Mark-Anthony Kaye

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

54 minutes ago, canuckgbp said:

Is he a free agent? 

I thought he wasn't. I thought that the Colorado deal involved several years. Does someone have a link to more details?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/sources-colorado-rapids-acquire-mark-anthony-kaye-from-lafc-in-blockbuster-trade

[Big_M]

hes the type of player who would want the highest possible salary at this point above anything else...27 and in usl until 23 then two years of being under 200k and last two seasons 225-250...if he has one shot at a big payday its now

[youllneverwalkalone]

[canuckgbp]

28 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

I thought he wasn't. I thought that the Colorado deal involved several years. Does someone have a link to more details?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/sources-colorado-rapids-acquire-mark-anthony-kaye-from-lafc-in-blockbuster-trade

Trasnfermarkt has his contract ending Dec 2021. List club option 1 year so we shall see I guess. Thought I read somewhere he was a FA but not sure now. 

[Obinna]

36 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

I thought he wasn't. I thought that the Colorado deal involved several years. Does someone have a link to more details?

https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/sources-colorado-rapids-acquire-mark-anthony-kaye-from-lafc-in-blockbuster-trade

From the article:

"Kaye signed a contract extension in 2018, which included a club option for 2022". 

So he's entering an option year, which is ambiguous (if not contentious) if you recall the Larin-Besiktas transfer.

Edited November 26, 2021 by Obinna

[Obinna]

7 minutes ago, canuckgbp said:

Trasnfermarkt has his contract ending Dec 2021. List club option 1 year so we shall see I guess. Thought I read somewhere he was a FA but not sure now. 

Might speak to the ambiguity around option years. Someone more informed than me can speak on it, but from what I recall of the Larin transfer, MLS was arguing that option years are automatic, whereas Besiktas contended that was against FIFA rules which don't recognize that sort of automatic renewal (or something like that). As I said, it's been a while so I may be misremembering, but either way I think there's some dispute over how overseas clubs interpret MLS's use of options. 

[baulderdash77]

I think one of Kaye or Osorio will be in Europe next year and the other will be at TFC.

BB has preferred a 4-3-3 countering setup and that requires a DM and 2 solid ranging CM’s.  

Both Kaye and Orosio are ideal at those CM roles and I see Bradley wanting to have a CMNT leader in his first choice lineup.  

It remains to be seen but I see that happening.

[Obinna]

39 minutes ago, Big_M said:

hes the type of player who would want the highest possible salary at this point above anything else...27 and in usl until 23 then two years of being under 200k and last two seasons 225-250...if he has one shot at a big payday its now

Which may give MLS an advantage, since he is a known commodity with a strong reputation and clubs will pay for his services, you'd think.

In Europe he'd obviously be less of a known quantity, but there are many, many potential clubs he could go to, in theory.

In Belgium alone, you have 5 clubs who could probably meet his salary demands. Then, you have another 3 or 4 in Holland (excluding Ajax because that's likely unrealistic). In England there's half a division in the Championship who could afford to pay him what he'd want. 

I think the ball is kind of in his court and it depends what he wants.

The option year thing might be a barrier though. If you are Colorado just to break even you'd want 2 million at minimum, so that you can recoup the 1 million spent on GAM (the league gets 50% of the outgoing transfer, right?). Realistically, it's probably more like 3 million (I'm sure they'd want to turn a profit), so who in Europe pays that money for a 27 year old midfielder without European experience, in addition to his wages? I guess that's the question. Or maybe Kaye takes a page out of Larin's book and pushes on the legitimacy of the options thing (assuming that it is still questionable, and I am under the impression it is).

Edited November 26, 2021 by Obinna

[Big_M]

club has the choice the exercise the option or not...deadline is nov 30 or the day after elimination so nov 30 for colorado...obviously if youre colorado you exercise and then negotiate on a long term contract and maybe even restructure to give the player a higher salary in 2022 and keep him happy...now colorado is an aging team with 10+ players aged 29+ so a bunch of them might retire or at least be done with the team and cole bassett likely heading to europe so they will need kaye around not only for his play but also leadership...there might be A LOT of turnover on this team...lets see how fraser handles it and if kaye stays hopefully it doesnt blow up in a bad way

Edited November 27, 2021 by Big_M

[Watchmen]

