Revs 2014 Roster Thread

Abbott and Costello are now in the house.

Q: Who's in Goal?

A: Why.

 

"What do you mean, why?"
"No he's the left back"

"Huh? Who?"
"Hu's the Chinese guy Buns signed over the winter. He's supposed to be good."

"Burns signed a Chinese guy? No way!"
"No Way is the new DP."

"I always said No Way we'd sign a real DP"
"Real is the Spanish guy who signed with Seattle. We had no chance at getting him. He wanted too much money."

"What?"
"The striker"

"The striker? How many goals did he score?"
"Howe's not going to score many. He's a central defender. Maybe if he gets up in the air on a corner."

"Wait, I thought you said He is the new Chinese guy"
"No, that's Hu. Pay attention! He is the Number 10"

"What?"
"No he's the striker."

"But you just said He's the other guy, not the Chinese one?"
"That's right"

"So Hu's the striker?"
"No he's the Chinese guy...."

 

Once word gets out that the Revs haven't sent all 4 players to Rochester, Burns won't be able to show his face in public. MLS will probably come down with fines and suspensions.

 

Just one more thread removed from the garment. Sooner or later, you will realize that the Emperor has no clothes...

 

Er, what? So just to be clear, if the Revs are indeed not living up to a responsibility they agreed to, that's ok by you? We obviously don't know the whole story, which is odd seeing as they're often so free with information, but it sounds like you're saying all that matters is what the Revs want, and if they don't feel like sending all 4 players to Rochester, who cares what some ink on a piece of paper says?

 

He's lucky he hasn't been arrested for incecent exposure, since he has been walking around buck-nekkid for years!

 

I'm saying, if Rochester isn't concerned, why should we be? And if they are, I'm sure they can figure out how to deal with it.

I want/expect the Revs to do what furthers their interest in MLS, first and foremost. If they're not ready to send 4 players to Rochester, I have NO problem with that. After all, the guys we sent last year didn't get very much p.t. anyway.

 

Did you attend the Brad Feldman School of Spin?

Duckett and Polak were in the top 10 in minutes for Rochester, and Latigue would have been if he didn't have a season-ending injury.

Most teams view this arrangement as a way to actually develop players for their MLS roster (see USL poster child Dom Dwyer).

Unfortunately, the Revs see it simply as a way to avoid participation in the Reserve League.

 

I think he is Brad Feldman.

 

/

Wait, what? What!?! If Rochester is concerned about the Revs not living up to their side of the bargain, you're "sure they can figure out how to deal with it"? You're quite the caring person, I can tell. So you don't want the Revs to ever worry about living up to any kind of agreement they signed? You really don't feel that Revs, and I suppose any company or organization or person, should ever live up to an agreement if they don't feel like it? Companies/people should only look out for their own interests, that's all that should matter to anybody? I don't know if this is a problem for Rochester, but if it is, nobody should care, as Rochester, and everybody else (including the fans I assume) are only on this planet to serve the Revolution's interests? Once anyone is no longer serving the interests of the Revs, well they can just figure out their own problems for themselves, which I believe is another way of saying "they can go screw themselves" (which is another way of saying something which is not fit for saying in mixed company).

OK, while I'm sure it sounds pleasant to you, it's safe to say I would not want to live in this world that you advocate.

 

Judging by the amount of time Mullins and Neuman have seen the pitch or made the bench they might as well send one of them down to Rochester. Imbogo could also benefit from regular PT

 

Who knows? Maybe the Rhinos are saying something like, "Um, hey, you guys still owe us a player. Now that you're 6 games into your season you should be able to send us someone..."

And the Revs reply that the Rhinos need to "be patient because we're trying."

 

FYP

 

I don't think there's any evidence to support that and it seems like a pretty unreasonable conclusion to me.

A simpler, less-conspiratorial explanation would be that Heaps still has some questions/concerns with the roster with injuries, players still coming back from injuries and some unknowns about how much the rookies will be able to contribute this year.

I know Brad Feldman and believe me, I'm not Brad Feldman (I pass better).

You seem to have some built in assumption that Rochester has some axe to grind here. I think it's likely they are fine with things the way they are - at least for now. I've always felt that the Rhinos coach probably would much rather play and develop his own players, that he's more likely to have coming back next year, than to give minutes to Revs players who could be pulled back at any time.

