Youth Clubs FIle Class Action Lawsuit vs MLS Players Union

I need info...do youth teams in other countries get a piece of transfer fees?

quote:

---

Why are they suing Dempsey, Bradley, and Yedlin?

---

I don't think they are suing those players. They are just saying those are the players they deserve compensation for training.

I could be wrong, but that was just the idea I got the first time I read it.

Sounds good, I'm for it. More money for the academies is a good thing and these players and clubs can afford it.

I think they have to name the players because they received part of the money from the transfers. You have to name the parties that got paid to try to reach the monies you are claiming that are owed. Unfortunate but necessary for the suit to work.

Head of the players union Bob Foose spouting gloom and doom:

quote:

---

"The effect of those payments is to take money and opportunity away from our players. If you were to implement this system, it would make it even harder for those players to get jobs overseas because it would add a tax on [their transfer]. And when you add a tax, it primarily -- if not totally -- comes out of the players' pockets. "In the case of lower-profile players, it makes it not worth it to sign an American player at all because for guys that aren't on the high end, you're talking about fees that are 300-400 percent of what the players would get paid or their transfer fee. "It's terrible for players no matter how you do it."

---

He goes further, bringing heat:

quote:

---

"These clubs have shown their true colors," he said. "What's going on is a fundamental attempt to build the youth sports industry, not to serve the youth or help develop our players. This is about developing more jobs for those people working in youth sports, and higher pay."

"The rules for training compensation and solidarity payments were intended to compensate small professional clubs when big professional clubs took their players and signed their players," said Foose. "That's what the system is for. It's not for what this is, which is an attempt to double-dip by nonprofit U.S. youth clubs that don't even have professional teams. "In other words, no one is taking these players away from these clubs. The clubs don't have anywhere for them to play, nor have they made them an offer. The club gets fully compensated for all the training they provide, but they see this as a way to grab some quick money."

"It's only about money. There isn't anything else involved," he said. "The rules are clear and have always been clear, both in Europe and as they are applied in the U.S. "[The youth clubs] now want to change the way those rules are implemented and want to do that for only one reason, because they want money. And they want that money off the backs of players."

---

From what I'm reading....this is just a shakedown tax.

In Europe, the youth training are subsidized by the respective clubs and they get a cut of the transfer as player moves up.

In America, youth/parents pay to play. We pay for the training, the tournament fees, travel, coaches, etc. There are very few clubs that completely subsidize youth academies. As we pay to play, clubs are not the ones taking the financial risks, but the parents. Clint Dempsey's youth story is quite something. If it wasn't for his sister dying, we would have never seen him play because they couldn't afford for him to play with his sister aiming for a pro tennis career. LINK

Dallas Texans sure as hell didn't subsidize Dempsey and I'm failing to understand why they deserve a cut of his transfers. This goes against the grain of what the transfer system is all about.

Not to mention, these clubs involved in this case are becoming second fiddle in their respective markets. Chicago Sockers is no longer top dog in Chicago with Fire taking over. Ditto for Texans to FC Dallas and Crossfire to Sounders. This is purely a money play to remain relevant in their respective markets.

Here is my concern:

I like the idea of doing away with pay to play. Like sch said, that needs to go and it's gone in other countries because youth clubs survive on money from big clubs.

But I have a bad feeling that these youth clubs here, if they win this suit and start getting payments, are STILL going to have pay to play. They are just going to use the money from clubs as an additional revenue stream. That would suck and we would still be stuck with pay to play.