Earl Cochrane new Canada Soccer General Secretary

[Ottawafan]

10 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

Which players? 

The MNT and WNT seem to want to throw every player in the CPL and in L1s across Canada (the highest women's tier in the country btw) under the bus. 

Apart from the women's appeal for more camps for women's youth internationals, never reflected in any corresponding statement by the men, the players are "us", the cause is "us", they seem to think they are the only ones whose needs are not being addressed. 

As elites, especially the men in terms of club salaries, but the women increasingly as well, they are not necessarily in conditions to defend their fellow players, and do not do so in practice.

Appreciate you proving my point.

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

To steal @Califax 's bit ,

"I look forward to seeing how this changes absolutely nothing".

[Metro]

2 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

Appreciate you proving my point.

Criticizing the actions of the players does not mean you are on the side of the bureaucrats.  I think UT is concerned that catering to every whim of the senior players may lead to sacrificing resources in another areas of Canadian soccer, particularly the grass roots programs.  If that is UT is saying, then I am in 100% agreement.

[phresh]

2 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

Appreciate you proving my point.

Everybody here supports the players. Doesn’t mean we have to agree with everything they say or do.

[smeghead]

Good riddance to bad rubbish. Wonder where he will fail upwards.

 

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, Metro said:

Criticizing the actions of the players does not mean you are on the side of the bureaucrats.  I think UT is concerned that catering to every whim of the senior players may lead to sacrificing resources in another areas of Canadian soccer, particularly the grass roots programs.  If that is UT is saying, then I am in 100% agreement.

Catering to the players comment is exactly the type of mentality those that back the CSA bureaucrats would use. Players want better working conditions and better pay. Yet posters here would rather band against them for some strange reason. Hopefully with new blood and new perspectives the CSA will find a way to look after their greatest asset. 
And the CSA isn’t supposed to be in the development arena; that’s the role of the clubs. 

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, phresh said:

Everybody here supports the players. Doesn’t mean we have to agree with everything they say or do.

If you support the players you’ll want to make sure they are treated properly. Instead too many rip on the players and would rather CSA help fund a private league instead of giving WC qualifying NT the support and resources it needs. Hoping that changes going forward. 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Think the way to think about it is this. The players are professional athletes with a short career. If you want them to take the CMNT seriously in addition to their club career so we have a successful team to cheer on then appeals to national pride doesn't really cut it. You need to make it worth their while financially.

From their perspective, CMNT revenues through sponsorships etc is money their efforts earned out on the field of play and is something that should be coming their way first and foremost once the CSA's expenses are taken care of not propping up Victor Montagliani's pet hobby horse, which should be able to fund itself through its own efforts.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[phresh]

18 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

If you support the players you’ll want to make sure they are treated properly. Instead too many rip on the players and would rather CSA help fund a private league instead of giving WC qualifying NT the support and resources it needs. Hoping that changes going forward. 

Aside from supporting the senior players, I also support those who play for the youth teams. This isn't just about the CPL. This is about the players who will be heading to the U17 WC with absolutely zero preparation and will get their asses handed to them. This is about the players who didn't qualify for the Olympics or the U20 WC. There are guys who would've benefitted from the exposure in Argentina. Again, nobody's arguing that the players should be treated fairly. But when Galindo reports that the men want 40% net of the prize money, and then you've got the Canadian Press reporting that the men and women supposedly agreed to a 40-40 split (which seems quite unlikely now), the numbers don't make sense and the players come off looking shady. That being said, someone mentioned a while back that not a single national team on this planet accounts for prize money in their budget as qualification is almost never a guarantee. The fact that Bontis and Co have stated they need that money for the viability of CSA operations is an example of piss poor management, but that is where things stand, and the players need to understand that.

[Unnamed Trialist]

2 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

If you support the players you’ll want to make sure they are treated properly. Instead too many rip on the players and would rather CSA help fund a private league instead of giving WC qualifying NT the support and resources it needs. Hoping that changes going forward. 

The CPL is a national league, stop being ridiculous. Where do you come up with such trash? It is a FIFA approved league, fully inserted into the world soccer pyramid, with teams qualifying for international club competitions. 

FIFA is a private sports organisation, it is not government funded and is run privately, with private accounting, business units. It is not a public entity, it even discourages government interference. All of world football of any value is governed by FIFA.

