I know this is off topic but I'm curious and was young enough at the time to not remember the full details of this. What exactly happened - he decided to head to France to watch the WC instead of coaching the team?
He signed on as an assistant coach to Steve Sampson about two weeks before the US team left for France.
Yes, and at the time, the Revs were middle of the pack, with some promise and hope for the season. But if the coach doesn't care enough to stick with the team through the stretch run of the season, how are you going to get guys like Dahir Mohammed to run through a brick wall for the good of the team? It's one thing for a couple of players to miss time (Moore and Burns), but the coach?? And Kraft gave his permission, which is baffling beyond belief. He should have said, "sure, go to France if you like, but you won't have a job when you come back."
Take them to the MLS Cup, duh. So, you're asking a question and then telling me how I have to answer it? So there's a track record, but Tom Hill can rationalize each example away? It's been fun playing. Why again was Clavijo fired? Because he was on the hot seat? Because they knew someone he might do a better job? Why wouldn't both reasons apply to Heaps? Just because you say Heaps is safe and the Revs are happy to "almost make the playoffs" (love to hear your "evidence" of that), don't make it so. The Revs have spent big money and resources on DPs, it would be rather startling if they didn't expect improved results. Anyone can see the trends - a team that improved for 3 straight seasons is now rolling back down that hill. The Krafts are no dummies (despite your belief) and can't be pleased with the path the team is on - almost playoffs or not. It's baffling beyond belief to you, but not necessarily to the owners and players. To get back to the question, he got fired because he failed to turn the team around and showed none of the magic touch that he had exhibited at DC. Not because he took a few weeks to help the USNT.
Yes, duhhhhhhh You couldn't tell? Duhhhhh If you weren't so focused on spin you could look at Heaps performance that season objectively. Somewhat good but, without JJ, not an MLS Cup run.
Feldman to Mariner during the Columbus telecasts: All you have to do is make it to the dance then it's a whole new game. ( Or something very close to that, I didn't write it down)
Has there ever, in the entire history of high-level sports, been a situation anywhere on planet earth, where a coach took a leave of absence from a team in the middle of the season (other than for health reasons), and he kept his job? Ever? maybe you can think of one, but I can't. Here's the thing: The 1998 team started out OK and was in at least a decent position when Rongen left. The engines may not have been firing on all cylinders, but the team was competent, and in the middle of the pack, surely a playoff team, and if things could gell with the new signings of Gorter and Goulooze, Gio Savarese, Ian Feuer in goal, they had the makings of a decent team, and at that point (yeah, their 3rd season), the best Revs team ever. The message the chief motivator sent was clear, this was just a side-show and he was looking to ingratiate himself with the USSF for a better gig with the Nats. Hint: the best way to do that is to be successful with your club, like Bruce Arena (and later Bob Bradley) were. The Krafts should never have even considered letting him leave the team. They should have fired him on the spot the second he asked, like any other sports organization in any sport anywhere on the planet would. Did he have a time machine or something? Because he didn't coach at DC until after getting canned by the Revs. Arena was there until he took the Nats job, after Sampson's debacle in France.
How many MLS Cups does Bruce Arena win in LA without Donovan or Keane? You think it's fair to judge a coach by saying that he couldn't have done it without his best player? Heck, without Bill Russell, Red Auerbach probably isn't in the hall of fame. I would imagine there are some examples, but I'm not spending the time to try to find one. Actually at that time, pretty much all of MLS was all for the success of the USNT - their fortunes were seen as linked. So this would have been viewed as something the league and the team supported. How do you know it came down that way. Typically organizations will ask permission to talk to a coach under contract. For all we know the USSF/USNT could have asked the Krafts if they would approach Rongen about helping the USNT. I agree that IF Rongen was out pursuing this (or any other job) while coaching the Revs, his loyalty to the team would be very much in question. But, we don't know that that's the way it happened. Good catch. I was thinking of his performance at Tampa.
