[Traded International Slots disappear after a week]

If it helps, I've uploaded a save where Atlanta United has 10 int'l slots at the beginning of the save (at 10am on February 27th in the game).  On the next click, the game advances to 1pm, and Atlanta United has 8 international slots.  It's replicable. There's nothing obvious (i.e., a specific transaction) that triggers the loss of international slots.

The save has been uploaded to the SI Games cloud - it's dcunited-atlanta_intl_slots_change_on_next_click.fm

The other thing is that in long-term sims (i.e. 5-6 seasons into the future), most MLS squads have 0-2 int'l slots.  However, the Canadian teams tend to have about 4-6 left.  I believe that Canadian teams are allocated three additional international slots that American MLS teams do not have.  So it's possible that the coding for these special Canadian international slots is immune to the bug that is causing the issues here.

And to reiterate what others have said, this bug essentially makes MLS unplayable. 

[Traded International Slots disappear after a week]

I've seen this as well - I simmed the game to 2029 and there were only 38 international slots left for the entire league by then.  Something is making the slots "disappear" over time.  

Conceptually related to this issue, it seems like the league overall has less international slots then it should.  According to the MLS roster rules and regulations page, there are 233 roster slots divided among the 29 MLS clubs.  When the game starts, there are only 198 international slots - so there are 35 "missing" when the game begins.

https://www.mlssoccer.com/about/roster-rules-and-regulations

Quote

International Players

In 2023, a total of 233 international roster slots are divided among the 29 clubs. These roster slots are tradable, in full season increments, such that some clubs may have more than eight and some clubs may have less than eight during any given season. With trades, there is no limit on the number of international roster slots on each club's roster.

 

[No matches scheduled for Charlotte II squad, can't schedule friendlies]

Just to follow up, this happens with other teams as well.  I am managing DC United, and can't schedule any friendlies for its feeder club (Loudoun United).  This seems to happen once the season starts.

[MLS Salary Cap Issues, 22.2]

I've uploaded them - there are three files at different stages.

dcu5b.fm - A few days before the registration date (March 30th, 2021)

dcu5c.fm - Registration day (April 2nd, 2021) 

dcu6.fm - After Castellanos is waived (April 6th, 2021)

All of the examples from the posts above are from this save series - but I've replicated the problem with a different start.  Happy to send those as well if needed.

Also, one more thing to note that might help.  As noted above, one issue is that the AI is extending contracts without using TAM, which affects the salary cap.  However, some players aren't paid enough to use TAM - you need to have a cap hit above $612k for it to go into effect.

 Many of the players in MLS in 2021 have contract extensions as part of their contract.  Using the example above, Sean Johnson has a one-year contract extension available to him (you can see it in the dcu5b.fm save, as he hasn't been resigned yet).  If the team wants to extend his contract, it has three choices - each with different cap impacts.

1. Simply trigger the contract extension clause for 2022 at $510k/yr.  This does not in any way influence the contract AND cap value for 2021.  So if the player has a favorable cap value (which Sean Johnson does at $200k/year), then this is the best choice - the cap value does not change.

2. Sign a more lucrative extension, but use TAM to reduce the cap value for 2021.  There might be a slight advantage to a smaller cap hit (of $150k), but it would involve a moderate outlay of TAM funds and a larger contract (at least $610k/year).

3. Sign an extension, and have a full cap hit.  This is what the AI typically does; and it is frequently a mistake if a contract extension is available.

So it might be best to have three steps for the AI when it wants to resign a player with a "good" cap value for the current season.

Step 1: If the player has an automatic contract extension, use it.

Step 2: If the player does not have an automatic contract extension, and will sign a contract that is TAM-eligible (cap value above $610k/year), then use TAM to reduce the cap hit as much as possible (i.e. to $150k/year).

Step 3: If the player does not have an automatic contract extension and will NOT sign a contract that is TAM-eligible (cap value below $610k/year), have their contract start date be "End of Season".  Then the current cap value does not change.