I mean, it's so stupid to argue this way. Not sure if you said you were a former player, but seriously, go get an education already.

Support the players, the whole language is childish: our NT players, men and women, have disrespected their own colleagues in recent months, playing in lower tiers many of them, in ways that bordered on abhorrent. You approve that?

Edited April 21, 2023 by Unnamed Trialist

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

The CPL is a national league, stop being ridiculous. Where do you come up with such trash? It is a FIFA approved league, fully inserted into the world soccer pyramid, with teams qualifying for international club competitions. 

FIFA is a private sports organisation, it is not government funded and is run privately, with private accounting, business units. It is not a public entity, it even discourages government interference. All of world football of any value is governed by FIFA.

I mean, it's so stupid to argue this way. Not sure if you said you were a former player, but seriously, go get an education already.

Support the players, the whole language is childish: our NT players, men and women, have disrespected their own colleagues in recent months, playing in lower tiers many of them, in ways that bordered on abhorrent. You approve that?

So much so far off base here.  Not worth responding to. 

[Ottawafan]

1 hour ago, phresh said:

Aside from supporting the senior players, I also support those who play for the youth teams. This isn't just about the CPL. This is about the players who will be heading to the U17 WC with absolutely zero preparation and will get their asses handed to them. This is about the players who didn't qualify for the Olympics or the U20 WC. There are guys who would've benefitted from the exposure in Argentina. Again, nobody's arguing that the players should be treated fairly. But when Galindo reports that the men want 40% net of the prize money, and then you've got the Canadian Press reporting that the men and women supposedly agreed to a 40-40 split (which seems quite unlikely now), the numbers don't make sense and the players come off looking shady. That being said, someone mentioned a while back that not a single national team on this planet accounts for prize money in their budget as qualification is almost never a guarantee. The fact that Bontis and Co have stated they need that money for the viability of CSA operations is an example of piss poor management, but that is where things stand, and the players need to understand that.

Players generated that money. If they don’t go on a run and make the WC, the CSA doesn’t generate those revenues or claim the $10M for qualifying.  When the CSA says it doesn’t have the money to pay the players because those $$$ have been allocated already… where?  And if Canada doesn’t get to those levels, where was the money going to come from?

[grigorio]

5 minutes ago, Ottawafan said:

Players generated that money. If they don’t go on a run and make the WC, the CSA doesn’t generate those revenues or claim the $10M for qualifying.  When the CSA says it doesn’t have the money to pay the players because those $$$ have been allocated already… where?  And if Canada doesn’t get to those levels, where was the money going to come from?

Isn't this equivalent to saying the efforts of the employees in a corporation generated profit for the corporation, therefore the employees should be entitled to that profit not the corporation?

The players perform a duty in the construct of an organization (CSA) and a governing body (FIFA). While they shouldn't expect a 1:1 matching of profits earned to personal benefit, the issue people have with their perspectives is that it almost seems they do. 

No one is anti-player. Many are anti short-sighted optics around short-term personal gains meaning they are pro long-term development of the sport in this country.  This isn't pro-players or pro-CSA. 

[Ottawafan]

16 minutes ago, grigorio said:

Isn't this equivalent to saying the efforts of the employees in a corporation generated profit for the corporation, therefore the employees should be entitled to that profit not the corporation?

The players perform a duty in the construct of an organization (CSA) and a governing body (FIFA). While they shouldn't expect a 1:1 matching of profits earned to personal benefit, the issue people have with their perspectives is that it almost seems they do. 

No one is anti-player. Many are anti short-sighted optics around short-term personal gains meaning they are pro long-term development of the sport in this country.  This isn't pro-players or pro-CSA. 

The players and the CSA setting the terms for employment, compensation and the working conditions.  Revenues go up, salaries go up. Especially for the players who are the sole reason the revenues are where they are. 

Actually the myopic view here is not paying the players. They are the ones who generate the revenue.  The top 15/20 players are why the CSA just pulled in $10M plus. Replace them with the next 15/20 players, the CSA won’t get any money. CSA is a governing body, they shouldn’t be in the development game.
Both sides need each other and need to work together. But the players are done dealing with an organization that has pushed them around for years. Hence why Bontis, Cochrane and I’m sure others are pushed out.  

[Gian-Luca]

10 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

Fascinating to see posters back these bureaucrats who have consistently steered the CSA poorly over the players who have felt their needs were not addressed.  Put the players first.  