Since Burns has said to wants and expects to fill the remaining roster spots within a few weeks, it seems pretty reasonable that they may want to wait until then to make decisions on who they want to send to NY. And, for all we know, Rochester is fine with that.

I can understand starving children in the 3rd world, but why should the Rochester Rhino's problems be my problems?

I think Heaps still is figuring out what those guys can contribute this season and when he has a better idea, then they'll make those decisions. I'm also suspecting that maybe Mullins has a knock of some sort, since he hasn't even been making the bench lately.

I mean that if the Rhinos are displeased about not having 4 Revolution players, they can call up Mike Burns and let him know that. If they feel the Revs are obligated to have 4 players there all season and the Revs see it differently, they can probably ask the USL and MLS to clarify precisely the what and whens of compliance within this program.

As I said, I think this whole discussion is rather pointless. There's no evidence of any kind that the Rhinos have any concern at this point.

 

I agree.

If this is the case, then I have to wonder how this relationship is beneficial for either team, much less both teams other than depth/practice bodies/compliance/payroll (if the Revs pay their guys in Rochester)/other ways? This feels to me like something that the Revs could work on improving, in parallel to this season, for next year. Find a real "partner" instead of a "relationship of convenience".

That is why I was asking some questions earlier in this thread (or the Rochester thread?) about player/coach/organizational communication between those in Foxboro and Rochester. Hopefully, the current Rochester situation can begin to work for the Revs and bear fruit. Hopefully this is just the first step towards the Revs eventually running their own USL Pro team.

 

Yeah. And since we have a full roster on the parent club, sureley Heaps would have had time to evaluate all the unknowns and have plenty of depth for injuries at the bottom third of the roster. Good thing the Revs didn't cheap-out and go with a less than full roster. After all, we're almost 20% of the way into the season by now.

But more to the point, if Rochester isn't publicly complaining, and they have agreed that they are OK with the 3 guys the Revs gave them, who cares? On the other hand, if it is the opposite case and Rochester has asked for another player, the Revs are in breach of the agreement. I don't have a PhD in math, but I know that 3 is less than 4. Either way, they probably wouldn't beef about this publicly.

But that's OK, as long as Kraft keeps crapping out espresso-flavored gelato, all is right with the world!

 

[quote="rkupp, post: 29955566, member: 12281" I think this whole discussion is rather pointless.
.[/quote]

---AMEN

 

There is plenty of evidence to support it, just none to PROVE it. Start with the fact that the 4 players they sent there last year were immediately released upon their return.

Wrong. I don't care if Rochester is upset about this or not. What I care about is how it makes the Revs look compared to the rest of MLS. Just like having multiple open roster slots for 6+ weeks, it makes them look unprofessional. I want the professional team I support to act like one. And I think it is one of the reasons why players like Parkhurst balk at playing in Foxboro, because they don't want to play for an unprofessional club.

 

Sporting Kansas City has only sent one of its required two players to Orlando City. Is that making them look bad?

 

That's an interesting point.

SKC also has one open roster spot. So perhaps that's part of the deal. That extra spot is the guy for Orlando, in theory.

This of course does not excuse us from having an absurd three open spots, but I get the idea.

 

Nobody cares except for a few people in this forum who just want more things to add to their complaint list.

 

Now that's pessimistic.

I would hazard a guess that it is a number near, or at, zero -- of how many people want more things about this franchise to not be up to snuff. Or even"want" anything to be less or worse than it should be. There are enough things already in need of fixing.

If there are people really like that, then they are on Chivas boards. Or RBNY, ChiFire, DCU, or possibly even Montreal. They might want to see a competitor/rival struggling to compete. Or to look worse than they do, for air cover.

 

Fine. I'll admit that this point is overblown, seeing as SKC and TFC are also shorting their affiliates. But as A Casual Fan pointed out, I don't WANT to add more to my list of complaints. In fact, I was a KAD my first few years on this board.

If you want to focus solely on the product on the field, and ignore the association between the front office actions and what happens on the field, that is your right. But I can't ignore the connection.

And when good players like Parkhurst would rather play in Columbus, and players with no association with the Revs say they would rather retire than play here, that raises a huge red flag for me.

So while one little thing like honoring your agreement with your affiliate may not be a big deal by itself, when there are 100 little things that add up to a bad reputation, it's time to pay attention.

 

Yes - but they do so much right it stands out.