3 minutes ago, Big_M said:

club has the choice the exercise the option or not...deadline is nov 30 or the day after elimination so tomorrow for colorado...obviously if youre colorado you exercise and then negotiate on a long term contract and maybe even restructure to give the player a higher salary in 2022 and keep him happy...now colorado is an aging team with 10+ players aged 29+ so a bunch of them might retire or at least be done with the team and cole bassett likely heading to europe so they will need kaye around not only for his play but also leadership...there might be A LOT of turnover on this team...lets see how fraser handles it and if kaye stays hopefully it doesnt blow up in a bad way

You pick up the option and then sit down with him to see what he wants to do. If he's determined to move to Europe, work with him to find a club that will pay a nominal fee.

[MM3/MM2/MM]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

(assuming that it is still questionable, and I am under the impression it is).

From what I recall the MLS option has been challenged twice, Larin and Camilo, in the end Orlando (2 million) and Vancouver  (?) ended up receiving transfer fees, basically their hands were forced, so gives credence to the legality of the option years. .

Many European teams also have club options in their contracts, not sure where the myth comes from that it is only MLS that uses club options.

Edited November 26, 2021 by MM3/MM2/MM

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, MM3/MM2/MM said:

From what I recall the MLS option has been challenged twice, Larin and Camilo, in the end Orlando (2 million) and Vancouver  (?) ended up receiving transfer fees, basically their hands were forced, so gives credence to the legality of the option years. .

Many European teams also have club options in their contracts, not sure where the myth comes from that it is only MLS that uses club options.

The issue IIRC is that player and club agree to exercise the option. In MLS the decision is made by the club alone (as @Big_M reminded us). I believe that's why there's a problem with them according to FIFA. 

You're right though, Larin's transfer (as well as Camilo's) set the precedent moving forward for MLS.

Besiktas wanted Larin on a free, but ended up paying them small money to make the problem go away, while MLS accepted a meager transfer that set a future precedent. Win-win.  

Edited November 26, 2021 by Obinna

[SthMelbRed]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

The issue IIRC is that player and club agree to exercise the option. In MLS the decision is made by the club alone (as @Big_M reminded us). I believe that's why there's a problem with them according to FIFA. 

You're right though, Larin's transfer (as well as Camilo's) set the precedent moving forward for MLS.

Besiktas wanted Larin on a free, but ended up paying them small money to make the problem go away, while MLS accepted a meager transfer that set a future precedent. Win-win.  

There are plenty of player contracts around the world that contain club options and others that have options that are based on pre-set appearance targets. With option years, there's usually also an in-built salary bump when they're exercised. I believe that where MLS got into trouble was their past standard practice of signing young players to one- or two-year contracts with multiple years of club options with no significant pay rises included. MLS used these contracts in conjunction with their anti-competitive 'single-entity' bullshit to keep domestic players on miniscule pay so that they could overpay foreign names. So far, nobody has taken the decisive step to actually challenge the validity of the option clauses at CIS, so they still remain, to some extent.

[Unnamed Trialist]

6 hours ago, Obinna said:

It would be easier for him on a free, if he has his heart set on Europe and the MLS deal he covets doesn't materialize (which it should, I agree). I think it all depends on how badly he wants Europe and if he can find the right situation when it comes to club, league, money, etc. 

Because MLS transfers are so awry, being a free agent is a huge plus if you are looking to go to Europe.

Of course, he has no real reputation abroad, and his games for Canada are competetent without being standout. He is a role player for us, and maybe for most teams. But if you are locked into contracts in MLS it is hard to extricate yourself. And surely, if he were to go to any decent league, he'd be making more money, so the incentive is there.

[Obinna]

8 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

There are plenty of player contracts around the world that contain club options and others that have options that are based on pre-set appearance targets. With option years, there's usually also an in-built salary bump when they're exercised. I believe that where MLS got into trouble was their past standard practice of signing young players to one- or two-year contracts with multiple years of club options with no significant pay rises included. MLS used these contracts in conjunction with their anti-competitive 'single-entity' bullshit to keep domestic players on miniscule pay so that they could overpay foreign names. So far, nobody has taken the decisive step to actually challenge the validity of the option clauses at CIS, so they still remain, to some extent.

