The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[dyslexic nam]

1 hour ago, Shway said:

 

This is an interesting stance for a collective. 
Especially when the Players didn't support the fans out in Vancouver. 

The amount of people who lost their hard earned money on their travel plans. What did the players do for the fans who they let down?

I guess the Voyageurs really is ONLY supporters of the NT teams, and less all things Canadian Soccer.

I think our stance should only be to ask for TRANSPARENCY, any support for that is warranted....no sides taken until we have that first. 

Because I'm definitely not for higher priced tickets to supplement dividends. 

I tend to agree that this is a complicated issue and that simply taking one side seems a bit risky.   Opposed to the players’ interests are the CSA, the CSB and the CPL.  I know that is an oversimplification but if you want to boil it down to the core and not pull any punches, that is sort of how the chess board is currently set up.  To come out and align with one side in the absence of a lot of info seems a bit risky.   
 

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, Ruud said:

What about CSB committing to women’s soccer ?  Was that ever part of their commitment?  In retrospect that was a blond spot by CSB and CSA.  

CSB/CPL made clear that they wanted to launch a Women's League but it wasn't "fast" enough for some of them who conveniently didn't take into account the 2 years under a pandemic that has been absolutely brutal for everyone in football from MLS to Ligue 1 shutting down.

What got lost in the discussion was that CSB owns L1O for the women's side while L1s will all have women's division. Project 6 wanting to launch without CSB is pure idiotic as they'll keep cashing in CanWNT marketing revenues regardless. They don't "have" to send them cheques, that's not how business works. The right thing to do is to work with them.

Not a fan of Rollins but he even said so himself and said that CPL was genuinely working on it and there was progress being made. They got blindsided by Project six. From a business perspective, not a great start. They talks about having stadiums and club working and I'll defend TFC here - not a great look to publicly shame them for not joining your project - you aren't entitled to stuff that isn't yours.

I 1000% want this league to happen but the way they go at it publicly and business-wise has left me less than impressed and pessimistic about the whole thing. Build the best business case you can without your "feelings" or a chip on your shoulders. They are coming across as such and I dislike it.

https://24thminute.substack.com/p/a-league-of-good-intentions

Here’s the thing: CSB and CanPL has been working on a women’s league proposal. They haven’t been moving as quickly as I, or others, would like, but they have been. They have investigated the very things that Matheson is talking about.

Additionally, as I’ve been told a couple times this week, the resistance to the women’s project mostly left the league office this year. Draw your own conclusions as to why, but I’m told that there is far more interest in a women’s league now than there was at this time last year.

There are people at the league office who have been working very hard at the project, in fact. For a lot longer than the 6-months that Matheson said her team has been. Those people are feeling a little discouraged today by an announcement that they see as premature and possibly harmful, I’m told.

There is not enough interest or understanding out there for two groups to be chasing the same thing without ultimately sinking each other. One has to step aside so that all efforts are coming from a single source.

Sadly, though, the suits are in a better position to get $80-million (according to the numbers Matheson has provided) in seed money to start this league than a former soccer player doing her MBA. I don’t mean to be cruel about it, but think about it from a detached business perspective.

Bay Street doesn’t care about Bronze Medals. The Bronze medal might get you the meeting, but after that, what matters is a solid business plan that shows where and when the profits are going to come.

What would be best is for Matheson’s group to reach out to CSB and work with them to get this done. We may not like how CSB came to be, but the reality is that they are here and they are set-up to support Canadian soccer. There has been work done and contacts made.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Ansem

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

2 hours ago, Shway said:

...I guess the Voyageurs really is ONLY supporters of the NT teams, and less all things Canadian Soccer...

From what I remember support for the CMNT and CWNT is how it started out with the Iranian guy from Edmonton called Reza (?).

[Ansem]

2 hours ago, zeelaw said:

Can't stand twitter users with no care to understand the complexity of the CSB deal and post blanket shit like #PayThePlayers

And the players themselves. I find it rich that they bash CSB/CPL when they benefited from SUM/MLS allowing the league to grow to the point of giving them good wages and opportunities. Leave the PR to pros because this makes them look bad - they don't understand the bigger picture of that deal, it's obvious

CSB is a private entity so the CSA deserves all the criticism to not being able to communicate better with the players

Edited February 13, 2023 by Ansem

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I actually upgraded my seats for Pacific this year after reading the men’s statement. Maybe they’re geniuses after all

More fans watched the CPL from September 2021 to end of 2022 in Canada last year than the MNT in all their matches.

