The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute

[Obinna]

3 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Oh I am upset at the CSA for being pushed into this deal with CSB.

The CSA pushed themselves. 

6 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

I have considered all sides and made a rational decision based on the information.

I am sure you have, it's the way you communicate it that suggests otherwise, like the above for instance. Maybe you meant they were pushed into the deal by the leadership, but that can easily be read as by the CSB

I don't mean to criticize here, just wanted to help clarify things. Cheers!

Edited February 17, 2023 by Obinna

[Ottawafan]

4 minutes ago, Obinna said:

The CSA pushed themselves. 

I am sure you have, it's the way you communicate it that suggests otherwise, like the above for instance. Maybe you meant they were pushed into the deal by the leadership, but that can easily be read as by the CSB

I don't mean to criticize here, just wanted to help clarify things. Cheers!

No, I meant what I said.  All good!

[Ivan]

1 hour ago, Ottawafan said:

The players never signed onto this agreement.  They are the ones getting the short end of the stick which is why they have continually brought the issues affecting them to the CSA.  As nothing has been resolved, it is fair to assume these issues are still not addressed.  Seems like the CSA/CSB is more interested in lining the pockets of a private business instead of looking after its own NT's.

  

Throughout the 87 pages of this thread, it is obvious that you and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum with respect to the formation of the CSB and its importance to the development of the game in this country.  That's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

What I don't understand from your point above is why you think the players should have signed off on this agreement. The players are getting what looks like the lions share of the bonus money, the ability to get their own endorsement deals (some of which, according to Noonan were brought to them by the CSB) and a percentage from jersey sales. Where are they getting the short end of the stick?  

 

[grigorio]

1 hour ago, Ottawafan said:

Which is a fair assessment, but not one held by NT's.  And nor should it be their responsibility to worry about the league.  They should be focused on how best to advance their NT teams and ensure they have all the proper tools to do so.  CSA is letting them down.

I feel as though the somewhat fluke Gold medal the women won and the INCREDIBLY recent (and still not proven if it’s here to stay) success of the men have both flown in the face of what it takes to reliably and sustainably succeed in the future and it has made a lot of us naive. 
 

Investing in national team camps for the current crop of generational (but unsustainable) talent will not further the programs of the men or women’s senior national teams. 
 

Only investing in domestic leagues and youth programs is an investment in building the long term viability and success of the programs.  
 

“pay the players!” does not result in a long-term successful federation able to sustain or repeat high quality results.

 

That said, it shouldn’t be one or the other but imo it’s foolish to think that members of a national program shouldn’t be very invested in and concerned with the viability of domestic pro leagues.  

Edited February 17, 2023 by grigorio

[Ottawafan]

25 minutes ago, Ivan said:

Throughout the 87 pages of this thread, it is obvious that you and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum with respect to the formation of the CSB and its importance to the development of the game in this country.  That's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

What I don't understand from your point above is why you think the players should have signed off on this agreement. The players are getting what looks like the lions share of the bonus money, the ability to get their own endorsement deals (some of which, according to Noonan were brought to them by the CSB) and a percentage from jersey sales. Where are they getting the short end of the stick?  

 

I am not opposed to the CSB or the CSA being involved with it or the CPL.  They are all stakeholders of the further development of the game in Canada and should be on the same page.

The revenues the CSA generate should not be diverted away from the growth of the national programs.  More camps, more games, more resources for the mem/women senior squads.  Any resources not allocated for these programs, and sent to a private business, isn't about the best interest of the programs.  

[dyslexic nam]

26 minutes ago, grigorio said:

I feel as though the somewhat fluke Gold medal the women won and the INCREDIBLY recent (and still not proven if it’s here to stay) success of the men have both flown in the face of what it takes to reliably and sustainably succeed in the future and it has made a lot of us naive. 
 

Investing in national team camps for the current crop of generational (but unsustainable) talent will not further the programs of the men or women’s senior national teams. 
 

