcup2002 at 12:39 PM on August 27, 2003
btw, Chelsea has only spent 100mil pounds of a 300mil-pound transfer fund. Chelsea is on course to take over from Man U as the most hated team in the EPL.
posted by worldcup2002 at 05:57 PM on August 27, 2003
I just realized ... erm .. isn't this a nice way to launder money?
posted by worldcup2002 at 05:58 PM on August 27, 2003
Launder money, ha ha ha. You're catching on quick, give mini-WC a kiss. Today Chelsea announced they'll sign Makalele too, maybe Liverpool can get him on load to replace Murphy?
posted by billsaysthis at 07:51 PM on August 27, 2003
Whoa, is Murphy really that bad, or are you catching Fooker fever? Hahahaha.
posted by worldcup2002 at 09:52 PM on August 27, 2003
Are you saying Makalele is not an improvement on Murphy?
posted by billsaysthis at 11:41 PM on August 27, 2003
Personally I'd argue he's not as creative, but if you want a defensive midfielder he'd be perfect. But that isn't what you want is it?
posted by squealy at 08:57 AM on August 28, 2003
Having said that Murphy is doing crap in my FFL team, and if I didn't have to pay four points for every extra transfer he'd be out on his ear. I don't blame him though, I blame Owen. ;-)
posted by squealy at 08:59 AM on August 28, 2003
Murphy is a joke... I cannot understand why he is not regarded as only an average player... He would NEVER make the starting lineup on any of the other title hopefuls...
posted by StarFucker at 09:40 AM on August 28, 2003
Yes, Roman's rung up a summer shopping bill of 100 million pounds. I would love to meet this man.