It’s time to form the PLL Players Association
The Premier Lacrosse League announced a version of free agency coming to the sport. Beginning next off season, players can negotiate contracts with their clubs, or other clubs upon the expiration of their current contract. This is a major step towards the PLL becoming more like big four leagues, where free agency, trade deadlines, and player movement are a major conversation driver and point of engagement for both casual and die-hard fans.
Coaches will also serve as team GMs, handling the signing of players, as well as trading other personnel decisions. This could be problematic, as the separation of coach and GM in other sports is often necessary. Coaches can become sentimental and emotionally attached to players — how could they not — while GMs maintain enough distance to be able to make hard decisions related to the trading or cutting of a player. Salary cap decisions get made and things of that nature, which is what makes the separation invaluable.
Free agency ties directly to player empowerment, and making sure that the players (the labor that makes the whole league work) are fairly compensated and have a certain amount of power when it comes to their contracts and value. I took a look at the system as it is now, although it may change in the next year. After trying to understand as much as I could, and speaking to several PLL players about how they understand the situation, I came to a bit of a strange conclusion. The system is heavily tilted in favor of the PLL and the clubs, with almost all the players in a rather unfavorable position.
As of this moment, players really have no incentive to sign anything other than a one-year deal with a team. On the other side of the table, the PLL teams have no downside at all if a player signs a multi-year deal. It’s pretty straightforward to understand why.
As a hypothetical, let’s say a player is set to become a free agent and has a very productive year. He puts up 35 points, his team makes a playoff run, everything goes well. As you’d expect, this player would likely be looking for a nice pay day come free agency, as they would in any other sport. There are two options for contract length here, a one-year deal, or a longer-term deal (anything two to four years I’m calling longer term; there’s no sense really in splitting hairs at this point, the sport isn’t big enough for that yet).
If a player signs a multi-year deal, the club they sign with has no risk associated with it at all. Let’s say after that earlier hypothetical season, the player has a serious regression. After a few games, they only have 2–3 points and haven’t been able to gel with the offense of the team they signed with, or changes to the roster of the team they returned to are causing issues. After a month of poor production, that player gets left off the active roster. After all, the depth of talent in the PLL is well documented, and teams often leave starting caliber talent on the inactive roster every week. Jake Froccaro was an All-Star and then didn’t play a minute during the Chaos title run. Seasons are short, wins are critical. Moreover, players in the PLL don’t receive a full game check unless they are on the active roster.
So, if a player signs a multi-year deal and underperforms, they risk being left off an active roster, getting a fraction of the money they signed for, and ultimately not being able to try and go somewhere else without asking for a trade. Trades in that situation are unlikely, as it often doesn’t make sense to trade someone when their value is that low. The club can effectively stash this player without worrying about a cap hit for the length of their contract if they want to. It’s risk free.
But what about the reverse? What if the player signs for multiple years and remains a world beater? Well, the club is the benefactor their too, and the player isn’t able to capitalize. If my hypothetical player stays hot, keeps playing at that high level and even turns it up, putting up a 40-point season, maybe winning a year end award, he’s stuck on a deal that undervalues him. The club gets to pay a player less than what their value is, and the player has to maintain production in order to capitalize down the road when the deal that is underpaying them expires. Even if a team signs an average player, middle of the road in points or a second line midfielder, someone like that, and that player takes a leap to the top of the sport, they remain stuck on their poor deal. There’s no opt out, there’s nothing that allows them to maximize their value immediately.
Another drawback on long term deals for players is the possibility of expansion of the schedule. You read that correctly. Let’s say our hypothetical player signs a four-year deal, paying him $40,000 per year, following a schedule like it is now. Two years from now, PLL is booming, and more venues and games are added. Good news, right? Except as it is now, the player who signed that deal doesn’t have his salary increased. He got $40,000 for 12 games, he’ll get $40,000 for 18 games or whatever number it grows to. His game check just reduced, even as he will be playing more, travelling more, and training more. The cap number also doesn’t change.
Finally, I was told by multiple players that marketing deals, which is extra money a player can make that won’t count towards the cap, aren’t being negotiated with players until after the player signs a deal with his club, hindering the income for some players. This isn’t a massive amount of money, I’d heard that the neighborhood of $10,000 is as much as most players can expect in marketing dollars currently, but it’s not nothing either. And it’s still leverage over a player that can make them feel obligated to sign a deal they might not necessarily be ready to sign yet in the interest of securing marketing opportunities.
