The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[Watchmen]

 

[red card]

18 hours ago, Bison44 said:

So did we ever figure out what the actual sponsorship money brought in by CSB was? 2.8 or 8.2?  Because that is prob the one important piece of info to come out.  Either CSA is making out like bandits (taking in 3-4mil) and CSB is only been able to raise 2.8 on that investment, or it looks like CSB made a nice profit of the deal on a mens WC year with lots of Buzz (which is exactly what you would expect/like to hear).  Still murky on how exactly the deal got approved..that should be cut and dried, they need to explain that.

 

If you switch the video settings to French and listen around 11:49, Berube says based on the information we have, it is about $8.2 million in 2022, maybe incorrect, that Cochrane can maybe confirm. In English, translator incorrectly says $2.8 million. Berube wasn't directly answering the question, so the NDP MP cut him off and no one came back to it. 

Credit to Ansem while it looks all the media missed it.

https://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2?fk=12073634

 

I was also looking through the few Canada Soccer reports available online. In the 2001 report, they did actually breakdown the sponsor/media monies that were being generated by IMG (called Soccer Canada Properties) that appears to be from April 2001 to March 2002.  But it can be extrapolated into other years as some deals went into 2006.

Total was $1.263 million across 15 companies with half paying less than 100k. Adidas paid the most in goods/monies combined but P&G paid the most in monies. Whirlpool was third largest as they came on board to support the first FIFA women's u19 that was held in Edmonton. CTV (owned Sportsnet till it was forced to divest) paid a paltry 5k/match from 1999-2006. Air Canada provided 3% rebate + maybe some free tickets?

 

 

 

[Bigandy]

15 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

As in stalling for months to negotiate with the players, treat them with a lack of respect, cut programs and refusing to engage them on the transparency/CSB issue. 

I think you aren't being fair in your assessment and think that the CSA is 100% evil and the players are 100% innocent. That bias is dangerous and now public opinion is forcing CSA to give into the demands of the national team players, even though they seem to be looking out for themselves before the program as a whole. 

1. Stalling for months to negotiate - CSA have a proposed bargaining agreement ready to be signed. The Womens team is the ones currently stalling? Perhaps the CSA had a slow process and delayed negotiations for various reasons, however the Womens team are also stalling. This is a 2 way street. The women will also get paid retroactively so at the end of the day, its more important to get the agreement done properly compared to quickly. 

2. Lack of respect - Bontis made a very disrespectful comment and is now gone. However, the rest of CSA is fighting hard to get the women paid amazingly when you compare our programs budget. Its honestly a bit insulting to the CSA that the womens team will be getting paid disproportionally well (compared to other nations with larger budgets) and they womens team is crucifying CSA. Have CSA had full respect to CWNT or CMNT - no. Have CWNT or CMNT been 100% respectful - also no. 

3. Cut programs - The CSA cut youth, mens, and womens funding. This isnt an attempt to break the women. It's an attempt to avoid bankruptcy. Youth programs have had waaaay bigger cuts than the women having to fly economy. 

4. Transparency - What transparency is required? CSA has public financial statements that will show pre and post CSB revenues. CSA cannot provide CSB financial details as they don't have access to CSB's financials.
What about the CSB deal was not transparent? Heres the news release: https://canadasoccer.com/news/canadian-soccer-business-csb-a-new-sports-enterprise-now-represents-premier-soccer-properties-in-canada/ . 
Edit- I am talking about the transperency of the deal itself. Not how the deal was signed. However, even if the deal was signed illegally, that is not a slight at the CWNT. Its just poor governance. 

Im just trying to point out that the CSA is not all bad and to be perfectly honest, I don't think this mess should be a gender equality issue. The issue is not gender based at all, but rather a lack of funds to support the needs of our program. 

 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Bigandy

[RS]

12 minutes ago, red card said:

Air Canada provided 3% rebate

What a great deal!

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

16 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

... 4. Transparency - What transparency is required? ...

