Post-match: New York Red Bulls - San Jose Earthquakes (Saturday, 3/16) postgame thread [R]

I don't disagree that it's unfortunate the Quakes couldn't bring in a player from another team, and yes, allocation could have been used to trade with rather than players. Given that the Quakes have traded almost exclusively for allocation money rather than trading with it, it seems their strategy is to use it to buy down contracts as intended, rather than turn around and use it to trade for MLS players. You should probably see a mix of both, but to get a good player, the Quakes would have to give up probably a large majority of their allocation money, which really reduces your flexibility with the cap.

I'm actually on the side of the FO on this one in that I'd rather stockpile allocation money and use it to buy down contracts rather than use it to entice trades. The problem is that the Quakes have used their allocation money on players that weren't worth it. That's a fixable problem with better scouting and player evaluation.

But will Colorado actually be better having acquired those players? History suggests they won't be, at least not significantly so.

Again, that isn't to say getting an MLS veteran or two wouldn't be a good idea, only that you have to be smart about those players just as you have to be smart about bringing in players from outside the league. The Quakes haven't demonstrated competence in either, which suggests they don't know how to evaluate talent at the MLS level at all.

 

We’re Rock Bottom baby with a dose of club pride. Personally I think the club needs to eat their humble pie as they look to rebuild.

 

You're actually making my point. The ownership/FO has not demonstrated any ability to use allocations $'s wisely when acquiring players from outside of the league. So why stockpile more money for the same purpose?

I do not care where a player comes from (whether from MLS or not) as long as they can help the team, but there's usually less risk in getting MLS vets who have already proven themselves in the league and they will require less adjustment when coming here.

 

True, but there is less upside, because stocking up on MLS retreads won't likely win titles. We once had Ike Opara; were we happier then? To obtain a competitive advantage, you need to develop your homegrowns and/or find missing pieces in the global market.

In the old days, you could rely on the draft and raid the lower leagues and get gems like Brian Ching and Brian Mullan and (so they figured) Cam Weaver. You could also rely on your network for players like Rafa Baca, Steven Beitashour and Wondo. Now every team is building its academy and looking globally.

Remember, the plan hatched when Doyle was let go was to move from mediocrity to championship caliber. Risk is involved for the reward of a better-than-mediocre squad. Putting chits on the academy and the global soccer market was a smart decision under the circumstances. But resources were needed to do it properly. And those were plainly denied and continue to be denied at what I believe to be appropriate levels.

 

Well, through three games, we are 0-3-0 with zero points while the Rapids are 0-1-2 with two points, so I would say that so far, recent history suggest they will be...

 

The 2019 version of the Rapids may not be better than the 2018 version, however. It's early but they're currently on pace to finish with fewer than the 31 points accumulated last season, notwithstanding their new acquisitions.

 

He was on the team for the only playoff series win since 2003, as well as for the 2012 Supporters Shield, so I'm going to say yes.

 

You'd have to compare the Rapids of last year to the Rapids of this year, not the Rapids to the Quakes. I wasn't suggesting the Quakes would be better than Colorado, and so far, San Jose has had nothing to do with where Colorado is in the standings.

Three games is also not definitive, so I wouldn't jump to conclusions too quickly. And ultimately, Colorado very well could be better than they were last year, my point was only that they have traded for MLS vets before with very little evidence it trended them upward overall. Outside of one season, they haven't been a good team for the last several years, so I wouldn't bet on them having the right player acquisition strategy.

Granted, I don't follow Colorado, so maybe they've made some FO changes that I'm not aware of.

 

My recollection is that I was in a distinct minority on this board at the time in holding the view that we should have kept Ike Opara. Hence the particular phrasing of my largely rhetorical question. The general (unhappy) view among fans at the time was, good riddance.

Sure, we would welcome him back now after his best-defender campaigns, but maybe he doesn't want to return to a place he felt unloved. Who can blame him?

 

I'll clarify, since I don't think I'm making your point at all. I think the strategy of acquiring allocation money makes sense since using it to buy down a player from another league is a better use of the money than using it to trade for existing MLS players. You can make a player who demands a lot more money than the average MLS player fit into an average MLS player budget using it.

Just because the Quakes have been bad at executing the strategy doesn't make it a bad strategy. Likewise, I'd prefer the team continue to try to find the right level of talent and bring them in than spend more effort on identifying current MLS talent. The reason for that also has to do with the fact that MLS teams have to field so many American or permanent residence players, so there's still lots of room to move around players with MLS experience.

This is an assumption which I'm not convinced is true. You have faith that the Quakes would pick the right MLS veterans, as if it's easier to identify them than outside talent. Yet you see examples of high level MLS players completely falling apart from one season to the next, like with Giovinco.

Getting players is always going to be a gamble, whether they have a track record in MLS or not. And again, I don't think the Quakes should intentionally avoid all players with MLS experience. I think their lack trades is mostly because the team has little leverage with other teams. They just don't have anything that other teams want other than allocation money, and that could be better spent.

 

Night vs Day. Attack oriented vs defensive minded. Build the team Around a solid defense vs develop a team style of play & a team ID.
1 step backwards vs 2 step forward LOL

 

JM vs ML in left fullback comparison.
JM could play CB Vs ML can play the MF.

 

2012 we had the bash brothers vs 2019 we have DP &/or “DP like “ to coin JD as attackers.

 

2012 we didn’t have a pathway from our Academy to the 1st team vs now we do kinda

 

MLS is moving forward & one of its goal is to become one of the top leagues

 

2026 WC Is on home turf so time is running out on our boys’ dream of playing in it!

 

Yes. 1979, I believe it was 8 in a row. That may be off by a game or two, but it was more than 3. Terry Fisher started the season as head coach, but was sacked fairly quickly, in favor of Peter Stubbe, who was actually the agent for much of the team...at least those who came from Germany and a couple of other European countries.

 

except that we play in the same league and they are ahead of us in the standings so to the extent that we all stack up against each other and compete for position in the standings it matters that there are other teams, even San Jose, to at least give the less crappy teams someone to look at in their rear view.

 

Thanks sj_oldtimer and Goodsports. So we’re not exactly in an uncharted territory of sucking...

 

I’m pretty sure we’re the worst team in the history of MLS though so we at least have that locked down.

 

Yeah - if we can’t be great, at least we can be great at being terrible!