Garber hints at change to 'Canadians as internationals' rule.

[Kurt-MTL]

Just to clarify, I wasn't really talking about transfer fees in my post. I just meant that I hope to see the CPL act as a "conveyor-belt" of talent and that loosening up MLS domestic rules would conceivably open up some potential landing spots for our guys.

For instance, if a young guy never really caught on with an MLS club/academy and doesn't want to cross an ocean on the off-chance he can toil away on some bench in 2nd division Finland, then MLS becomes a realistic option if he can impress at a CPL club and win a trial, because now he'll be considered a domestic (again IF it happens). 

I agree with TRM that developing talent is a difficult and lengthy process but if Sigma can do it then at least we know that it can be done here in Canada..  

[Lou]

There are no changes in the new MLS rules.

Domestic Players

• U.S.-based Clubs: For U.S. Clubs, a domestic player is either a U.S. Citizen, a permanent resident (Green Card holder) or the holder of certain other special status (e.g., has been granted refugee or asylum status).  There is no limit as to the number of U.S. Domestic Players on a U.S. Club’s Roster.

 

• Canada-based Clubs: For Canadian Clubs, a domestic player is either a Canadian Citizen or the holder of certain other special status (e.g., has been granted refugee or asylum status) (“Canadian Domestic Player”) or a U.S. Domestic Player.  There is no limit as to the number of Canadian Domestic Players on a Canadian club’s roster.
  • There is no limit as to the number of U.S. Domestic Players or Canadian Domestic Players on a Canadian club’s roster; provided, however, that a Canadian Club is required to have a minimum of three (3) Canadian Domestic Players on its roster at all times.

 

International Players

• U.S.-based Clubs: Any Player who does not qualify as a U.S. Domestic Player in a U.S. Club shall be considered an International Player, and must occupy an international slot on a U.S. Club’s Roster.

 

• Canada-based Clubs: Any Player who does not qualify as a U.S. Domestic Player or a Canadian Domestic Player shall be considered an International Player, and must occupy an international slot on a Canadian Club’s Roster.

http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/roster-rules-and-regulations

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

4 minutes ago, Lou said:

There are no changes in the new MLS rules.
http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/roster-rules-and-regulations

New season, same old Don Garbage rules.

[Gian-Luca]

Wasn't the change being mooted/rumoured intended to be introduced in time for the 2017 season anyway?

 

[Macksam]

Even if a rule change takes place, it will do very little in dealing with the risk of a Canadian league forming. If MLS is truly concerned about such a league, which they probably should be, awarding franchises in Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa would pretty much kill the CPL from ever forming. To me, that idea isn't even far fetched. This league will obviously go to 32+ teams so you might as well Expand into it to cover Canada and stop any rival league from forming. If I was apart of the BOG or BOD (whatever they have) that's what I would push for.

 I wonder how everyone on the pro CPL front (which I'm apart of) would feel about that. Would you you be ok with heavy MLS expansion in place of the CPL forming? For me, we'd need at least 8 franchises for it to be ok in my books. Even 6 isn't good enough for me.

[MtlMario]

Even @ 8 franchises (which I don't think MLS will ever agree to) I'm too hyped up now about a CPL that I would be happy with it.

[baulderdash77]

Another Canadian MLS team is something that really would give me mixed feelings.  It would kill any chance of a CanPL league forming, bUT it would also be a top end team.

I guess at this point I'd rather have a CanPL than another MLS team.  The league will broaden the talent funnel and expand the pool more than another MLS team.

 

[Complete Homer]

Reason to believe Canadians "developed in a Canadian program for X number of years" will count as domestics this year or next.

[TRM]

MLS has a history of letting D2 teams grow the game in their market then selling a franchise to them and robbing D2 of a market. That won't be changing any time soon.

I don't see any city under 1 million getting a MLS team here or in the states so that limits us to 3 more of which only Ottawa is in position to be viewed as viable by MLS. There are lots of cities in the USA that have 2+ million and strong D2 teams (attendance wise).

[Alex D]

All MLS would have to do to kill CPL would be to poach Ottawa. 

