Photo by Winslow Towson/USA Today Sports
By SBI SOCCER
In light of the recent complaints regarding the absence of training compensation in American soccer, the U.S. Senate has joined the conversation and forced U.S. Soccer into answering some tough questions.
U.S. Soccer answered the questions posed, offering insight into why MLS avoided paying compensation to youth teams for the transfer of their former players.
Youth clubs Crossfire Premier, Dallas Texans SC and Sockers FC Chicago officially filed complaints, per Sports Illustrated, with the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber on the topic of training compensation, claiming a combined $480,500 on transfers involving U.S. Men’s National Team regulars DeAndre Yedlin, Clint Dempsey and Michael Bradley.
Complaining clubs claim Major League Soccer took the entire transfer fee for each player, including the five percent portion meant to be distributed to youth clubs for their role in player development.
U.S. senator Maria Cantwell (D., Washington) submitted four questions to U.S. Soccer, with one of those being a call to explain why MLS supposedly took all solidarity fees and did not award any to the youth clubs — which should happen per FIFA regulations.
U.S. Soccer drew from the precedent set by Fraser vs. MLS, a 1996 court case that validated MLS’ single entity structure while protecting the league from antitrust issues, but the federation also appealed to the Bosman case.
The 1995 European case essentially states that former clubs cannot collect transfer fees on players that were not currently contracted by a team.
“In addition, U.S. Soccer concluded, with the advice of outside counsel, that enforcing the (Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players) with respect to the training compensation and solidarity payment mechanisms could be found to violate the antitrust laws of the United States given their potential impact on the mobility of players,” U.S. Soccer’s response said.
“Given recent European court decisions regarding player mobility—and in light of the growth of the sport of soccer in the United States, including the emergence since 2007 of the Development Academy, whose clubs often directly fund the training of elite players—that analysis is currently being brought up-to-date. But, U.S. Soccer has chosen not to enforce those aspects of the RSTP system that are of questionable legal validity in this country and which might expose U.S. Soccer to increased legal risk.”
U.S. Soccer also claims that it did not want to risk potentially unlawful practice.
“Over the past several years, several intermediate courts in Europe have determined that some methods of training compensation and solidarity payment mechanisms are unlawful and violate the (European Union) Treaty,” the response says. “In other words, the decisions by the intermediate European courts are consistent with the conclusion U.S. Soccer reached regarding the potential for antitrust risk.”
U.S. Soccer states that MLS’ transfer dealings are conducted under the notion that no transfer payments would be made, as teams “would have demanded higher transfer fees,” if there was an understanding that money would be passed on.
The federation also addressed Sen. Cantwell’s inquiry into why MLS repeatedly refused to pay the youth clubs. USSF said the issue is more of a U.S. policy more so than one tied to a specific league because NASL and USL transfers are handled in the same manner.
U.S. Soccer has called a meeting with many of the U.S.’s top youth clubs and other interested parties on Oct. 16 in Chicago, while the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber has two months from filing to make a ruling.
So why would giving financial incentive for youth soccer clubs to develop talent be a bad thing?
MLS owners have enough to spend ridiculous amounts of Michael Bradley and Jozy Altidore and they can’t bare to lose 5% on transfer fees?
i agree with zips, gary page and open cup fan. i hope the you clubs can get their five percent or whatever. i’m sure they deserve it. in more general way, i think that with all of this exciting growth of mls in this country, if at least a small amount of the money doesn’t trickle down to the youth clubs, you have to think there’s something wrong with the system, yes?
What typical hypocrisy by mls bots. If all the youth clubs said no more pay-to-play starting tomorrow would USSF /mls approve of compensating youth clubs?
.
No they would NOT, they would still withhold money from everyone in this country that isn’t mls.
.
#bushleaguemls
#corruptussf
Has the Technical Director shared his feelings on this? Shouldn’t this be a topic that he is on top of?
It seems he is on top of it, since everyone certainly seems to be very “uncomfortable” right now.
yes he is. He’s advising players to become unattached to any club at around 17 yrs and 6 mos and then shop themselves around in Europe, mostly to his German buddies, so a European club can sign them for free. Thus avoiding all these nasty American lawsuits and insuring soccer in the US is weakened.
For me, this is just another example of why USSF needs to grow up and stop being MLS’ poodle. MLS is more than happy to pursue its narrow immediate interests even at the expense of soccer’s development in the US or even of the development of the soccer business in the US (not the same thing). It is long since time for USSG to assert the authority it has as the national federation to take control and force MLS into line.
Unless there is an official court ruling on the regulation systems you are talking apples and oranges
So MLS loves the European model when it comes to pocketing money but not so much when it comes to pro/rel, salary, and scheduling?
Beggars can’t be choosers.
Two things plebs. One, we’re miserly as f*ck. Two, these clubs are not MLS academies and are now competitors.
*US Senator (representing WA State)
Props to Maria Cantwell. An excellent State Senator who consistently works for constituents on wonky policy issues like this – if they have merit.
I hope the clubs get their money and then I hope the parents sue the clubs for the tens of thousands they spent on their kids development.
