True. To some it's not a joke seeing as Frazier is such a "classy" guy and "did amazing things" at RSL.
I was at the press conference today. Contrary to popular belief, today Vergara acknowledged his mistakes from 2005. Said he wanted to broaden the fan base to more non-hispanics by playing attractive soccer and bringing in talented players. Not moving from Los Angeles. Downtown USC stadium partnership deal in the works. Talks will resume. Possible Los Angeles incorporation in name. More academy youth will play, not just Mexicans Crouyff will lead the coach search. All nationalities welcomed to play for Chivas USA. DP player or players in the works. Goal for the next 3 years is to move out of HDC and be an MLS Cup contender. With all of the tweets from Whal, Davis, Twelman and the comments here, you'd think Vergara announced the second coming of the Aztlan movement.
Probably because he was there at the first coming of the Aztlan movement. By the way, in the reports he's pretty clear about mistakes other people made, particularly in moving away from the initial path taken [which, yes, would have been the 2005 path]. Can you tell us what he specifically admits to being his own mistake? And why he thinks it was a mistake to have deviated from the path of 2005?
The divorce he talks about between Guadalajara and Chivas USA relates to the interchange of players, training, and ideas. Not to the Mexicans only policy. Let's be clear. He admitted it was a mistake coming pursuing a Mexican only team in MLS because of our failures. He admitted being part of that failure.
I met with him. He admitted to never having his hands on the club before and that he didn't invest to buy full control just to lose money. I say lets all wait and see, but it did sound like he is ready to put money into CUSA with the stadium and player acquisitions.
Reading the various accounts of the press conference, it sure doesn't seem that he does. I'm also struck that there seems to be no recognition for how much MLS itself has changed since 2005. Let's remember, RSL and Chivas USA were the first expansion teams following contraction and MLS' near death experience in early 2002. Seven years and several successful expansion teams and designated players later, MLS is much more secure, much more profitable and has a much higher profile. The league now talks about achieving parity with Liga MX, and while there is still some distance to go, that's not so fanciful today. This isn't hat in hand MLS anymore. This isn't a league that needs Vergara to show them how it's done. There's also this: since 2005 MLS has launched nine new teams (San Jose included) and relocated another, and arguably Chivas USA is by far the least successful of the bunch. The Chicharito story illustrates how badly Vergara still misses the point. For me, the takeaway of the tale isn't that Preki thought Chicharito wasn't good enough, as Vergara condescendingly suggested, but that he was offered to the MLS team on loan for only one year. No long term commitment, no long term investment. Even if Vergara's version of the story is completely accurate, he's saying he offered to give junior the keys to the nice car for the weekend to impress his date, but he had to return it promptly and without any scratches. Does anyone get the sense that Vergara would ever allow Chivas USA to roster talent that could be used in Guadalajara? Of course not. At best, his vision is a glorified developmental club with a brand tie in for the parent. And if he really thinks that kind of team can compete in MLS circa 2013, he's in for another rude awakening. In 2005, MLS didn't have many choices. Remember, this was a shot gun wedding when USSF blocked Vergara from putting a Mexican league club in LA. And while Vergara's vision was probably problematic even then, people weren't exactly lining up waving $10M checks to get into MLS either, let alone $40M. So a deal was struck. But there is no reason to continue to embrace this flawed vision now. Even RBNY, for all its faults, can't be accused of using MLS to develop stars for another club they own. MLS has earned the right to demand and expect more from its owners. It's a mess IMO, and whatever fleeting improvement the team may show on the field, as long as MLS allows a team that exists only to complement the goals of another parent club, it's not going to work. But, it seems, Vergara and the BofG are going to need to figure this out the hard way.
Agree with this. I wanted to point out the difference between NYRB and CUSA, since they're in similar situations: NYRB exists to complement the goals of the parent company, but CUSA exists to complement the goals of the parent club. NYRB might only be around to sell energy drinks, but it can be argued that the Red Bulls' success as a team does sell energy drinks. An eventual, long-term CUSA success, however, hurts CD Guadalajara, since it would succeed with resources that could benefit (the real) Chivas.
re-mexicanization theme is racially charged. you go for the top talent regardless of ethnic background.
