Any chance we go with a 4-1-3-2? That's a lot of forwards that are not real savvy as lone strikers. Maybe Jay will initiate a buddy system up there.
Came home to this today. I was hoping for camo but the new 2014 @NERevolution jersey is pretty sweet! #NERevs pic.twitter.com/KVlgSGKJqn— Jon Lester (@JLester34) February 19, 2014
Jeff Lemieux @jeff_lemieux 2m A couple new unsigned players on the #NERevs preseason roster, including someone named Shalrie Joseph. Anyone recognize the name? Roster.
Also worth noting... Some guy named Charlie or Shirley or Sherry Joseph was just added to the Revs' Preseason Roster. Says he's a 6-3 midfielder from Grenada who last played for Seattle. I'll try and see if I can find out more about him.
First Marko, now Shalrie. Can Heaps/Burns get any more lazy or are they just incompetent in finding new players. And Shalrie trialing doesn't sound like he will be signing that one day contract and retiring a Rev.
Of course, Burns probably has the real difference maker (i.e., the proven, non-reclamation player) nearly in the fold, but while we wait for that -- Shalrie is a better option than empty roster spots. He is the equivalent of baseball's "utility player" at this point. Other than wing spots, he can provide depth, at least as emergency backup, at most spots on the field. Even keeper. And can help make sure there are enough players for the occasional full field scrimmage at practice. Might also help with a veteran presence amidst all the young'uns. Roster is lacking in that department right now.
I don't see Shalrie making the 2 deep for any position on the field, possibly 3 deep. Appears to me to be a complete nostalgic move to appease fans, and judging by the instant reaction, it worked. Are we going to send him to Rochester? We already have one old retread playing DM, we don't need another sitting on the bench with him. I'll wait and see how he shows, perhaps he found a fountain of youth or time machine back to 2009, but this appears to just be lazy. Better than an empty roster spot? Sure, but that wouldn't make it a good move, just a less terrible one.
No blood, no foul. This board has often expressed a desire to see our veterans treated with more respect. So let Shalrie train with the team. There are several best case scenarios - one day contract - retire as a Rev, joins the staff in some capacity, he turns out to be good enough for spot duty against physical teams, e.g. to protect a lead (a better Andy Dorman), who knows? He's not going to waste a roster spot and be a drag on the cap. I'm sure that Heaps, of all people, understands that SJ is not the answer at Dmid.
It would be 3 deep for many positions. Not just one. That's one salary to buy the equiv of a 3rd deep at all the central positions. (That's the "utility player" idea I mentioned.) And it is OK to appease fans once in a while. Some might even claim it is "good" from a business perspective to have players whose presence has a payback that goes beyond strictly the on-field skills that they bring. With Reis gone and most of the rest of the team not yet instantly recognizable, this team is in sore need of a "face of the franchise" at this point. (Leaving it all on Diego's shoulders is not fair to a developing teenager. ) But if they are really going to bring someone else(s) in to fill the roster AND who is a much better solution ( ...well, that could happen....), then I'm with you -- let's not dwell on Shalrie. But I can think of a few reasons (in no particular order) why this would be a good move -- 1.) Depth, at many positions, as mentioned. 2.) Face of the Franchise/Goodwill add to the team, as mentioned. 3.) Composed "tough" guy. Roster sorely needs more of this. Collin and others out-toughed Revs in the playoffs, and no one answered. Not saying Shalrie is the answer to that, but more players will learn at least a little more toughness if they playing alongside or against him every day in practice. It's just not there right now with this team. 4.) Depth of veteran experience. A young roster is good as a long term core; but at some point, it needs to have deep experience available to draw on, and not necessarily from players who are long term solutions. (After all, you cannot simultaneously have all young players and also have deep experience.) Many teams in many sports pick up the experienced veteran(s) to get them over the hump when contending late in the season; it is possible that this could be a similar move, but done early in the season as opposed to figuring it out late. Revs have struggled to find those players mid-season. This past season it would likely have been a difference maker in late-season games and playoff games if there were more experienced veterans available to drop into the latter end of games to shore things up. Sure, there are cons to Shalrie, but most of those seem to me to be "cons" only relative to players they have not yet obtained. When he is being compared to empty roster spots, I only see upside. When the choice becomes him vs. another real player (because the roster is full and there is a real choice that has to be made by FO), then that becomes a very different discussion.
Sorry to cause you to type out such a long reply as I agree with most of what you said. For me it all comes down to your last sentence. This team shouldn't be settling for filling out a roster. My frustration is that we've done nothing to address the issue of bite which Heaps and Burns have both mentioned needing. Bringing in a 3rd string DM doesn't address that. We need a starting quality player that possesses that bite. Shalrie wasn't good enough to start 2 years ago and he wasn't good enough last year to be a backup in Seattle. For me he's a waste of a bench spot. Being a utility player is great if you can backup multiple positions, but instead I see him backing up our backups. I'd actually be more interested in bringing him in as a 2nd assistant coach. I like the idea of his experience helping teach some of the younger players. I'll admit I have no idea how well liked/influential he could be in that role though.
We needed a starting caliber DM who could partner Caldwell going into this off-season. So far we've yet to sign someone that fits that mold. If the only people we bring in for that position are DelPiccolo and Shalrie I'd be extremely unimpressed.
I would love to sign Shalrie to a one day contract and allow him to retire a Rev. I'd also love for him to get involved with the academy as he seems to have a knack for working with and teaching children. That being said, I do not want to see him on the field for the Revs next season. It's time to hang 'em up, he's past it and doesn't add anything to our current team.
If the only people brought in for any position are the ones brought in so far, I'd be unimpressed. Intrigued, yes. Teal, the Belgian - both intriguing. Impressed -- well, that's a possible outcome later on. Everyone brought in so far is unproven, or a project, or reclamation, each with significant risk associated with it. (Some with possible significant upside, that is not a question in my mind.) But none are ready-to-go, top-shelf difference makers. Perhaps one or two could turn into one -- but that is different than being impressed now.
It seems to me that Joseph underwent a rapid fall off in his on field performance the season before he left the Revs, a descent that continued out West. None of us really knows why that was. Was it something other than a soccer player getting old with father time taking his toll which is usually irreversible or was it something else that was resolvable? As someone who has really enjoyed watching him play I'm hoping he's regained his MoJo and can add some sage leadership and periodic shifts to help metor our young roster.
Joseph's still under contract with Seattle, or they at least still control his rights. If they Revs have to give up anything to get him it's a bad move already.
Maybe Shalrie was working out in the area, felt good and asked the team if he could try out with them? What are they going do, say no? Anything is a pretty high bar. I can't imaging Seattle would be looking for anything significant (or would be in a position to demand such), since they don't really want him.