MLS and FM11 - hopefully bug-free with all the new rules and regulations!

I've thought about making this thread for a while since FM11 was released to kindly remind you guys at SI about the new CBA that the MLS and the MLSPA (MLS Players' Association) have signed off. I love playing MLS in FM and there's a lot of change this year, which means a lot more work for you guys to code in for FM11.

There are some new rules this season...mostly listed in this site.

The few concerns I would have about this include:

• the correct coding of those players that should receive guarantee contracts. 24 years of age is straightforward but not too sure about the 3 years of MLS service (maybe just count the number of days they've been with an MLS club)
  
• the increase in the salary cap. Not too sure if the license will allow you guys to change the salary cap after every year but hopefully yes
  
• the re-entry draft for unsigned/waived players
  
• options in player contracts
  

And also there are some new roster regulations. One of the biggest ones is that each club can sign up to 3 Designated Players (I will say DP/DPs). Full rules are in the wiki.

Home-grown players: all teams have youth academies now. Team are allowed to sign two from their academy every year, and these players do not count against the roster limit or to the salary cap. I hope in FM11, all teams will have youth academies, and allow players to sign with the senior side, but only 2 of them won't count against the salary cap. There were youth intakes in the 2nd patch for MLS clubs, but this was removed in the final patch. I hope MLS clubs will also have youth intakes, but maybe at most 4 a season, because we still rely heavily on the Superdraft.

And also for FM11, please don't make TFC Academy a feeder club of TFC and treat it like a youth team like you normally would for other clubs with youth teams. They're not separate clubs even though TFC play in MLS and the TFC Academy play in the CSL.

I'll hope to make this the official thread about MLS in FM11. But anyways, if any of you MLS supporters have anything else to add to what I wrote in this OP, definitely post to make the MLS experience in FM11 as realistic as possible.

GO REDS!!!

I sure hope that all of the rules are updated, so when i play my Fire save, things will be realistic.

I hope so too. Gotta fix the mess that is DC United.

Have to agree here... playing MLS in FM10 seems like a dumbed down version of the game, but still like playing my Rapids and rebuilding the mess of a roster they start with.

So I have my MLS game and 1 or 2 other games I play usually so I can get a better experience playing outside the MLS setup. So hopefully it will get adjusted with FM11 to be more entertaining.

Amen to all this!!

Cheers everyone for the comments and that we seem to all be in agreement about this.

And something that a lot of MLS newcomers get confused about is the trading module (or coined part-exchanges to those eastern side of the Atlantic). I can trade with other MLS clubs with no problems but those who are new to the league always find a little trouble trading. Now, I took this idea from EHM07, which seemed to be a little too easy to trade players but I think you guys at SI can find a happy medium. I probably think this might be too late for FM11, but certainly something to think about in FM12.

I want to incorporate this with the improved interaction in the game. Like normal transfers, trades are much more than 'I'll give you this player, my 1st rounder, and allocation money for your player". Now, some players on clubs are untouchables while the other GM is more willing to discuss about other players. EHM07 had a star system of 0 to 5 stars to determine how valuable the club thinks of the player, and 0 to 5 starts to determine how valuable the other clubs think of your players. I think the star module will help some players trade in MLS.

Now, here's where the interaction comes in. IRL, if one club GM (or director of football for those Europeans who don't get what a 'GM' is...) calls another club GM to inquire about the services of a player, it's more than just 'here's what we want', although that is probably the starting point of negotiations. Clubs usually have 'lists' of players that they're more willing to trade than others. I hope someone can understand my idea and expand on this. It's always been something I wanted in EHM (before it died... ) and I would like this to be in FM too now that you guys at SI have improved the interaction module. I probably think one might be too late to get into FM11 (since there's everything in the OP that you have to code first ) but it's something to think about for FM12.

To be honest there are only a couple things about the MLS trading/transfers that annoy me. The 'offer to club for DP slot'... I play the Rapids in the MLS, they have a small park and few fans so even being well under the salary cap I can spend more then I make, so DP slots are pointless, let me offer players for money just like every other league. The other thing is, it would be nice to be able to make a deal to -gain- multiple players. I can make an offer to get one player and I can give them as many players as I want, but it would be nice if you could make one offer to get 2 players or a player and a draft or such. Separate offers is harder to manage and more 'expensive' imo.