Only investing in domestic leagues and youth programs is an investment in building the long term viability and success of the programs.  
 

“pay the players!” does not result in a long-term successful federation able to sustain or repeat high quality results.

 

That said, it shouldn’t be one or the other but imo it’s foolish to think that members of a national program shouldn’t be very invested in and concerned with the viability of domestic pro leagues.  

I would add that there is a big distinction between the national team and the specific players who are in the national team at this particular point in time.  The national team is an institution that persists beyond individual players.  It is part of the footy superstructure and is paramount over the interests of any particular set of players.  

[Ottawafan]

38 minutes ago, grigorio said:

I feel as though the somewhat fluke Gold medal the women won and the INCREDIBLY recent (and still not proven if it’s here to stay) success of the men have both flown in the face of what it takes to reliably and sustainably succeed in the future and it has made a lot of us naive. 
 

Investing in national team camps for the current crop of generational (but unsustainable) talent will not further the programs of the men or women’s senior national teams. 
 

Only investing in domestic leagues and youth programs is an investment in building the long term viability and success of the programs.  
 

“pay the players!” does not result in a long-term successful federation able to sustain or repeat high quality results.

 

That said, it shouldn’t be one or the other but imo it’s foolish to think that members of a national program shouldn’t be very invested in and concerned with the viability of domestic pro leagues.  

Never once have I advocated for the paying of players.  

Everyone should be invested in the growth of the CPL.  However it is a private business with owners worth in the billions of dollars.  The men and womens teams rightfully so do not want their hard work to go towards subsidizing these owners. 

100% adding camps will further advance the program.  Not just the senior side but also the youth squads.  CSA needs to continue to find players, integrate them into the squads and build relationships.  On the mens side they have 3.5 years to build towards the 26 WC.  The core 8-10 players they have right now will likely all be there.  Ensuring the growth of the the squads and the continuity should the prime focus of the CSA.  With the women, they are months away from their WC and they can't get the proper resources. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ottawafan

[grigorio]

12 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Never once have I advocated for the paying of players.  

Everyone should be invested in the growth of the CPL.  However it is a private business with owners worth in the billions of dollars.  The men and womens teams rightfully so do not want their hard work to go towards subsidizing these owners. 

100% adding camps will further advance the program.  Not just the senior side but also the youth squads.  CSA needs to continue to find players, integrate them into the squads and build relationships.  On the mens side they have 3.5 years to build towards the 26 WC.  The core 8-10 players they have right now will likely all be there.  Ensuring the growth of the the squads and the continuity should the prime focus of the CSA.  With the women, they are months away from their WC and they can't get the proper resources. 

There was an episode of Footy Prime maybe a year or so back when Brennan was going on about how the CSA needs to get more sponsorships and Forest pushed back with “What are you selling?? A handful of games a year on One Soccer?”
 

Point being it makes me wonder how much of a role the CPL itself has played in building out a more appealing sponsorship portfolio for brands wanting to get involved in Canadian Soccer rather than showing up once every 4 years for a couple of weeks around a WC. 
 

I don’t think we can discount the fact that the CPL and the exposure it creates for brands (albeit still pretty small right now but trending up hopefully) is a really important component in incentivizing brands to get involved with Canadian soccer at all for the consistent YoY guaranteed eyeballs it offers to compliment the highly volatile and fluctuating MNT/WNT tourney success dependent visibility. 

[El Hombre]

19 minutes ago, grigorio said:

Only investing in domestic leagues and youth programs is an investment in building the long term viability and success of the programs.  

Agree with this.

The domestic league, specifically one set up like the CPL, fills the void that people on here have been asking for for the last 20 years: bridging the gap between the youth programs and full professionals.  So, in a sense, the CPL itself fills the biggest hole in our youth program.

One could easily make the argument that funding the CPL is significantly better for youth programs than various camps.

[Obinna]

24 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Never once have I advocated for the paying of players.  

