Grant Wahl has put together a ton of information that helps him rank the ambitions of every club in MLS. He looks at stadiums, training facilities, academies, spending on DP's, atmosphere at games, willingness of owner to be public in their stance on winning, etc etc. Our Revs rank dead last in the league There is a lot of fun information loaded in this article for those that like this sort of thing. http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2016/03/04/2016-mls-ambition-rankings
Revs in theory have sunk even further given the "Jones for crap" trade was made after the rankings were compiled. Even more sobering.
One can argue about any specific position in this ranking chart but it is almost impossible to argue that the Revs are not in the bottom group of teams given this criteria. It is almost like the criteria was chosen specifically to show how bad things are here in NE compared to what others in the league are accomplishing with infrastructure and the like.
I guess I was a little to liberal with my use of "impossible to argue" Still, given the criteria used......................
We're clearly not ambitious. The best we can be said to have ambition-wise is to be a "moneyball" team. But without a Billy Beane, even that ambition seems... ambitious.
For those who thought the signing of Jones ushered in a new era of Revs management: Welcome to the same old Revs...
My response is not meant to be an attack on anyone specifically so don't read it that way. That said, the responses here rubberstamping our own club being ranked dead last frankly make me sad. I shouldn't have to defend the revs on our own board by pointing out obvious flaws in an "objective" ambition ranking that makes almost no sense. After reading it carefully, then considering the clubs he ranks as most ambitious, his criteria ($$$, not winning), I can safely conclude this ambition ranking is an utter load of unmitigated horseshit. There's a sociological concept that highlights how we gravitate to whatever will support our worldview. I would expect nothing less than the unanalytical and lazy fans among us on this board and across our league who are only happy to take a SI writer's opinions at face value bashing their team without questioning why for more than 10 seconds. Come on guys, read these rankings with objective eyes rather than "We suck at everything we do, forever" eyes. We are better fans than that.
He lists his criteria. If you have a problem with those items, then explain where? We really don't. Most of our DPs haven't been such. The one real one we've had so far was through a coin flip, no real work done on our part to "find" him. No SSS. Our owner rarely acknowledges the team during the season, never mind off-season. Has Kraft ever shown anything to symbolize that the Revs winning is the most important thing? (Note, Revs ... not Pats). Atmosphere is starting to finally get better at Gillette, but are we anywhere close to Seattle/Portland, etc? I don't think I need to talk about the lack of buzz around the Revs. We do well with the academies, but we don't have our own USL team. Hell, we barely use the Rhinos now. Those are mostly facts that I just stated, but yes, there's some opinions too. So tell me where Grant was wrong, using the criteria he did?
If it were up to me these are the actual ambition rankings heading into 2016.. Portland Timbers (MLS Cup champs, CL) Columbus Crew (MLS Cup runner ups - deserve a honorable mention considering how much they are doing to improve their place) NYRB (SS champs, CL) SKC (CL) Dallas (CL) Vancouver (Canadian CL) Montreal (Drogba, CCL title run last year, investment) The revs would be probably #10-12 or so. LA, Seattle are top 10 but top 3 is absurd. Then we have the rest - TFC hasn't made the playoffs in their existence - until that happens it's a reflection of their ambition. Wahl is on something to place TFC top 5 that made me literally laugh out loud. I will leave it to others but there's my 2 cents. Be skeptical.
We signed Jermaine Jones in 2014 to a DP contract. Kouassi is on the way this summer. A SSS is taking an eternity but in progress. Lots more facts.
I mentioned Jones already. And let's be honest, I think most of us have no idea about Kouassi, and whether he's a "DP" or not? In progress SSS isn't the same as having a SSS. That's the whole point, as that was his criteria.
You're confusing ambition with actual success. Ambition. If you don't think TFC has shown more ambition in the league than the Revs, I have no idea what to say. They've not succeeded ... which is a different statement.
Yeah, the short writeup was disappointing (basically "It's the stadium, stupid"), but the detailed report was more interesting: http://www.si.com/article-list/mls-.../mls-ambition-rankings-new-england-revolution In short, the Revs continue to hide the info they are not proud of.
