I have no idea if he's match fit, but wouldn't the guys in MLS think hey here's a guy who went to BC, played for the Bolts, is from Manchester NH, so DCU would be a great fit for him? This was a bummer for me, I was really hoping Davies would be a nice fit, you know since we need SOMEONE to attack
http://www.mlssoccer.com/regulations This hasn't been updated, but see Part II. A. on allocations. Returning national team players are awarded to teams through an allocation process, and DCU was ahead of us due to their worse finish last year.
Also, the Revs are a totally undesirable location for a player like Davies. The only thing that would make the Revs appealing to him in any way is that it is sorta his hometown club.
So even though he hasn't been on the USMNT in more than a year, he's still a pool player? Thanks for the clarification. Still bums me out. Why is it an undesirable location? Are you saying Charlie wouldn't want to play here or that MLS wouldn't want him here because NE doesn't need any marquee names? I mean it's moot anyway, obviously. But still...
It's just not a good situation here. DC United, even though they havent been good on the field the past couple seasons, is a top notch MLS organization. The Revs are maybe the worst. I dunno, I just dont think the Revs right now are a good option within MLS for a player like him looking to reestablish his career quickly so he can get back to Europe.
It's tough to elaborate on something that you have no idea what you are talking about. That post was the definition of a guy talking out of his behind.
Part of Charlie's reasoning for not coming to MLS was that they wouldn't pay him enough and that he could make far more and Sweden, but also that he wanted to play for only DC or the Revs. I'm sure that the Revs were either the first or second choice for him when coming back to MLS (not that he had any say in where he was going).
Why D.C. United get first crack at Charlie Davies Allocation rankings set priority for acquisition of USMNT players MLSsoccer.com February 4, 2011
When has MLS ever sent us anybody? There's always rules that exclude us and other rules that are ignored for LA or NY when it suits their (MLS) purpose. Secondly, he cant play defense so I doubt the Revs have any interest I see no reason to be hopeful for this season yet. Once again the Revs have not done enough to turn us around while other teams have improved. I am totally sick of the way this team is run and how theyre letting it rot on the vine
JoeMax Moore My old mans brain can't remember too many of the details but over the years the Revs have lucked out a few time---esp when TB and Miami were broken up. That single event completely changed the roster and set the stage for the Revs run to four MLS Cup finals. The Revs are not victims of league bias and all the smack about LA or NY getting special treatment probably has little basis in fact.
How do you know this when you don't know yet who they are bringing in? Do you not believe they have more signings awaiting clearance? Or are you assuming that the signings won't be good ones? Either way, the gloom seems premature, imo. Here is the team that lost 1-0 in LA to open last season. New England Revolution (0-1-0): Preston Burpo (GK), Seth Sinovic, Emmanuel Osei, Cory Gibbs ©, Kevin Alston (Khano Smith 90’), Chris Tierney, Pat Phelan, Joseph Niouky, Sainey Nyassi (Zak Boggs 58’), Kheli Dube (Kenny Mansally 76’), Zack Schilawski I see two people on that 2010 roster who are likely starters in 2011. The rest of the starters and the subs from the 2010 team are either gone or likely to be subs on opening day 2011 -- some might not even make the 18-man game day roster.
This really isn't true at all. For example: People like to whine about this, but there isn't much evidence to back it up. DC United had the top spot in the allocation rankings since they finished last during the past season. There was nothing the Revs could do. It's far from certain that Davies would be an improvement on our current forward corps anyway.
So when it gets towards the end of the season again and either we clearly won't make it in the playoffs, or the team is so bad that it will be a one-and-done type of thing, it isn't crazy to start rooting for more losses. A player like Davies could have really raised the profile of the club during a time when it desperately needs the publicity. From certain angles this can make sense. If you want to get back to Europe and need to stir up a buzz to do so, where do you want to play and who do you want to play with? Donovan at the Home Depot Center on ESPN? Or Joseph at Gillette on the regional CSN broadcast? For players coming in from Europe the Northeast/Boston area and Stevie Nicol might be a very attractive option, but for U.S. born players who know MLS and have a finger on the pulse of soccer in this country we may be towards the bottom of the barrel. Again more reason for the team to do everything it can to raise its profile and create some publicity.
Well it depends what Davies (or any player coming from overseas) is looking for. If he wants to regain his footing and get some playing time, the Revs would be a good option, as IMO he'd win the number 1 striker job and combine well with Stolica and Perovic. But if a player is looking for a club with a good match atmosphere and with owners that are willing to splash the cash to win, etc. then the Revs would be near the bottom of the list, as a previous poster said.
I think there's probably a small possibility that, if DC passes, the Revs might see if they could get him in for a look. Whether he gets picked up by a team I think will depend on whether that team is willing to have some patience - and Olsen's comments are pretty straightforward that he *needs* Davies to be able to play now if he's going to sign him. Beyond this group, I think very few people know and/or care that much about Davies. Even over at BC, they hardly even know that they have two players in the USNT program - or even what that means. I'm pretty curious about whether most Rev fans think we should sign him. I have the feeling that if we don't (whether we have the opportunity or not), the team gets blamed, and if he falls to us and we do, the team would get blamed for tying itself up with another injury risk!
I'll go on the record and say it would be worth the risk. But I don't think he'll fall to us, so irrelevant anyway.
Isn't that the case we had with Twellman? Risk vs reward? They took the gamble on his being available last season in hopes of getting a league MVP back --- and they lost. Was it worth the risk? History says no -- but you don't have history before hand. You add things up and then throw the dice and man-up to what ever unfolds. Risk vs reward. FWIW, I think this case is a little less risky and like you I would sign him if we get the opportunity.
In the Twellman case I said they were making a mistake. In that case, they were proven wrong to depend on him coming back. There's a big difference between coming back from an injury and coming back from something where the sunlight alone can hurt you.
I'm glad to know you had more information than Rev Central about Twellmans physical status prior to last season. It's a shame you didn't share your insights with Nicol et al and saved them from following the information they had that lead to them making a decision that turned out badly.
Since it took MLS 10+ years to implement the academy system, and Davies happened to develop before that time, this debate is a waste of time. The Revs have no more connection to the player than United does. This reminds me of the insane debate that irish players should come to Boston, and no where else. You can't blame the Revs not getting a player because of a rule that the league made up.