YES! Despite spelling, 'analyzable' IS a word. I had to check. Regardless, I'm with our good Doc on this sentiment. I'm also agreeing with others that it is a good sign that the Revs are making moves before 2012 is even over. The roster actions are speaking louder than the fluffy smoke blowing words - we need to watch what gets _done_ over the next months, not what is said. I can also confidently state that my opinion is better than anyone's. Had to get the vanity in there somewhere. Kevin D.
"Great" signings? I think you exaggerate a bit. I'm not sure I heard anyone call the first three great signings. Expectations were higher for Lozano for sure, because he's younger - the only thing wrong with the others were their age/condition. I don't disagree. I'm not sure why he was bust and I'd really like to know - because he seems to be only the latest in a string of "busts" from LA signings who should've produced at least something (like Badilla before him and Phillips before him, ...).
You're wrong, because i said so. Yeah, I'd like to know that too. My guess with Lozano is that Heaps wanted to invest in McCarthy by starting him and this left Lozano the odd man out and he was making to much for a CD coming off the bench.
I think that was pretty clear, but some where along the line Heaps decided he wanted to develop McCarthy instead.
Develop McCarthy at CB in spite of having an expensive veteran SI, brought in to be a starter available? Ballsy confidence in the quality of McCarthy over Lozano or naieve stupidity.
No, that''s the economy of MLS rules. If you can fill a need with a young/domestic/cheap, you use your resources to get expensive, veteran SIs for more important [i.e., offensive] needs. If you look at it over the short-term, playing Lozano would've probably made sense. But, regardless of what he may have said, I think Heaps has taken a somewhat longer view. Putting his faith in Macca and taking the time to develop him is better in the long term, even if it makes the team look bad for signing and not using Lozano. I'm pleased that Heaps didn't take the safe and easy route and I'm convinced that McCarthy is on his way to becoming a very good centerback (despite the perception that our defense was a shambles, it was pretty close to league average in goals against - and many more of those GA came because of midfield mistakes than by our centerbacks, particularly McCarthy).
I think this sums up Heaps & Co position pretty well, however, in this case I'm not sure they got it right. Ether way when it became clear McCarthy was going to be the starting for the season it became clear that the Revs where taking a long term view on team development.
Yes, absolutely. But you make that decision before you sign the expensive International, not after. And if they decided that they young, cheap, domestic player is better than the expensive foreigner, then cut the foreigner early enough so they can use the money to sign someone else who can step in and help right away. Yeah, I would also go with the "poor talent evaluation" theory.
I don't think so. If McCarthy had proved to be in over his head and they played him anyway, then that would be true. But, he showed from about about his 2nd or 3rd game that he wasn't going to be a disaster back there. I think at that point, they thought that if Lozano wasn't going to be significantly better, than it was worth pushing McCarthy's development. Well, when was Heaps supposed to be able to see McCarthy in a new position with the opportunity to make that evaluation? New coach, new position, relatively new player. They could have cut Lozano earlier, but they weren't exactly deep at that position (and IIRC, both Barnes and Soares had some injury issues in the first half). I know a lot of people don't rate him as highly as I do, but I think he's probably in the top 3 most positive developments for the season, along with Nguyen and Sene - and may have a bigger impact over the long term.
It's funny that there are two people who defend McCarthy as a suitable CB: 1) A first year head coach (at any level btw) who just lead a team that didn't make the playoffs, set a franchise winless streak record (right?), and barely beat the abysmal points total of the year before. and 2) The biggest Revs homer on the Revs bigsoccer board Gentlemen, case dismissed.
Didn't Ives list him on his "most improved" XI for the whole league? I don't really rate him as more than an adwquate depth player, good for sub duty, spot-starting, etc. but everyone's mileage may vary.
Ives is clueless. I get so frustrated when people value his match ratings, analysis, draft boards, etc. He's essentially a BigSoccer poster with a few connections. I'm not at all impressed by his knowledge of the game or his ability to analyze it.
You can count me as supporting McCarthy enough to invite him to compete for the other spot next to the new DP centerback. If that means I think he's a suitable CB, then I'm #3.
The Revs ranked 11th in goals against. That's pretty hard to do with a centerback who's less than suitable. Of those GA, a few were on Reis, several on Soares (who had a rough season), a whole bunch were on midfielders who didn't track their men (including Joseph, Simms, Nguyen, Rowe, etc.) and a bunch on Alston, who regularly loses his mark on the back post for crosses, corners and free kicks. There were a few where McCarthy shared fault, mostly due to communication problems with other defenders (I remember one where one of the mids let his man go by, McCa stepped up and got caught in no-man's land as the ball was passed by him; another where Henry made a pretty ridiculous shot after McCarthy struggled, but stayed with Henry, while Reis left his goal and a third where he was undressed in a wide-open field (along with Soares) after the midfield turned it over while on the attack). None of these are things that don't happen to the best of defenders from time-to-time. It's interesting that the same people who insist McCarthy can't be any good, are much the same as those who insist that Shuttleworth can't be any good. Because, after all, who are they? Just Rev bargain boys, right? The thing both Shuttleworth and McCarthy have in common are pretty good (exceptional in BS's case) numbers earned over significant playing time this season. The Revs biggest problem, far and away, is scoring goals. That puts way more pressure on the defense because they were often pushing forward in desperate attempts to generate more offense. The defense looked very bad at times, but the bigger picture shows that they were basically an average (and young and inexperienced) MLS defense.
I think there is potential for the New England Revolution Defender of 2012 and he is a more than suitable third center back. He should definitely return to this squad to compete for a spot in the starting line-up but the overall depth of the position needs to improve.