I would be okay with 6 MLS clubs plus expanded USL presence, but that wont happen.

3 MLS + 6-8 CPL > 4 MLS 

[TRM]

7 hours ago, Alex D said:

All MLS would have to do to kill CPL would be to poach Ottawa. 

I would be okay with 6 MLS clubs plus expanded USL presence, but that wont happen.

3 MLS + 6-8 CPL > 4 MLS 

Or 3 MLS + 3-4 NASL > what we have now 

[Alex D]

/\ true. But the NASL isn't the most stable league itself. CPL is worth a whirl.

 To the original topic, even a waiver for one Canadian to count as domestic per American team would be a step in the right direction. 

[Jason]

On 3/15/2016 at 10:40 AM, Alex D said:

All MLS would have to do to kill CPL would be to poach Ottawa. 

I would be okay with 6 MLS clubs plus expanded USL presence, but that wont happen.

3 MLS + 6-8 CPL > 4 MLS 

I don't think adding another Canadian MLS would kill the CPL.  And with the franchise fees that MLS is getting and the demand they have right now, there are not going to go into Ottawa when Sacramento and other places are falling all over themselves to get in.    If the only reason to go would be to kill the CPL, that seems not worth it.  The CPL may never get off the ground or survive, and even in a best case scenario wouldn't be remotely competitive with MLS for over a decade.

Canada won't get another MLS club until two things happen: 1) Very big ownership group shows interest and has a solid stadium plan and 2) It is a clearly superior market compared to American markets that are clamoring for a team.  If I was Garber I would take San Antonio, Sacramento, Phoenix, Baltimore, Detroit for example way before I'd ever take Calgary or Ottawa or Edmonton.  Just the realities of an American centric league.  We can't forget that MLS is an American league and Canadian teams are just there because it suits MLS and the USSF.  If the MLS really cared about Canada, they would've done something about the international stuff by now, even if they were getting pressure from the USSF as has been rumoured.

Jason

 

 

[-Hammer-]

On 3/5/2016 at 10:39 AM, Macksam said:

Even if a rule change takes place, it will do very little in dealing with the risk of a Canadian league forming. If MLS is truly concerned about such a league, which they probably should be, awarding franchises in Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa would pretty much kill the CPL from ever forming. To me, that idea isn't even far fetched. This league will obviously go to 32+ teams so you might as well Expand into it to cover Canada and stop any rival league from forming. If I was apart of the BOG or BOD (whatever they have) that's what I would push for.

 I wonder how everyone on the pro CPL front (which I'm apart of) would feel about that. Would you you be ok with heavy MLS expansion in place of the CPL forming? For me, we'd need at least 8 franchises for it to be ok in my books. Even 6 isn't good enough for me.

I would honestly be disappointed, because I would know it's still a US league, trying to develop US talent to our detriment.

Unless mandatory Canadians were implemented (and we are talking minimum 40 starting, across the league) I would have troubles believing this is a truly, bi-national league. That said, I'd probably give lukewarm support to a Hamilton team if it did happen with Bob Young's blessing. However, if they didn't run a tight and fair priced ship, I'd be out quick. The key here (and the reason the CPL is coming about) is it has to having high level, meaningful and constantly improving development for Canadian players so our national team improves.

Now that all said, this isn't going to happen. MLS is not going to pursue Canadian expansion to kill the league because

1) It's US Ratings suicide as it is for hockey. Viewers in the US don't care to watch Edmonton vs Montreal, much like Rogers is suffering with their NHL deal right now with no Canadian teams in the play-offs. 

2) The Canadian ratings are very much unrealized (despite ample promotion) and no where near worth aggressive expansion. If we are to believe this article  http://tinyurl.com/z4an5c5  and take it with a shaker of salt, it's still far too much risk for little reward.

3) It is doubtful your can find enough rich Canadian owners willing to front the absurdly high expansion fees MLS touts. This means you'd have to lower the expansion cost which would intensely aggravate the existing teams. Especially the newer ones.

