1/29/04 Soaked the game up, now it's my time to shine

So what exactly is this new MLS FIFA transfer window date:

Jan 1 to March 1

OR

Jan 1 to March 31

I've seen both dates in mutiple places.

 

http://www.laopinion.com/deportes/?rkey=00040128203300998495

América VP:
"The team will be called 'América USA' and obviously wear the uniform we choose. We still haven't signed the contract, but all these details have already been discussed ... "

 

Why do I not see this thing lasting?

 

USA's Major League Soccer primary window:
January 1 to March 31
http://www.mlsnet.com/content/04/mls0127transfer.html

 

It seems like every time a Mexican VP says something like this then Garber has to jump up and deny it. Does Lalas speak spanish?

 

Wasn't there a quote just yesterday from an AEG executive saying that there will be no name or uniform change? This thing is getting out of control, the story changes daily. I know in business dealings both parties aren't always on the same page, and sometimes different angles are leaked by the different sides, but this is crazy.

 

This name brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.

 

Also coming soon...

England Britain UK

 

the proposed name does have that little thingie over the "e" to completely diferentiate itself.

 

First of all, it's La Opinion, the Latino press' version of Chris Bergin. Take it w/ a grain a salt. Or better yet, don't take it. To boot...

Leiweke isn't a an owner (dueño) of any club in MLS.

The first part of the article rehashes all the news from earlier this week. (See threads on the Lalas press conference plus many news articles from 1/28)

The 2nd part states America's intentions to do what they see fit.

My take? Tuesday was pure damage control on MLS' part in an effort to assuage the fears of loyal fans AND to put pressure on SJ State and/or position the team to benefit from a community-based stadium, which would help the future owners.

America's reaction was/is jockeying for position in front of the Mexican press and US Latino press.

B4 mass hare kare commences, take a deep breath, and know that in about 15 days we should have more definitive answers according to CA.

 

Did anyone else notice the quote in the Dallas story about the Frisco ground breaking being held on 2/18, had that been reported elsewhere?

 

how many casual soccer fans are going to think this is the national team playing??

 

odd.

From the Globe

Matt Driver will become an executive at the Atlantic City Tropicana Hotel and Casino and return to coaching the South Jersey Barons

 

Well, Vergara's guys said they were going to start in 2004, and we all saw how well that went over with MLS.

If Televisa chooses to engage in a pissing contest with OmniLife, more power to them. They still need to convince the people who run MLS to agree to their ideas.

 

I guess we're talking about SJ and Club America here. So in 2005 we could have:

Chivas USA
America USA

Oh boy.

How about calling the San Jose franchise Club Mexico?

 

So, when Tim Leiweke "emphasized that Club America would be a partner of AEG, and that buying into the Quakes would not result in renaming the team," as reported yesterday, he was, what, lying?

Jesus, people, can we PLEASE stop with the sky-is-falling speculation and the selective attention....?

 

From the same article:

There will not be a name change.

They will continue calling themselves the San Jose Earthquakes. The will continue to play in San Jose and remain named the Earthquakes.

 

And in other soccer news., Lamar Hunt purchased Mexican soccer power Cruz Azul. He said that the club would be renamed the "Blue Crew."

 

...as opposed to their sister team "Crew Blew".

 

Should we then call Chicago, NY/NJ, DC and/or LA "Club Austrian" b/c the principal owner is Austrian?

The main difference is that two foreign clubs are interested in investing. What they have to offer in addition to money, is a brandname recognition amongst a desired target group. MLS and any of its investors would be foolish not to explore its feasibility. From what Garber et al have said, it appears that the league is against changing the name (at least significantly).

Club America has made no mention of carrying out a project anywhere near the scale that Chivas USA will carry out. If CA buys SJ (still an "if"), the club probably would have a Mexican player or two, but not an entire squad. So just like I won't call Chicago "Club Jamaica" b/c Damani Ralph is Jamaican, neither will I call SJ "Club Mexico" b/c they have a couple of Mexican nationals.

 

I think the best thing to do would be to incorporate Club America into the name somehow, but keep it as the San Jose Earthquakes. Therefore, the team name could officially be:

Club America's San Jose Earthquakes

This name could easily be incorporated into the Earthquakes logo as it is today.

People could still refer to it as the quakes.
It still has the locale in the name.
And the ownership group gets its recognition for marketing purposes.

Seems pretty simple to me.

 

Why don't they make it "San Jose Earthquakes, America's team"? That works even better!

 

While it pains me to point this out b/c history has shown that mass hysteria will ensue, but I must be fair in the translations.

The part in bold is what Leiweke said, not CA. Now, b4 I post what CA said, I must point out the difference in tone. Notice that Leiweke uses the future tense (no cambiara', seguira', permanecera'), which is FAR MORE EMPHATIC than the more common future construction "ir + a + infinitive", which the CA vp uses. The future tense is so emphatic at times, that it is also a command, a strong one at the that. To boot, the 10 commandments are in the future tense.

So, here is CA's vp:
El equipo se va a llamar América USA y obviamente con el uniforme que nosotros queremos.

Translation:
The team will be called (not an emphatic, set in stone tone) America USA and obviously will wear the uniform that we want.

The difference in tone is pivotal in understanding what Alejandro de Haro (vp of CA) is saying. This is what they want, but he is not insisting on it.

 

I think in this case, he means the uniform that we love.