US Soccer's Response to Senate Questions Regarding Training Compensation


US Senate Investigates US Soccer
US Senate Investigates US Soccer

US Soccer has been hiding behind the bush for too long.  Way too long.  On a variety of issues.  The issue that I have been working on, and exposing to the world, is US Soccer’s pattern of unlawfully denying American youth soccer clubs the right to be paid training compensation and solidarity contribution.


If you have been following the training compensation issue real closely, you are well aware that the United States Senate has taken a keen interest into FIFA corruption and the United States Soccer Federation’s failure to notice that this blatantly corrupt organization was corrupt.  Senator Cantwell of Washington State was further interested in why US Soccer was denying youth soccer clubs, like Westside Timbers and Crossfire Premier money, large amounts of money, that was owed to them under the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players for developing players like Rubio Rubin and DeAndre Yedlin, respectively.

I had the privilege of writing the background to the questions for US Soccer, Sunil Gulati, and Dan Flynn.  These questions were written into the Senate record.  Of course, US Soccer took their time answering these questions.  Apparently they hired outside counsel to give them a reason, any reason, no matter how laughable to support their position.    First, it was child labor laws.  Next, it was NCAA eligibility.  Then, it was the Fraser consent decree, which was and remains total non-sense.  Now, its anti-trust concerns that prevent USSF from ‘enforcing’ Articles 20 and 21 of the RSTP regarding training compensation and solidarity contributions.

First, I don’t think USSF has standing to prevent one third party from giving another third party money that, according to the unifying organization of all entities, FIFA, all parties agreed to exchange, receive, and facilitate by being a member of FIFA.  Second, if all the other countries in the world demand training compensation and solidarity fees, and the fees are based on the division and country the professional club plays in, it can’t harm player movement to finally demand these fees.  We have been soccer clubs in the rest to of the world a free pass since 2001 when the FIFA RSTP came into effect, and you know what, we aren’t exporting players like Colombia, where clubs get training compensation.  Nor are we producing quality players.  Not game changers.  Yes, it’s true, we are exporting a few more players than we used to.  But isn’t it also true that youth clubs should be compensated, whether or not the kids were scholarship players.  Sunil Gulati, a freaking Professor of Economics at Colombia University (not intentional, but I’ll take it), sure as hell teaches the future leaders of the free world about free market economies, and that but for incentives and reward the economy would flounder.  It’s basic western economics.

We have a meeting with USSF and Co. next month.  My best guess is that the furthest USSF will move at the bargaining table is to ‘allow’* Development Academies (i.e., MLS youth clubs) to seek training compensation only for scholarship players.  Humblebrag, I have been right about everything so far and not gotten much credit for it.

Enjoy US Soccer’s responses to the questions on the Senate record.

senate transfer senate 1 senate 3

Here is Sports Illustrated’s take.

*US Soccer has no business allowing, implementing, or enforcing training compensation or solidarity contributions whatsoever.  All US Soccer has the right to do is release the Player Passport, and if no club claims the training compensation or solidarity payments after 18 months, US Soccer can claim the money.  That. Is. It.

Write a comment:


Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


STAY CONNECTED WITH US:               

This website is a public resource for general information about our practice. Nothing on the website should be used as a source of legal advice. Communication via this website does not establish an attorney-client relationship with Cory Roth Law Office. Please do not send any confidential information to us until attorney-client relationship has been established. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. This website is not a solicitation of employment.