Floro Must Go

[Ruffian]

4 minutes ago, The Ref said:

It will be nice to see some quick action by Montagliani regarding Floro.  A new coach may get us to Qatar, but keeping Floro will sure not get us there.

Would it be Montagliani's decision still? He may still be the CSA President, but this decision will affect the future direction of the association when he will not be president.

[Califax]

.

[Unnamed Trialist]

Another thing no one here seems to give credit to is how we were treated by refs in this cycle. 

It is a simple fact: refs were not going to screw us and have to deal with Floro's ire, however tempered, in Spanish (most being Spanish speakers). We were largely respected, to the point that you could even argue that two of our goals the other day could have been called back. In fact our first resembles one that was called back years ago and knocked us out of a Gold Cup. 

Now that a Canadian is head of the region, I think that could be another factor in our favour. I really think we had to work to get into the box and take on defenders, I am sure refs were willing to call something our way. More than maybe we appreciated. Sure, the ref in Honduras was buddying with their coaching staff and players the whole game (they are not stupid), but still did not hurt us. 

This is another reason why I prefer a Spanish speaker, not necessarily a Spaniard but one who can do press conferences in Costa Rica or Guatemala in Spanish, better for our being respected in the region by refs and the overall Concacaf hierarchy.

 

[Califax]

29 minutes ago, Ruffian said:

Could this be CanMNT coaching news?

 

#MoyesIn

[Unnamed Trialist]

18 minutes ago, Ruffian said:

Would it be Montagliani's decision still? He may still be the CSA President, but this decision will affect the future direction of the association when he will not be president.

Like the argument that Obama should not appoint a Supreme Court judge because he won't be president after January?

Most elected officials leave a legacy that plays out after they are gone, why should the CSA be different with a new coach?

[dyslexic nam]

6 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Another thing no one here seems to give credit to is how we were treated by refs in this cycle. 

It is a simple fact: refs were not going to screw us and have to deal with Floro's ire, however tempered, in Spanish (most being Spanish speakers). We were largely respected, to the point that you could even argue that two of our goals the other day could have been called back. In fact our first resembles one that was called back years ago and knocked us out of a Gold Cup. 

Now that a Canadian is head of the region, I think that could be another factor in our favour. I really think we had to work to get into the box and take on defenders, I am sure refs were willing to call something our way. More than maybe we appreciated. Sure, the ref in Honduras was buddying with their coaching staff and players the whole game (they are not stupid), but still did not hurt us. 

This is another reason why I prefer a Spanish speaker, not necessarily a Spaniard but one who can do press conferences in Costa Rica or Guatemala in Spanish, better for our being respected in the region by refs and the overall Concacaf hierarchy.

 

Not trying to pick a fight, but I think it is ludicrous to think that refs gave us good calls because they didn't want our Spanish coach to yell at them.

 

EDIT:  the ref who gave us the 2 offside goals was Jamaican.

[Ruffian]

2 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Like the argument that Obama should not appoint a Supreme Court judge because he won't be president after January?

Most elected officials leave a legacy that plays out after they are gone, why should the CSA be different with a new coach?

Supreme Court judges appointments are for life. This is more like a general manager of a team wanting their own coach and firing the previous one.

[Unnamed Trialist]

4 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Not trying to pick a fight, but I think it is ludicrous to think that refs gave us good calls because they didn't want our Spanish coach to yell at them.

Just shows how little you know about refs and reffing in general. Or just shows how your agenda is so one-sided you'll even argue it was Benito's fault your cereal was soggy this morning. 

Floro was a huge influence on positive reffing IMO.

Influence on reffing establishment is essential as it makes an official think twice. Home influence is one factor, the pressure of the institution naming you to ref as well, first your association that nominates you, then the Confederation that chooses you. Both being very political decisions. Any ref getting to international level has moved politically through the system, and plays the politics as well as reffing technically right. Few are clearly the best refs from their respective country, most have something else they work on. 

But since you don't want to pick a fight: name one single decision that went against us unfairly in the last cycle under Floro? And ask yourself why so many went our way?

Then compare that to the 30 years previous.

[AvroArrow]

4 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Not trying to pick a fight, but I think it is ludicrous to think that refs gave us good calls because they didn't want our Spanish coach to yell at them.