Should we dismiss summer signings now? Honest question. Signing Kouassi to anticipate a huge midfield gap left by the departing Jone doesn't matter apparently? Not saying he is the end all-be all but that signing did happen - from Sion, a club we have heard if in a league we respect. Kouassi captained his side against Liverpool in the EL, FFS. He is 26, clearly a decent player who fulfills a need. Whether we want to say none of that matters or not we should at least acknowledge this is a different off-season by that move alone compared with a year ago and (almost every other) recent off-season. I would be far less critical reflecting on the 2015 off-season but guess what, this is March 2016 not March 2015. We can't stay stuck in the past and evaluate our club using the same data that was used a year or 2 years ago. That's my fundamental problem with Wahl's rankings this year - they are lazy, inaccurate and fine for the people that aren't paying attention. That's not us here. Now let's get into the academy. Again, not about the spend but the ROI that distinguishes ambition. You can have dozens of great prospects but if you sign guys like Gerrard, Gio, Keane and other square pegs, it doesn't mean you are developing your youth talent. LA has no identity and didn't come close to the MLS Cup final in 2015. The fact they were ranked first is hilarious. In fact apart from Zardes, LA gets pretty low marks from me for turning their impressive your setup into actual starters that contribute to MLS success. The revs rank higher there. As for the revs... Signing guys like Diego, Caldwell, Herivaux and other academy prospects means nothing? Turning academy and youth players into bonafide starters on a virtual annual basis means nothing? Making that academy quality and youth development count into like for like tourneys means nothing? Making the New England Revolution an attractive destination for the region's elite talent when there is ample choice is worth nothing in these ambition rankings? The SSS stuff being in progress (as much of a joke as it is in actual tangible terms) means nothing? Jon Kraft stumping for the revs on local sports radio in 2015 (and shocking us all in the process) never happened or doesn't matter? Yeah he doesn't do it enough but that's how the Krafts do business - we had known this for 20 years and it shouldn't be a shocking new revelation for a 2016 ambition ranking. Now let's get into the actual numbers. The STH rev renewals ranking among the best in the league, the increase in attendance YOY (16.6k/26.4k home attendance in 2014 with 32.7k the high vs 19.6k home attendance in 2015 with 43k the high). Making the playoffs (ok stumbling into a road play-in that was lost, but still the revs made it in while x% of teams ranked above them failed to do this basic requisite). If increasing attendance, improving commercialization, making it to the 4th round in the USOC and qualifying for the MLS Cup playoffs places the revs dead last in the league in ambition then so be it. I will leave that for you guys to soak in and come to your own conclusions. That may not make any sense to a thinking fan willing to consider the data points I have provided however. Again, if Wahl has lived under a rock since 1996 and didn't know anything about MLS or the revs, then he could levy some of these claims but...really? All I ask is for you all to apply your healthy, smart skepticism and analytical abilities to Wahl's rankings as you would for virtually anything else revs related. Call it like it is, all I am saying. [/end rant]
I'm not even sure if you're arguing my comments, or just ranting on Wahl's rankings. I've made my comments that, to me, help clarify why it makes sense. And you keep bringing up the SSS talk. Talk isn't breaking ground. Talk isn't already playing in our own stadium. It's talk. So no ... I don't put talk in the same category as those that already have a stadium. Regards the Academy, as much as I like Caldwell and Diego (honestly, haven't seen enough of Herivaux to be able to speak of him, Zardes (who you mentioned) and Jamieson IV aren't exactly on the scrap heap. They also have a place to put their Academy players who have signed (LA II). Do we? Also .. what other academy prospects have we signed?
I sort of agree with both of you. Revs shouldn't be dead last, but stacked up against other clubs they don't look as if they're trying that hard. In a way, I think the ambitions of the club are qualitatively different from those of other clubs: namely, to produce acceptable results from the smallest inputs of money and effort. And I know as fans, that's a maddening approach -- and yet, in fairness, they've been pretty darn good at it. Maybe even the best in the business.
again don't get caught up in the dead last part so much. Anyone can argue any specific spot they want, as some of it is subjective. It is better to judge the teams perhaps in groups. And for anyone using a non biased looked (like Wahl was), putting the Revs in the bottom tier group as compared to the other teams is not outrageous. That does not mean some small good things are happening, but when you stack what little we are doing with what is happening with many other teams, there is no other conclusion to make than we are falling further and further behind. I think one mistake RevsLiverpool might be making is confusing ambition (which can and should affect things in the future) with current results.
You provided plenty of facts - lots of true statements. The partnerships have been underutilized or misguided to this point - especially Rochester. Sporting CP took far too long to develop into something more than symbolism. However, sending 3 young revs to Portugal to train and learn from a class org, signing Sambinha from Sporting's youth setup, and Heaps/Burns scouting players in person (and then closing a transaction based on player they like) are signs of intent or ambition to me. It's far from perfect but a step in the right direction.
The only thing that matters is a teams record and from that perspective the Revs are a mid table team. The rest of the discussion is bull-crap designed to sell copy and get fans jaws waging, NETID
It's possible I am confusing ambition with results but without getting too philosophical or semantic - why would ambition outweigh results? It's like our presidential election campaign with candidates on both sides selling us their ambitions. That's all great but what % if what they promise will come to fruition? Here's an example from politics of the applicable subtlety that I am trying to articulate. Say there is one candidate who has an ambition to put a colony in Mars by 2018. His rival says let's fix our domestic roads and bridges to decrease accidents by 10% nationwide. Candidate A gets elected, tries to get the colony going, spends billions in taxpayer money, but ultimately fails. Candidate B then gets elected, succeeds in increasing safety by 8% nationwide, fixed hundreds of domestic roads and bridges, and of course spends taxpayer dollars but far less than what candidate A spent on the space program. Does the Mars candidate's pipe dream ambition make him more or less appealing than the more pragmatic roads and bridges candidate? If we judge by "swing for the fences" it's candidate A. If we judge by "station to station base running" and OBP type mindset, then it's candidate B. The part of the equation I insist is important is results. I don't care or want a colony on Mars by 2018 if I can have more confidence driving in my daily life. It's simply personal preference and worldview. Grant Wahl would declare "swing for the fences" LA the winner, I would declare "spend less, spend smart, be practical and win" Portland Timbers at the top of the rankings. I hope this makes sense and I have articulated clearly the delta between ambition and results.