Sweeney: With drama swirling again, Revs in the right for rejecting Nacional's so-called 'loan' offer

For the second consecutive preseason, there’s a bit of drama down on the soccer side of Patriot Place.

Last year, it was Lee Nguyen, the then-incumbent central attacking midfielder who had held out for three and a half weeks at the start of preseason training. By all accounts, he had asked for — and was initially rejected — a trade out of Foxborough.

We all know how the club resolved that situation.

This year, the swirling winds of rumor and innuendo centered on Diego Fagundez, the incumbent central attacking midfielder, the Revolution’s first Homegrown signing — and may I add, the soccer-playing pride of the Pioneer Plastics City. Over the weekend, reports filtered out of his native Uruguay that Club Nacional de Football, one of the two Uruguayan soccer powers based in Montevideo, inquired about DF14’s services. Another report suggested Fagundez wants out of New England.

And as we reported Tuesday afternoon, Fagundez countered that claim. He said that he “never said” he “wanted to leave.” He added Nacional reached out to him, Fagundez told them to contact the Revs’ front office.

From what he said, the Revolution rejected the offer.

There are a couple of differences that I’d like to point out here. First, there is no indication in Fagundez’s case that he’s pressing for an exit, unlike Nguyen had in asking several times for an outgoing transfer.

The second difference is the tone both men used when BostonSportsJournal.com spoke with them about their situations. Last April, after not being named in Brad Friedel’s first six matchday squads of the season, Nguyen expressed beleaguered annoyance with the questioning and said, a few times after protracted sighing, that “I’m here doing my job, doing everything that is asked of me.”

Tuesday with Fagundez? He was cheerful, answered the questions diplomatically, and didn’t seem annoyed at all with the situation.

And why would he? After all — he is the incumbent No. 10 in Foxborough. There isn’t another No. 10 with his experience on the roster. He said it himself: “The coaching staff really likes me here, I’m in a good spot, and I’ve been starting a lot.” Right now, he has a job, a job he is good at — third highest chances created in the league last year, just a reminder — and is in a place where he fits in well with the system.

He also seems to take all of this back-and-forth in stride, not worried whatsoever about this situation: he’s under contract for this year, and has options after this. He even said that whatever happens, happens; if the Revs pick up his option, fantastic. If they don’t, he’ll worry about it in November.

While we're here, let’s also dive in a little on Nacional’s situation.

In 2018, Nacional is reported to have not paid its players for five whole months — to me, a massive red flag; earlier Wednesday, a Nacional supporter contacted me over Twitter and said, “Acá no hay plata.”

Roughly translated? There’s no money here.

Nacional’s new manager is in the midst of rebuilding his squad ahead of the Primera campaign as well as this year’s Copa Libertadores. According to that link above, he is not necessarily worried about the financial matters, and just coaching the squad. And in the midst of rebuilding, he has brought in five new players to the squad in the last three weeks. Of those five, three were brought in on loan.

Traditionally in football, the loaning of a player occurs when a certain club can afford salaries, but not a full transfer fee. There is a caveat that if they are in the same league, i.e. a Chelsea player or an Arsenal player loaned out to, say, fellow Premier League side Huddersfield Town, the loaned player cannot play for Huddersfield against the parent club. The parent club, of course, owns the player’s contract.

In Major League Soccer, though, the rules are a little different. While an MLS club can loan a player to another intraleague club, it doesn’t happen very often; a club can only make one loan per season. MLS clubs may loan out a player to a non-MLS club, provided its within the receiving club’s transfer window, and with the player’s consent.

The sending club would also receive roster relief — in other words, the player would be removed from the club’s roster — but not given Salary Budget relief unless otherwise agreed to in the loan agreement between the two clubs.

Here is the sticking point in this whole thing: it all has to do with money, and who exactly would pay for Diego Fagundez’s wages with Nacional if the Tricolores wanted to take DF14 on loan.

In this situation, Salary Budget relief means the Revolution would take Fagundez’s $190,000 salary off its books, and Nacional would instead pay him.

But as Julian Cardillo wrote today, that’s not how Nacional apparently wanted to bring Fagundez aboard. Nacional approached the Revs and offered to take Fagundez on loan, on the proviso that the Revs keep him on their books and continue paying him.

After all, the Revs have done that in the past: last year, they sent Mark Segbers to Orange County and Nico Samayoa to Las Vegas on loan; Femi Hollinger-Janzen had a one-match loan to Tulsa. All three were inevitably short-term loans, and the Revs paid their salaries while those three were away from the club.

Yet keep this in mind: Segbers and Samayoa made the Reserve Roster minimum of $54,500 each, while Femi made $67,500. That’s a drop in the hat, and with the exception of Femi’s one match away, all off-budget.

Fagundez, though, is an on-budget player, $190,000.

In short, Nacional wanted the Revs to keep a player on their books who wouldn’t play a single minute for them this season -- in a league where every bean is counted with a sharp eye.

Quite simply, Nacional is having a laugh.

I don’t think this is necessarily over, but I don’t necessarily think DF14 is going to head to Nacional — at least not this season. If they really want him, let Nacional accrue some pesos, and then come to the New England front office with an offer worth Fagundez’s talents.