You are sounding like a paid shill at this point. Would have been good to hear about stuff like the 10 year unilateral renewal in 2027 and the $3 million fixed fee (with only small incremental increases) even in the World Cup hosting year back in 2018. In the final analysis the CSA didn't have to do either of these things and the CSA Board would likely not have ratified if these details had been publicly available because there would almost certainly have been a huge backlash against it. Earl Cochrane is quoted as saying:

https://northerntribune.ca/canada-soccer-executives-heritage-committee/

... Cochrane mentioned the deal with CSB isn’t bad, but needs to be modernized and says they are working on it.

“There are two elements of the existing deal that we would like to see adjusted and those are the ability for us to reap the rewards of the success of our national teams… and the second is to address in some way, shape, or form the term.” ...

Edited March 22, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[El Hombre]

26 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I think you aren't being fair in your assessment and think that the CSA is 100% evil and the players are 100% innocent.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity/incompetence.

[Ansem]

 

According to Joshua, the February 2019 item was voted on by the CSA

 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Ansem

[Mattd97]

those last two posts work very well together

[Bigandy]

25 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

You are sounding like a paid shill at this point. Would have been good to hear about stuff like the 10 year unilateral renewal in 2027 and the $3 million fixed fee (with only small incremental increases) even in the World Cup hosting year back in 2018. In the final analysis the CSA didn't have to do either of these things and the CSA Board would likely not have ratified if these details had been publicly available because there would almost certainly have been a huge backlash against it. Earl Cochrane is quoted as saying:

https://northerntribune.ca/canada-soccer-executives-heritage-committee/

... Cochrane mentioned the deal with CSB isn’t bad, but needs to be modernized and says they are working on it.

“There are two elements of the existing deal that we would like to see adjusted and those are the ability for us to reap the rewards of the success of our national teams… and the second is to address in some way, shape, or form the term.” ...

I think you are missing the sentiment of my posts. The point I am making is that the CSA is not 100% evil and certainly not 100% against the women. Your points on the CSB deal are valid but do not point to the CSA being evil or that its a gender issue (not saying thats what you are implying, but I am just reaffirming my stance). 

However, the CSB deal was a good deal in 2018, is likely a good deal from 2018-2021, and is not a horrible deal in 2022. 
Lets look at the numbers of 2022. 8.2 million in revenue generated by the CSB. If CSA were in charge of marketing, they would certainly make less in revenue as they are not marketing specialists. (The USSF made 51m in sponsorship revenue with SUM in 2019 and then made 39mil on their own in 2021. This is roughly about a 25% decrease. Keep in mind the USSF has been able to leverage SUM's work of 10+ years and they still dropped 25%). 

So the 8.2 million in revenue would certainly be at least 25% lower without the CSB deal. So that is $6,150,000 (At best in a WC year, with massive amounts of hype). From that $6,150,000 you have to deduct all the costs the CSA would incur to acquire that. I think that a yearly payroll would be at least 1million, not including rent, equipment, travel costs etc.  So now its at arguably $5,150,000. So without the CSB deal, we would be ahead by $2million dollars, at best, in what should be our best revenue generating year. All other years should be lower. 

With the CSB deal, we are getting over a million more than we were getting prior to the CSB deal, and we are getting a pro league in canada which then means we get a world cup. 

I am not saying its a phenomenal deal, but its also not a horrible one. 

I'd recommend looking at the numbers before calling me a paid shill. If you really support our CWNT and CMNT teams, then its more important to be factual than crucify CSA because thats easy to do and everyone hates the people in powerful positions. 

 

[Ansem]

Don't mind OTP - he just hates anything related to CPL

[Shway]

I was going to say "@Bigandy you're getting sucked in". 

He suffers from PTSD from the failed CSL back in the late 80's.
Word is, he lost his house betting on the 1987 final when the Steelers lost to Kickers 1-2. He blames it on Lettieri not having his lucky charmed parrot named Ozzie in the net due to the CSL not allowing it "calling it an equipment infranction". If he had won, his fortunes would've have changed....and now he keeps that picture as a reminder that in his eyes "anything all-Canadian should die" all in the name of Ozzie the stuffed animal parrot.

True story, correct me if I'm wrong @Ozzie_the_parrot

[Bigandy]

1 minute ago, Shway said:

I was going to say "@Bigandy you're getting sucked in". 

