ag futbol Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 About 30 minutes in.. TFC trails 2-1 mainly due to some poor set piece defending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Oh great. Nana injured and Garcia coming in. That bodes well (for Seattle). 3-1 now. Very bad clearance by Cann. Best of luck next year but the closest team to catch is taking 3 points from you today. It's over for 2010. 3-2 now. Steal a point maybe? You've got about 5 minutes to do it. Charge! Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtlfan Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Sealtle 3 TFC 2 Fulltime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Sealtle 3 TFC 2 Fulltime Seems to me .. Seattle playing on artificial turf looks pretty good..for what a second year team ? Just what do you do with TFC, Seattle draws 37k plus gets ..what appears to be a playoff berth.. and has a settled coaching situation, and seems to have the full stadia involved in chants and supporting..... are they the class of the MLS now ? With TFC dropping .... down to being almost irrelevant giving the resurgence of Red Bull NY and the success of Columbus... a mid west rust belt town ... wonder how long the kool aid drinkers supporting TFC can take this taste in their mouth's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Seems to me .. Seattle playing on artificial turf looks pretty good..for what a second year team ? To be fair Seattle is a second year team 12 years in the making. Plus they sorted out coaching and everyone on the team knows if you don't like it, TOUGH. Just ask Freddie L about that one. The correct structure with the correct people in the correct places bringing in the proper type of internationals (Montero & Nkufu) along with the correct placements in crucial positions (Keller) and you have a recipe for success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guppy Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Oh great. Nana injured and Garcia coming in. That bodes well (for Seattle). 3-1 now. Very bad clearance by Cann. Best of luck next year but the closest team to catch is taking 3 points from you today. It's over for 2010. 3-2 now. Steal a point maybe? You've got about 5 minutes to do it. Charge! Nope. Bad clearance by Cann, but Garcia got beat on the play ... I dunno what it is, is it a curse? Must Garcia play no matter what due to some supernatural force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Seems to me .. Seattle playing on artificial turf looks pretty good..for what a second year team ? To be fair Seattle is a second year team 12 years in the making. Plus they sorted out coaching and everyone on the team knows if you don't like it, TOUGH. Just ask Freddie L about that one. The correct structure with the correct people in the correct places bringing in the proper type of internationals (Montero & Nkufu) along with the correct placements in crucial positions (Keller) and you have a recipe for success. Other than the administration, Seattle is a 2 year old team not a 12 year old team. Almost no players from the USL team made the jump to MLS and the team was completely rebuilt from scratch. At present there are only 3 players on the Sounders who played on the USL team and in reality it is only one, Roger Levesque, and even he is only a substitute. The other two are Taylor Graham who has only played one game in two years of MLS and Sanna Nyassi. Nyassi is a key player now but he signed with the MLS team at the end of their last USL season and only played 5 USL games. The difference between the two teams is not how old they are, it is that Seattle signed a coach with experience and success to run the team while TFC hired an idiot and then took 4 years to figure out what everyone knew even before they hired him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag futbol Posted October 2, 2010 Author Share Posted October 2, 2010 Other than the administration, Seattle is a 2 year old team not a 12 year old team.[/b[ Almost no players from the USL team made the jump to MLS and the team was completely rebuilt from scratch. At present there are only 3 players on the Sounders who played on the USL team and in reality it is only one, Roger Levesque, and even he is only a substitute. The other two are Taylor Graham who has only played one game in two years of MLS and Sanna Nyassi. Nyassi is a key player now but he signed with the MLS team at the end of their last USL season and only played 5 USL games. The difference between the two teams is not how old they are, it is that Seattle signed a coach with experience and success to run the team while TFC hired an idiot and then took 4 years to figure out what everyone knew even before they hired him. Agreed. They just showed what can be done in this league if you're serious about running your operations and have the right people in charge. And primary the reason why they have a decent team is because they can scout talent. They introduced various players into the league who have worked out well. TFC by comparison can barely find a signing that can stick in the league when their contract is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guppy Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Other than the administration, Seattle is a 2 year old team not a 12 year old team. Almost no players from the USL team made the jump to MLS and the team was completely rebuilt from scratch. At present there are only 3 players on the Sounders who played on the USL team and in reality it is only one, Roger Levesque, and even he is only a substitute. The other two are Taylor Graham who has only played one game in two years of MLS and Sanna Nyassi. Nyassi is a key player now but he signed with the MLS team at the end of their last USL season and only played 5 USL games. The difference between the two teams is not how old they are, it is that Seattle signed a coach with experience and success to run the team while TFC hired an idiot and then took 4 years to figure out what everyone knew even before they hired him. I remember their first games were atrocious and Mo said that he misjudged the quality of team or did he say he misjudged the quality of the league? He said something like that. No one thought to ask, how the heck does that happen? An early giant red flag.