
Gary Gibson
12/25/25
Earlier this week, the NWSL announced the “High Impact Player” (HIP) rule. Designed to allow teams to spend an additional $1 million over the salary cap, the rule was fast-tracked as a response to the “Trinity Rodman saga,” giving clubs a loophole to pay global stars competitive wages without hitting the standard cap.
While the league frames this as a “win” for talent retention, the reality is far more complicated—and significantly more damaging to the league’s long-term health.
Two Paths, One Wrong Turn
There were two clear schools of thought on how to handle the growing global demand for talent:
- The NWSLPA View: Simply raise the team salary cap by $1 million across the board. This gives every team the flexibility to spend on the players they value most.
- The NWSL Board View: Create a restricted “Designated Player” style rule tied to external “marketability” and arbitrary media rankings.
The NWSL chose the latter, implementing a system that feels like a poorly conceived version of MLS’s DP rule—one that prioritizes optics and “marketability” over actual footballing merit.
1. It Kills Parity (The “Utah vs. San Diego” Problem)
A simple salary cap increase benefits everyone. It allows a small-market team like Utah Royals to identify a diamond-in-the-rough and pay them what they’re worth or simply spend the money filling out the roster with .
Instead, the HIP rule disproportionately favors big-market teams like Gotham FC and West Coast giants. Let’s be real: no world-ranked superstar is choosing Salt Lake City over San Diego or New York if the money is the same. By tying extra funds to “High Impact” status, the league is effectively ensuring that the richest, most attractive markets get even richer, while everyone else is left fighting for the “standard” cap leftovers.
2. The Arbitrary “List” Problem
If you’re an NWSL GM, you are no longer allowed to decide for yourself—using your own scouting and data—that a player is worth a certain salary. Instead, you have to hope they make a list.
The league is using external rankings like the ESPN FC Top 50 and The Guardian Top 100 as benchmarks. This creates a massive conflict of interest:
GM Influence: Since GMs and coaches vote on the NWSL awards (which account for part of the HIP criteria), they can now directly influence whether their own players—or their rivals’ players—qualify for “the bag.”
Bias & Unscientific: These lists are voted on by media members who are often biased, arbitrary, or simply don’t watch every game.
Media Partners: ESPN is an NWSL media partner. The league has now created a system where its own business partners essentially decide which players are “marketable” enough to get paid.
3. A Front-Door Union Bust
At Soccer Over Gotham, we stand with the players and independent supporters’ groups. This move feels like blatant “front-door” union-busting. By implementing this unilaterally without bargaining with the NWSLPA, the league is stripping away player agency.
Players will now feel like they need to lobby media members to be put on a list. It seems obvious that under Commissioner Jessica Berman, the owners would still rather pay lawyers to fight the union than pay the players themselves.
The Ultimate Irony: Gotham’s Own Stars are Disqualified
Perhaps the most “NWSL” thing about this rule is that it disqualifies some of the very stars who have built this league’s current momentum.
Under the current criteria (which looks at the previous two seasons), Gotham superstars like Midge Purce and Jaedyn Shaw wouldn’t even qualify for HIP status:
- Midge Purce: Despite being the 2023 Championship MVP, her 2024 injury and lack of “Best XI” honors in the specific two-year window leave her out.
- Jaedyn Shaw: One of the brightest young talents in the world, yet because she hasn’t hit the arbitrary “Top 40” of a specific media list yet, she’s stuck under the standard cap.
When your “Superstar Rule” doesn’t even apply to the superstars winning you trophies, you have to conclude that the NWSL Board of Governors simply isn’t watching the same game we are.
What do you think of the new rule?
Leave a comment