He suffers from PTSD from the failed CSL back in the late 80's.
Word is, he lost his house betting on the 1987 final when the Steelers lost to Kickers 1-2. He blames it on Lettieri not having his lucky charmed parrot named Ozzie in the net due to the CSL not allowing it "calling it an equipment infranction". If he had won, his fortunes would've have changed....and now he keeps that picture as a reminder that in his eyes "anything all-Canadian should die" all in the name of Ozzie the stuffed animal parrot.

True story, correct me if I'm wrong @Ozzie_the_parrot

Hahaha I'm a sucker for being baited. 

Can't someone on this thread bring up bagged milk or tell me who shouldve taken the PK against Belguim. 

[dyslexic nam]

For me the true nugget was saying that someone else was coming across like a paid shill.  You can’t make this stuff up.  

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

...and this will no doubt go on and on with nobody addressing the point that even Earl Cochrane conceded that the two issues I highlighted with the deal that were definitely not public knowledge back in 2018 very much need to be modified in 2023 from the CSA's standpoint now that they are out in the open. The problem is that CSB are well within their rights to tell the CSA that the terms are fixed where those two aspects of the deal are concerned by the original contract and they'll need to wait until 2037.

[Unnamed Trialist]

7 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

For me the true nugget was saying that someone else was coming across like a paid shill.  You can’t make this stuff up.  

We all have our agendas, sometimes even to the point of being pains in the butt. But few are so consistently bent in one direction and willing to miscontrue so consistently at even the most inappropriate moments, to the point where you'd have to wonder if they are being paid. 

Mind you, I never thought he or anyone else here is paid to post the way they do, though there are a few cases of professional or personal interest swaying posting.

[Shway]

1 minute ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Mind you, I never thought he or anyone else here is paid to post the way they do, though there are a few cases of professional or personal interest swaying posting.

and who might you think this is....😅

[Unnamed Trialist]

Just now, Shway said:

and who might you think this is....😅

For the cases of players' family, we forgive it and even concede that their posting is very fair and judicious. We are blessed to have parents of NT players posting with such good sense here.

Then there are people with ties to clubs, and even working with clubs.

There are a few people making money off soccer, as journalists, coaches, other.

I was not talking about those posting in biased ways because they are fans or this or that player or club.

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, Bigandy said:

I think you aren't being fair in your assessment and think that the CSA is 100% evil and the players are 100% innocent. That bias is dangerous and now public opinion is forcing CSA to give into the demands of the national team players, even though they seem to be looking out for themselves before the program as a whole. 

1. Stalling for months to negotiate - CSA have a proposed bargaining agreement ready to be signed. The Womens team is the ones currently stalling? Perhaps the CSA had a slow process and delayed negotiations for various reasons, however the Womens team are also stalling. This is a 2 way street. The women will also get paid retroactively so at the end of the day, its more important to get the agreement done properly compared to quickly. 

2. Lack of respect - Bontis made a very disrespectful comment and is now gone. However, the rest of CSA is fighting hard to get the women paid amazingly when you compare our programs budget. Its honestly a bit insulting to the CSA that the womens team will be getting paid disproportionally well (compared to other nations with larger budgets) and they womens team is crucifying CSA. Have CSA had full respect to CWNT or CMNT - no. Have CWNT or CMNT been 100% respectful - also no. 

3. Cut programs - The CSA cut youth, mens, and womens funding. This isnt an attempt to break the women. It's an attempt to avoid bankruptcy. Youth programs have had waaaay bigger cuts than the women having to fly economy. 

4. Transparency - What transparency is required? CSA has public financial statements that will show pre and post CSB revenues. CSA cannot provide CSB financial details as they don't have access to CSB's financials.
What about the CSB deal was not transparent? Heres the news release: https://canadasoccer.com/news/canadian-soccer-business-csb-a-new-sports-enterprise-now-represents-premier-soccer-properties-in-canada/ . 
Edit- I am talking about the transperency of the deal itself. Not how the deal was signed. However, even if the deal was signed illegally, that is not a slight at the CWNT. Its just poor governance. 

