Sporting KC player rumors

negotiating is fun if you're one of the parties involved, but it sucks really bad if you're on the outside, like all of us, because at least half of what each side says is complete and utter bullshit. until something concrete happens, none of us should really be slinging any mud in either direction.

 

As the league gets better, maintaining the everyone is just above average approach becomes more expensive. The strategy can stay the same, but they need another couple million in cap room and a non-dp top salary of closer to $700k.

 

One handful is allowed, because one thing we know is that it's now within six months of BF's contract ending, and he isn't signed. that may be the club's plan, it may be BFs plan, but it is not the fan plan.

 

i get that. i guess this is where my detachment kicks in. i feel that the business of sport has overtaken it so completely that fans have to start treating their teams/clubs like they would any other business instead of like a "club" to which they belong. this is, of course, a sliding scale as there are teams that have actual fan ownership/stake in the club. in the US, though, where it's a pure franchise model, this approach needs to take hold. yeah, it's less fun to be a fan, but you certainly feel a lot more grounded in reality at the end of the day. none of this "we're not season ticket holders, we're season ticket members so you're part of the team" garbage that sporting wants to feed you.

this is a general comment, by the way. it's not a direct comment at you, mschofield (i know you know your stuff).

 

I totally get this. And I don't disagree with the idea, but I like SKC more than I like, say, a McDs. So I want a bit more than a value meal.

 

He looks quite interesting. If nothing else, have we ever had a player who scored a winner against Barca? Never played for Juve's senior team in Serie A, but that's hardly a mark against him. Very few MLS players have reached those lofty heights. But played quite a bit in La Liga, and always well enough to keep Juve interested and wanting to keep him on the books. at 25, sounds like a BF replacement, which is a. sad because I hate seeing BF go, and b. a good thing because if BF is moving on, he sounds like a decent replacement. Of course, given what looks to be his skill set, Rossi would work in the center of a three man mid field behind BF, as a withdrawn AM/striker with two all out strikers. the ol' 4-3-1-2...

 

If he's in, Benny's out I am thinking.

 

More on Rossi: http://www.gazzamercato.it/juventus/fausto-rossi-il-kansas-city-offre-un-triennale-allex-juve/
Proposed 3 Year contract at 300,000 Euros per year (about 336,800 in today's dollars).

 

Isn't that about what we are paying Benny?

 

Rossi has been out of contract with Juve since the end of June. It is not clear why he did not remain with Pro Vercelli but he has had months to find a situation that would provide him with a better shot at either playing on a better Serie B team or making a move to Serie A. Frankly, a young Italian who wants a shot in Serie A doesn’t make a move to MLS unless there is nothing else on the table, especially not for $300K.

What does this mean for SKC? Who knows, but to me it feels like BF is out and Rossi is in. La Stampa describes Rossi as an attacking mid with “quality that cannot be debated” (loosely translated from link below). The counter to that is that if he was any good, why was he at Pro Vercelli (barely avoided relegation into Serie C)? He played a full season on this crappy team and only scored one goal.

http://www.lastampa.it/2016/06/21/e...ta-un-caso-7u5d5rDB96IrncUIpKVW5I/pagina.html

 

Okay, but he's played 55 games in La Liga. both times he was loaned to clubs that were relegated, but we don't hold against Benny (and rightly so) that he was unable to get many games at one of the worst teams in the history of the Prem, or at a middling Bund side. Rossi has played, still today, a far greater role at his clubs than Uri has yet played after SKC, and they are about the same age. Mustivar failed to break through at Bastia. All have been quite successful with us.
His resume is probably most similar at SKC to that of RE. I'd take that.
Does this mean Rossi is a sure fire success at SKC and MLS? No, but his failure to shine last season, or at a higher level overall, hardly rules him out.
Until proven wrong, or he isn't actually signed at which point he's total crap and forgotten, I chose to believe he could help.

 

Didn't I say he can’t help SKC. I was responding to Buzz’s comment about him coming over here for less than a DP contract and how that was odd if he had other offers. He’s an out of contract player who sat around Italy for two months waiting for offers and then wound up in Kansas. Hard to make any conclusion other than he didn’t have a better offer.

As for his potential contribution to SKC, you are right that he might be able to contribute and your comparisons to players that have succeeded here are valid. Since he played in the Italian youth national system, he should be one of SKC’s best technical players. He should also be used to high fitness requirements because Italian clubs and the Italian national team have notoriously high fitness requirements. With that combination, we can be optimistic it will work.

 

This article, read in its entirety, will explain why Rossi has a better than average chance in being a success in the MLS. Its also why the USA soccer program will always trail other countries development programs.
http://www.socceramerica.com/article/70378/italian-american-playing-youth-soccer-in-italy.html

 

Good article. It's a bit like that in Germany too. Kids playing soccer unsupervised! What a radical concept.

 

It's just basketball in the US.
The reality is that until 4th grade here, soccer is fun and only fun. From 5th grade, it's crazy serious. this isn't surprising because at the time that kids are ruthlessly slotted into potential and none groups in football, they're doing the same with academics, sorting into the 20 percent who might go to college and have professional careers, and the 80 percent who can at best hope to be laborers.
Talk to a Jr high principal about how many mothers they've had sobbing at their feet begging for a kid to be given a chance. It's kind of terrifying to an American. On the upside, it's merit based. Richard von Weizsaecker wasn't just a former German president but a deeply adored one, led the nation through reunification, etc. The German ideal of a statesman. He spoke at my kid's graduation ceremony, and at the end of his speech tucked in a plea that the school accept his grandchildren for the following year. Their foreign language skills were determined to be sub school standard (they were elementary kids). The grandkids were rejected.
As for the footie, the coaches know their stuff backwards and forwards. It was brilliant watching them coach my daughter (my son was culled when he turned 16, though he was proud to have made to it to 16). But my daughter played for youth coaches with UEFA b licenses, and later, in the 2bund, ended up playing for a guy with an A.
BTW: Most parents didn't often show up at matches, and weren't encouraged to. My daughter was mortified that I did. The fans at their games were the normal club fans, who were hanging out having a couple beers at the club in any case.
This has nothing to do with anything, I suppose, but good find.

 

Ahhh Socialism.. You only get what they feel you deserve to get. But at least it's merit based as you said. Over here we have built in many artificial barriers and money is the gatekeeper.

I'd rather have our system where we have room for late bloomers and let people have a dream while incorporating some of the more positive aspects of the European system.

 

I also prefer our system, but Germany is straight up capitalist. This isn't a socialist holdover as much as a feudal one.

 

Don't want to get all political. But the way they handle education and athletics always seemed directly Socialist because they don't want to waste large amounts of resources on people with the wrong type or no potential.

 

When it was Socialist, they actually focused on the worker class being the most honored section of society. There was a need for others with higher degrees to serve the workers (doctors, teachers, engineers and architects), but their role was to serve the needs of the many. The worker took priority. which is just saying you aren't wrong, but they viewed it very differently.
The feudal holdover is that nobles deserve better because they are better. The poor deserve less because they are lesser. The capitalist twist is they changed the system from being based on birth and wealth to merit and intellect, but same concept of a dividing line. Those with higher degrees are magnified. college profs are highly valued.
Also, oddly, they have a ton more respect for CEOs than we do.
No idea what the topic was though...