To be honest there are only a couple things about the MLS trading/transfers that annoy me. The 'offer to club for DP slot'... I play the Rapids in the MLS, they have a small park and few fans so even being well under the salary cap I can spend more then I make, so DP slots are pointless, let me offer players for money just like every other league. The other thing is, it would be nice to be able to make a deal to -gain- multiple players. I can make an offer to get one player and I can give them as many players as I want, but it would be nice if you could make one offer to get 2 players or a player and a draft or such. Separate offers is harder to manage and more 'expensive' imo.

If you read the wiki link, you can't trade DP slots anymore, so trading them in FM11 will be a thing of the past! I would also just like to be allowed to offer to clubs like other European clubs.

As for your second point, I'm not too sure, because IRL I've never seen those deals where there are multiple players...

EDIT: nearly forgot to add this. In the final patch in FM10, some foreigners aren't taking citizenship because they 'see no benefit'. I remember they all took in citizenship in 10.2 so I hope in FM11 that they will always take citizenship to help with foreigner limits.

should still be able to trade a player for allocation money, right?

Not more rules and regulations. Heh!

Actually, I quite like playing an MLS save. The different regulations add some spice that can't really be found anywhere else.

As for your second point, I'm not too sure, because IRL I've never seen those deals where there are multiple players...

Well I can't say I've seen it in the MLS, but in other sports.

should still be able to trade a player for allocation money, right?

You can still trade a player for allocation money. You can still waive players too, but you're responsible for the rest of their wages since most are on guaranteed contracts.

Not more rules and regulations. Heh!

Actually, I quite like playing an MLS save. The different regulations add some spice that can't really be found anywhere else.

Yep, it was especially designed to give people even more headaches (like SI). Just when you were getting the hang of the regulations, MLS creates some new ones.

Well I can't say I've seen it in the MLS, but in other sports.

I understand what you're coming from, but MLS is different from the other American leagues too since they allow money transfers like in the European leagues, which is rare in American leagues. And they have trades, common in American sports, but rare in European sports like football.

Just in General - are there reasons why the MLS has made all these rules. Especially the trade ones, which i have little knowledge of.

Coming from A league I know its mainly, A to keep clubs financially viable (salary cap, squad restraints) and B to try and promote Australian Youth at home.

Are clubs in the MLS quite poor?

The clubs are for the most part backed by extremely wealthy groups however, most of the owners are businessmen who look at the league as a money making venture and while progress has been made in making money most mls teams do not make money.

The reasons to for salary cap rules are as you said financial reasons,

the trade rules have a lot to do with the fact the league is a single entity, rather than in other leagues where each team is on its own. Most players with the exception of DP's, are signed with the league instead of each team

Yeah, the MLS in general is barely a successful league. You have to understand we in the US have had more then one football (soccer) league(s) start and crash in the past because the people here don't have the respect for the sport the rest of the world does (really stupid in my opinion), but better international results and the MLS have started to change that.

One thing to keep in mind is that more then a few MLS clubs have attendance (or even max park seating) less then say English or Brazilian second league clubs. When I play Colorado in FM, the lack of income because of the small park, no sponsors, and small fan following means to make a competitive team I spend $1 mil on acquisitions and the remaining $4 mil of the starting funds are gone by the end of the first season. Mind you this is being well under the salary cap and well within the clubs internal budgets. Now I wonder if maybe too much money is flying out the window due to the code or something ($500k/month in "other" expenses is the killer).

So if SI's financial modeling isn't too far off then the smaller MLS clubs still can not compete without breaking the bank because of no income, even with the salary cap. Oh not to mention the meager prize money made if you win things like the US Cup.... actually if I remember correctly winning the league itself the one time my team made nothing at all.

Yeah, the MLS in general is barely a successful league. You have to understand we in the US have had more then one football (soccer) league(s) start and crash in the past because the people here don't have the respect for the sport the rest of the world does (really stupid in my opinion), but better international results and the MLS have started to change that.