Yeah, that's the downside of central planning. Sure, you can raise the standard in a short period of time, but it can be at the cost of the individuals players who built it from the ground up.

Even without "overpaying for foreign names", they'd still be utilizing that single-entity bullshit. 

[Watchmen]

9 hours ago, SthMelbRed said:

So far, nobody has taken the decisive step to actually challenge the validity of the option clauses at CIS, so they still remain, to some extent.

Wasn't there a case last year where a player was going to court with MLS over the option year/transfer,  as they had a significant free agent deal blocked? I remember it happening but can't seem to find it now.

[narduch]

15 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

Wasn't there a case last year where a player was going to court with MLS over the option year/transfer,  as they had a significant free agent deal blocked? I remember it happening but can't seem to find it now.

Kaku at NYRB?

He left for Saudi Arabia.

According to wiki they got nothing in return 

[Big_M]

Kaku issue wasnt the option year, it was that the player claimed that the option year was not exercised by the club before Dec 31 2020 while Red Bulls said they did exercise it before that date...its not clear whether Red Bulls have taken it to the FIFA dispute resolution chamber

[Watchmen]

2 hours ago, narduch said:

Kaku at NYRB?

He left for Saudi Arabia.

According to wiki they got nothing in return 

 

41 minutes ago, Big_M said:

Kaku issue wasnt the option year, it was that the player claimed that the option year was not exercised by the club before Dec 31 2020 while Red Bulls said they did exercise it before that date...its not clear whether Red Bulls have taken it to the FIFA dispute resolution chamber

That's right, it was Kaku. And the dispute centered around the timing of the option being exercised and not directly with the option itself.  Looks like its still tied up in the US court system.

[CanadaFan123]

Just now, Watchmen said:

 

That's right, it was Kaku. And the dispute centered around the timing of the option being exercised and not directly with the option itself.  Looks like its still tied up in the US court system.

It was dropped in September by MLS/NYRB. 

[Big_M]

They let go of the lawsuit against the advisor of the player in september...not clear if they went or will go to fifa

[Obinna]

Just now, CanadaFan123 said:

It was dropped in September by MLS/NYRB. 

And to circle back, it would never have gone to court in the first place if options were agreed upon by player and club.

And that's the problem with how MLS structures "options". It's unilateral and the players don't have a say....

So Kaye may be handcuffed when/if he's looking for European clubs this winter. I have no doubt he can sign on a free somewhere across the pond, but if clubs have to pay a transfer fee it gets complicated. 

[Obinna]

I wonder if Kaye is better off seeing out his option year at Colorado, then heading to the World Cup with Canada (should we get there) as a free agent. On one hand, I hate all things unattached FC, but the World Cup basically starts at the end of the MLS season, so it's not as if he'll really be out of season and at risk of being dropped.

He could garner attention at the World Cup that could lead to a pretty nice European move.

It would be a significant gamble, and without signing an extension he'd be leaving some nice MLS money on the table, but I don't know if he gets to Europe without taking that risk. I guess though if he has a really good World Cup some team would pay a transfer fee for him, regardless of his age (he'd be 28 years old).

The safe play would be to sign a new contract (for significantly more money) with Colorado and let the chips fall where they may as far as Europe is concerned.

[SthMelbRed]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

I wonder if Kaye is better off seeing out his option year at Colorado, then heading to the World Cup with Canada (should we get there) as a free agent. On one hand, I hate all things unattached FC, but the World Cup basically starts at the end of the MLS season, so it's not as if he'll really be out of season and at risk of being dropped.

He could garner attention at the World Cup that could lead to a pretty nice European move.

It would be a significant gamble, and without signing an extension he'd be leaving some nice MLS money on the table, but I don't know if he gets to Europe without taking that risk. I guess though if he has a really good World Cup some team would pay a transfer fee for him, regardless of his age (he'd be 28 years old).

The safe play would be to sign a new contract (for significantly more money) with Colorado and let the chips fall where they may as far as Europe is concerned.

Players have historically been reticent about going into big international tournaments while out of contract. It's a massive risk that they suffer a serious injury without the safety net of a guaranteed income stream.

[Obinna]

9 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

Players have historically been reticent about going into big international tournaments while out of contract. It's a massive risk that they suffer a serious injury without the safety net of a guaranteed income stream.

Good point.