And I think this is where Andrew truly fails as an owner. He doesn't understand this entire process that's been laid out. Maybe he would be willing to fund it if he really understood it. Maybe he's just too impatient, or honestly can't get the funds to do it. But the bottom line is we will not have a club like we should until we have a change in ownership. Wether that's a new owner/ownership group or a change in how Andrew runs his business makes no difference to me. #HauptmanOut
Or he's coached 160 fewer games than anyone on the list ? Arena won 2 MLS Cups in his first two years; Yallop won 1 MLS Cup. ------------------------- Jason Kreis started midseason; the second full season, his RSL team won the MLS Cup after finishing with more losses than wins (11-7-12). Dominic Kinnear did won MLS cup in his 3rd and 4th year. Sigi Schmid won USOC in his 3rd full year, MLS Cup in his 4th year
Records are for MLS regular season play with the Fire only, and are in a different format from what Bunge was using:
Denis' regular season record (including his time as interim after DS) Played: 64 Wins: 24 Losses: 17 Draws: 21
That still puts Klopas second to Bradley in points per game, without the shoot out win. He also hasn't consistently had a Nowak or a Blanco. He may not be a perfect coach but he's at least had more success than most in what I think we all agree is a more difficult era to be successful. I don't see an easy path to improving our situation with our current ownership group. If we replace Klopas without a solid, public plan it'll be a continuation of the worst of what we are. Sir Alex was 100% correct and we're a directionless mess under Andrew.
None of the 11 MLS coaches who led a team during the 2012 or 2013 seasons (including interims) who are currently out of work had better numbers then Frank in their last position. Of the 12 coaches who have been in their position over a year, only Bruce, Sigi, and Dom have better PPG numbers for their current club:
Wow. Well, these numbers just continue to support the idea that we have a pretty good thing with Klopas. This isn't personal, it's quantifiable. Stats aren't everything but they can help solidify an argument. We need to win a big game and we need a plan for our academy but I don't think we need to reboot the whole process to get there.
Yep. I've seen this script before in other sports and with other teams. If the FO is rudderless and reactionary, the head coach doesn't really mean squat. You get mild bumps and coaches that have moderate success, but they come and go and none of them can succeed, even if they are good coaches. Is Frank a good coach? I'm not convinced. And like I have said many times, this team doesn't really pass the smell test. You watch them in comparison to the best teams, and we just don't match up. So, his PPG and other "stats" are actually pretty impressive. Players like playing for Frank and you can't underestimate the importance of that.
In a day and age of talent pool dilution, finding enough players that are MLS-quality should be easier, not harder, IMO. This is due to the reality that the definition of "MLS-quality" has worsened due to the larger number of roster spots available in this league, when compared to MLS 1.0. Moreover, winning in a league with much more expansion than in any other time frame of MLS should be easier, not harder. Beating expansion teams and recent expansion teams [MTL, VAN, POR, PHI; SEA before this season] should be relatively easier than beating well-established teams. Additionally, beating teams that aren't even trying [Chicas and NER] should be easier than in the days when they were making something of an effort to compete. And beating teams that are either poor or incompetent [SJE, TOR and DCU] should be easier than in their earlier days in the league. I actually believe that it is easier to win in today's MLS than in earlier times in the league. And with further dilution of the established player talent pool through expansion, it should become even easier in coming years, if the club has any vision or direction for the future.
It's more than absurd. You can kind of make the argument in American football because no one else plays it. Soccer has literally tens of thousands of professionals. MLS going from 12 to 19 teams is not diluting anything. In addition, the American player coming of age now is significantly better than the early days of MLS. If Khan's argument was correct, the level of play would be worse now. Go watch some games from the 90s.
Look up the winning % of expansion teams in MLS in recent seasons. In general, playing against expansion teams in their first few years of operation has been a relatively easy task in this league; our '98 team being a massive outlier. More like going from ~264 players to ~570 players. In other words, a 115.9% increase in roster spots from 2001 to today. [I'll show my work: 12*22 = 264; 19*30 = 570; % difference = (570-264)/264 = 115.9% increase.] Yes, in 2001, the roster limit was 18+4 =22/team. So 306 guys that were playing in the A League years ago are now in MLS rosters today? No wonder the Rochester Rhinos are far less compelling than a decade or so ago! [J/K] You know what, I'll even skip the SI/TI/YI designations from 2001, and assume that there were zero internationals in MLS in 2001, compared to 152 international slots today. In other words, from 2001 to today, I'll assume that of the 306 new roster spots, 152 of them are new international players. Even if MLS teams in 2013 consumed all available 152 international slots [which they aren't], there are still 154 domestic players collecting paychecks in MLS today that otherwise wouldn't have back in 2001. That's a little bit more than "no dilution," IMO. And yet, veterans like Logan Pause continue to draw paychecks in today's day and age.
Check out the starting lineups from the first few MLS Cups and the last few. The quality of the league is substantially better. Your analysis is faulty in many respects. One important factor is that US players are staying put more because salaries are higher. In addition to Donovan, and Dempsey, you have a lot of quality Americans staying home and making a living. Guys like Beckerman and Zusi Gonzalez and Duka etc. Stay here. That is huge. With today's structure, perhaps we wouldn't have lost Beasley, Wolff, Bocanegra, Razov, Ralph. We have been watching a mediocre team. But the top teams today are better than ever. Unless you believe that Arash Nouamouz starting an MLS Cup represents the glory days.
