Re: REVS CONTENT (Wahl ranking Revs DEAD Last in FO/Ownership Ambition)

Fyp

 

What is deeply depressing [well, one of that which is deeply depressing] is that even with this lack of ambition we did manage to build a very very fine team in the mid 00's. A team which, with a modestly high level of ambition from our FO [Say, Salt Lake. Nevermind LA's or Seattle's] could have established itself as one of the strongest teams in Concacaf and a perennial MLS power. A team which, with a reasonable modicum of ambition [say, Chicago Fire] could have sustained itself as one of the consistent challengers for the Cup and a strong representative in international play. A team which, with a smidgeon of ambition [say, the Hunt owned teams] would at least have been a consistently strong, composed, playoff side.
But we had/have an ownership of zero ambition for the team, and a front office of the ignorant or the idiotic or the indifferent. It would have taken abysmal lack of ambition to squander the position we were in......and yet it was so squandered.
What a shame.

And so a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to us all.

 

Just a quick reply to Patfan1 from the other thread regrading his comment about only disagreeing with the rankings because it had the Revs at the bottom. If you look at my posts on this topic i did not even bring up the Revs once, in fact, i don't have any problem with the Revs being at the bottom of this list or any other list after last season. My point is this is just a list of teams who have been hot in the media for the last 3 or 4 months and is no reflections of a teams overall ambition.

 

There's no tiebreaker for last place this time. We win fair and square.

 

I agree with the above 100%.

This is the place the attack the ineptitude of the Revs organization top to bottom. Ideally this would be possible without other posters personally attacking each other, but I understand folks are entitled to their own opinions and are passionate about the team and soccer in this country.

Looking forward to reading more discussion from all in 2012.

 

With my vast business knowledge, and superior intelligence to you all, I can safely tell you that Bob Kraft is not a savvy businessman, and that the Revs aren't being run as a smart business.

There, I win.

 

Must spread rep.

 

Disagree. If Kraft were to invest in a new SSS like so many Revs fans desire, he would creating a problem in filling Gillette Stadium during the NFL off-season, and also filling the new SSS during the MLS off-season.

Also, an urban SSS means less people visiting Patriot Place. Why would Kraft support the Revs if it would hurt Gillette Stadium and Patriot Place?

It is just as probable that Kraft determined that moving the Revs out of Foxboro will be a net financial loss for him.

 

It's interesting that you chose to make examples of things that I didn't specify in my post. I'm glad you wasted as much of your own time as you usually do with everyone else's

 

Wouldn't that be maintaining the current status quo..i.e. his current business model?

 

He would have Concerts and big name soccer games in Foxboro with no MLS schedule to complicate the scheduling.

 

I agree with you JD. All talk of a SSS is pure smokescreen. The Revo will be in Gilette as long as Kraft owns the team.

 

If you are willing to venture a six-pack that is a bet I would be glad to take

 

This thread is about the Revs' lack of ambition as it was portrayed by Grant Wahl which includes the lack of an SSS.

I think I was at least on topic by discussing why building an SSS may not be in Kraft's financial interest, which is related to the topic of whether Kraft is a savvy businessman.

Finally, you wrote that I chose to make examples of things you didn't specify in your post. Besides the fact that the world does not revolve around Kraft Out, your previous post didn't provide any examples at all. You merely wrote that a) you have vast business knowledge, b) you have superior intellect, and therefore conclude that c) Kraft is not a savvy businessman.

 

First, I don't think the current MLS schedule is too prohibitive of concerts at Gillette Stadium. However, if the Revs leave Foxboro, that are 17 extra days of an unoccupied stadium.

Second, there are also so many opportunities for "big name soccer." An EPL/La Liga team will only play 1 exhibition game locally, and there is only a limited opportunity for USMNT games too.

 

I'll be happy to take the bet Doc. But how many years of status quo will you give them before you pay off?

 

It's hard to set a drop dead date but (going with my usual positive thinking best case scenario ) I think we will hear of the selected location in 2012 and play in our new 24K stadium in the 2015 season.

There I'm on record 27 Dec 2011

 

Pauvre Doc

 

Brave, Doc, brave. Some would say ludicrous. If there was a Revs' Board Medal for Bravery you would win it. You already sweep the annual KAD of the Year voting.

I'll be on record saying that will not happen.

However, if you're right and we're all wrong (literally, I probably speak for everyone reading this post outside the Revs' org KADs), then I will be first in line to happily eat crow.

 

Maybe if he loses enough money and plays to 2-3K per game in the morgue, he'll dump the team to someone that cares.

Its a shame to watch soccer in NE go down the tubes because of an apathetic owner. We could be a Portland if we had a real stadium and a team worth cheering for

 

haha you still don't get it.