4) You have plenty of more profitable, more lucrative, more densely populated markets in the US that you want to stop the NASL from grabbing, and they are a much larger, credible threat to your best markets the the CPL is. No offence, but New York, Los Angeles and most cities in MLS offer a much bigger chance to make a lot more dough then even the big three Canadian markets. 

5) The majority of suitable stadiums are either owned or currently in control of CFL interests who (if not courted as owners) aren't likely to grant access for this league and are even less likely to see their work towards making the CPL happen be cast to the winds unless it's VERY much made worth their while.

6) The worth of the Canadian Dollar is currently incredibly uncertain and low right now making it very risky for an owner to invest in a league where I pay my players in US dollars, as opposed to a purely Canadian one.

7) We have to face the simple fact that Ottawa (who would be the next best market) is still drawing only 5,400 on average and Edmonton isn't even approaching profitability in the NASL. Montreal and Vancouver got the nod because they were drawing twice that before joining MLS. It's far riskier out the gate for an owner to invest in MLS then it would be for a CPL team, where you are limiting potential losses over several years.

8) The USSF requirement of 75% US teams means at most MLS can add is another 2 teams currently or risk de-sanctioning.

What I think you are more likely to see is them try to cut a deal with Rogers or Bell to keep the CPL off the air if it becomes successful, and give exclusive rights to their product for cheap to one or the other. They'll also likely run smear (like Rogers has for ages with the CFL) towards the other network. I think you'll also start seeing MLS try to appease the CSA more on the grass-roots and USL level, to have the CSA declare the CPL division 2 or put it more on the back burner and give it grief, which with Montagliani at the helm, probably won't work that well, but might work with his eventual successor.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

Go back ten or fifteen years and you will find that people on here were absolutely adamant that MLS would never accept a Canadian team, then it was repeated as an accepted fact that a second one would never be allowed, then it was no way will number three ever get in....If someone is willing to write the cheque and there is a viable stadium deal in a metropolitan area of well over 1 million people like Ottawa, Edmonton or Calgary then it could happen as it in fact almost did previously in Ottawa's case. The Lynx drew flies at D2 level, but that wasn't an issue on getting an MLS team into Toronto, so arguments around crowd sizes in Ottawa and Edmonton ignore past history on how MLS handles matters. MLS is going to expand out to about 32 teams over time, so it could still easily handle an extra Canadian team. Alberta is the obvious niche remaining to be filled in a Candian context. As for the CPL, what are the reputed CFL investors still waiting for at this point, if a 2026 World Cup bid wasn't/isn't involved? I seriously doubt it is even on the radar as a concern at MLS HQ.

 

 

[1996]

Even with the current three MLS teams and the two NASL teams  and no CPL I think we will still be fine eventually all five of our pro academies will start developing players who will not only go on to play in the MLS and NASL but in Europe too. Moreover, I believe that in the future you will see another two Canadian MLS teams come in and the MLS changing the rules to have more Canadians play, the CPL would help but even without one the future will still be bright for Canadian players. Remember there are many countries with smaller populations than Vancouver that produce some world class players and who have good national teams. We have three cities in the MLS with a combined population of what close to 10 million if you combine the surrounding areas that's bigger than a lot of big time soccer ranked counties to produce players.  We went for many years without an MLS type league in any of our three biggest cities, the last league that was in away on the same level of MLS was the old NASL which folded in 1984. Today we have academies in our three MLS teams, we are getting decent media coverage at all three teams, good crowds at all three teams this is only going to help in the long run in inspire kids to take up the game and staying in the game longer to one day play on a big stage maybe first here and then in Europe. The CPL would help but even if it does not happen the future will still be bright for Canadian soccer.

