No one is arguing they didn't have better options. We are arguing whether he was a good player or a bad one, whether he helped us win or if we were better off without him. There are a plethora of guys out there better than Baca. The issue is if Doyle has enough money to convince one to come here. Well, #1 it was pure data. #2, it was only a waste of time to those who are wearing these:
The discussion is not good vs bad -- it's whether he was effective in the role that he was assigned. And it has to be examined in the context of the players and strategies at hand. Once you start going the what-if route, the argument is moot.
I think Cruz Azul plays Monterrey before long. I'll watch that game so I hope Baca sees the field. But I hope Monterrey wins <g>
Rafa to 2nd Division. I'd say that vindicates some people, EXCEPT Villarreal went too. Villarreal is young, but definitely an MLS talent. http://iworldcup.org/?p=52639
Rafael Baca, José Villarreal sent to Cruz Azul’s B-team in Mexico’s second division http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/...larreal-la-galaxy/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
well this season 4 matches & Baca has started all 4 & went the full 90...also to answer you question, yes
I think they wanted Baca to attack more and in the process undervalued him as the midfield glue of the Quakes in those years. In 2014 there was yammering about the need to "upgrade" Baca's spot and the player they got for that was JBP. I think JBP was a pretty good player but he was also a d-mid and probably even less suitable as an attacking player than Baca. If anything what they should have done is kept Baca and used JBP to replace Cronin. As it was the central midfield was just not the same after Baca left and was generally lousy until last part of last year when they acquired Godoy. Sadly, I can imagine JD using JBP as the scapegoat for all this when the real problem might have been his own undervaluing and selling of a very effective Quakes CM and then signing a round peg and trying to fit him into a round hole.
I liked Baca AND Cronin. A lot! But we needed someone more dominating in midfield. Jazzy, I do think JBP was sold to us as square peg in a round hole - he was never going to enhance possession or create attack or score a bunch of goals. But JBP had all the freedom and opportunity to show his quality and he was just bad, all on his own. IMO. I can't imagine Doyle scapegoating Pierazzi - why would he do that to his own high profile signing? The guy had size and work rate - the main things Doyle seems to consistently value.
Something more dominating than our supporters shield run? If anyone needed to be upgraded it was Cronin as his pairing with baca was redundant.
Someone more dominating... yeah, I think so over time. Don't get me wrong, we played some great ball that season. And when we didn't, we still had the Goonies and a number of guys who could whip in a good cross. And when we didn't, we still had the Goonies. Unfortunately, Yallop chickened out in the playoffs and bet it all on Route 1.
I thought JBP was pretty good, easily better than Cronin, in that he'd at least pass the ball centrally and not just flair it out to space on the wing, but hey, reasonable people can disagree. But in any case, we agree on the square peg / round hole thing. I have this sinking feeling that Doyle figured that he'd be creative because he's French, and they are artistic and stuff, and it went no deeper than that. Not sure what he saw. I watched JBP's highlight video too, and he was a straight up d-mid. Doyle would not have scapegoated Pierazzi publicly necessarily, but I can imagine him doing it privately. He let it slip out how unhappy he was with Cam Weaver in 2009, and that was his (big) baby. In the past, when the team didn't do well, he'd say that it was because the players were "under-performing", of course not that he didn't select a good group of players or that the coaching left more to be desired. There was a point last season where there was no JBP to be found, and it was unclear if there was a nagging injury or what. I joked at the time that he was tied to a chair in Doyle's basement or something, but maybe there is actually some truth to that .
When David Alioto was prez he confided to me how they were disappointed in Weaver. I can't remember his exact words, but, it was along the lines of Weaver being a much "softer" player than they wanted, kind of a baby Huey.
Yeah, what gets me a bit about this is that they want to blame it Weaver. Cam was going to Cam. He didn't come to San Jose and decide to play worse. They should be blaming themselves for signing him and trying to make him the centerpiece of their offense. Oh well, given that Cam Weaver turned into Chris Wondolowski, it was perhaps a good move after all, thanks to our present coach, who now seems determined to remake Mark Sherrod in the image of Cam Weaver :--).
Cam had one good year for Seattle in USL-1, and a couple of decent years in the Norwegian second division before becoming a Quake. He never could quite make the leap to a good first division player. Sherrod had a pretty good college career, scoring 52 goals in 4 seasons at the University of Memphis, where Jahn only managed 24 goals in his 4 year Stanford career. Perhaps Jahn faced stiffer competition in the Pac-12. I am not sure Jahn or Sherrod will be any better than Weaver at the MLS level.
That Sherrod goal total may be a bit inflated. I see different numbers in different places. I think it's become kind of a Paul Bunyon folk hero thing ("and then he scored 10 more goals in the game, three of them standing on his head"!) Best guess is that it is more like about 40, and don't know how many assists he has. Jahn had 12 assists, which is consistent with what I was saying about his solid combination play. I think Jahn is already better than Weaver. Their career goals per minute numbers are not all that different, and Weaver had the opportunity to play with all of those good Houston teams. And Jahn is just better in combination play.
I always like Rafa, I thought it was a travesty we let him go, another Doyle-esque moment (one of too many)