Especially since the refs at the home game against El Salvador were Jamaican.

[jpg75]

Mont Vic as head of CONCACAF had a lot more to do with the reffing these past 2 games than Floro.

[dyslexic nam]

I have no idea why we got the calls.  It just sounds dubious to say that two offside non-calls were given to us because Floro.

Given that the linesman didn't raise the flag, are they too in on the gag?  Did they all discuss it before the game and decide we would be the beneficiaries of any 50/50 calls?

And in contrast to your 'moving politically through the system', I would say that those refs probably did their careers more harm than good by making two mistakes - one of them so obvious that it has folks on this board scrambling to review the laws of the game to find some plausible explanation.

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 minutes ago, AvroArrow said:

Especially since the refs at the home game against El Salvador were Jamaican.

My argument was Floro was a factor, which I think is unquestionable. His prestige was not something a single reffign team wanted to deal with with an obvious mistake. We got the benefit of the doubt almost always, like never before. And now that the Concacaf president is Canadian, that is a factor.

I did write that, you probably read it, but since that is not convenient you think it is not worth thinking about.

But since you are an expert on this board at being deliberately iclose-minded and knee-jerk, as I have observed before, defying every value your name should represent (innovation, risk, technical know-how), I'll save the sense for someone who can understand it.

 

[Unnamed Trialist]

Pisses me off a guy takes the name of such a great Canadian legacy and pisses on what it represents in almost every post he makes. 

The Avro Arrow, I know what it means, what it meant, maybe more than most here for some family reasons-- then we have to deal with a guy usurping the name who represents every sad-ass mentality that led to its demise. 

[AvroArrow]

2 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

My argument was Floro was a factor, which I think is unquestionable. His prestige was not something a single reffign team wanted to deal with with an obvious mistake. We got the benefit of the doubt almost always, like never before. And now that the Concacaf president is Canadian, that is a factor.

I did write that, you probably read it, but since that is not convenient you think it is not worth thinking about.

But since you are an expert on this board at being deliberately iclose-minded and knee-jerk, as I have observed before, defying every value your name should represent (innovation, risk, technical know-how), I'll save the sense for someone who can understand it.

 

Do you speak Spanish?  That would explain the sudden fear that has taken over me. 

My response was only to your comment that getting yelled at by the Spanish-speaking Floro likely contributed to some of the favourable calls that we received on Tuesday.  Since Jamaicans (normally) speak English, getting yelled at in Spanish will likely achieve just as much as you going to your local Chinese restaurant and yelling at the staff in German.  It was more or less a joke comment, but feel free to keep riding that high horse of yours.

[dyslexic nam]

...

[aloyol]

I don't remember us being disrespected by referees in the 2012 and 2008 WCQ.

The last time we were screwed by crazy decisions (speaking of WCQ here) was in the 2004 WCQ campaign (both time against Honduras).

So, we can safely conclude that CONCACAF refs respect former Real Madrid coaches just like they respect former King of Donair coaches.

[kingvikingstad]

22 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

My argument was Floro was a factor, which I think is unquestionable. His prestige was not something a single reffign team wanted to deal with with an obvious mistake. We got the benefit of the doubt almost always, like never before. And now that the Concacaf president is Canadian, that is a factor.

I did write that, you probably read it, but since that is not convenient you think it is not worth thinking about.

But since you are an expert on this board at being deliberately iclose-minded and knee-jerk, as I have observed before, defying every value your name should represent (innovation, risk, technical know-how), I'll save the sense for someone who can understand it.

 

It's possible, I agree, sure. To peddle it off as THE defining factor for good reffing decisions and a reason to keep Floro is in my eyes, missing the mark. Ice cream sales are correlated to shark attacks, but so is swimming. I wouldn't point to ice cream sales as the primary reasons for shark attacks occurring, which is what I feel you're doing here with Floro and reffing. Yes, Floro may have helped, but maybe having our man as head of CONCACAF, random chance, better home support, improved reffing, etc. may have also contributed. 

Secondly, I can't help but notice you've not answered my first question. What are these special things Floro is making his mark with tactically that us peasants are unaware of, that you'd like to fill us all in about? 

