Guest Jeffery S. Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I have heard that Dale Mitchell will be presented to the press as the new national coach on Thursday the 11th, the day after the Annual General Meeting of the CSA. I heard this from one of the press people who wrote back to me after receiving the Voyageurs protest letter. It seems to have come up at the Hall of Fame banquet this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 You heard anything further on Linford's future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (sigh) Dale Mitchell does not have the experience to be the Men's National Team coach. What is his coaching background? What teams has he coached? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juby Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 If were gonna settle, I'd prefer stephen hart, he's done well for a interim and seems to have a good head on his shoulders but there's very little between the two in terms of overall quality in my opinion. could this mean a promotion for hart to the U-20 team after the WC? doubt they'd switch youth coaches at the immidiate point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cndsoccer Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 maybe 2014....what a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocco Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Where is going to take place the AGM? Will be great if the VOYAGUERS show up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 [xx(] Ug. Guess it was just a revolt and not a revolution. Double Ug. Wonder what it all means? (Politically. If anything). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cndsoccer Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 they went cheap on the coach again... well i guess they can increase there bar tab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 And thus, if true, begins another four years of disappointment. I think we should abandoned qualification, and just focus on hosting a world cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cndsoccer Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 maybe the under 14 girls will make it. they seem to think that is more important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffymac1971 Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 Sorry boys, I think Mitchell is the right man over Hart. Look at Mitchell's track record compared to Hart. Mitchell has coached and led Canada to Under 20 WC in 03, 05 and 07. 03' World Cup team lost in extra to quarter final to Spain. Hart, U17 head coach failed to quaify for 03, 05 and now 07. Hart might be interim coach but Mitchell has better track record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 For me, the only good thing is this: with the money we save we have absolutely no excuse not to be playing 10 matches a year, at least 4 at home. Plus more home friendlies. The money has to be spent on getting the team playing experience, starting now. Responding to most who think Mitchell cannot handle the u-20s and the senior men at the same time: it is quite normal in some national team programs for the senior men's coach to be right on top of what is happening with the youth. This often means having the senior coach guiding a general philosophy, but having someone else training the group, with both on the bench for key games. Though we are sort of talking about the reverse situation, I would not be surprised to see Mitchell coaching both the Gold Cup and the u-20 WC this summer, perhaps with Hart close by. At least we will get full value for our money if that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthew Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I think Mitchell is a much better option than Hart and at this late date one or the other is almost a necessity. At the very least we will be more or less going forward from where we stand rather than starting from square one with someone who doesn't know our players. We've totally squandered our prep time and start in a hole before a ball has been kicked. To me that is the major worry. The way the Simoes business was handled is a travesty, but not getting Simoes concerns me less. Mitchell may in fact, be a better choice, but even if he is not I don't think Simoes is significantly better as a coach, as a TD I think he would have been very valuable, but as a coach I didn't see him being a miracle worker. He and Mitchell both have positives and negatives . . . In the time between post-U20 until qualifying starts (I'm assuming next spring, say a year's time) we will have to maximize our friendlies, but that won't allow us to play many (any) at home again during the Euro season/winter. And means we won't likely be playing many against CONCACAF opposition either. The more it changes . . . Maybe it's best I'm going into a qualifying cycle as pessimistic as I've ever been in my life. Guarded optimism has never done me any good. cheers, matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I like Michell but was in favour of Simoes being hired. That being said if Simoes was 10 times a better hire than Mitchell, Mitchell is 1000 times better than Hart. I will give Hart credit for bringing back some guys to the national team who Yallop pissed off and calling good squads. Otherwise he showed complete incompetence in training the team and installing any sort of tactical strategy (ie. even a poor tactical strategy would have been preferrable to the 11 men doing what they wanted that we saw under Hart). Hart's coaching abilities are not even close to those of an international level coach. I would have preffered Simoes be hired this time with possibly Mitchell as his successor. However, if Mitchell is hired this time I will be behind him 100% until he shows me he is not deserving of this support. Anyone wanting to look in the archives will see I also supported Yallop's hiring and liked his Belize squad. Afterwards I was very dissappointed in his squad selection, tactics, acceptance of personal responsibility, etc. and became probably his biggest critic on this board. I think Mitchell should have my and other posters full support at the beginning. Afterwards we may need to be critical of his decisions and results, ie. good results and we remain behind him. If he starts making a lot of questionable decisions and the results are poor than we can criticize his performance and choice as head coach. Until then he should get our full support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Grizzly I like Michell but was in favour of Simoes being hired. That being said if Simoes was 10 times a better hire than Mitchell, Mitchell is 1000 times better than Hart. I will give Hart credit for bringing back some guys to the national team who Yallop pissed off and calling good squads. Otherwise he showed complete incompetence in training the team and installing any sort of tactical strategy (ie. even a poor tactical strategy would have been preferrable to the 11 men doing what they wanted that we saw under Hart). Hart's coaching abilities are not even close to those of an international level coach. I would