Im just trying to point out that the CSA is not all bad and to be perfectly honest, I don't think this mess should be a gender equality issue. The issue is not gender based at all, but rather a lack of funds to support the needs of our program. 

 

Having some understanding of how clubs and provincial/national programs run and are administered, it's no surprise I am pro player.  I will always back the players against the bodies they represent. They are the most important asset the associations have.  

[Bigandy]

13 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Having some understanding of how clubs and provincial/national programs run and are administered, it's no surprise I am pro player.  I will always back the players against the bodies they represent. They are the most important asset the associations have.  

I am pro player/team too!!!! However, when i say pro player, i want whats best for the squad. Sometimes that means cutting budgets in one area for another. 

What that means to me is to make accurate assessments based on the numbers and not create or increase a divide between organization and players for no reason. Isn't it in the best interest of the players to have a harmonious relationship with CSA, or at least to not put any more fuel on the fire on topics that don't need it?

[Bison44]

42 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

I think you are missing the sentiment of my posts. The point I am making is that the CSA is not 100% evil and certainly not 100% against the women. Your points on the CSB deal are valid but do not point to the CSA being evil or that its a gender issue (not saying thats what you are implying, but I am just reaffirming my stance). 

He isnt missing it, he is ignoring it.  If you dont jump on this bandwagon and vilify CPL, ooppss CSA for making a deal that helps form a CPL, completely...he wont be happy.  Nobody thinks the CSA is well run, however these hearings have not produced any sort of smoking gun, dead body in the trunk type moment to show they were anything but short sighted (renewal term length) and poor manager/communicaters.  All of which we knew and I doubt it will be much better if we shitcan everyone on that vol CSA board. As for your point, I didnt hear anything about how the women got shafted or how there was any bias against them in terms on funding over the years.  There is a major shortfall now as there prob have been over the years but you can point to the players strike helping cause this one.  It sure seems like the national teams put pressure on the CSA and got major concessions which will make Canada probably the most equal and treat our women better than most.   This protracted continued tearing each other apart in public is hurting everyone and setting soccer back when we should be firing on all cylenders.  

[h coach]

1 hour ago, Bigandy said:

I think you aren't being fair in your assessment and think that the CSA is 100% evil and the players are 100% innocent. That bias is dangerous and now public opinion is forcing CSA to give into the demands of the national team players, even though they seem to be looking out for themselves before the program as a whole. 

1. Stalling for months to negotiate - CSA have a proposed bargaining agreement ready to be signed. The Womens team is the ones currently stalling? Perhaps the CSA had a slow process and delayed negotiations for various reasons, however the Womens team are also stalling. This is a 2 way street. The women will also get paid retroactively so at the end of the day, its more important to get the agreement done properly compared to quickly. 

2. Lack of respect - Bontis made a very disrespectful comment and is now gone. However, the rest of CSA is fighting hard to get the women paid amazingly when you compare our programs budget. Its honestly a bit insulting to the CSA that the womens team will be getting paid disproportionally well (compared to other nations with larger budgets) and they womens team is crucifying CSA. Have CSA had full respect to CWNT or CMNT - no. Have CWNT or CMNT been 100% respectful - also no. 

3. Cut programs - The CSA cut youth, mens, and womens funding. This isnt an attempt to break the women. It's an attempt to avoid bankruptcy. Youth programs have had waaaay bigger cuts than the women having to fly economy. 

4. Transparency - What transparency is required? CSA has public financial statements that will show pre and post CSB revenues. CSA cannot provide CSB financial details as they don't have access to CSB's financials.
What about the CSB deal was not transparent? Heres the news release: https://canadasoccer.com/news/canadian-soccer-business-csb-a-new-sports-enterprise-now-represents-premier-soccer-properties-in-canada/ . 
Edit- I am talking about the transperency of the deal itself. Not how the deal was signed. However, even if the deal was signed illegally, that is not a slight at the CWNT. Its just poor governance. 

Im just trying to point out that the CSA is not all bad and to be perfectly honest, I don't think this mess should be a gender equality issue. The issue is not gender based at all, but rather a lack of funds to support the needs of our program. 