Bizarre post. I didn't actually see a single poster "backing" Cochrane in this thread prior to your post, it was pretty much condemnation or posters saying his leaving is largely irrelevant.

[Kent]

2 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

The players and the CSA setting the terms for employment, compensation and the working conditions.  Revenues go up, salaries go up. Especially for the players who are the sole reason the revenues are where they are. 

Actually the myopic view here is not paying the players. They are the ones who generate the revenue.  The top 15/20 players are why the CSA just pulled in $10M plus. Replace them with the next 15/20 players, the CSA won’t get any money. CSA is a governing body, they shouldn’t be in the development game.
Both sides need each other and need to work together. But the players are done dealing with an organization that has pushed them around for years. Hence why Bontis, Cochrane and I’m sure others are pushed out.  

You are probably aware that the men's team didn't qualify for a World Cup for 35 years before they qualified for Qatar. The vast majority of money then (and maybe still now?) is from fees from the hundreds of thousands (maybe up to a million?) of amateur players every year. And yet, even though the national teams did nothing to generate that revenue, they still got compensated. If they are supposed to get all (or mostly all) of the revenue that they help generate, shouldn't they have to help make up the difference in the years where they don't generate the needed revenue?

Before you start calling me anti player or pro bureaucrat, I am sure the CSA is not doing a good job with the money they have access to, and it also seems like the players are acting short sighted with some of their demands. And the CSA isn't subsidizing the CPL or the CSB. The CSB purchased something from the CSA. Essentially the CSB is paying the CSA more money than they were previously getting, and in addition investing relatively large amounts of money into the game in this country. It's literally win/win for the CSA. The only argument is whether it could be a "win more/win" situation instead with a better deal.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

4 hours ago, Kent said:

You are probably aware that the men's team didn't qualify for a World Cup for 35 years before they qualified for Qatar. The vast majority of money then (and maybe still now?) is from fees from the hundreds of thousands (maybe up to a million?) of amateur players every year. And yet, even though the national teams did nothing to generate that revenue, they still got compensated...

^^^you would almost get the impression from reading the above that the CMNT and CWNT drew no spectators to their home games pre-CSB deal, attracted no corporate sponsorships through IMG, weren't regularly appearing in Gold Cup and Women's World Cup finals tournaments, and that the CSA were completely incapable of doing things like hosting the Women's U-19 World Cup in 2002, the Men's U-20 World Cup in 2007 and the Women's World Cup in 2015, all of which particularly on the women's side drew larger crowds than would have been attracted at that time in many other parts of the world.

Only the marketing genius of the Hamilton Ticats and CFL people like Bob Young and Scott Mitchell was capable of helping the CSA unlock the sport's potential once webstreaming emerged as an alternative to cable outlets like TSN and it was CONCACAF's turn to host the Men's World Cup again in 2026 to the extent that they needed to be handed the keys to various important CSA, CMNT and CWNT related revenue streams at a fixed annual fee out to 2037. Some people on here can't see the wood for the trees and grasp just how absurd and potentially corrupt that looks to many non-soccer people including federal politicians in Ottawa.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Unnamed Trialist]

8 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

Players generated that money. If they don’t go on a run and make the WC, the CSA doesn’t generate those revenues or claim the $10M for qualifying.  When the CSA says it doesn’t have the money to pay the players because those $$$ have been allocated already… where?  And if Canada doesn’t get to those levels, where was the money going to come from?

False again. The CSA hires the coach and staff. They take CSB money to fund qualifying, including travel, amenities. The CSA decides to make bold moves to play in freezing conditions giving us onfield advantage which also helps our travel. 

Again, childish arguments showing total understanding of how a national team works. 

[Ottawafan]

3 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

^^^you would almost get the impression from reading the above that the CMNT and CWNT drew no spectators to their home games pre-CSB deal, attracted no corporate sponsorships through IMG, weren't regularly appearing in Gold Cup and Women's World Cup finals tournaments, and that the CSA were completely incapable of doing things like hosting the Women's U-19 World Cup in 2002, the Men's U-20 World Cup in 2007 and the Women's World Cup in 2015, all of which particularly on the women's side drew larger crowds than would have been attracted at that time in many other parts of the world.