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSoccerFan Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 I can't believe CBC didn't show a decent replay of the first Seattle goal. It looked offside to the naked eye. An experienced soccer broadcast crew with a clue of what they're doing would've shown that immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearcatSA Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 Agreed. They just showed what can be done in this league if you're serious about running your operations and have the right people in charge. And primary the reason why they have a decent team is because they can scout talent. They introduced various players into the league who have worked out well. TFC by comparison can barely find a signing that can stick in the league when their contract is done. Big +1 on the highlighted point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 2, 2010 Share Posted October 2, 2010 It is really clear the difference in approach to hiring a coach/manager taken by the two teams. Seattle hires a guy who had just won the MLS championship with Columbus to go along with the MLS championship and CONCACAF Champions Cup (predecessor to Champions League) that he won with LA. Columbus wanted him to re-sign with them and were mad when he didn't and accused Seattle of tampering. At the time of his hire by Seattle he had already coached 254 MLS games. Mo by contrast was an interim coach with NYRB who had a decent record for the five games he coached the team at the end of the season. Then in the offseason and pre-season he made a number of the puzzling decisions and mistakes that became all to frequent at TFC and the team had a terrible start and he was fired after 12 games. So to sum things up, Seattle hired a guy who had coached 254 MLS games, won 2 championships plus a continental championship whose previous team wanted him to return. TFC hires a guy who had been fired by his team after coaching a total of 17 MLS games. Plus, it took TFC 4 years to figure out what NYRB figured out in 17 games, that Mo was a poor coach and manager. This is the reason for the differing fortunes of the two teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 Other than the administration, Seattle is a 2 year old team not a 12 year old team. Almost no players from the USL team made the jump to MLS and the team was completely rebuilt from scratch. We both agree on that. That is what I think was the biggest difference. Seattle had 12 years building a soccer operation and learning what was needed for success in North American soccer. They knew few would make it and built from the back out. They knew they needed a first rate coach who knew the league. They knew a lot of new players would be required. They knew their scouting and picks for internationals would have to be first rate. All those lessons they learned and addressed before they played thieir first game. A team is more than just the players on the field. Maybe TFC will get there in 3 or 4 years but for now at least the MJ era is over and TFC can start clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgnewf Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 http://viewfromthesouthstands.com/2010/10/sickness-in-seattle/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 It is really clear the difference in approach to hiring a coach/manager taken by the two teams. Seattle hires a guy who had just won the MLS championship with Columbus to go along with the MLS championship and CONCACAF Champions Cup (predecessor to Champions League) that he won with LA. Columbus wanted him to re-sign with them and were mad when he didn't and accused Seattle of tampering. At the time of his hire by Seattle he had already coached 254 MLS games. Mo by contrast was an interim coach with NYRB who had a decent record for the five games he coached the team at the end of the season. Then in the offseason and pre-season he made a number of the puzzling decisions and mistakes that became all to frequent at TFC and the team had a terrible start and he was fired after 12 games. So to sum things up, Seattle hired a guy who had coached 254 MLS games, won 2 championships plus a continental championship whose previous team wanted him to return. TFC hires a guy who had been fired by his team after coaching a total of 17 MLS games. Plus, it took TFC 4 years to figure out what NYRB figured out in 17 games, that Mo was a poor coach and manager. This is the reason for the differing fortunes of the two teams. That senior management at MLSE did not follow a good hiring practice.. or that they ..seem to be unable to select for success based on past performance ? Or are you saying the people MLSE consulted... in Toronto like Dick Howard and his ilk did not have a clue and just said ..hey Mo is a scotsman and famous so he must be good ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 I can't believe CBC didn't show a decent replay of the first Seattle goal. It looked offside to the naked eye. An experienced soccer broadcast crew with a clue of what they're doing would've shown that immediately. Yeah I thought so too. It was a turning point in the game and TFC looked awful after that. Cann's first poor game of the season, though outside of Nana all of the TFC back four had poor matches and unfortunately its not the first time for them this year. After setting up the goal Maicon Santos was very poor today I thought and Peterson back to his invisible form (where he has joined La Brocca for the past two months). One positive is that its nice to see Lindsay do such a great assist on a goal in just his first MLS game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 So to sum things up, Seattle hired a guy who had coached 254 MLS games, won 2 championships plus a continental championship whose previous team wanted him to return. TFC hires a guy who had been fired by his team after coaching a total of 17 MLS games. Plus, it took TFC 4 years to figure out what NYRB figured out in 17 games, that Mo was a poor coach and manager. This is the reason for the differing fortunes of the two teams. This is it in a nutshell. Somehow the MLSE suits were charmed by Mo Johnston's smoke and mirrors act. I mean sure, there is such a thing as giving a guy a second chance and hoping a change of scenery brings out the best in him, but what was it that MLSE saw in Mo that warranted a contract extension FFS? He should have been gone after 2008, at the latest. P.S. Trillium can fuck right off with the kool aid drinkers remark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 Yeah I thought so too. It was a turning point in the