 

I find this general thread sadly amusing and the players hard to sympathize with… i am heavily involved with another moderately successful Canadian sport, probably similar to the success soccer has. Of course a different overall economic structure because of football’s global appeal.  Our sport is representative of many Canadian Amateur sports. Our best Canadian athletes win some prize money and the very top level international athletes may make $100k per year, prize money, sponsorship. Ie what the better cpl players make… our top athletes pay the association about $10k a year towards travel costs to compete for Canada to help cover the costs, the association pays for coaches/support staff,  some travel etc. And I know it is not because the Board are going out and buying expensive suits. Like the CSA board, they are volunteers that spend countless hours of their free time trying to move the sport forward. To hear paid fulltime professional athletes ask for appearence fees to compete for Canada and complain that they have to fly economy is kind of sad and shows how out of touch they are compared many other Canadian national sport team athletes is sad. The Commons committee should be investigating why there is no equity across sports and why Canada can’t support all of our athletes better, so at least they are above the poverty line… A word of caution. For about 8 years we focussed resources on the older most successful athletes, significantly because the Own the podium funding focussed on that. Consequently when those athletes retired, there was no “next generation” athletes coming through behind. There is an obvious corrolory with soccer not being able to run youth National Team camps, losing dual nationals…

[dyslexic nam]

25 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Having some understanding of how clubs and provincial/national programs run and are administered, it's no surprise I am pro player.  I will always back the players against the bodies they represent. They are the most important asset the associations have.  

The problem with that perspective (IMO) is that body has a mandate to oversee the affairs of all aspects of the national program - all of which ultimately relate to the player pool and the strength of our national team.   Youth programs, CPL as a developmental league, international game arrangements, etc - they all ultimately tie into the players.  It just isn’t about the specific players on the team at this moment in time  - it is about the players that will continue to move through our program.  It is being “pro player” - it is just taking the long view vs backing the current squad for a bigger payout.  

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

22 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Having some understanding of how clubs and provincial/national programs run and are administered, it's no surprise I am pro player...

Always important to remember that this forum isn't in any way representative of the people who are involved with grassroots Canadian soccer. You knew what I was talking about with soccer associations not being happy when TFC Academy started to tread on their toes on elite youth player development. Some of these guys are completely oblivious.

Then there were the suburban youth clubs that see youth national championships as the be all and end all and were less than pleased when the star player that could help them do that moved over to the TFC academy teams for some genuinely pro level training. That crowd is now heavily involved with L1O so there's a reason why CanPL doesn't push the academy angle the way it should.

People inside the CSA bubble were so fixated with having a D1 to rival the hated MLS that they were willing to mortgage 20 years worth of national team sponsorship revenues to make it happen. Now the chickens have come home to roost because of course the national team players were going to be upset when the details of what was signed emerged...

[Ansem]

11 minutes ago, h coach said:

The Commons committee should be investigating why there is no equity across sports and why Canada can’t support all of our athletes better, so at least they are above the poverty line… A word of caution. For about 8 years we focussed resources on the older most successful athletes, significantly because the Own the podium funding focussed on that. Consequently when those athletes retired, there was no “next generation” athletes coming through behind. There is an obvious corrolory with soccer not being able to run youth National Team camps, losing dual nationals…

This is why I view this committee as a joke. They are more interested in pandering and scoring political points than getting at the heart of the matter. Of course they don't want to dig because we'd see how little the government actually invest in sports in this country compared to other developed nations.

The CSB witch hunt is crazy to me as their involvement means less need for government to increase their subsidies. Why on earth would you go out of your way to discourage private investment by trying to vilify it instead of focusing on core issues and encouraging more private investment? Why no words on Bell & Rogers taking money from the program for years and making ad revenue on the content? Or why are they going out their way to complicate things for CSB/CPL limiting their exposure, hence potential revenues for the CSA? Why aren't they leading on that and get the CRTC to force them to carry those games on cable?

All questions that aren't interesting to them but playing politics. We have a sad class of incompetent politicians in this country, yet another example why we can't have good things and Canada is progressively getting worse and worse and worse.

[Aird25]

46 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

I will always back the players against the bodies they represent.

Irrespective of the current dispute, that seems very, very silly. It does help to understand where you're coming from though.