How did Losada's style get Hamid injured? That was kind of a strange one for me. Does he make the goalkeepers do fitness with the rest of the team? My guess is it's a lingering thing from last season when he got hurt in a game (FCC maybe?). Kasper's quote about having a talented team stuck out to me too.
Ashton can't really fail here. If DCU continues to underperform it's all on Losada or on the roster assembled by the FO. If the team performs well it's because Ashton has better knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the individual players. But even if our record improves I think Chad will remain a career backup. If I were Chad, I would take the opportunity provided by our injury list to run out some of our younger players, several of whom have looked good recently (e.g., Hopkins; Djeffal; Yow last night; et.al.). At worst any prospective new manager will have a better idea of the level of talent in the club. At best, we might snag a few victories.
↑↑↑ THIS ↑↑↑ I liked Losada a lot. Obviously I don't know him and am not with him daily like the players are but we all know some coaches are more demanding than others. Are some too demanding? Sure, but my gut feeling was that when players see results from a system working and generally like the coach – even if he's tough – they will stick with it because they believe. But NO SYSTEM WORKS WITHOUT TALENT! You can't get rid of your best players, not replace them, and think the team will somehow magically get better (or even stay the same). Other coaches know this, of course. Who would take this job now...other than Chad F#çking Ashton??? And here is the bottom line to me: Whether or not ownership and the front office are making the right call this failure is clearly on them 100%, and we all know this is Levien and Kasper (I doubt Rushton can or did make this decision). They either hired the wrong guy or they hired the right guy but didn't/couldn't give him what was needed to succeed. I lean toward the latter, and fully expect to see Losada go on to have a very successful coaching career.
Not sure if you guys noticed but United is in last place I'm not saying that I think ditching Losada was necessarily the right thing to do, but the hagiography for a guy that led this team to the bottom of the table isn't exactly becoming. It's news to me that Arriola left because he didn't want to play for the guy but that's an important data point too. Say what you will about Olsen, but in ten years he never lost the locker room.
For a 2 time Wooden Spoon winner in less than 10 years to fire a manager early in the season makes you wonder if someone pulled a gun on the FO and or ownership. It's one thing to put a manager on a short leash but this was a strange time to start.
Considering Jesse Marsch has blamed a lot of Leeds' injury woes on Bielsa overtraining the team, I don't see DC United going after him after their Losada experience. You think the players who were unhappy with Losada are going to be happy with Bielsa? I don't. Also, DC scored over half its goals in 2020 after the switch to Ashton in only 7 games. I don't think he's looking to do Bennyball.
Horse shit, there's no hagiography going on. One year with pathetic front office support is unfair to the guy. He made the team interesting again, was decimated by injuries last year and still hasn't gotten the players he wanted. I cared, i bought a jersey for the first time in 10 yrs or so last year. I didn't need an MLS Cup win, i just wanted something worth watching. He gets one year? What a joke. That's not hagiography it's anger over a shit front office.
Nobody seriously thinks Bielsa would answer a call from DC much less take the job. But yes, i agree that Ashton showed more tendency to attack than Olsen, but then again everyone does. Even Simeone
I don't disagree with you. The roster is garbage. You could put Pep Guardiola on the DC United sideline and they very likely don't make the playoffs. But it's been that way since Tommy Soehn was in charge of the Brain Staff. The difference is that the players would run through a wall for Soehn and Olsen. It turns out they wouldn't for Losada. Why? I don't know the answer. But the adoration on here for Losada when the team is sitting at the bottom of the table is weird.
For me, what would be good to know is whether or not Losada was given any sign that he was on thin ice, or if there had been any conversations about the issues which led to this decision.
He's over with a winning team in this town It was bad. That's a different game if their keeper hadn't dropped that ball on to Kamara's head. They looked flat, dead, no zip and like they didn't even know each other. The broadcaster's even mentioned how no one on DCU was talking and Losada was the loudest voice in the stadium. That's a load of horse shit. They sold Arriola & Paredes and replaced them with ??? Anyone? Jason needs to have his machete taken away. I wondered that before last year when we passed on a number of promising candidates. I've been saying #LevienOut for a looooong time The cupboard was already bare. The idea of Jeff (they called him Jeff on the USOC broadcast last night) Kempin makes me want to projectile vomit. They've got to do something because that's a lot of money down the shitter otherwise.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, Losada turned the team into one that was fun to watch, which we haven't had for years save a short time with LuchoRoo. The fact that we're at the bottom of the table right now fits nicely with the fan narrative that DCU let too many good players go over the offseason, i.e. a roster issue and not (obviously) a coaching issue. (Besides, being at the bottom of the table isn't so weird for DCU fans to see.) Maybe Losada played a part in losing some of the players, but with the track record the FO has, it's easier to side a bit more with Losada's vision than with the FO and potentially unhappy players. This is a fandom that's been frustrated with the FO for a long time, and had a glimpse of what could be that's now been suddenly taken away.