Everyone should be invested in the growth of the CPL.  However it is a private business with owners worth in the billions of dollars.  The men and womens teams rightfully so do not want their hard work to go towards subsidizing these owners. 

I sense that something is getting lost in translation here. I'll try and put my finger on what that is:

1. The players are not subsidizing the owners, the players are subsidizing the league. The league is not the owners, the league is the league. The personal wealth of the owners, which varies by the way, needn't factor into this discussion, because then it goes wayward into the realm of "so-called greedy businesspeople", which then gets into insinuations about character and motive that cannot be proven or disproven anyways.
2. Even more accurately, the players are not subsidizing the owners or the league, the CSA is subsidizing the league. The fact the CSA is essentially taking from the players to give to the league is a problem, but it's a matter for the players to hash out with the association, which they are doing (or at least trying to do). 

 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Obinna

[Ottawafan]

3 minutes ago, grigorio said:

There was an episode of Footy Prime maybe a year or so back when Brennan was going on about how the CSA needs to get more sponsorships and Forest pushed back with “What are you selling?? A handful of games a year on One Soccer?”
 

Point being it makes me wonder how much of a role the CPL itself has played in building out a more appealing sponsorship portfolio for brands wanting to get involved in Canadian Soccer rather than showing up once every 4 years for a couple of weeks around a WC. 
 

I don’t think we can discount the fact that the CPL and the exposure it creates for brands (albeit still pretty small right now but trending up hopefully) is a really important component in incentivizing brands to get involved with Canadian soccer at all for the consistent YoY guaranteed eyeballs it offers to compliment the highly volatile and fluctuating MNT/WNT tourney success dependent visibility. 

Then let’s continue to give the senior squads the tools and resources necessary to ensure they aren’t volatile or fluctuating as you allege. Women have been successfully for over a decade and men are starting to develop their own success, making a WC and placing young talent at high levels of play in Europe. No need to take a step back. 

[Ottawafan]

4 minutes ago, El Hombre said:

Agree with this.

The domestic league, specifically one set up like the CPL, fills the void that people on here have been asking for for the last 20 years: bridging the gap between the youth programs and full professionals.  So, in a sense, the CPL itself fills the biggest hole in our youth program.

One could easily make the argument that funding the CPL is significantly better for youth programs than various camps.

I can see the league one day having success bringing in younger players who then proceed into the national programs. But at this point the talent is coming thru MLS squads/NCAA and youth programs in Europe. Putting camps together to flow these players into the various national squads is the current path. 
 

[Obinna]

5 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Then let’s continue to give the senior squads the tools and resources necessary to ensure they aren’t volatile or fluctuating as you allege. Women have been successfully for over a decade and men are starting to develop their own success, making a WC and placing young talent at high levels of play in Europe. No need to take a step back. 

Our programs need funding, not only the men and the women but the youth as well. Leadership needs to change at the CSA so they can figure out how to accomplish that. The CSA invested in the domestic pro game, which is paying dividends already and will continue to do so, but if there are not adequate funding of programs by the CSA, we are going to end up developing players for other nations, since nearly everyone now a days has multiple passports. 

[Obinna]

It's funny that we've gone from lamenting the dearth of people in Canada willing to invest in the pro game, to now lamenting the subsidies that drew these investors in. I admit this is not a good situation we find ourselves in, but on the balance, it is still better than the alternative (no pro league). 

The CSA needs to find a creative way to increase their income. Maybe they can appeal to the government for help. Maybe there is an opportunity here now that government is getting involved. Hey feds, you want the women to have more? Help us by giving to the CSA those resources to make it happen. You care about the development of women's sports? Put your money where your mouth is and help us make it happen. Make the government indirectly fund the growth of this game in Canada.

I don't expect the CSA to convince the government to do that, but it would be cool. Government already funds the CSA to some extent, let them increase the funding to help make this complex problem go away. 