[paul-collins]

I'm thinking a proper debrief and forensic review of the cycle should be conducted by Jason de Vos or whoever in CSA is to make the decision.  

For example, interviews with many/all who played a part, including players who joined, were included, were excluded etc would be useful to understand whether Floro's program is worth continuing.

• It's clear that we were able to attract some talent that we previously had not (Arfield and Jr in particular).  what changed?
• Some players like JDG are singing praises.  Specifics?  (this is not for us lay observers, it is for Jason to hear)
• Some players were excluded.  Again, what will they say about that off the record to Jason?
• How does Floro view these things, and are his views consistent with theirs?
• Finally, how does he explain/defend the decisions he made beyond these questions?  Does it merit constructive criticism, and will he accept said criticism?

No one is perfect.  Let's see if he can explain what he did, accept any mistakes that the powers that be have identified, and try to correct them - all while attempting to build on the items he *has* gotten right.

[masster]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here is Larson's article saying Floro should be gone:
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/09/07/its-time-for-benito-floro-to-go

[theaub]

Sadly, I do enjoy the pressing.  The issue (as noted in the column) is we never had enough actual fit players to press correctly.

[Dub Narcotic]

3 hours ago, Ansem said:

 

Objectively, if we had scored on a fraction of the scoring chances we had, we'd be making the hex or participate in Copa America. Under Floro's system, we had our chances (MANY CHANCES) and we blew it, pure and simple. That has more to do with the lack of technical skills and depth than Floro.

 

This is categorically not true. There is a rock-solid stat to determine finishing ability: g - (e)x(pected)G(oals). This team actually outperformed the xG in this last campaign; Floro was actually saved from looking worse than he actually was by some decent finishing and referee calls that went in his favor.

[Forlorn]

38 minutes ago, Dub Narcotic said:

This is categorically not true. There is a rock-solid stat to determine finishing ability: g - (e)x(pected)G(oals). This team actually outperformed the xG in this last campaign; Floro was actually saved from looking worse than he actually was by some decent finishing and referee calls that went in his favor.

I mean some of the chances were ridiculous. Larin at the Gold Cup for example, If he couldve scored on a literal open net we would've made it out of the group.

[toontownman]

2 hours ago, paul-collins said:

I'm thinking a proper debrief and forensic review of the cycle should be conducted by Jason de Vos or whoever in CSA is to make the decision.  

For example, interviews with many/all who played a part, including players who joined, were included, were excluded etc would be useful to understand whether Floro's program is worth continuing.

• It's clear that we were able to attract some talent that we previously had not (Arfield and Jr in particular).  what changed?
• Some players like JDG are singing praises.  Specifics?  (this is not for us lay observers, it is for Jason to hear)
• Some players were excluded.  Again, what will they say about that off the record to Jason?
• How does Floro view these things, and are his views consistent with theirs?
• Finally, how does he explain/defend the decisions he made beyond these questions?  Does it merit constructive criticism, and will he accept said criticism?

No one is perfect.  Let's see if he can explain what he did, accept any mistakes that the powers that be have identified, and try to correct them - all while attempting to build on the items he *has* gotten right.

Can't be knee jerk. They should take their time not only to assess if floro can still take us forward but if there are other credible better options if not.

[toontownman]

...the one thing we have is time now.  So we should try rush into a decision. 

[-Hammer-]

I think it comes down to this. How much are we paying Floro, and how much is he willing to take to stay with us? He likely made a substantial chunk of change, given his extensive background. Well, we've now determined that his presence has resulted in the status quo.

So, my stance is, he either takes a salary cut befitting of a status quo coach, and the windfall from that money gets put towards something more meaningful, or you can him and go with a cheaper manager.

Most importantly, given that many here seem to feel that development, and not coaching is the issue (which I will agree with, but I don't think Floro's systems and coaching were immaculate by any means). There is no point in hiring a high end coach, to coach a team that's not talented enough to make the hex unless you are trying to use such a coach as a face to market the team.

I don't think he's a bad coach, I think his defensive mindset is something that our team has to play to be successful given our talent level. I do feel he fails to make adjustments and has some questionable personnel choices, but I don't think he's good enough to be giving him what he's likely making.