[Meepmeep]

4 hours ago, SF said:

Way behind on the comments here, but I actually think this whole this is quite simple. The players - mens and womens - don't trust the federation. In fact, it's now well past mistrust - it's full resentment. The details and aren't even important any more.

I agree with this.  
 

I’d also add that because of the interconnections the CSA CPL and CSB are often times viewed as one in the same.  Or at least CSB and CPL.    
 

So if there are perceived swipes at one of the orgs it’s because they’re all viewed as one. 
 

I don’t think anyone is against a CPL or a SUM style marketing deal; most just resent the CSA the CSB and how the current CPL was formed/funded.  

[narduch]

5 minutes ago, Meepmeep said:

 

I don’t think anyone is against a CPL or a SUM style marketing deal; most just resent the CSA the CSB and how the current CPL was formed/funded.  

I don't know about that. There are quite a few people commenting in this thread that don't see the value of the CPL and probably wouldn't care if it died.

[Ansem]

27 minutes ago, narduch said:

I don't know about that. There are quite a few people commenting in this thread that don't see the value of the CPL and probably wouldn't care if it died.

I genuinely think that those posters don't want CPL to die but they really wish that CPL would just be an MLS feeder already, ideally mostly to the 3 clubs - meaning, they wouldn't need that much investment if the scope of the league was lower. (conferences, bus traveling etc...) How dare does it advertise itself as a D1 and have D1 ambitions?

Just pay the players and do more of what we used to do 🙄

[Ruud]

38 minutes ago, narduch said:

I don't know about that. There are quite a few people commenting in this thread that don't see the value of the CPL and probably wouldn't care if it died.

Worth a vote but almost everyone who cares enough to read 236 pages about Junior Hoilett likely has been hoping for a domestic league in this country.  
 

 

[Watchmen]

7 hours ago, Ansem said:

Who owned L1O at that time isn't the point. The point is that this "infrastructure" has played a big role in getting guys to the next level. Investments into that tier and all current / future L1 leagues is obviously needed. Imagine how much better it could do with more resources, funding and much needed upgrades on all metrics. 

CSB now owns L1O and looks to owns/invest heavily there and thus far, it's looking promising for the future.

I do not think you can guarantee they will "invest heavily" there when they're still trying to prop up their CPL teams. So far I'm not sure we've seen any benefit to their ownership of L1O, they don't own the other L1s, and they would not be the first company to buy something and then mismanage it.  I'm absolutely going to continue giving L1O credit for helping out the current national team, but that credit for past performance does not extend to CSB.

[Sal333]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

I don't know about that. There are quite a few people commenting in this thread that don't see the value of the CPL and probably wouldn't care if it died.

Very few posters have any animus towards the CPL. It's directed mostly at the CSA and their secretive deal with CSB.

If you listen to Sinclair and Beckie's video they're not complaining  about pay. Their grievances are about the cuts in the budget which results in reductions to the support staff, elimination of most youth and senior camps, elimination of home games and cuts in resources to prepare for the women's WC.

The last two years the women won Olympic gold and the men topped CONCACA and made it to the WC for the first time in 36 years. Sinclair pointed out that with those recent successes bright, shiny sponsors have lined up to support soccer in Canada yet the CSA is reducing budgets. Something smells. Especially when the CSA stonewalls any request for transparency. 

With that CSB deal the CSA has tied their own hands. The men's and women's team successes the last two years will be things of the past. They won't be able to keep up with the rest of the world, let alone improve. All the sponsor money  generated by the two teams goes to the CSB, meanwhile the CSA cuts budgets.

You see that as a winning formula?

Edited February 13, 2023 by Sal333

[Watchmen]

1 hour ago, Ansem said:

I genuinely think that those posters don't want CPL to die but they really wish that CPL would just be an MLS feeder already, ideally mostly to the 3 clubs - meaning, they wouldn't need that much investment if the scope of the league was lower. (conferences, bus traveling etc...) How dare does it advertise itself as a D1 and have D1 ambitions?

Just pay the players and do more of what we used to do 🙄

You make "successfully developing players and moving them on to a higher league" sound like a bad thing. I guess I'm in that group.

As for how it advertises itself, I don't really care.

[Ansem]

39 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

I do not think you can guarantee they will "invest heavily" there when they're still trying to prop up their CPL teams.