game and TFC looked awful after that. Cann's first poor game of the season, though outside of Nana all of the TFC back four had poor matches and unfortunately its not the first time for them this year. After setting up the goal Maicon Santos was very poor today I thought and Peterson back to his invisible form (where he has joined La Brocca for the past two months). One positive is that its nice to see Lindsay do such a great assist on a goal in just his first MLS game. How has Gargan mostly avoided criticism for his defensive abilities, which are near to non-existent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 Other than the administration, Seattle is a 2 year old team not a 12 year old team. Almost no players from the USL team made the jump to MLS and the team was completely rebuilt from scratch. We both agree on that. That is what I think was the biggest difference. Seattle had 12 years building a soccer operation and learning what was needed for success in North American soccer. They knew few would make it and built from the back out. They knew they needed a first rate coach who knew the league. They knew a lot of new players would be required. They knew their scouting and picks for internationals would have to be first rate. All those lessons they learned and addressed before they played thieir first game. A team is more than just the players on the field. Maybe TFC will get there in 3 or 4 years but for now at least the MJ era is over and TFC can start clean. I am sure Seattle's administration learned some good things during the 12 USL years. However, I don't think one needs 12 years experience to come up with the idea of hiring a good experienced coach for your team especially when it is the first coach you will ever hire. Even with some of the mistakes we have seen FC Edmonton make they hired a good coach a year before they even started playing. I could understand an inexperienced TFC administration making a lot of mistakes in other areas but this seems like a no-brainer. Even worse, it seems like they didn't learn anything in the 4 years they were in the league and kept giving the guy who was obviously incompetent a vote of confidence and a contract extension. I don't think you can use inexperienc in management as an excuse for the TFC situation, it was pure incompetence and idiocy. If the Blue Jays hired me as their president even though I don't know very much about baseball, don't really like the sport and don't have any experience in sports management, I am sure I would make a lot of mistakes in many areas. However, the first thing I would do is hire the most knowledgeable and successful manager I could afford with the budget I had available not some guy who had never even coached a full season in the sport. It is that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackTheBlizzard Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 What is being airbrushed out of TFC's history in this thread is that there was an attempt to hire an MLS championship winning coach in the shape of Frank Yallop but he turned the job down. The presence of Bob Gansler as an assistant to Mo Johnston should also arguably have helped to address that issue. The problems faced in finding Canadian players of sufficient quality to start regularly in MLS is also being conveniently forgotten. Really what Seattle exemplifies to me is that fieldturf should never have been allowed as an excuse for failure in a TFC context from the middle of the 2008 season onwards. Too many people drank the proverbial kool-aid on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 How has Gargan mostly avoided criticism for his defensive abilities, which are near to non-existent? Well he always provides effort so he is a bit of a folk hero to some TFC fans, but in a match like today he was clearly out of his depth re: speed, and once Nana got injured the same applied on the other flank (where the 3rd goal came from before the Cann blunder). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag futbol Posted October 3, 2010 Author Share Posted October 3, 2010 Yeah I think people have the blue-collar blinders on when it comes to Gargan. He's ok, I'd probably keep him on the team as a depth player next year but otherwise he's hugely overrated. He gets pulled all over the place by the attackers regularly, it's almost Jim Brennan-Marvell Wynn bad at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 What is being airbrushed out of TFC's history in this thread is that there was an attempt to hire an MLS championship winning coach in the shape of Frank Yallop but he turned the job down. The presence of Bob Gansler as an assistant to Mo Johnston should also arguably have helped to address that issue. The problems faced in finding Canadian players of sufficient quality to start regularly in MLS is also being conveniently forgotten. Really what Seattle exemplifies to me is that fieldturf should never have been allowed as an excuse for failure in a TFC context from the middle of the 2008 season onwards. Too many people drank the proverbial kool-aid on that one. So you have a list of one experienced guy and he turns you down so you go with someone completely inexperienced? Yallop would be far from number 1 on my list anyway but I would certainly hire him long before Mo. However, my list of guys that I would have hired before Mo even on an MLS budget would be pretty long. Even worse, their effort to hire Yallop is probably only due to him being a prominent Canadian as opposed to them actually doing any research as to who would be a good coach/manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmcmurph Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 The problems faced in finding Canadian players of sufficient quality to start regularly in MLS is also being conveniently forgotten. I'm not forgetting or minimizing the problems that that rule imposed on Toronto. That is where a knowledgeable coach/COO/scouting staff are so important. Knowing what they were up against a scouting staff becomes crucial. MLSE seemed to be relying on Mo and his contacts (and agent buddies). Oh well tis over now. I hope TFC get the off field staff they need and make the playoffs next year. It would be a huge boost for soccer in this country if they could. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted October 3, 2010 Share Posted October 3, 2010 Did De Rosario do his cheque signing celebration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.