have preffered Simoes be hired this time with possibly Mitchell as his successor. However, if Mitchell is hired this time I will be behind him 100% until he shows me he is not deserving of this support. Anyone wanting to look in the archives will see I also supported Yallop's hiring and liked his Belize squad. Afterwards I was very dissappointed in his squad selection, tactics, acceptance of personal responsibility, etc. and became probably his biggest critic on this board. I think Mitchell should have my and other posters full support at the beginning. Afterwards we may need to be critical of his decisions and results, ie. good results and we remain behind him. If he starts making a lot of questionable decisions and the results are poor than we can criticize his performance and choice as head coach. Until then he should get our full support. I basically agree with this position. I too thought Yallop was ideal, then he came up with bad decisions and poor results and I turned off him. But even then, in his last year, the team played some good soccer. By then, though, it was too late to matter, and he could not vindicate himself with friendlies what he had squandered in official matches. If Mitchell is the coach, then he has to be 100% responsible for the Gold Cup campaign. If he decides to throw it (not lead the team, not prepare it properly, not coach it himself, not call in the best players, call in u-20s for Gold Cup as a way of preparing them for their WC instead of benefitting the senior team) so he can focus on the u-20 WC, he will have automatically lost all credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.If Mitchell is the coach, then he has to be 100% responsible for the Gold Cup campaign. If he decides to throw it (not lead the team, not prepare it properly, not coach it himself, not call in the best players, call in u-20s for Gold Cup as a way of preparing them for their WC instead of benefitting the senior team) so he can focus on the u-20 WC, he will have automatically lost all credit. This is a tricky situation as I would say our priorities should be 1) WCQ 2) U-20 WC and 3) Gold Cup. Yet the problem is that number 3 can have a significant effect of number 1. The problem for Mitchell is that if Canada progresses far into the Gold Cup it is at a time he should be holding a training camp and friendlies for the U-20. I would still prefer Mitchell to be in charge of the Men's team immediately but he may have to delegate the responsibilities for some Gold Cup games to Hart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cndsoccer Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 comparing mitchell and hart is like saying i rather have jock itch instead of crabs...what a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S. Responding to most who think Mitchell cannot handle the u-20s and the senior men at the same time: it is quite normal in some national team programs for the senior men's coach to be right on top of what is happening with the youth. This often means having the senior coach guiding a general philosophy, but having someone else training the group, with both on the bench for key games. Though we are sort of talking about the reverse situation, I would not be surprised to see Mitchell coaching both the Gold Cup and the u-20 WC this summer, perhaps with Hart close by. Well, exactly. Mitchell will have to not only coach the senior team, but will have to oversee the younger teams and the whole youth system. It will be interesting to see what new directions he implements across the country. I am assuming of course that the CSA does not hire a separate Technical Director. Can Mitchell do all this an elevate soccer in Canada in the eyes of the rest of the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knowitall Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 I contacted the offices of the CSA 1-613-237-7678 and was told the following; The AGM is being held this weekend and the elections will be held on Sunday the 14th of May.The individuals elected to the Executive will now be elected for a 4 year term as per the new by-laws.The position of C.O.O. will not be filled until August.No decision made on the coach and Hart is coaching for the Gold Cup and Mitchell is far too busy with the U20. The Executive are in Toronto and are having meetings all week on a wide range of issues prior to the AGM. Remember this is what I was told by the offices of the CSA. What I was not told by the offices of the CSA, but has been confirmed by 2 seperate sources, is that the individual who was the number 1 choice and was offered the job of C.O.O. did a U turn and rejected the opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 August???? Unreal. If our stated goal was to NOT qualify for 2010, I don't think we could possibly do anything more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VancouverDude Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 quote:Originally posted by cndsoccer comparing mitchell and hart is like saying i rather have jock itch instead of crabs...what a joke. Early nominee for quote of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 I think Dale Mitchell will be a fine coach. Between his years with the Vancouver 86ers/Whitecaps and the national U-20 side, he's been a full-time head coach for going on nine years and has been consistently successful. He's coached four cohorts of U-20s, so he knows the young talent in our system. He's been through the CONCACAF wars as a player. I have every confidence in him and I'll feel very good about our chances of qualifying for 2010 if he is indeed named as our new coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joga bonito Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 The issue is not really Mitchell vs Simoes (although Simoes was a great opportunioty in my view)...its the structural changes that Simoes offered to change the approacgh to developing our national elite and their succession. Mitchell won't touch that - and I am not sure he is capable or willing to do that anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 In some ways I feel like we live in Mongolia and we're talking about G-8 microeconomic issues. Simoes may have great ideas, but I don't think he'd have the resources unless we can get a COO and keep a president who puts the focus on the MNT. We need sponsorship dollars to get more friendlies and get our players over here and to Central America on first class flights. We also need more professional clubs with academies playing North America top flight soccer. This is about all we need to qualify IMHO. We don't need some magic Brasilian witch doctor and his strength trainer. Not to disrespect Simoes record, I just don't think his ideas mean much until we have the cash to cover the basics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 quote:Originally posted by MikeD He's coached four cohorts of U-20s, so he knows the young talent in our system. Actually it is just three (2003, 2005 & 2007's teams - Paul James coached the 2001 edition), but the point is nevertheless a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.