SEATTLE — The players signed an agreement. Sticklers could stop the argument right there.

They could say that the footballers should have been smarter about capping their earnings at $1 million per tournament, and instead opted for a 50/50 split. They could say the union should have been better visionaries in anticipating what might come.

It’s a contract, guys! Don’t sign it if you don’t like it!

This is a valid argument. But let me offer a counter. You can decide what’s right.

The issue at hand is a prospective payout for MLS teams involved in the FIFA men’s Club World Cup, which begins this month. In March, FIFA announced that a record $1 billion prize pot will be awarded for the 32 teams in the tourney — $525 million guaranteed for participation, and another $475 million based on performance. This means that the three CWC teams from MLS — the Sounders, LAFC and Inter Miami — will be guaranteed $9.55 million each, with $1 million going to the players. Should any of those teams advance in the tournament, the prize money per team will increase, but due to a stipulation in MLS’ collective bargaining agreement from 2021, the players’ share maxes out at $1 million. That means close to a 90-10 split for the owners regardless of results, and potentially something much more lopsided.

As you’re probably aware, the Sounders aren’t too happy about this. Before last Sunday’s game vs. Minnesota, players for the club donned T-shirts with the words “Club World” and “Ca$h Grab” bracketing Mr. Monopoly on the front, and the words “Fair Share Now” emblazoned on the back. Players felt that the 2021 CBA clause that caps MLS players pay at $1 million for “performance and/or participation in a compulsory tournament or noncompulsory tournament” is outdated. They think that nobody involved in the negotiations could have envisioned the $1 billion windfall stemming from this Club World Cup, which likely wasn’t on the owners’ radar.

After all, until the Sounders won the CONCACAF Champions Cup in 2022, no MLS team had ever qualified for the Club World Cup, which became a once-every-four-years event after the most recent CBA was ratified. Moreover, the understanding is that MLS’ Vancouver Whitecaps would have received $2 million had they won the CONCACAF Champions Cup last Sunday. In other words, MLS has made exceptions to the $1 million cap for outside tournaments in the past.

Still — a contract is a contract if we’re talking about what’s legally binding. I think back to former NBA great Scottie Pippen, who was the sixth-highest-paid player on the Bulls in his heyday despite being one of the 10 (five?) best players in the league. He sat out for part of the 1998 season in protest, but my take was always: “Scottie, you opted for the long-term deal. This is on you.”

He wanted security and chose not to bet on himself via a short-term contract that would have prompted more lucrative free-agent offers if he played well. Pippen outperforming his salary was a possibility when he agreed to the terms. He just didn’t want to risk it.

But what’s going on with the Sounders in regard to the Club World Cup doesn’t feel the same. This would be like if Pippen were struck by lightning and, as a result, gained the ability to dunk from half court, thus quintupling ticket prices and TV ratings. It would be something that nobody on either side of the bargaining table could have conceived of when negotiating his contract. An ungodly financial boon from out of nowhere — kind of like a $1 billion prize pool for players in a league whose previous tournament highs were less than 1/100th of that.

I can see why Sounders owner Adrian Hanauer would be upset with his players. He likely saw the shirts as a surprise attack. Even if he wanted to disperse the prize money more evenly among the Sounders, the MLS board of governors would take him to task for defying the CBA. Still, berating the team, as he reportedly did, is never a good look for an owner whose net worth likely exceeds all of the players’ combined.

The truth of the matter is, the players had talked about what they felt was an unfair disparity before. It didn’t get much attention. Like it or not — and it’s fair not to like it — these shirts got people talking.

Perhaps the real lesson here is to think long and hard about what you agree to before signing that dotted line. Had players just asked for a percentage instead of a cap, there would be zero frustration right now. Anticipating the future as best they can has long been a hallmark of the rich. Maybe the owners were just 10 steps before the players.

But I doubt it. The Club World Cup will generate significantly more prize money for participating MLS teams than any tournament before it. It’s understandable for players to think the CBA stipulation is outdated.

The MLS doesn’t have to make any financial adjustments on this matter. Should it, though? Like I said, you can decide what’s right.

____

©2025 The Seattle Times. Visit seattletimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.