It’s a pretty clear disadvantage for players in this situation. I’ve spoken to a number of PLL players about this who asked me not to mention names here. One of them told me they would never sign a multi-year deal barring a massive increase in salary. Most of the higher player salaries currently sit in the $45,000 range. Long term deals to this point have generally only been a bump of a few thousand dollars, which isn’t enough for players to risk being stuck somewhere and not being paid, or possibly being underpaid. With that in mind, some are actively advising others in the league not to sign more than a one-year deal, as they really have little or no upside or reward for doing so.
There are obviously cases already where players sign for multiple years. Notably Grant Ament and Graeme Hossack, among the best in the world at their respective positions, signed deals with the Archers through 2024. And again, they’re the best in the world at their positions. Ament could start next year with no points through three games and he wouldn’t be dropped from the active roster. But the system needs to be on the level for all players, not just a situation where superstars feel comfortable on long term deals and everyone else is taking on all the risk.
Some players clearly don’t mind the situation as is. I spoke with a player who told me that with the right coach, in a great locker room, and provided the money was basically the max of what he’d consider his value to be financially, he’d consider signing a two-year deal, but otherwise would just sign one-year deals going forward. These are rather unique situations though. What’s being described is the utopian ideal of a player situation, in which case the player would CONSIDER a two year deal. To expect everyone, or even the majority of players, to find this situation isn’t realistic.
So, what’s so bad about just signing the one-year deals? Bet on yourself every year, make some money, hit the reset button on your situation each off season when needed, sounds like a win for a player, correct? Not really.
Think about how the other major pro sports leagues operate. Long term deals with guaranteed money are what players are looking for in almost every situation. In the NFL, this is particularly important, as often the only money guaranteed by a player’s contract is the signing bonus and any other money marked as guaranteed. If you see a player sign for $100 million, $30 million guaranteed, it’s very likely the value of their contract all said and done is not nearly $100 million. In the NBA, contracts are guaranteed for players barring some extraordinary circumstance. Play or not, players are paid what’s in their deal. Deals have bonuses, incentives, opt outs, and more ways for the player to have some control. Pro lacrosse players shouldn’t be any different, and the free agency structure shouldn’t force them to be.
Lacrosse players, like NFL players, should strive to maximize their value and contracts as much as they can, while they can. Lacrosse is a physical, violent sport. I have spoken with players who tell me they’ve suffered multiple concussions within a single season, which aren’t always part of the injury report each week. The league recently partnered with Q-Collar, which is a piece of equipment players wear to reduce the risk of severe brain injury — a testament to how seriously the league is taking traumatic brain injuries. For some guys, this injury risk is compounded when they go straight from the PLL season to the indoors and theeven more physical and punishing box game in the NLL. But, no active roster spot, no full paycheck. Injured players in the PLL can get workers’ comp pay, but that’s not the full value of their game check, and some players have told me that getting the workers’ comp money has been quite difficult so far. It’s still a game where scary, career threatening injuries can happen every time a player steps on the field, and for that reason it’s paramount that players have the opportunity to maximize their earning potential while they are playing.
The solution here, as it is in most sport leagues, is a strong labor union. The PLL Players Association needs to become a reality it needs to happen quickly. And I say it needs to happen quickly because based on the sentiment of several players I spoke with, there’s already frustration brewing with the way contracts are set up. A collectively bargained agreement between the players and the PLL affords the players protections and salary guarantees they need in order to make this whole free agency thing work in an equitable way. Players on their own, with or without an agent, without complete information on the market, negotiating a contract with a league that has a massive list of talent anxiously awaiting their own spot on a roster, and with clubs taking on almost no risk, is not what this should look like. I’ll side with labor over management almost every single time — and virtually every time in the world of sports. The players make this whole thing run, and a union is necessary to make sure they’re compensated fairly and with an opportunity to maximize their contract lengths and values. There is enough NLL talent, and even NLL union leadership, with experience in how this union should work and what collective bargaining looks like. I hope the leadership from those NLL players in the PLL leads to union formation gaining momentum quickly.
