I know the idea of the draft. Is that in all the big 3? Baseball basketball and ladies forward pass rugby?
All sports pretty much, including soccer (at least when they started, i have no idea how they do it now). Hockey, womens bball, etc.
I donāt think MLS has a draft, believe they use same system of club promotion and player trading that EU does.
They have a draft, Google for the win.
I know this is off topic but does NBA seriously have a wage cap? Because I always remembered seeing news of players renewing contracts on ridiculous amount and I went to googleā¦and like what, they have players on 100s of millions for 5 year contracts? And that is within the cap? I meanā¦those are ridiculous amountsā¦
I imagine that was a more complicated deal than usual too, what with the owner fleeing the country and all that.
They have a soft wage cap that is a percentage of the money generated by the league. I think itās a 50-50 split with the owners (or there about). So there are 30 teams, league makes (these numbers are way low and picked for ease of math) 30 mil, each team would have a soft cap of 1 mil. You can spend more than that, but that puts you in āluxery tax penaltyā. Luxery tax teams, for every dollar they are over the soft cap, pay a percentage (150% or something) to all the teams not over the cap. So tax teams write checks to non tax teams at end of every season. This is the easy version. There is much higher repeaters tax if you are over multiple years in a row so something like a 1 mil contract will cost you 5 mil total after the tax. And when you are over the cap- you can resign your own players and continue to go up in salary- but you canāt sign anyone in free agency except for something they call the āmid level exceptionā that is a dollar amount based on the cap #. This year is roughly 10 mil per team, which would give you one decent player or a bunch of crappy ones if you need to fill out roster. See the LA lakers- they have 3 guys on huge contracts and a then a bunch of cheap bad players. This is only scratching the surface, itās more difficult and detailed than Iāve laid out but you get the idea.
They are on huge contracts because the league generates huge amounts of money (its incredibly popular), and the game is 5 vs. 5, with total of 15 players per team, so $ is split between a much smaller pool of players than any other sport. One great player is more important in basketball than one great player in football - 1/5 th of team instead of 1/11th - and you need a at least a couple to win title- so good players get PAID.
And contracts are going to spike again in a couple years- tv deal is up for renewal and itās going to be massive- so that slice of pie for players is going to jump with it, as will the contracts. Some average players are going to routinely get 20 to 30 mil a year, and the good ones will easily clear 50, if you think itās eye watering now.
Weāre potentially at a real ātrousers of timeā moment here. Letās say there are two potential owners out there. One is a richer version of FSG and one is essentially the Dubai Royal Family. One will run us as a business and the other will do anything to beat City to the title. United are the other team for the other owner.
In this situation, which owner do you want? We can have our morals and principles and watch the Manchester clubs disappear over the horizon. Or hold our collected noses and let the success (sports) wash over us.
Tricky.
For me, itās not tricky at all: itās a big NO towards all corrupt state owners, whatever their means are. If we can stay with fsg, or get a similarly responsible owner as they have been, weāll be good.
I agree with this. Our model isnāt broken, it just needs some minor tweaking.
Not even close to being tricky, a richer or more willing to spend FSG everyday of the week.
A lot and I mean a lot of us will stop following altogether if itās a sports washing vehicle. The thought of having to do that, to go through with something of that enormity , to lose something that youāve completely emotionally invested in for the majority of your life in my case 40 years now cannot be overstated. Itās hard to even think about tbh.
For me anyway itās definitely not a case of winning at all costs.
The main tweak is that FFP is enforced and the hydrocarbon cunts arenāt able to dope.
Ok, so now Man U are also up for sale, isnāt that going to make it harder for FSG to find suitors?
Ineos will buy United. He is a fan and tried to buy Chelsea.
I hope so, heās a Tory fuckwit.
Depends on what requirements FSG have for selling and the requirements of the buyer. Utd will need investment into the ground etc, might need their back office building up. Weāre pretty much a turn key operation in that respect.
I think now the Training Ground and Stadium renovations are paid off FSG plus is basically just FSG.
Other than that I agree. If itās oil-doping, sports washers, Iām out.
That was my thought as well. Despite seeming a bit more professional under Ten Hag, they are still a shitshow.
The biggest problem is that the stadium is falling apart and infested with rats, and needs ripping down and building again. I donāt think Carrington is that far behind. Their wage bill is out of control and need addressing.
Itās not half as bad now Ronaldo has fucked off.
But the other points for me is why Iām not sure theyād get what they want, maybe thatās the level of investment needed not the actual buying priceā¦ Like Chelsea went for Ā£2.5bil but with a comittment to spend another Ā£1bil + on infrastructure.
We are as oven ready a deal as you could get, yes the squad needs investment but Iād argue at least half of the funds for that will be already in the club ready to spend.
I fail to understand why fans think itās plausible for a business owner to have to dip into their own pockets multiple times in a season to subsidize the operations of their club?
What kind of world do we live in where this is an expectation by the fans?
Shouldnāt it be a requirement that the club operate within the revenues of itās success and sponsorship revenues?