One thing to keep in mind is that more then a few MLS clubs have attendance (or even max park seating) less then say English or Brazilian second league clubs. When I play Colorado in FM, the lack of income because of the small park, no sponsors, and small fan following means to make a competitive team I spend $1 mil on acquisitions and the remaining $4 mil of the starting funds are gone by the end of the first season. Mind you this is being well under the salary cap and well within the clubs internal budgets. Now I wonder if maybe too much money is flying out the window due to the code or something ($500k/month in "other" expenses is the killer).

So if SI's financial modeling isn't too far off then the smaller MLS clubs still can not compete without breaking the bank because of no income, even with the salary cap. Oh not to mention the meager prize money made if you win things like the US Cup.... actually if I remember correctly winning the league itself the one time my team made nothing at all.

I would agree with the financial modeling issue for MLS. Playing as Columbus, I am well under my authorized budget but am still losing money each month. The highest costs are the 'other' and 'non-soccer' expenditures which are beyond my control. I have edited my bank balance to reflect these errors. After a number of FM versions, SI still has not accurately reproduced MLS although it is not a major concern to them.

But if you know the history of the league, it was bleeding a lot of money in the beginning. IRL, not a lot of franchises are making a profit. The only ones I can think of are LA Galaxy, TFC, Seattle, and RBNY. Other clubs are still having trouble breaking even because of the reasons Martyr mentioned.

its going ot be confusing, but cant wait to use Angel, Henry and Marquez!

But if you know the history of the league, it was bleeding a lot of money in the beginning. IRL, not a lot of franchises are making a profit. The only ones I can think of are LA Galaxy, TFC, Seattle, and RBNY. Other clubs are still having trouble breaking even because of the reasons Martyr mentioned.

Yep, why I'm not sure if SI's modeling is messed up or just the league IRL... even look at it now, if an MLS team sells a player to another league they take 33% of the sell? I never knew that until I saw it in-game so I don't know if its totally true but makes sense. Yet you don't see that elsewhere. It's actually really frustrating when pathetic sports like baseball and basketball are rolling in money but the MLS struggles. At least they've been successful to a degree though, I remember when it started no one expected it to last the first couple seasons.

Those clubs that are successful though, I have to admit it's a real pleasure seeing the fans getting into it and supporting them.

its going ot be confusing, but cant wait to use Angel, Henry and Marquez!

lol, yeah so much for the salary cap helping to make things even. I have to completely gut Colorado's roster and bring in actual good players for cheap, being a frugal manager is kind of rewarding when it works though.

The DPs actually make the league not have much parity...the 'big four' (LA Galaxy, RBNY, Seattle, TFC) have a total salary a lot greater than the other clubs. It won't be as even as years past...

Yep, why I'm not sure if SI's modeling is messed up or just the league IRL... even look at it now, if an MLS team sells a player to another league they take 33% of the sell? I never knew that until I saw it in-game so I don't know if its totally true but makes sense. Yet you don't see that elsewhere. It's actually really frustrating when pathetic sports like baseball and basketball are rolling in money but the MLS struggles. At least they've been successful to a degree though, I remember when it started no one expected it to last the first couple seasons.

Those clubs that are successful though, I have to admit it's a real pleasure seeing the fans getting into it and supporting them.

I believe the league takes 33 percent of money from an overseas transfer.

It frustrates me, as an American, to see my domestic league struggle. I know people who are avid fans of the sport, yet refuse to follow the MLS, because they feel it's second-rate. Regardless of that issue, there are still clubs that are well supported, like TFC, LA, and Seattle. Even teams that aren't necessarily well supported or any good are still increasing in quality, San Jose brought in their first ever DP this year.

As for the league's parity, the salary cap still keeps the league relatively close. Hopefully once all of the teams are established well enough, the salary cap can be lifted while the league still stays relatively equal. But until then, the DP rule allows teams like New York to sign some real quality players without making teams like Dallas and San Jose completely irrelevant. We are starting to see some separation between teams, but I believe we won't see anything similar to the Barclay's Premier League (in terms of standings, not in terms of quality) until the salary cap is lifted.