[MLS Salary Cap Issues, 22.2]

I want to add to this post, as I think I've figured out a big piece of the problem.  In short, the AI is not using targeted allocation money when it should be.

A primer on target allocation money (TAM)

In MLS, there are two mechanisms for reducing salary cap impact.  One, which has been implemented in FM for a while, is general allocation money (GAM). With this, you can buy down non-DP contracts (in most cases) such that their cap charge is about half of their salary for any given year.  This is implemented in the game when you click Contract/Buy down salary cap impact.

However, there is a second way to buy down cap impact - targeted allocation money (TAM).  When signing a player to a contract (either a new signing or a contract extension of an existing player), you can use TAM money to offset the cap impact for any player making above the designated player (DP) minimum that is not a designated player.  TAM funds can be used to decrease the cap value to a minimum of $150k/year if available, and are only utilized the year the player is signed.  So let's say that you sign a player to a three year, $900k/year contract.  You can use TAM funds to decrease the cap impact for year 1 of the contract.  For years 2-3, GAM needs to be used (unless you decide to restructure their contract - then TAM can be used again).

For MLS, this is an extremely important piece of roster development.  It essentially allows for the development of an "upper-middle class" of players that can really strengthen teams outside of DPs.

In past versions of FM, TAM funds have been nearly impossible to use.  However, in FM22, you can use TAM.  When signing a player, click on "additional budgets".  A new screen will show up that shows "SALARY IMPACT ADJUSTMENTS".  If the contract is TAM eligible (where the payroll budget is above $612k/year), then you will be able to reduce the cap impact using TAM.  Click on the "On D-TAM" radio button and (importantly) use it to reduce the cap impact as much as you want, as long as you have TAM.  The cap impact will be shown in the section "On Salary Budget".  

This is an amazing addition for those who play MLS in FM - it allows for quite a bit more flexibility in signing new players, and in dealing with cap issues.  But there is a big problem - the AI doesn't know how to use it.

TAM and the AI

Looking at the same game referenced in the previous post, I looked at the LA Galaxy.  In that game, Sebastian Lletget starts the game being paid $924,000 year, with a cap impact of $199,000 a year.  So he has a good cap value, but his contract expires at the end of 2021. Given that he could leave MLS on a free, it makes sense that the AI would want to resign him during the season.

The AI resigns him on April 4th to a $774,000/year contract for three years, and uses all of its $175,000 of GAM to reduce his cap impact to $612,000.  This is important - in no way is this the right decision.  The Galaxy can easily take money from its $2.8 million in TAM to reduce the cap impact of the Lletget signing all the way down to $150k/year.  However, the AI did not touch their TAM funds.  Instead, they were forced to waive two players and begin the season over the cap.

Looking across the league at other teams, the same thing is happening.  When either signing new players or resigning current players that are TAM eligible, the AI is either not using TAM, or not using TAM maximally.  In the previous post, Toronto signed Fredy Guarin to a $612k/year contract, and then cut him one month later.  Looking at this cap impact, neither GAM nor TAM was used.  They could have easily stayed under the salary cap and kept him if they used TAM when signing him.

How to (quickly) fix this

Given that the AI is barely using their TAM funds, the easy fix would be this: For new signings that are TAM eligible (i.e. cap values that are above the DP-minimum but are not DPs), the team should always use TAM funds to decrease the cap hit to the minimum ($150k).  Given that there aren't many TAM-eligible signings per season, it is unlikely that teams will run out of TAM - and if they do, they can use GAM or restructure contracts.

And just a note: It would be really nice to put some resources into this. Imagine if a Football Manager game was released and, say, Harry Kane  and a slew of very good Premier League players were released on a free to start the season. There would be an uproar, the game would be rightfully panned, and the issue would be fixed immediately. This doesn't seem to happen with MLS. It's wonderful that new additions (like the ability to implement TAM) have been added - but the game isn't really playable if only the user can use it and the AI can't.