Fair point, but speaking only for me--last year was more fun to watch than had been the case in a while. I had been drawn back in a bit, and my initial reaction to this is the FO saying that stability and status quo are more important than risking further growing pains. I felt like giving Losada the reins showed a bit of ambition and risk-taking; qualities I hadn't seen from the club in a while. The results this year? Not so much, but I hadn't quite given up hope. Maybe the FO is right and there was no turning the current shitshow around, but this move doesn't exactly reek of ambition to put it mildly. Just "make the shitty roster happy and continue as we were" which very well might make for a happier locker room, but doesn't make me want to spend time and money going to Audi Field.
I've said the exact same thing about this team for years now, about the manager not mattering. We sold off two of our most dynamic players and replaced them with less dynamic players. You can't really do that and expect results. It's not like we were a great team last year, we missed the playoffs. There's not much addition by subtraction in pro sports. Less talent is less talent, so there's a clear explanation of the adoration Losada is getting. He made the team fun to watch, he gave the fanbase hope of something better. Instead, we see ownership is not committed to winning. I wonder how those big name celebs who bought in over the last year or so feel about having their names associated with a loser.
Heads were going to roll when the team lost four MLS matches in a row, but not in this abrupt fashion.
Well, someone's going to hire Bielsa, Marsch's quotes not withstanding. He did some pretty amazing things with Leeds. I don't think Marsch was intending to slight him. Bielsa was in a tough spot with so many injuries to key players. His problem was he wanted a small talented roster to do all that running, which meant this season that small roster was stretched, physically and mentally, until it broke at a point in the season where it couldn't be patched up. Marsch has outlined his differences with Bielsa on that point, previously. I'm shocked the British press blew that out of proportion. As for Bennyball II, I'm saying I don't want to see it. Ashton actually has done well in his head-coaching stints, and he's played the kids a fair amount. I'm not a Never-Ashtoner. But this situation is different than previous ones. This time he knows he has a chance to actually be the head coach. I am concerned he'll abandon the attacking style that's been the one good reason beyond blind loyalty I've had to watch the team in the last decade, that small window of Rooney aside, and replace it with something much safer and more pedestrian both in terms of style and roster usage. I don't think it'll be Bennyball II, per se. But it'll probably look a lot like it, in comparison, and I'm not sure I'm over my PTSD.
For fans like me who are/were #TeamLosada, this is something worth acknowledging--as much as I loved the way he had this team playing last year, there's not only been little of that this season, there's also been a real lack of fight on the field. While my heart tells me there's a culture of mediocrity that Losada was up against, last night was troubling--he gave a LOT of guys who've been on the outside looking in some playing time, and he was not rewarded with as much fight and hustle as you might have expected. If the FO has a case, last night would certainly be a data point.
And yet the first 45 minutes of our last League match was the most exciting of the season, and it looked as if everything had clicked into place. And then came the last 10 minutes, which was probably our worst. I guess the FO didn't want to give Losada credit for that first half.
I'm trying hard to see the other side given that my own inclinations are #TeamLosada. I mean--as dumb as I think this decision is, I don't think it's a conspiracy. More than likely, there's at least some kernel of truth even if I believe they're making too much of it or not picking the right side of the argument. And I think hanging the second half of that game on him is really unfair since he didn't tell Kamara to get two stupid yellow cards, and he wasn't out on the field injuring first Najar and then Odoi-Atsem. Would different subs at different times in the second half have preserved at least a point? Very possibly, but that sure seems like going out of your way to find a straw to break the camel's back.
1) It's not "adoration." He simply put a team on the field that was compelling to watch last season (for the first time in a long time). 2) When you're a mid-table club, thin on talent, and then sell or otherwise dump (and don't effectively replace) some of your most productive players then bottom of the table is generally where you end up.
We'll win a few games under Ashton. Then we'll lose a few. Then win some, then lose often. We'll wind up under .500 and miss the playoffs because that's our talent level, esp without Najar.
Fair or not, Ashton had better prove you wrong. We just fired a coach whose head nobody was calling for and replaced him with THE common technical-staff denominator over a short lifetime of largely poor results. I am rooting for him, but he has some headwinds to overcome, and doing about as well as the last three guys isn't an acceptable result.
Is that really true. He has been either the Assistant or Interim Coach on a ton of losing teams for the last decade. Why would this be any different.
As @Q*bert Jones III repeatedly said, in this thread and in others, even when the Olsen teams were terrible, he never lost the locker room. Clearly the players include Ashton as part of that.