Something like that, only have the youth clubs return some of that money voluntarily to avoid the litigation expenses followed by the clubs reducing charges in the future would be the most equitable, it seems to me. But, of course, that would make too much sense.
I have mixed feeling about this situation. On the one hand, if a club already collected the training fees from the player’s parents under our pay-to-play system, it makes no sense to play the training compensation to the club. And if the training compensation is paid, shouldn’t the previously paid training fees be refunded to the player’s family? The compensation rules makes sense only if kids are getting free or virtually free training. This is not the situation for most clubs in this country, where the pay-to-play system is the norm. On the other hand, the USSF’s reliance on decisions of European courts that found violations of the European treaty is misplaced. The United States is not a signatory of the European treaty and neither US nor the USSF is no bound by it. Moreover, it is a little disingenuous to rely on European laws, when European clubs routinely share transfer fees with the clubs that developed those players. The USSF’s argument that the MSL negotiated the transfer fee with the notion that MLS would not share the proceeds is silly. MSL’s negotiating strategy has no bearing of substantive rights, if any, of other parties. Similarly, I don’t understand how transmitting a part of the transfer fee from a European club to a youth club in the United States violates antitrust laws.
Anti-trust is a tough area to get a grasp on, but I think part of this hinges upon the free movement of labor, which is theoretically limited by amateur contracts. Of course, they aren’t really labor until they are paid. And MLS doesn’t want to pay itself training fees for players developed by other clubs within the league since that may look like a violation of its single entity status.
But, there’s also the double-dealing aspect of clubs that charge players and then receive training compensation & solidarity payments.
I’m pretty convinced that, even if they tell us what’s in sealed documents, it’s gonna be a tough one to understand.
I can understand MLS’s reluctance to pay MLS franchises, which could jeopardize the single entity appearance. However, the clubs that filed the complaints (Crossfire Premier, Dallas Texans SC and Sockers FC Chicago) and seek compensation are not part of the MLS. That’s why the antitrust argument does not make sense, unless there is some nuance that is not readily apparent.
Just from a quick rfead, it sounds like MLS wants it several different ways. They claim immunity from anti-trust laws, then say they can’t do some things that might violate anti-trust laws. Then they say they are following European court decisions, which have no legal authority in the US. Then when asked if they couldn’t find something that would work within US laws while satisfying FIFA, they say it would not be feasible, but do they give any specific reasons why? Although I’m not an attorney, this sounds like a lot of double talk in which they use laws’/decisions when they are consistent with what they want, then ignore them when they aren’t.
I don’t think there’s anything contradictory in saying that MLS as an organization enjoys an antitrust exemption but still must not violate antitrust laws. Also, while it’s true European cases aren’t binding in the US, courts will frequently consider foreign law especially if there’s no US law on point. I haven’t followed this issue closely though.
I am surprised to hear there is not a US version of this; especially an NBA-AAU equivalent for example.
unfortunately for the youth clubs i just don’t see much to lean on here unless they were able to negotiate the transfer of contract to the pro team who then profited on the next transfer.
…I never understood why MLS claimed Yedlin as a Homegrown player..
I can see why the Youth Clubs are not happy..
I’m curious if the youth clubs paid his way though. That’s the main hangup I think. Most of US Soccer is pay to play, so the costs of development are being paid by the players and their families, not the youth clubs. As that changes, and this could help change that, to a model where youth clubs fund the development, then it makes more sense for aportion of the transfer fees to be passed on. But if youth clubs are charging players/families, and collecting portions of the transfer fees, that seems silly. Their profit model is the upfront fees not the pass on transfer fees – doesn’t seem fair to get both.
This!
These youth clubs nurture these players from a young age and expose them to elite organized youth soccer.
Their able to participate in tournaments involving world renowned youth clubs and national teams which gives these kids the exposure to those scouts..
The Dallas Texans have developed plenty of talent beyond Clint Dempsey like Omar Gonzalez, Brek Shea and Lee Nguyen and in my opinion deserve a measly compensation of five percent for doing so.
If the player was really really good but couldn’t afford the fees and travel I can assure the youth club did not charge them to play. Landon Donovan has stated that a lot of his expenses were just taken care of, he doesn’t know how, because his mother couldn’t afford it all. I know the club that developed Darlington Nagbe did not charge him club fees plus he was helped out in a lot of other ways by coaches, etc. You can knock pay to play all you want, but it’s really middle class and rich kids paying more so a few poor really good players can train in a good program. I say a few because even if a club is willing to let a kid play for free, the travel demands of top youth soccer is just too much for some poor families. The number of youth clubs we have that are proven when it comes to developing talented technical players are just too few and far between in a country of our size that the travel to have top competition can be excessive. Just getting to practice, even if it’s free, may involve too much time and travel for a poor kid with one parent are two working poor parents. Clint Dempsey said he drove 3 hrs each way to train with his youth club in Dallas. There are clubs in this country like Crossfire, Sockers FC, Magic and many more that have a proven track record over decades of developing good talent but they are at a severe disadvantage because they are not part of a professional club. This really should be addressed. MLS and US Soccer should be providing more for them.