Heh, avid football fans the refuse to support the MLS because they think it's second rate? Well it is second rate because it doesn't get any support, people are so stupid sometimes.

Anyway, I can't help but think DP's are more of a gimmick, a way to bring in big name players, if a team has money, for the hype. They do sit in complete opposition to the salary cap, having both is almost the same as having neither. So I'd agree they cause a lack of parity in the league, that's not so bad of a thing in other football leagues because it's so popular though. But the last thing you want for a struggling league is that disparity. Colorado has very little of a following, a small park they don't even fill, and questionable staff imo. Take all those and combine them with elite teams that have much more money and can use it and the team looks all the worse to the fans and the following doesn't grow, or even shrinks.

Bottom line I think DP's are pointless, IRL and in-game. In-game I trade the things away like they are poison. Not only do I get a player in return, but in a league like the MLS you can get good quality very cheaply, just have to look around for it. IRL, they don't help the league in any way shape or form.

But if you know the history of the league, it was bleeding a lot of money in the beginning. IRL, not a lot of franchises are making a profit. The only ones I can think of are LA Galaxy, TFC, Seattle, and RBNY. Other clubs are still having trouble breaking even because of the reasons Martyr mentioned.

IIRC, Galaxy, TFC and Seattle were reportedly the only ones making a profit.

Columbus reportedly was making an operating profit, but it would be wiped out by the cash calls to the central office.

Supposedly the rent at Giants Stadium was one of the biggest stumbling blocks. I can't vouch for its accuracy, but I read once that every MLS team except New York could be in their own stadium, and the league would still be unprofitable because of the rent. (IIRC, it was somewhere on the order of $250,000 a game just to open the doors)

The DPs actually make the league not have much parity...the 'big four' (LA Galaxy, RBNY, Seattle, TFC) have a total salary a lot greater than the other clubs. It won't be as even as years past...

I believe the league takes 33 percent of money from an overseas transfer.

It frustrates me, as an American, to see my domestic league struggle. I know people who are avid fans of the sport, yet refuse to follow the MLS, because they feel it's second-rate. Regardless of that issue, there are still clubs that are well supported, like TFC, LA, and Seattle. Even teams that aren't necessarily well supported or any good are still increasing in quality, San Jose brought in their first ever DP this year.

As for the league's parity, the salary cap still keeps the league relatively close. Hopefully once all of the teams are established well enough, the salary cap can be lifted while the league still stays relatively equal. But until then, the DP rule allows teams like New York to sign some real quality players without making teams like Dallas and San Jose completely irrelevant. We are starting to see some separation between teams, but I believe we won't see anything similar to the Barclay's Premier League (in terms of standings, not in terms of quality) until the salary cap is lifted.

True about the DPs, but then the league has always had a "Help Metrostars/Galaxy" policy. (and yes, the division of transfer fees is 2/3 to the club, 1/3 to the league)

San Jose is a bit of concern about getting a DP, because you have to ask if they're trying to get into an arms race they can't afford. They're using a college stadium that's barely over 10,000 seating, and have no approval for a stadium of their own. Dallas can't draw for flies in Frisco, and their only experiment with a DP (Denilson) was a total flop.

That being said, I think Seattle's signing of Alvaro Fernandez was exactly the way a DP should be used. Sign a guy out of South America, as you can probably pay him less than it would take to get someone over from Europe, even if you're paying him DP wages. (but I say that as someone who would do cartwheels if Martin Palermo came here)

The flip side is you're seeing some of the smaller teams like RSL thinking seriously about how they can compete in a DP world, if they can't afford one. From what I've read out of the Salt Lake papers, it sounds like they're going to focus hard on development. Which would probably end up helping the national team more in the long run.

Heh, avid football fans the refuse to support the MLS because they think it's second rate? Well it is second rate because it doesn't get any support, people are so stupid sometimes.

Anyway, I can't help but think DP's are more of a gimmick, a way to bring in big name players, if a team has money, for the hype. They do sit in complete opposition to the salary cap, having both is almost the same as having neither. So I'd agree they cause a lack of parity in the league, that's not so bad of a thing in other football leagues because it's so popular though. But the last thing you want for a struggling league is that disparity. Colorado has very little of a following, a small park they don't even fill, and questionable staff imo. Take all those and combine them with elite teams that have much more money and can use it and the team looks all the worse to the fans and the following doesn't grow, or even shrinks.