Only the marketing genius of the Hamilton Ticats and CFL people like Bob Young and Scott Mitchell was capable of helping the CSA unlock the sport's potential once webstreaming emerged as an alternative to cable outlets like TSN and it was CONCACAF's turn to host the Men's World Cup again in 2026 to the extent that they needed to be handed the keys to various important CSA, CMNT and CWNT related revenue streams at a fixed annual fee out to 2037. Some people on here can't see the wood for the trees and grasp just how absurd and potentially corrupt that looks to many non-soccer people including federal politicians in Ottawa.

I forget how few here have actually been part of high level development at the club level or had to deal with the provincial/national governing bodies. The have no clue to the corruption and rot every step along the way. Players do and have had to live thru it. Guess you could say it shapes their perspective when it comes to dealing with the various associations. Hopefully moving out some of the old guard will bring about a new direction and work with the players. 

[Ottawafan]

2 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

False again. The CSA hires the coach and staff. They take CSB money to fund qualifying, including travel, amenities. The CSA decides to make bold moves to play in freezing conditions giving us onfield advantage which also helps our travel. 

Again, childish arguments showing total understanding of how a national team works. 

Homie I’m not quite sure what you are trying to point out here. Did you quote the right post?

[Ottawafan]

8 hours ago, Kent said:

You are probably aware that the men's team didn't qualify for a World Cup for 35 years before they qualified for Qatar. The vast majority of money then (and maybe still now?) is from fees from the hundreds of thousands (maybe up to a million?) of amateur players every year. And yet, even though the national teams did nothing to generate that revenue, they still got compensated. If they are supposed to get all (or mostly all) of the revenue that they help generate, shouldn't they have to help make up the difference in the years where they don't generate the needed revenue?

Before you start calling me anti player or pro bureaucrat, I am sure the CSA is not doing a good job with the money they have access to, and it also seems like the players are acting short sighted with some of their demands. And the CSA isn't subsidizing the CPL or the CSB. The CSB purchased something from the CSA. Essentially the CSB is paying the CSA more money than they were previously getting, and in addition investing relatively large amounts of money into the game in this country. It's literally win/win for the CSA. The only argument is whether it could be a "win more/win" situation instead with a better deal.

Never said all. And I don’t think they are being shortsighted.
How would they have helped make up the difference?  By agreeing to forsake their salaries for the greater good?

[Kent]

16 hours ago, Ottawafan said:

Never said all. And I don’t think they are being shortsighted.
How would they have helped make up the difference?  By agreeing to forsake their salaries for the greater good?

Fair enough. I guess in the moment I misinterpreted this line "Replace them with the next 15/20 players, the CSA won’t get any money." Which I guess you meant to mean they don't get any of that $10 million qualification money.

[Kent]

20 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

^^^you would almost get the impression from reading the above that the CMNT and CWNT drew no spectators to their home games pre-CSB deal, attracted no corporate sponsorships through IMG, weren't regularly appearing in Gold Cup and Women's World Cup finals tournaments, and that the CSA were completely incapable of doing things like hosting the Women's U-19 World Cup in 2002, the Men's U-20 World Cup in 2007 and the Women's World Cup in 2015, all of which particularly on the women's side drew larger crowds than would have been attracted at that time in many other parts of the world.

Only the marketing genius of the Hamilton Ticats and CFL people like Bob Young and Scott Mitchell was capable of helping the CSA unlock the sport's potential once webstreaming emerged as an alternative to cable outlets like TSN and it was CONCACAF's turn to host the Men's World Cup again in 2026 to the extent that they needed to be handed the keys to various important CSA, CMNT and CWNT related revenue streams at a fixed annual fee out to 2037. Some people on here can't see the wood for the trees and grasp just how absurd and potentially corrupt that looks to many non-soccer people including federal politicians in Ottawa.

I think I took Ottawafan's position as being more extreme than they intended, where it seemed to me like they implied without the national teams the CSA makes no money. But I absolutely believe there were plenty of years between 1986 and 2022 where the national teams cost more money than they made. Especially when you consider things like in the bad old days where it was the visiting team that was driving ticket sales rather than Canada. If you consider the money from those fans as being earned by the visiting team, and only the money from the Canada fans being earned by the Canadian players, then the dollar amounts are even skimpier.

[The Ref]

Congratulations to Jason De Vos on his appointment.

 

[Olympique_de_Marseille]