 

[El Hombre]

1 minute ago, Ottawafan said:

I can see the league one day having success bringing in younger players who then proceed into the national programs. But at this point the talent is coming thru MLS squads/NCAA and youth programs in Europe. Putting camps together to flow these players into the various national squads is the current path. 
 

Nah dawg.  That's how it has been done for the last 20+ years and it is proven it doesn't work.  We've had success at the youth levels at various stages but it rarely translated into national team success because there were very little opportunities for these players in the 17-22 age range.  Any success we've had at the senior level is despite this system and not because of it.  This is where the CPL steps in, especially with its mandate for U21 minutes.

The Canadian Premier League has been around for four years and has only really been able to be there for one U20 team (2022) and was able to give professional experience to the following players at a crucial time in their development: Kamron Habibullah, Lowell Wright, Matt Catavolo, Kwasi Poku, Keasean Ferdinand, Matteo Campagna, Tiago Coimbra (potentially), Jean-Aniel Assi.  Some of the players cut from that tournament squad also had CPL professional experience: Adisa De Rosario, Tomas Giraldo, Max Piepgrass, Mouhamadou Kane, Ronan Kratt.  And that's just the first co-hort.

Without the CPL a lot of these players get lost in the grinder, as we've seen happen over and over and over again over the years.

[El Hombre]

14 minutes ago, Obinna said:

The CSA needs to find a creative way to increase their income. Maybe they can appeal to the government for help. Maybe there is an opportunity here now that government is getting involved. Hey feds, you want the women to have more? Help us by giving to the CSA those resources to make it happen. You care about the development of women's sports? Put your money where your mouth is and help us make it happen. Make the government indirectly fund the growth of this game in Canada.

Reducing expenses would also be a noble goal.  I'd love to get a deep look at their P&L.  I can't help but think that there is a ton of fat that could be diverted to better use.

[grigorio]

12 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I don't expect the CSA to convince the government to do that, but it would be cool. Government already funds the CSA to some extent, let them increase the funding to help make this complex problem go away. 

 

Between FIFA and the government there could be more funding to help normalize the differences between investment in the programs and invest in youth that has nothing to do with the CSB deal. 

The fact FIFA pays out a tiny fraction of WC bonus to women’s programs compared to men’s and funds a greater team size for men’s WC compared to women’s (apparently) skews the economics right out of the gate. 

[GasPed]

59 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I sense that something is getting lost in translation here. I'll try and put my finger on what that is:

1. The players are not subsidizing the owners, the players are subsidizing the league. The league is not the owners, the league is the league. The personal wealth of the owners, which varies by the way, needn't factor into this discussion, because then it goes wayward into the realm of "so-called greedy businesspeople", which then gets into insinuations about character and motive that cannot be proven or disproven anyways.
2. Even more accurately, the players are not subsidizing the owners or the league, the CSA is subsidizing the league. The fact the CSA is essentially taking from the players to give to the league is a problem, but it's a matter for the players to hash out with the association, which they are doing (or at least trying to do). 

 

But isn't it even more accurate to say the league is also subsidizing the CSA (and by extension the national team players) to the tune of $3 - 4M per year, via the CSB/CSA deal?

[SF]

54 minutes ago, Obinna said:

I sense that something is getting lost in translation here. I'll try and put my finger on what that is:

1. The players are not subsidizing the owners, the players are subsidizing the league. The league is not the owners, the league is the league. The personal wealth of the owners, which varies by the way, needn't factor into this discussion, because then it goes wayward into the realm of "so-called greedy businesspeople", which then gets into insinuations about character and motive that cannot be proven or disproven anyways.
2. Even more accurately, the players are not subsidizing the owners or the league, the CSA is subsidizing the league. The fact the CSA is essentially taking from the players to give to the league is a problem, but it's a matter for the players to hash out with the association, which they are doing (or at least trying to do). 

