Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

8 hours ago, masster said:

That’s a lot of quotes from a manager who has never actually managed Phonzie.  Let’s hope that changes ASAP.. I know I sound like a broken record but it makes me sick knowing we played more friendlies in 2013 than when we finally have generational talents.  It’s beyond messed up.. it almost seems intentional and malicious. How is this possible that we finally have world class youths and play the fewest matches in the history of this country?  Like, how?? It’s like drafting first overall and keeping the kid in the AHL.  We should be playing a top 20 nation at home.. we should be playing 2 matches every window, we shouldn’t be wondering whether these 3 matches are it (they are).  

Canadian footy journalist PLEASE WAKE UP.  Instead of asking the same question about phonzie 100000 times why not ask when we plan to play a team in the top 100 of FIFA rankings.  It’s all roses now but guess what?? If we don’t change Davies will and he will not be leaving Bayern Munich to come play amateurs in Toronto every other month that I guarantee you.

Edited by Keegan
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2018 at 2:31 PM, RS said:

Can we get over this inferiority complex?

Did MLS limit employment for Mexicans, Costa Ricans and Panamanians after those countries went to the World Cup and the U.S. didn't? Were all Trinidadians expelled from the league after their team crushed the American WC dream in Port of Spain?

Canadian employment options are artificially limited by B.S. USSF protectionism and it's a situation that needs to improve, but it's not going to get worse if Canada gets better. If anything, that'll mean more MLS coaches would be open to taking a look at Canadian players.

The difference is there's no Mexican, Costa Rican or Panamanian teams in the league. If players from these countries out compete players from other parts of the world for the international spots on MLS rosters there's nothing MLS can do about this, short of reducing the international roster spots.  

The issues with the treatment of Canadian players, is that they're second class domestic players in their own league. This makes it extremely hard for entry level Canadian players to catch on in the league. IMO this is not exactly the same issue as mid-career Costa Ricans (etc), developed in their own domestic league, out competing other mid-career players for MLS international spots. 

You may have a point though, in that if Canada is doing well, it could attract more MLS scouting towards Canada, particularly if the CanPL is working out as a league.

Once we have our own league though, perhaps the top players developed in the CanPL will be at a level where they can compete for the MLS international spots, and their will be ample opportunity for entry level Canadians in the CanPL, making the second class domestic player issue no longer such a big deal.

Edited by A_Gagne
Link to post
Share on other sites

Weird.  If PSG did make a last minute offer of 16m, you wonder (1) why they didn't take it if the deal was not signed; and (2) why PSG would have come in so late if the Bayern deal was already done (you think they would have their people watching this closely if they were thinking of bidding).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole "last minute" offer is kinda b.s., there is no countdown time constraint on Davies signing. Hell the transfer can't go through for another 5+ months anyways nor do MLS have to sell him. PSG probably came in with the offer when the deal with Bayern was being finalized, MLS/Caps put it to Davies and his reps. who shot it down because it makes less soccer sense for him to go there (no domestic status in France will make it harder to break into the first team). It's just a convenient excuse to let PSG save face and/or not burn a bridge with PSG.

Edited by jpg75
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keegan said:

Does MLS still get final say on a transfer  they get zero part of?  Seems like a conflict of interest.

Great question. I know they’ve vetoed transfers in the past under different circumstances but those were players coming into the league

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, A_Gagne said:

The difference is there's no Mexican, Costa Rican or Panamanian teams in the league. If players from these countries out compete players from other parts of the world for the international spots on MLS rosters there's nothing MLS can do about this, short of reducing the international roster spots.  

The issues with the treatment of Canadian players, is that they're second class domestic players in their own league. This makes it extremely hard for entry level Canadian players to catch on in the league. IMO this is not exactly the same issue as mid-career Costa Ricans (etc), developed in their own domestic league, out competing other mid-career players for MLS international spots. 

You may have a point though, in that if Canada is doing well, it could attract more MLS scouting towards Canada, particularly if the CanPL is working out as a league.

Once we have our own league though, perhaps the top players developed in the CanPL will be at a level where they can compete for the MLS international spots, and their will be ample opportunity for entry level Canadians in the CanPL, making the second class domestic player issue no longer such a big deal.

Chicago just paid a very hefty 400k in allocation money for a canadian.  That a lot of money.  But what this tells us is that at the end of day,  if you have talent or if the club believes you have talent,  you are going to play.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Free kick said:

Chicago just paid a very hefty 400k in allocation money for a canadian.  That a lot of money.  But what this tells us is that at the end of day,  if you have talent or if the club believes you have talent,  you are going to play.  

If I'm not mistaken, neither Chicago nor MLS have paid a penny of actual money. This appears to be a good opportunity for Edwards, but let's not pretend that using Monopoly money to trade for a Canadian who is already under contract is equivalent to an American MLS side taking a chance on a Canadian who is contacted in another league or is out of contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, maccaliam said:

If I'm not mistaken, neither Chicago nor MLS have paid a penny of actual money. This appears to be a good opportunity for Edwards, but let's not pretend that using Monopoly money to trade for a Canadian who is already under contract is equivalent to an American MLS side taking a chance on a Canadian who is contacted in another league or is out of contract.

Allocating money and usage of allocation is an important component of building a competive club.   When you spend x amount of allocation on a player it's means you have x amount less to spend on an alternative.  So it counts for a lot.  Especially given that this is the pool of money you use on overseas talent. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RS said:

MLS holds his contract and has paid his salary for the Whitecaps. The league has a say.

Another strike against MLS then, what a shame.  For the cost of ~200 k a league gets to choose how you handle your 16M investment.  What a league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Keegan said:

Another strike against MLS then, what a shame.  For the cost of ~200 k a league gets to choose how you handle your 16M investment.  What a league.

Vancouver never invested 16M in him, though. For every Alphonso Davies, there are 100 Bryce Aldersons who don't work out but are all paid entirely by MLS.

Regardless, the Whitecaps are going to be getting a massive injection of money very soon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Free kick said:

Allocating money and usage of allocation is an important component of building a competive club.   When you spend x amount of allocation on a player it's means you have x amount less to spend on an alternative.  So it counts for a lot.  Especially given that this is the pool of money you use on overseas talent. 

 

It appears you are assuming they were planning on spending this money on another player though. Not all teams use all of their allocation money, and since Chicago hadn’t used the money they have had on any player, acquiring Edwards has cost them nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...