And it doesn't help that the ownership is generally cheap to begin with.

As far as the stadium goes, the experience of the past several years shows clubs are better off putting new stadiums in the central city, even though it's much more expensive than in the suburbs. Colorado and Dallas are in the suburbs and have attendance issues. Chicago really doesn't draw that well at Toyota Park (they draw about 1300 a game less than RSL do). Toronto and Seattle have done spectacularly well with downtown stadiums (both were attendance wastelands when they had USL teams). RSL is doing pretty well out in the suburbs, but they're kind of a big fish in a small pond (only major league competition is the Jazz) and have pretty good public transport links. The public transit link is helping Red Bull even though that's out in northern New Jersey (IIRC from what New Yorkers say, it's easier to get to Red Bull Arena, even though it's farther from the city, than the Meadowlands)

Bottom line I think DP's are pointless, IRL and in-game. In-game I trade the things away like they are poison. Not only do I get a player in return, but in a league like the MLS you can get good quality very cheaply, just have to look around for it. IRL, they don't help the league in any way shape or form.

Yeah, DPs have been pretty pointless. Since the rule came in in 2007, no team has won an MLS Cup with a DP (though Guillermo Barros Schelotto became one after Columbus won in 2008, and even that lasted only for the 2009 season. His contract that began this year pays him less than DP wages). Of course, the rules before this season made it really hard to fit the rest of a team in under the salary cap if you were paying for more than one DP.

Heh, avid football fans the refuse to support the MLS because they think it's second rate? Well it is second rate because it doesn't get any support, people are so stupid sometimes.

Yeah, we've argued in circles many times.

And it doesn't help that the ownership is generally cheap to begin with.

As far as the stadium goes, the experience of the past several years shows clubs are better off putting new stadiums in the central city, even though it's much more expensive than in the suburbs. Colorado and Dallas are in the suburbs and have attendance issues. Chicago really doesn't draw that well at Toyota Park (they draw about 1300 a game less than RSL do). Toronto and Seattle have done spectacularly well with downtown stadiums (both were attendance wastelands when they had USL teams). RSL is doing pretty well out in the suburbs, but they're kind of a big fish in a small pond (only major league competition is the Jazz) and have pretty good public transport links. The public transit link is helping Red Bull even though that's out in northern New Jersey (IIRC from what New Yorkers say, it's easier to get to Red Bull Arena, even though it's farther from the city, than the Meadowlands)

Yeah, DPs have been pretty pointless. Since the rule came in in 2007, no team has won an MLS Cup with a DP (though Guillermo Barros Schelotto became one after Columbus won in 2008, and even that lasted only for the 2009 season. His contract that began this year pays him less than DP wages). Of course, the rules before this season made it really hard to fit the rest of a team in under the salary cap if you were paying for more than one DP.

We could definitely draw more at Toyota Park, but I believe attendance is increasing. It was packed in the game against New York, so hopefully that trend will continue.

And it doesn't help that the ownership is generally cheap to begin with.

As far as the stadium goes, the experience of the past several years shows clubs are better off putting new stadiums in the central city, even though it's much more expensive than in the suburbs. Colorado and Dallas are in the suburbs and have attendance issues. Chicago really doesn't draw that well at Toyota Park (they draw about 1300 a game less than RSL do). Toronto and Seattle have done spectacularly well with downtown stadiums (both were attendance wastelands when they had USL teams). RSL is doing pretty well out in the suburbs, but they're kind of a big fish in a small pond (only major league competition is the Jazz) and have pretty good public transport links. The public transit link is helping Red Bull even though that's out in northern New Jersey (IIRC from what New Yorkers say, it's easier to get to Red Bull Arena, even though it's farther from the city, than the Meadowlands)

Yeah, DPs have been pretty pointless. Since the rule came in in 2007, no team has won an MLS Cup with a DP (though Guillermo Barros Schelotto became one after Columbus won in 2008, and even that lasted only for the 2009 season. His contract that began this year pays him less than DP wages). Of course, the rules before this season made it really hard to fit the rest of a team in under the salary cap if you were paying for more than one DP.