I use them in a sentence together all the time..."Chivas USA, where talent goes to die." I think that was their marketing slogan the last 3 years.
From a performance standpoint sure. But at the gate, TFC slaughters TFC. There are plenty of teams with shortcomings in MLS. Chivas USA has been bad in every single possible facet of the game, from the front office to the coaches to the players.
"From a performance standpoint sure. But at the gate, TFC slaughters TFC." I know this is a typo, but I suspect there are those in Toronto that would agree that TFC is its own worst enemy.
This is exactly what is wrong w/ Chivas. And I bet money that every move Fraser made, Cue or someone was telling him "is he Mexican? Is he Hispanic?" And when they weren't, he was told dont get him. So who does he get? Old aging players on their downside. Just look at that roster. My gut says Riley, Smith, Labrocca, Kennedy and Townsend, among the better players on that crap team need to look elsewhere now. Cue was not doing anything that Vergara will do. He just might have more money to it. The only time the experiment didn't fail is when Bradley/Preki MLSized it.
True, but they have at least made the playoffs in their 8 years of existence. 4 years in a row, even. And a regular-season conference title, to boot. Toronto has missed the playoffs all 6 years. And TFC found a way to finish worse this year than a Goats team that couldn't score as many goals on the season as Wondo alone.
Good point, it's an important distinction. Which leads us to another consideration, it's now been over a decade since the Court for Arbitration for Sport upheld UEFA's rule procluding any clubs owned by a common owner from participating in UEFA competitions. The court agreed with UEFA that "when commonly controlled clubs take part in the same competition, the public might perceive such a situation as presenting a conflict of interest potentially affecting the authenticity of sporting rules." http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/131633/c-a-s-backs-uefa-on-dual-ownership While CONCACAF doesn't have a similar prohibition to my knowledge, I think this is a similar issue. MLS should not allow common control over MLS teams and other teams in CONCACAF, IMO. (And, yes, I think the same issue applies to common ownership of operating rights for more than one MLS team as well.) I don't think they can escape the perception that one team is being operated as the dominant club to benefit the owner's interest, the other as the subservient one. In other words, you'll never convince fans that Chivas USA won't be manipulated in order to benefit the parent club, perhaps not on the pitch (should they ever meet in the CCL), but almost certainly off it.
News Release from 2016... "On Sunday the Galaxy will be taking on the Seattle Sounders and Sergio Aguero at Farmers Field. The Galaxy announced that more than 65k tickets have sold and that they expect a sellout crowd of over 72k. 'It's always fun to play the Sounders', said Galaxy captain Cristiano Ronoldo said. "They're a good team with world class players." The Galaxy beat the CCL Champion Portland Timbers last Saturday after Jose Villarreal scored a brace and Timbers star Samuel Eto'o was sent off in the 74th minute. Across town Chivas USA will be taking on the New England Revolution in an attempt to avoid relegation." Point: CUSA has set themselves up to be a couple steps behind the rest of the league for years. Sell the team to San Antonio and end this charade.
Sure. UEFA was specifically concerned about match fixing, but multiple ownership casts a cloud of conflict over a lot of issues, from player loans to transfers (including the avoidance of transfer fees payable to the league by simply signing players after their contracts expire). You get the idea. There are simply too many potential transactions that will not be -- cannot be -- arm's length which can be manipulated to better the parent club at the expense of the MLS team.
Theres probably not much MLS can do though. As long as he's making his cash calls and playing by the rules he probably has final say on everything else. Look at the move the owner of the Miami Marlins pulled yesterday, horrible for the image of MLB but technically within the rules of the league. I think MLS has their version of Al Davis here. If he came to MLS with this business plan in 2012 he'd of been laughed out of the room but he got in at a time when MLS was desperate for any investment.
I'm more inclined to believe this than Vegara's version. It just doesn't fit that MLS would agree to a one year loan and, though not mentioned, without an option to buy.
Considering Mama Chivas was one of only two FMF/MLS teams bounced out of CCL in the group stage would you really want to tap into their "expertise" anyway?
Hey! I know TFC sucks but I'm pretty sure they're still an MLS team! ChivasGuad, RSL, and TFC all failed to advance out of the group stage.