 

Agree, but would further state that the players are paid an amount they are able to negotiate - or, put another way, what the market for their services says they are worth.

The CSA, in running its business, needs to understand its labour costs (well, costs really) AND project what these costs might be into the future. If the CSA decides to "sell" some future projected revenues and prices those projected future revenues lower than amounts needed to run their business, then they're guilty of mismanagement and the outcome is a disgruntled labour force.

Same for any business anywhere that exists in a competitive environment.

The CSA took a risk. Their implicit calculation was that they could support their business with the CSB revenue stream over the life of that contract. At the time it probably felt like a reasonable risk. Turns out they made a rather large mistake.

For the record, the CSB also took a risk. Seems like they've been rewarded and, for me, they should not be vilified.

That's both business and economics. You take risk and some win and some lose. Normally those who wind up on the losing side are held accountable. 

[Ivan]

1 hour ago, Ottawafan said:

I am not opposed to the CSB or the CSA being involved with it or the CPL.  They are all stakeholders of the further development of the game in Canada and should be on the same page.

The revenues the CSA generate should not be diverted away from the growth of the national programs.  More camps, more games, more resources for the mem/women senior squads.  Any resources not allocated for these programs, and sent to a private business, isn't about the best interest of the programs.  

Okay, I can agree with most of that.  The only point i'll make is that the sponsorship revenue is not generated by the CSA, it's generated by the CSB.  The CSB then pays an agreed to amount to the CSA which is apparently 3-4 times higher than what the CSA generated on their own.  So they are not funding a private business, the private business is doing that on their own.  I do realize this is a chicken and egg scenario and the success of the national teams is a significant driver.

The only thing missing in this equation is a women's league, where I think the girls are getting their noses out of joint (and rightfully so) with the CSB.  There needs to be something done for the development of the women's league with this money and hopefully they can work things out eventually with Project 8.

[CanSoccfan11]

8 minutes ago, Ivan said:

Okay, I can agree with most of that.  The only point i'll make is that the sponsorship revenue is not generated by the CSA, it's generated by the CSB.  The CSB then pays an agreed to amount to the CSA which is apparently 3-4 times higher than what the CSA generated on their own.  So they are not funding a private business, the private business is doing that on their own.  I do realize this is a chicken and egg scenario and the success of the national teams is a significant driver.

The only thing missing in this equation is a women's league, where I think the girls are getting their noses out of joint (and rightfully so) with the CSB.  There needs to be something done for the development of the women's league with this money and hopefully they can work things out eventually with Project 8.

Agreed, the CSB isn't actually taking any cash from our national teams or the CSA.  Infact they are giving cash to the CSA.  They bought the rights to use the Canadian Soccer Brand in a specific way.  I'm not going to blame them for taking a risk and having it pay off.

Also how sure are we that what the brand is now worth more than what has been paid?  Sure I could see this year alone with making the WC being worth more then the $3 million the CSA is getting but how about the past number of years where they were collecting that guaranteed amount?  How much was the brand worth 2 plus years ago with no guarantee of making the WC?

 

Also as mentioned the CPL was a requirement to host the WC and any short fall in revenue from the CSB deal will be made up by the CSA and then some in 2026.  

 

It is incredibly shortsighted to look at a deal at only one point in time which is what everyone is doing right now.  The CSB deal will likely play a big role in growing this sport in the country and if executed correctly will lead to plenty of money for everyone.  As mentioned there will be tangible results for the CSA and the players in terms of WC gate revenue, jersey merchandise etc in 2026.  Those massive revenue streams don't exist without this deal and securing the WC.

[dyslexic nam]

17 minutes ago, CanSoccfan11 said:

It is incredibly shortsighted to look at a deal at only one point in time which is what everyone is doing right now.  The CSB deal will likely play a big role in growing this sport in the country and if executed correctly will lead to plenty of money for everyone.  As mentioned there will be tangible results for the CSA and the players in terms of WC gate revenue, jersey merchandise etc in 2026.  Those massive revenue streams don't exist without this deal and securing the WC.