Seriously? You're going with that? OK, I'll take "If it wasn't for all the games we lost, we'd be undefeated" for $500, Alex. Um, my whole point was that as far as I can tell, something like this has never, ever happened. But I could be wrong. If you "imagine" that it might have, then find an example. It's up to you to find it, if you claim that it is even in the remotest realm of possibility. Sure, MLS and USSF were joined at the hip then, and it may have been the USSF asking first for permission. But my point still stands. Rongen had a better shot at doing something good for the good of the game in this country by making the Revs into a quality team. Especially since we were one of the best supported team, and the popular line was that if the Revs ever had a good team, it would be massive. remember, we were the ones who were Seattle before they invented themselves on the 8th day. No telling what might have happened if Rongen stuck around, but it certainly would have been better for the Revs (and league) and he would have contributed a lot more than he could have by sitting in the press box at Parc des Princes and noticing that Burns should have been a step closer to the post. Sure, we don't know what happened, but even if the USSF did ask, the Krafts should have said no. And I would have thought that if Sampson wanted Rongen, he would have spoken to him first, and if Rongen said, "Well, see, I'd love to help you out but I'm busy with my club..." that would have been the end of it. So obviously Rongen wasn't forced to do it, and if he had even the slightest commitment to his club, he would have turned it down.
First, what Tomhill said. Second, this is typical rkupp topic hopping. I think the original comparison was to prior, non-Nicol Rev coaches but now it is about the LA coach? I not only think it is fair, I think it is required in Jay Heaps' case. Bruce Arena's performance in LA is reflective of his performance in the LA system. LA is committed to scouting players like the ones you mention, negotiating with them, and paying a premium for them (this is demonstrated by their payroll and # of DPs relative to the league and certainly relative to the REVs). LA can and probably should judge his performance in the context of how he continues to perform and can be expected to perform in that system. For the REVs, the 6 months of nirvana with JJ that resulted in a Cup run were absolutely not a result of the REV's system; it was an anomaly. A perfect storm of a "returning" nat, an owner anxious to prove a magazine wrong, a "coin flip," and maybe even a player playing above his maintainable level (if we go with your "JJ was washed up" theory) resulted in a CUP run. But with JJ injured (last year) or gone (this year) and the REVs having returned to the system of Burns (picks)/Biello ([doesn't] find the money)/Heaps (coaches) and a fiscal policy a little more down to earth, one should judge what Jay Heaps can do within that system. I argue that when you remove the cup anomaly from the measurement he achieves a pretty flat performance resulting in a borderline playoff team. I remain an avid supporter of the idea that Burns and Biello should be let go as well. It isn't all on Heaps. But Heaps has, by no means, done anything more noteworthy than Rongen or Clavijo.
I'm topic hopping??? You asked a question ("What has he done, really, that exceeds Clavijo or Rongen?") and I gave a pretty clear answer - getting a team to a championship game almost always buys a coach some job-security. Then you say that was primarily because of Jones (shift). And, that may be true, but to a certain extent every successful coach's performance is due to their best players (it's an ongoing argument over whether Brady makes Belichick look like a genius or Belichick makes Brady look like a GOAT QB). So, how can you take a coach's best player (by a large margin) out of the equation, unless you are going to do that with everyone else you are comparing him to? If that's topic-hopping, it's only to answer your question. And, FWIW, I didn't compare Heaps to previous Revolution coaches. I did point out that the Revs have fired 5 coaches, so I think that would lead any reasonable person to conclude that Heaps is not all that safe. The track record shows, counter to what Tom maintains, that the ownership does not accept mediocre performance indefinitely.
Oh sure they do. Heaps will still be our coach as we enter the 2019 season. OK, so if we win MLS Cup he will be deserving of that, but if we flounder along in almost-mid-table mediocrity, I don't think they'll fire him. Only if they completely hit rock bottom at a Chivas/1999 Metros/2001 Mutiny level do they show him the door.
Wrong. Your sequencing is inaccurate to the point of falsehood. The ORIGINAL question included, "Any response that mentions a cup final better have a lengthy footnote about the temporary lapse in Kraft fiscal policy and a terribly disloyal, washed up DP named Jones." No shift rkupp. And BTW, Belechick having the foresight to dump Bledsoe (and others since) makes him look like a genius because he was able to judge that a quarterback, that was in high regard by professionals as well as amateurs, could be jettisoned. The REVs could use someone in management with some foresight.
He wasn't the coach but we can't forget the metromutts' Djorkaeff going back to France during the '06 World Cup, in the middle of the MLS season:
Sure, there's a long history of players doing that, especially MLS players leaving to play in the WC. But a coach leaving his team?