News: Revs trade Feilhaber to Kansas City for Allocation + Draft Picks

It's pointless to argue with someone who constantly moves his own goal posts.

 

I was wrong. No big deal.
My point still stands. We use most of our league resources most of the time. Saying "all" was a bit of a hyperbole considering that no teams use "all" of their league resources. My point remains, we need to use our league resources more effectively. We need to sign players that stick around.

None of us know for sure. We can only estimate. I made my estimation, and defended my estimation with reasoning/logic and the very small amount of information available to us.

I've seen dozens of individuals on this board estimate what we spend on salary, and not one has considering signing bonuses. Often, individuals even leave out the easy stuff like transfer fees.

Burns also said we reached the cap this year, but people don't believe him on that.

 

In this discussion, who ever said that? If you want to bring in every discussion that has ever happened on the Revs boards, then sure, a lot has been said. However, it would make more sense to actually stick to the things that are said within the context of the current argument. Otherwise, this entire exercise is pointless.

 

That's why I never argue with Republicans.

 

No one does for sure. But people try to estimate what we spend on salary all the time. It's not like I'm the only one. The idea that we consistently spend less salary budget simply isn't true.

1.) Looking at the numbers, we spend about the same on salary budget.
2.) Even if we appear spend a little bit less, there are plenty of explanations and intangibles that make these calculations far from accurate

My arguments simply based on the available information and my own logic conclusions. When you don't have certain information, you can't simply omit it. We know signing bonuses exist, you have to consider that in your head when you calculate what we spend. You have to make your best assumption about said missing information.

Why wouldn't we spend our allocation money? What's the incentive? Stockpiling allocation is completely illogical.

 

Are you counting his comments about the MLS Cup winner never being a wild card team?

 

This was in this thread:

 

Cleverly you cropped out the rest of his post. He was basically playing devils advocate for both sides saying that we don't know either way. But I'm glad you can continue to try to manipulate things to fit your argument. It's admirable.

 

I love being proved wrong. I'm a freakin' scientist. That's how science works. I make a hypothesis based on available information and logic and then I try to prove myself wrong. If I can't do so, then it's up the all the other individuals in my field to do so.

To suggest that there's something wrong with having a hypothesis proven incorrect is idiotic. That's how we, as humans learn.

Also, the idea of "moving the goal posts" being bad seems silly to me as well. As new information becomes available, the context of the argument naturally changes. Hell, people are still trying to disprove the theory of gravitation (general relativity). People poke holes in the theory all the time, yet alternative explanations are offered.

 

Hmm... I not sure I know what you're saying. This is the entire post.

I'm also not sure I'm manipulating things to fit my argument. I'm not really attached to my argument. I'm not even sure I believe my argument. I'm just throwing it out there.

 

Obviously you missed the entire point of his post.

 

Perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

The most destructive of all human diseases is the need to be right.

 

Then I am apparently the most destructive human. Ever.

 

I already did above, and you still missed it.

 

We spend the $15Million on salary budget that LA spends? Or, to be more blunt, add up the total compensation in the published player salaries and the REVS are low in the table (sorted most to least). Those are the closest numbers to facts we have.

Please stop arguing about a "Cap" or "Budget" that we can't even define let alone gather enough facts to judge.

It isn't a budget when the DP Rule allows you to break it by a factor of 5.

 

Lets not forget that Houston and the Revs spend just about the same amount. It's who you spend the money on thats the real deciding factor, much more than the amount. Similarly, when spending big nucks past the Cap on DP's it's the who you spend the money on that matters the most.

The way Revs central has misfired in signing SI's over the past 5-6 years I'm not sure that if they spent as much as LA or NY they would have been too much better off

 

Obviously spending more money CAN yield a better roster. But if the guys making the decisions are as useless as the ones in Toronto, all that money won't make a lick of difference.

3 of the 4 Champions League teams this coming year were in the bottom quarter of MLS as far a salary. They achieve success with good scouting and a phenomenal technical staff. There's no sense in spending money until we have quality technical guys on board.

 

My post was not an appeal to spend LA or NY money. It was an appeal to please drop discussion of a salary budget that barely exists. LDD, first patfan (I think) pointed out it was just a budget, not a cap. You acknowledged his comment in passing but then continued on using the word budget but meaning cap (IMHO). No offense, but you tend to go into deep deep SPECULATION about transfer fees, salaries, and allocation money to try to prove the REVs meet some threshold of spending that they can easily bend to the point of breaking. In addition to the DP rule, people have pointed out that other "fringe benefits" (cars, housing) can also be used to break the spirit of spending control.

I believe everyone agrees with (what I think is) your main point: An organization needs to fire on all cylinders from the corner office, to scouting, to coaching, to fitness training, to the players. I agree that Houston seems to be an example of a well run team that that spends, as best we know, more around the mythical "budget." I'd say LA is another example of a well run team that spends way above the "budget." I can't help but wonder, if both teams continue to be well run across the board but also continue with the current salary gap, who will win more out of the next 10 MLS cups. I believe Houston might rack up an impressive number of "runner-up" trophies.

On these boards, I believe we all have a tendency to take one point, in isolation, and try to prove the REVs aren't that different than some other successful team. "Oh team X is pretty successful and they don't spend more than us..." "Hey, team Y is pretty successful and they don't have any DPs..." "Hey, team Z is successful and they have a young, inexperienced coach..." "Hey, team W is pretty successful and they don't hire scouts..."

To me it's like everyone is trying to prove that the REVs are really a good, competitive team when all we have to do is look at their record to realize they are very much the opposite. In fact, like Doc's post above, we go a step further and EXCUSE the organization saying, "It's okay that the REVs didn't/don't <insert topic here> because it wouldn't have mattered..."

None of it is okay. This team needs to get its act together and effectively use all of the options and resources available (and maybe dream up some new rule bending techniques) to improve. If that includes splashing a little cash on coaches, scouts, front office, players, etc. to achieve success before 2032 then I'm all for it, but get the other parts right too. [Oh yay, here come the "it isn't your money" posts.]

Just fixing Blooter isn't the solution here IMHO. I am very unimpressed with our Front Office, our scouting, and our coaching. And the ownership, well...

 

So was promoting Burns and Bilello after numerous failed seasons but the Revs did it anyway.

 

I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm just sick of people saying "we never use allocation money," and "we never spend the cap," when there isn't evidence to support these claims. Realistically there isn't much evidence either way, but in the interest of fairness and balance, I feel obligated to argue that we do use these resources.

All too often, this forum is a echo chamber. You need individuals providing alternative opinions and looking at issues from different angles. Without alternative viewpoints, suggestions and hyperbole become fact. It's all to easy to end up like the GOP establishment circa election night 2012.

Not really. Those guys are/were known quantities. Financially, the Revs have been one of the more successful clubs in recent history. It wasn't until 1 or 2 years ago that several teams started passing us in this regard.

If KSG is of the mindset that they can "just ride it out" and maintain the organization at a small profitable level until they can either sell for a hefty profit or invest and build a new brand, then hiring guys like Burns/Bilello makes financial sense.

 

Imagine what Dom Kinnear could do with Bengtson, though.

The difference is that Houston knows exactly what it's playing at, with improvement or decline due simply to the quality of individual at each position. Boniek Garcia at RM instead of Colin Clark made a big difference. But in the Dom Kinnear system, it was the same position.

With the Revs, I get the sense that quality is being wasted because we don't have a coherent playing philosophy. Sene had to create so much on his own last year.