In 2013 - The 9 expansion teams added since 2005 (Chivas. Salt Lake, Toronto, San Jose, Seattle, Philadelphia, Portland, Vancouver and Montreal) have averaged 1.37 PPG The 5 expansion teams added since 2009 (Seattle, Philadelphia, Portland, Vancouver and Montreal have averaged 1.51 PPG. The ten teams that existed before 2005 have averaged 1.38 PPG. It looks like the presumed competitive advantage of established institutional knowledge/facilities is being effectively offset by the presumed advantage of a clean slate and learning the mistakes of the past.
A lot of what you suggest has some validity, but dig deeper. There are still a lot more [shyttier] domestic players now than ever before. And some of the middling players from MLS 1.0 are still around. FFS, our team captain still draws a pretty hefty check, despite him being craptacular, for example. With a 115.9% increase in available jobs, perhaps the best domestic players are better today. But OTOH, the garden-variety league replacement types are shyttier today. I dunno. I would still put up the 2000 FIRE team against any of the past ~10 MLS Cup Champions, and I'd feel pretty good about the Y2K team's chances. And even some of the early DCU teams would hold up in today's league pretty well, IMO. On the other end of the spectrum, today's DCU team = that 1999 metroturds team that went something like 7-25. Actually, I think this year's DCU team will set the record for fewest wins, goals, and points in competition. In other words, this year's DCU team should be another "free win" for their opponents, although we couldn't finish them off in USOC play. Overall, I don't take it as a given that it is harder to win in today's MLS than it was before.
I'd look at teams that have existed for more than ~5 seasons as not necessarily "expansion" teams any more. I don't really have a reason for holding this view, other than my personal opinion. How much of this is skewed by Seattle's big pockets? And how much of this is skewed by DCU's incompetence? DCU is on their way to having the worst documented performance by a MLS team in league history. [This makes the USOC failure hurt all the more, BTW.] I think a lot of this is skewed by two teams, chiefly DCU and Seattle. On top of this, two other established teams [NER and Chicas] aren't really trying, IMO. So I would think that there would be a bit of "noise" in the numbers, because of these factors. Nice work, BTW.
I'm with you, that we need a change, but I have ZERO confidence in the morans that are running the team. If the rumor is right, that it's his job if he wants it.. Who would you rather be the coach? Marsch or Frankie. 1.I don't think Andy and his clowns could find a coach that would make us better. Before Frank, they hired CDLC, Hamlet and Osorio. 2.He's to cheap to go and get a coach that could/might make us better. I know NOBODY, wants him anywhere near this team, but I think he would be an improvement over Frankie. But he might be to expensive for Dear Cheapness..... Peter Nowak.......
Neither one. Marsch was not prepared, and not qualified for the MTL job, IMO. And he has done nothing to improve his preparations and/or qualifications since getting sacked. And I truly believe that this club needs "new voices" in the FO and in the coaching staff. Neither of those two "put in the work" to learn how to manage at the MLS level prior to being hired for their management positions. Neither of those two served a sufficient "apprenticeship" by assisting long enough, and/or by coaching long enough at a lower level, IMO. As an aside, Bradley, Arena, and Schmid have all won MLS Cup, and yet all have been fired from one or more jobs in this league. The latter two have had MLS success in a second or third stop AFTER being fired. With that in mind, I'm not convinced that Nowak wouldn't be able to succeed in a third act as manager in MLS. [Although some of the rumors about him in Philly are less-than-flattering.] The problems go deeper than just a coach, IMO. The FO needs a major overhaul, there have to be some changes to the roster, and there needs to be some vision from somewhere in the organization.
LOL I saw the set-up, but had to scroll down to the punchline. I thought that you would say: "Steve Nicol." Anyone care to do the legwork comparing the records of the owners? From the start to present, including breaks for expansion?
Like I said I have ZERO confidence in the morans that are running this team. That's why they will hired Marsch and think that he's going to do a better job than Frankie. The only thing that's going to turn this team around is if Dear Cheapness sells the team and the new owner either knows something about the sport (gets rid of Andy's clowns) or he brings in a FO that knows something about the sport. Somehow I don't see that happening, so we will be stuck with this mess for along time. Just keep brining in so, so players, in the summer transfer window. Just enough to keep/get us in the 5th place (play-in game).
If we take away Seattle - The four recent expansion teams (Philly, Montreal, Portland, Vancouver), PPG only goes down to 1.49 If we also take away Philadelphia and only look at the 3 newest expansion teams (the 2011 and 2012 additions), PPG goes back up to 1.53! Now - If we take away DC from the traditional 10 - the other 9 average 1.47 PPG. DC is definitely skewing the numbers, but it looks like the recent expansion teams are holding their own. 3 out of the 5 added in the last 5 years would make the playoffs if the season ended today, including 2 out of the 3 added in the last year years (Portland and Montreal). The other two (Phily & Vancouver) are just outside looking in. Historically - there is some evidence that the second wave of expansion teams (2005-2008) were easier wins early in their existence, although Bob Bradley did pretty good work with Chivas in year 2, and they were good in year 3 and 4 under Preki before falling off the face of the earth in year 6. Toronto has never gotten it together, while San Jose and Salt Lake were significantly better by year 4 of their existence. This third wave (2009-2012) looks to becoming harder to beat earlier on, but it's really too early to know for sure.
Out of curiosity why would you take away Philly? In what way would they skew anything? I think it is clear that DCU and Seattle skewed the numbers for this season. Of course, getting free wins against weaker expansion teams skews every manager's record.