If what we are hearing is going to be the prevailing attitude, then I will have a conversation with my rep about whether or not I will continue to be a season ticket holder. I want a team that is going to win. I'm not going to apologize for wanting to see them win as much as possible. If Earnie doesn't want me there because of that opinion, then that is what I'll tell my rep. It's Earnie's suggestion, not mine. I don't put down my hard-earned money to watch a "feel good" story emerge over the course of several seasons...I can go to the movies and do that at a fraction of the cost and a fraction of my time spent. Again, I'm not going to apologize for feeling this way. I understand that we can't spend as much as other teams, but that doesn't mean we can't put together a nicely balanced squad of vets & new players, filling in the holes as we need them that will win more than 3 times in nearly 300 days. Earnie's smug routine is starting to wear thin REALLY fast.
It's wrong in the context of MLS (and US sports in general), where parity and salary cap structure is a really meaningful part of the structure. If you're Everton, you can point at the perennial top 6 teams and make a reasonable case that finishing mid-table is perfectly fine given that you're totally out-resourced by other teams. If you run the Cleveland Browns, there's no excuse because the entire league has been structured to be competitive. MLS is kind of a gray area because of the DP rule, but that only affects the salary cap for three players at the end of the day.
Excellent point and in other words, a perennial lack of competitiveness is what's unacceptable to us. In a league where half the teams get to the playoffs, getting there (barely) 2 times out of 7 and then quickly striking out ain't good enough. I was bemused by Stewart's lack of understanding that we'd suffered most of this before him, but at least he publicly recognized it now. I like the fact that in MLS (unlike Euro leagues) it's not just one of the same 2 or 3 teams who will be champions any given year. So we don't need or expect dominance, to use celt's word, we just want to be competitive.
MLS is setup as a parity driven league, and as such it's very difficult to have sustained dominance for more then a couple of season's in a row. Especially now, with the growth of the league (number of teams increasing). Teams dominating for more then 2-3 years in a row will become less common. I do agree that the Union need to become competitive on a yearly basis though. The model they are trying to implement should help them compete year in, and year out. RBNY and FC Dallas are already having success with this model. Sporting KC is attempting to do the same thing as well. SKC and FCD weren't exactly overnight successes either.
I hate cherry picking comments, but when? When do the competitive years start? As for the SKC comment. This is a false equivalency Jay. Because those two teams took a while to succeed it will take a while for us to as well? SKC rebranded in 2010 and won the Cup in 2013. Not overnight, but three years ain't bad. Read this http://www.kansascity.com/sports/mls/sporting-kc/article64253682.html to highlight the difference between Earnie's comments and Heinemanns philosophy. " Sporting KC says championships are the benchmark for success" Not, don't come if you're expecting us to win. Or we're not necessarily looking for good players. Or if you're not at practice don't criticize. But we measure success by championships.
I love Oldham Athletic and watch them whenever I can - primarily FA Cup matches. I had no idea they were ever in the Premier League. You learn something new every day.
Who are teams with winning records. Next Alex, I'll take "Things the Philadelphia Union are Not" for 200
Are headed in the right direction, but I need to see more 24 vote(s) 53.3% All it takes is 2 wins to get that Reddit Positivity in here!!
Ha! Was referring to Sheffield Wednesday. One thing more on topic - What Earnie said was that if you go to the matches expecting them to win every time, don't come. He's right. This is a parity driven league and no team wins every time. He at no point said we shouldn't expect them to win.
At least it's not the kind of uncritical parroting of the party line we saw on PSP yesterday (coupled with the defensive "Are you a real fan" subtext). This thread proves that people here care about the team and are hopeful, but haven't abandoned their critical thinking skills and are ready to hold the FO to account.
My point is once dominant teams - i.e. ones with "sustained dominance" to use your terminology - are now not doing so well. Their 2017 records are 3-5-2 (LAG, 11 points) and 2-7-2 (RSL, 8 points) ... compared to the Union's 2-4-4 (and 10 points) to-date in 2017.
I'm not saying I want us to be a mid-table EPL team, I was just giving some examples to our Union brethren.