That's where the lionshare of their domestic talent will be coming from in the near futher. It will be in their interest to make it as strong as it can be as it will provide them strong talent at low costs. Also, by professionalizing that tier and bring it under their control, they could even add clause giving them either or : first right of refusal similar to MLS discovery thing AND/OR making sure that a portion those transfer/resell fees goes to CSB as well. (Just speculating on what they could do by controlling the whole thing)

It just make business sense to invest in it D3

 

43 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

So far I'm not sure we've seen any benefit to their ownership of L1O, they don't own the other L1s, and they would not be the first company to buy something and then mismanage it. 

League 1 Canada?

On paper, League 1 Ontario is part of the MediaPro deal (hoping for some games)

They helped on BC League 1 and mosty likely work with PLSQ

League 1 Canada wants more League 1s across the country with the same model (men & women) - who owns League 1 Canada?

45 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

I'm absolutely going to continue giving L1O credit for helping out the current national team, but that credit for past performance does not extend to CSB.

Who cares? That's not the point. The point is that investment is needed in D3 and its part of the bigger picture to grow our pool and funnel the best into CPL or abroad. This falls under CSB and we've seen their involvement like I listed above - it's just the beginning. Part of that CSB funding will come from the marketing money from the deal with the CSA and in tern I expect them to grow the league 1 brand as much as possible.

Doubt CSB/CPL all you want but I believe in Dino Rossi or are you going to insinuate that he doesnt have D3 at heart and will sell out to the greedy CSB owners?

[Ansem]

26 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

You make "successfully developing players and moving them on to a higher league" sound like a bad thing. I guess I'm in that group.

As for how it advertises itself, I don't really care.

It's a good thing. CPL can do both - move players up AND be as ambitious as it wants/needs to be. Glad you don't care about the label - just wish that others would do the same

[Ansem]

46 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

With that CSB deal the CSA has tied their own hands. The men's and women's team successes the last two years will be things of the past. They won't be able to keep up with the rest of the world, let alone improve. All the sponsor money  generated by the two teams goes to the CSB, meanwhile the CSA cuts budgets.

If you look at the USSF/SUM relationship which was simular, the NTs kept winning trophies and medals and qualifying consistently for World Cups and getting prize money over prize money which I assumed went straight to USSF, not SUM. (WC money goes to CSA and not CSB)

Hate to sound like this but this is aimed at the men specifically - start winning trophies. If you're called up, for Nations League / Glod Cup - show up and win. I'm aiming at the guys who benefited from the same SUM/MLS formula and shamelessly took aimed at CPL.

Start winning your association more money.

Sorry for the tone - not impressed with the men's statement

 

[kacbru]

47 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

If you listen to Sinclair and Beckie's video they're not complaining  about pay. Their grievances are about the cuts in the budget which results in reductions to the support staff, elimination of most youth and senior camps, elimination of home games and cuts in resources to prepare for the women's WC.

Exactly this and it is quite clear in their statement.  The men's statement muddied the waters.

Both programmes are having success, there is increased revenue, yet there are cuts.  They want to know why.  

CSA refuses to tell them.

CSB/CPL, etc. is all just speculation and a distraction.  Why won't the CSA be transparent and accountable to the players?

Seems to me like that is the only way to move forward.

[Ansem]

4 minutes ago, kacbru said:

Exactly this and it is quite clear in their statement.  The men's statement muddied the waters.

Both programmes are having success, there is increased revenue, yet there are cuts.  They want to know why.  

CSA refuses to tell them.

CSB/CPL, etc. is all just speculation and a distraction.  Why won't the CSA be transparent and accountable to the players?

Seems to me like that is the only way to move forward.

Actually, the women carried the CSA and I get them being fed up with the leadership

The men's success is very recent... they might want to consistently win like the women and win trophies before they make reckless statements undermining the very thing that will help the long term goals of this program

[Sal333]

17 minutes ago, Ansem said:

If you look at the USSF/SUM relationship which was simular, the NTs kept winning trophies and medals and qualifying consistently for World Cups and getting prize money over prize money which I assumed went straight to USSF, not SUM. (WC money goes to CSA and not CSB)

Hate to sound like this but this is aimed at the men specifically - start winning trophies. If you're called up, for Nations League / Glod Cup - show up and win. I'm aiming at the guys who benefited from the same SUM/MLS formula and shamelessly took aimed at CPL.

Start winning your association more money.

Sorry for the tone - not impressed with the men's statement

 

The women won Olympic Gold. The men won a spot in the WC. The CSA responds by cutting the budgets.

You're right if they had simply won a couple of trophies they could have auctioned them off to help with the budget.

You're not impressed by the men's statement and I'm not impressed by your post.