Seattle does amazingly well from what I've seen. I saw a friendly with one of the EPL teams (forgot who, maybe Man U) not only was it packed full but it just -sounded- like a European game even. It's got to be the only place I've seen a match that I was wondering, "is this really in the US?!".

Colorado's stadium isn't even in the suburbs, it's in a freaking empty industrial area (live in Denver). First time I saw where it was I thought it was the dumbest location. But then it's not big enough to support too many fans even if it was in a better place. I know they use to play in Bronco stadium, but I guess the rent was too much kind of like the NY case.

Anyway, after so many years being up an running I hope the cheap management, bad league 'design', and peoples 'soccer is stupid' mentality doesn't bring the MLS down like previous attempts. But if FM is even half accurate (which I've seen some really good parallels, right down to players personalities), then I can't imagine how it won't become a bunch of second rate teams with only a few competitive ones.

After one season of my latest start, I rebuilt Colorado spending only about 500K on transfers net (with some luck thanks to bad AI waivers), won the league... was an amazing finish with some key players injured and lots of extra time & penalties, kind intense actually. Anyway the team is obviously successful. But even though I'm only spending about 2/3 of the salary cap the team is still broke, so I can't imagine the real team ever having a truly competitive team without going into massive debt.

Will SI consider adding MLS youth players and youth teams if MLS supporters can find enough data about the youths?

Will SI consider adding MLS youth players and youth teams if MLS supporters can find enough data about the youths?

Do they really need data on them? I mean if they are usable by the team by the rules/regulations then they just have to generate players just like anything else. I've never looked to deep into this part of the MLS but it seems the Academies are the MLS version of U20/18 teams, heard Colorado just called up one of their Academy players during their last game. So instead of just having the Academies sitting there for show with a few players coming from them each season it would be nice if we could interact with them. Like my next season started for Colorado and I've gotten my hands on a nice 16 y/o ST and 17 y/o CB, loads of potential but no place on my first team for them yet. One I can't loan out because I traded for him so I'm the third club in 1 season (he can't play for more then that in the same season) the other rejects all options to go out on a loan to a feeder. So it would be nice if they could be sent over to the Academy just like I could move a player over to my U20 team for a Euro club.

Maybe I'm just not seeing it but the Academy just looks like an annual lottery to get a nice player out of it if you are lucky. Beyond that there is nothing you can do with them, despite them being listed in your 'Squad' drop down like other feeders.

Do they really need data on them? I mean if they are usable by the team by the rules/regulations then they just have to generate players just like anything else. I've never looked to deep into this part of the MLS but it seems the Academies are the MLS version of U20/18 teams, heard Colorado just called up one of their Academy players during their last game. So instead of just having the Academies sitting there for show with a few players coming from them each season it would be nice if we could interact with them. Like my next season started for Colorado and I've gotten my hands on a nice 16 y/o ST and 17 y/o CB, loads of potential but no place on my first team for them yet. One I can't loan out because I traded for him so I'm the third club in 1 season (he can't play for more then that in the same season) the other rejects all options to go out on a loan to a feeder. So it would be nice if they could be sent over to the Academy just like I could move a player over to my U20 team for a Euro club.

Maybe I'm just not seeing it but the Academy just looks like an annual lottery to get a nice player out of it if you are lucky. Beyond that there is nothing you can do with them, despite them being listed in your 'Squad' drop down like other feeders.

Yes I want to be like any other youth team in Europe. You can just freely move youth players between the senior and academy squad. Like I posted earlier teams can have up to 2 youth players that don't count against the squad cap.

And the new youth batch is always like a lottery, whether you're playing as Chelsea or TFC. In FM09 I had the best right back in the world, and he was from Real Oviedo in Spain.

Yes I want to be like any other youth team in Europe. You can just freely move youth players between the senior and academy squad. Like I posted earlier teams can have up to 2 youth players that don't count against the squad cap.

And the new youth batch is always like a lottery, whether you're playing as Chelsea or TFC. In FM09 I had the best right back in the world, and he was from Real Oviedo in Spain.

