Well that's easy for you to say. Look at it another way. He's carrying around that burden the whole time. His form begins to dip in '09, and he starts to come in for all sorts of criticism to the point that he becomes a by-word around here. We do eat our own for whatever reason, but often times there did seem to be a special level of hell, so to speak, set aside for Robbie. Now, had all of that criticism come purely from fans around the league, well, that's the sort of the thing a player can really thrive on. Except that it didn't come from elsewhere, most of it originated here. And it had nothing to do with his sexuality. It was all about his performances, which I would imagine would make it doubly difficult to take. So even that "escape" you mentioned was now gone, if you think about it.
If he had said that nobody had improved since Robert took over (excepting the Hammer) it would be a true statement. O'Rourke, Gaven, and Marshall were not as good players in 2012 or so far this season as they were in 2008. O'Rourke is probably the closest case since he started poorly in 2008. You can argue that Williams or Speas or whoever has gotten better since they arrived or that Higuain is better than Schelotto if you want (I don't buy that last part) but of the players who were on the last pre-Robert team, the only one playing better nowdays is Gruenebaum.
Eddie Gaven had steadily improved since 2008. 2008 24 apps-3 goals 2009 30 apps 6 goals 2010 28 apps 3 goals 2011 26 apps 5 goals 2012 34 apps 9 goals
If you go by points Gaven's best seasons are 04 7 goals 7 assists for 14 points, 05 8 goals 4 assists for 12 points, and 07 5 goals 7 assists for another 12 point season. In 12 he had the 9 goals and 2 assists for 11 points; his fourth best year in points. All I'm saying is that it is debatable Gaven's improved under Robert.
Just because I threw in my two cents about Gaven improving I'll also say about the initial statement KC is completly right. To say no one has played well during Roberts tenure is asinine and not debatable. You don't win the supporter's shield without a team that's playing well.
Eddie's a significantly better player than he was in '08. I think you could make a really good case that he's the lone example of an outfield player who has improved having been coached by this staff for 4.5 seasons, but if I put aside statistics and judge subjectively, I totally see him playing much better. His awareness of the game is better. He's always in the right place. His touch is better. He's stronger and a lot more assertive/confident. And despite the Crew official media saying a few weeks ago that Eddie doesn't dive, there are times when Eddie totally does—which is good, in my opinion. He doesn't do it recklessly or needlessly, but he does try to draw penalties when it's warranted. That's positive development to see in a veteran professional player. The fact that MLS referees suck and aren't giving him the benefit of the doubt that he has earned being a 10 year veteran says more about the ignorance of MLS referees and maybe how they view the team. If Eddie played for LA, he'd get more respect—from refs, media, opposition, etc. If you want to go totally abstract and theoretical with this argument, you could say that his improvement would be greater under better coaching, and I'd totally agree with that. These guys may be adult, professional players, but coaching does have an impact upon player development at this level. Development is something that I think this staff is remarkably bad at, and one of the things that worry me about Speas, Trapp, and the rest of the homegrown players that the club is eager to bring into the senior squad. If your future rests on these players and not spending money on DP signing and veteran internationals, then player development post-high school and post-college needs to be exceptional.
It sort of comes down to a league wide problem about young players not being developed properly. The league went through this period of time where they were trying to find the next Lebron James of soccer and was signing guys younger and younger without a good developmental program in place. Now that the league has a great youth system and reserve teams in place I think we will start seeing things change.
Colorado is playing Shane O'Neill LA is playing Villareal, and Jack McBean NE is playing Diego Fagundez Chivas is playing Agudelo (only 20, realize he is in a bit different scenario from the rest listed) TFC is playing Osorio and Henry (played 18 games as a 19 year old last season) Vancouver is playing several 20 year olds but none are regulars SKC is playing Orsell and Saad Union is playing Jack McInerney FCD is playing Castillo (several younger players in/around the first team) RSL is playin Gil (seems like he is been around for a long time, only 19) SJ is playing Cato Seattle is playing Yedlin I make this list as a point of showing that teams are playing and relying on younger players. Everyone is 20 or younger on this list. I left of several more foreign based players.
Key players like GBS, Marshall, and Danny O all have declined under RW. An argument can be made that Gaven improved at least last year but that is because the team was playing one sided.
Declined is not what was said though; what was said was "No one has played well since RW took over except the Hammer." they are not the same and what was stated was demonstrably false.
I don't really buy this argument. RW's coaching suffers due to his tactics and maybe his inability to significantly improve players. However, I don't think he's running guys down. Sure, his tactics have led to a dearth of offense, but I don't think that's because of player degradation. I also would disagree that DOR has declined under RW (or at least as a function of RW). DOR was a often a liability during the 2008 run. His play was reckless and led to a lot of PKs and red cards. Sure it was nice to have a bruiser at times, but I don't remember the fans fawning over him that year. In fact, I remember some groaning about Sigi when he would start. He improved significantly during the shield run in 2009. He was voted MVP of the team that year--and it was probably the best year of his career. Part of the improvement was his role was primarily at DM instead of CB, though he was a utility guy in both 2008 and 2009. His 2010-12 seasons were riddled with injuries, which I don't think you can blame RW for. I think he's been relatively solid this year after getting his footing back. However, he's older and his body has seen a lot more wear.
While I agree with you, MLS has often accomodated such requests. Since MLS is single entity, the league is more important than any individual team, and I think the league sees tRR as an asset--and one they want in the league.
Why? Until Jason Collins maybe they could advertise Rogers as openly gay and try for media attention that way. Rogers in his own right is a pretty mediocre player who failed in England's 3rd division.
I'm with kgilbert here. I think Robbie IS special. I think MLS wants him back, and will want to advertise that he's playing here. If nothing else, at this point it'd look bad if MLS couldn't get the deal done to bring him back. If you want to bring up a ludicrously imaginary upside though, how about this: Robbie Rogers is welcomed back to MLS, both by fellow players and the fans, and then a few weeks later, a few dozen random players from all around Europe ask their agents if they can negotiate a deal to go play in MLS. I'm half joking, but I'm also half serious. We've seen some ugly crowd chants (be it racist or anti-gay or whatever) come from various parts of Europe (certainly not all, but some), and there might be some players willing to make the move over here if they felt they could be more open about who they are. If the crowd at any MLS stadium tried to get some anti-gay chant going, they'd be stopped by their fellow fans or the league immediately. But like I said, ludicrously imaginary.
I've said this in the MLS forums -- I'm not impressed. Rogers "wants" to play in LA? Good for him. I "want" to hammer Jennifer Lawrence. A lot of players want to play in LA. Should the league accomodate them all? If the league/Galaxy make it worthwhile to Chicago by way of trade for the rights they legally acquired according to MLS rules, then he'll go there. If they don't, he won't. If Rogers doesn't get what he wants, and decides he'd rather retire than play somewhere other than LA, that's his decision. We're not talking about Messi here.
Actually, if the league accommodated all the players who want to play in LA, it's not likely to make the Galaxy better than they are now.
No it wouldn't. It would only be showing that it treats everyone equal. You shouldn't get free shit just because you are gay, that's discrimination.