[Sal333]

30 minutes ago, Ansem said:

It's a good thing. CPL can do both - move players up AND be as ambitious as it wants/needs to be. Glad you don't care about the label - just wish that others would do the same

I rather enjoy the CPL. The only thing I have against it is it's a capitalist venture subsidized by the efforts of the men's and women's teams. In my books that's not capitalism. 

[Bison44]

2 minutes ago, Sal333 said:

I rather enjoy the CPL. The only thing I have against it is it's a capitalist venture subsidized by the efforts of the men's and women's teams. In my books that's not capitalism. 

CSB made a deal with CSA.  They paid cash on the barrel for certain rights from CSA.  How is that not capitalism??  Money is not being funneled into CSB under the table, they paid for something and prob lost money for the first few years and now maybe they are making money of that deal.  You can whine about how its a bad deal for CSA...THIS YEAR.  Maybe next year after all the money grubbing by the players, all the fans will be turned off and there wont be any sponsors at all for the national team, and it'll be a shitty deal for CSB.  

[red card]

55 minutes ago, Ansem said:

If you look at the USSF/SUM relationship which was simular, the NTs kept winning trophies and medals and qualifying consistently for World Cups and getting prize money over prize money which I assumed went straight to USSF, not SUM. (WC money goes to CSA and not CSB)

Hate to sound like this but this is aimed at the men specifically - start winning trophies. If you're called up, for Nations League / Glod Cup - show up and win. I'm aiming at the guys who benefited from the same SUM/MLS formula and shamelessly took aimed at CPL.

Start winning your association more money.

Sorry for the tone - not impressed with the men's statement

 

Your comments about the CSB deal being SUM like also extends to the payout. USSF got US$30 million/yr from SUM for broadcast & marketing rights. Prorated to Canada ex currency, it is $3 million which is the CSB payout.

Given the differences in accomplishments between the US & Canadian teams this century, SUM either underpaid USSF or CSB is overpaying CSA. The US women's team won 3 World Cups during SUM's tenure, 2 World Cups pre-SUM, 1 Olympic Gold pre-SUM, 3 Olympic Golds during SUM and was mostly ranked the #1 team in the world during the SUM deal. The US men made all World Cups ex 1, made the WC quarters once, won a number of Gold Cups and was usually ranked as a top 25 team.

 

Edited February 13, 2023 by red card

[youllneverwalkalone]

I wonder why CSB wouldn't capitalize on an opportunity to redirect more to the CSA budget in exchange for some basic professionalism at the Association. How did we go from Montopoli to Cochrane?

I've defended CSB and the CPL, but if we can't have camps and friendlies at all levels for men and women then what is the bloody point of any of it? At very least, have someone who doesn't seem to have birthed out of the arse sweat of Kevan Pipe come out and explain it clearly.

 

 

Edited February 13, 2023 by youllneverwalkalone

[narduch]

5 minutes ago, youllneverwalkalone said:

I wonder why CSB wouldn't capitalize on an opportunity to redirect more to the CSA budget in exchange for some basic professionalism at the Association. How did we go from Montopoli to Cochrane?

I've defended CSB and the CPL, but if we can't have camps and friendlies at all levels for men and women then what is the bloody point of any of it? At very least, have someone who doesn't seem to have birthed out of the arse sweat of Kevan Pipe come out and explain it clearly.

 

 

You figure One Soccer would not be happy that the women aren't playing friendlies in April. That is content they need

[red card]

A mainstream sports journo view of things via Cathal Kelly of the Globe:

 

First, that no one cares how much money a soccer player makes. I care about what nurses make...Soccer, I can live without. So can you.

Second, beyond basic necessities, we are all owed the same thing in our professional lives – whatever we can negotiate.

Third, that none of this has anything to do with fairness, a word that gets tossed around a lot whenever this issue arises. This is about money...This is about getting and/or keeping as much for yourself as you can.

Canada Soccer is to blame for letting it get to this because its No. 1 job is making sure things never get to this.

By all means, do what you (players) feel you must to get what you believe you deserve. But don’t feel the need to tell us every twist in the story. Call us when it’s all over. Or don’t.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/article-canada-soccer-to-blame-for-womens-national-team-players-dispute/

 

[Cblake]

This is great to see, hopefully the Feds can hold the CSA's feet to the fire. 

https://www.thespec.com/ts/sports/soccer/2023/02/13/liberal-mp-wants-to-expedite-having-canada-soccer-before-parliamentary-committee.html?fbclid=IwAR3EPn6ri8qGjDctsAI9o351CbMoW-FkefBjzxB1PlXqorV9NnqEwhiLVXc