Oh i get that newgens are a lottery, it's just that with the MLS academies that is their only function, that's all I'm saying. Just silly to have them sitting there dangling like you can do something with them but you really can't and you just have newgens magically appear on your squad list from them. I can't imagine it being that hard to implement them like other clubs youth squads.

Edit: I forgot there is one question I have about the academies that maybe someone here knows. Because of the whole disconnected I've never really figured out if your teams coaches, especially a youth coach of course, have any affect on the academy training? I know it says they share training facilities but have no clue if they actually use your coaches since you can't interact with them at all.

I had a little talk (if you can call posting on another forum, a 'talk' ) with the North American HR about getting academy players in the game, but he then reminded me about the college player issue. He apparently also proposed fake names like in EHM07 with the college players, but someone told him SI wouldn't allow that.

Which means that there have been talks about having academies (youth teams) for MLS clubs. I hope there is a workaround for this, but I hope that there are MLS youth teams because I believe this period is the beginning of clubs developing homegrown players. And if you guys have MLS youth teams, why not add youth team tournaments because I remember there was a youth tournament somewhere in the States (Dallas/Fort-Worth or was it Houston I don't remember...) but even European youth teams participated in this tournament. I hope someone can expand on this and what the tournament name is and all.

And could you please encourage clubs to build soccer-specific stadiums, the Revs are still playing at Gillette Stadium in my game and it's 2019...

1/3 of transfer fees to the league?

That's ridiculous. It's like something the PL would come up with over here and then be laughed at, like the 39th game thing.

1/3 of transfer fees to the league?

That's ridiculous. It's like something the PL would come up with over here and then be laughed at, like the 39th game thing.

They don't want another NASL.

And this is not MLS related, but it is CONCACAF related: there is a proposal to revamp the World Cup Qualifying for the CONCACAF region, more info here. I'm not sure if it will be ratified before FM11 goes gold but just putting it out there for the guys at SI.

Which means that there have been talks about having academies (youth teams) for MLS clubs. I hope there is a workaround for this, but I hope that there are MLS youth teams because I believe this period is the beginning of clubs developing homegrown players. And if you guys have MLS youth teams, why not add youth team tournaments because I remember there was a youth tournament somewhere in the States (Dallas/Fort-Worth or was it Houston I don't remember...) but even European youth teams participated in this tournament. I hope someone can expand on this and what the tournament name is and all.

You're probably thinking of the Dallas Cup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Cup

Probably the logical thing to do is put the academies in and have them produce newgens. Wouldn't get the existing academy players, but at least it would be in place for the game.

1/3 of transfer fees to the league?

That's ridiculous. It's like something the PL would come up with over here and then be laughed at, like the 39th game thing.

League structured differently. Central office holds the contracts.

As is right now (FM 2010), it's better to have the MLS academies as a seperate feeder club, with "players move freely" option. It works, in a weird way. If you set it up this way, you can "buy" anybody from your own academy team for zero dollars (the academy seems to automatically accept any offer from the parent MLS club) -- but you have to enable the move freely option in the editor.

The problem, in FM 2010 with having them as a U18 or U20 tab within the main club would be that the ENTIRE ACADEMY TEAM would count within the 24 player squad size!!!

So, under current circumstances, it is better for the academy teams to produce regens, but not the MLS team.

If the academy could somehow be set up as a U18 team or U20 team connected directly to the main team, but the players would not count toward club roster maximums, that would be ideal. But it would require a lot of hard-coding, and to be honest, I would guess it's impossible.

It is reasonably rare, IRL, for academy players to play in the MLS in a competitive match. Much more common in friendlies, or the less important Canadian Championship. And if a player is indeed good enough, the MLS club will usually just sign the player on permanently, as TFC recently did with Doneil Henry.

So, to be honest, the current system with "players move freely" enabled is not too bad as far as realism. What would be a great addition, though, is that 2 players per year can be promoted and not count towards the salary cap/squad maximum size. I would guess this could be hard-coded REASONABLY easily.

With the demo being released now, (I haven't player MLS) but wanted to know if the OP's comments re salary cap, dp's etc had been properly implemented into FM11?