I know this isn’t contrary to the other things you said, but you don’t even have to look into the future to see the kind of sea-change that has happened.  We have a national domestic league.  We have a dedicated soccer broadcaster that has provided absolutely unparalleled access to Canadian footy content.   We have infrastructure (both human, and bricks and mortar) that simply does not happen in the absence of this deal and the league it facilitated.  We have an emerging pyramid that is integrating pre-existing elements (e.g. L1O) with the new league.  

None of that happens over the past 5 years without this deal.  Full stop.  No league.  No OS.  No intentional and coordinated evolution of the developmental structure.  At best we may have had rogue start-ups trying to emerge recently in light of our newfound success.  But there is no way it has the level of coordination and integration we are seeing. 

If I am being honest, I can’t understand how someone could maintain that sort of effort deserves no support from our national association. 

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, El Hombre said:

Nah dawg.  That's how it has been done for the last 20+ years and it is proven it doesn't work.  We've had success at the youth levels at various stages but it rarely translated into national team success because there were very little opportunities for these players in the 17-22 age range.  Any success we've had at the senior level is despite this system and not because of it.  This is where the CPL steps in, especially with its mandate for U21 minutes.

The Canadian Premier League has been around for four years and has only really been able to be there for one U20 team (2022) and was able to give professional experience to the following players at a crucial time in their development: Kamron Habibullah, Lowell Wright, Matt Catavolo, Kwasi Poku, Keasean Ferdinand, Matteo Campagna, Tiago Coimbra (potentially), Jean-Aniel Assi.  Some of the players cut from that tournament squad also had CPL professional experience: Adisa De Rosario, Tomas Giraldo, Max Piepgrass, Mouhamadou Kane, Ronan Kratt.  And that's just the first co-hort.

Without the CPL a lot of these players get lost in the grinder, as we've seen happen over and over and over again over the years.

Nothing wrong with both.  Look at the core of the men’s NT at the moment. All came from various streams. In time the CPL will push thru more talent and I’m all for it. But currently the talent is scattered thru various places. Best way to corral it is to have camps that identity and bring in talent from MLS, NC2A, European academies and squads, CPL. Cutting camps and not holding them is detrimental to the overall growth of the men’s and women’s teams. You can see that right dawg?

[Obinna]

10 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Nothing wrong with both.  Look at the core of the men’s NT at the moment. All came from various streams. In time the CPL will push thru more talent and I’m all for it. But currently the talent is scattered thru various places. Best way to corral it is to have camps that identity and bring in talent from MLS, NC2A, European academies and squads, CPL. Cutting camps and not holding them is detrimental to the overall growth of the men’s and women’s teams. You can see that right dawg?

And to add: This shouldn't be a zero-sum game. We should be able to have a pro league and adequate funding for camps. Everyone supports that goal, surely. 

We'll get there, despite the growing pains we are enduring at the moment. 

[El Hombre]

39 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Nothing wrong with both.  Look at the core of the men’s NT at the moment. All came from various streams. In time the CPL will push thru more talent and I’m all for it. But currently the talent is scattered thru various places. Best way to corral it is to have camps that identity and bring in talent from MLS, NC2A, European academies and squads, CPL. Cutting camps and not holding them is detrimental to the overall growth of the men’s and women’s teams. You can see that right dawg?

Yeah, but the problem is we aren't really "cutting camps" because we've rarely had them in the past when it comes to the youth.  CPL relieves some of the pressure to have those camps because you can evaluate players more easily in professional games.  There's more visibility

This current U17 team had a camp in December and one in September.  Plus other regional camps, I think.  That's more than we've had in the past, so I don't see how the CPL is impacting the CSA's ability to hold camps.  And if you give those 17-22 year olds professional jobs in Canada it reduces the need to go abroad which reduces the chances of them getting poached by other countries as they grow into a footballer.