[mikey_s_]

Interesting quote from Joey Saputo today:

Olivier Brett‏@Olivier_Brett

J. Saputo sur le statu des joueurs canadiens en #MLS: "C'est plus une question de permis de travail aux États-Unis." #IMFC @RDSca

[Trillium]

21 hours ago, mikey_s_ said:

Interesting quote from Joey Saputo today:

Olivier Brett‏@Olivier_Brett

 

J. Saputo sur le statu des joueurs canadiens en #MLS: "C'est plus une question de permis de travail aux États-Unis." #IMFC @RDSca

 

How to Canadians on NHL teams get work permits to travel to USA and play hockey as members of a Canadian team ? The MLS bullshit on this issue is laughable and the Players Union is not stepping up nor is the CSA and Canadian MLS franchise operators.

The variance in applications is a contravention of NAFTA, and if TFC, Impact and Vancouver filed an action they would win under NAFTA ( so in fact would the CSA ).

 

NAFTA's investment chapter (Chapter 11) contains a variety of new rights and protections for investors and investments in NAFTA countries. Specifically, Article 1110 of NAFTA guarantees foreign investors compensation from the NAFTA governments for any direct government expropriation (i.e., nationalization) or any other action that is "tantamount to" an "indirect expropriation." In addition, Article 1102 provides for "national treatment," which means that governments must accord to companies of other NAFTA countries no less favorable treatment than they give to their own companies. Article 1105 contains a "minimum standard of treatment" provision, which includes vague prose about fair and equitable treatment in accordance with international law.

[Obinna]

Excuse my ignorance, but if Canadians were given equal access as per NAFTA ruling, would Mexicans also be entitled to this?

[pint]

I don't buy the explanation one bit.

If USL doesn't have the same restrictions then why would MLS? This is simply USSF and MLS being protectionist towards American players.

[Ruffian]

Before 2011 Canadian teams were supposed to have more Canadians on their roster. Now they only require 3 Canadians according to this CBC article:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/mls-maintains-canadian-quota-1.1070902

In 2010 it says they needed 8 Canadians on their roster and now they need 3. This was a huge change. It may have been needed at the time because MLS had not been in Canada long enough to produce enough quality players to fill their rosters. Things must have changed by now. Toronto have 9, Montreal have 7 and Vancouver have 9 Canadians. They could go back to the original 8 Canadians on Canadian team rosters and this would not be a hardship for the Canadian MLS teams now. Maybe CSA has discussed this and this is why we are seeing Canadian internationals being pursued by MLS and NASL teams.

[TRM]

I would rather the CSA wait until after the MLS makes right by us. I the CSA does their move first then the MLS can always say "they've taken care of it" and leave it on the back burner forever with just lip service being paid to fairness.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

23 hours ago, Ruffian said:

...Maybe CSA has discussed this and this is why we are seeing Canadian internationals being pursued by MLS and NASL teams.

Think the homegrown player rule is the most probable explanation for what incentivized the boost in domestic roster content:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homegrown_Player_Rule_(Major_League_Soccer)

The unpalatable truth is that MLS entry from 2007 onwards revealed that elite player development by the CSA and provincial associations was not getting the job done compared to what was happening in the United States at that point. The CSA and provincial associations were probably less than thrilled at subsequently having their role in that regard usurped by the three MLS academy teams, so the way these issues get framed by the CSA still tends to be more adverserial than it really needs to be. What we need to see is the three MLS youth academies each consistently churning out a couple of MLS quality players per season (this is normal targeted rate of return with youth academies and clubs know that most of the kids involved are effectively acting as jersey fillers for the few blue chip prospects). Progress has been made, but I don't think things are at that level yet. Hopefully the USL franchises will provide the missing link on that.

[rob.notenboom]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

The CSA and provincial associations were probably less than thrilled at subsequently having their role in that regard usurped by the three MLS academy teams, so the way these issues get framed by the CSA still tends to be more adverserial than it really needs to be.

The pro academies are the cornerstone of the EXCEL program and they base almost all of their U17/U20 camps/etc in some way around the pro academies. So rather than being less than thrilled and adversarial, they seem to be using the pro academies and pushing players toward them. 

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

It was the elite players (and to a significant extent their parents) that decided to move en masse to the three pro academies and away from national championship chasing youth clubs and the provincial team programs. National team coaches select rosters that reflect that reality, but that is not the same as it being something that was either instigated or welcomed by the CSA.