"But I do think the Revs should be fined for trying to hide the true appearance of their attendance from the public. And yes, I am joking." The stadium's crap no matter how you dress it up or size it down. The Magpie
Hey Magpie, since you're here. Have the Feds rounded up the notorious Moore Gang, international drug smugglers?
I think if I were a Metro fan, the thing that would bother me most is how the team came unglued in the second half. I think Arisrules is half-right; the first 40' was competitive. But after the Revs scored, I never sensed that Jaws soundtrack pum-pum pum-pum pum-pum where Metro gradually ratchets up the pressure as they did in the tie at Gillette earlier. Metro looked much better in the part of the game where they weren't scoring. Woly and Lisi in particular should be in Metro's 2004 plans. I think Edgar is great also, but as someone said, he needs support (Pope.) As far as Bradley's decision goes, who's to say? Who on this board knows what's going on in the locker room? I'm sure he had his reasons, and I bet there is more to the story than we know. If the Revs get an attitude over this game they're idiots. And Magpie's right about the stadium.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] 1. This game was competitive. The Revs didn't score their first goal until the 41st minute. Before that, BOTH teams had multiple chances to score. At the end of the game the shots on goal were 10 to 9, I'd say about 7 of the Metros 9 shots on goal were very good scoring chances. The difference was that the Revs finished their chances and got some lucky bounces. Except for the opening 7 minutes or so, there was no period of time where teh Revs kept it in our side for an extended time of pressure. All I am saying is that this game could have gone the other way, pretty easily. If Hall does the right thing, and makes the handball call there, 3-2, completely different match. Plus lets not forget the flukey nature of many of their goals, combined with the piss poor performance of Grafer with Addo and forchetti in front of them. They got 5 goals against a b team, with everything in their favor! So What. Also, their defense was absolutely horrendous. I didn't see the Revs dominate us. I saw us for periods of time, buzzing around their box. How many times was Nugent WIDE open. I mean acres of space in front of him, near the box. That was the type of game. Fun to watch, because both teams defense sucked. For the Metros that means nothing as it was our reserves, for the Revs it means they have some major problems, especially if our best players can play at their best.. 2. I didn't realize that Mathis was so sick, especially since he hustled a lot the last game. So, it is obviously better that he sat then so he can be healthy. Had I known that he was that sick, I would not made that comment. As for Jolley and Amado. Amado played with injuries throughout the season (hand was wrapped up multiple times). Jollley also missed an extended period of time with injuries. I would rather make sure they were completely healthy. Same with Pope, who left the Dallas game I believe early, with some type of injury or strain. Why risk it? It def. is not worth it. 3. Coaches in all sports do this. Honestly, it doesn't matter if you have the home match first or second. It does not give you a real advantage, because in MLS the crowds aren't rowdy enough to really impose fear on an opposing team. Plus, we are better on the road, so in some ways this might be better for us. As for the fine, that is ridiculous. Should Marlins fans be pissed off that Soriano and Giambi didn't start in Game 5 (albeit for different reasons)? I don't think so. Bradley's strategy was to get his best players rested up, healed, and focused on the task at hand, the two matches next week. If that warrants a fine, then that is just as stupid as the league mandating coaches wear slacks.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] I for one am pissed that I won't be able to buy an "Eastern Conference Second Place: Home Field For Game Two, Baby!" t-shirt. This game was critical, don't drink the Kool Aid. Bring Back OZ, who, back in 2000, when there was a home field advantage (two games at home in a best of three series) lost the final game in New England and said, "This game was just a show for the fans, we all knew it was meaningless." Of course, when Metro left the field in defeat that night, the Fire were tied 2-2 at Columbus (they'd eventually win 3-2) and the Metro game was hardly meaningless. Of course, we'll all rue Bob's decision when we are forced to play the 30 minutes of golden goal in front of 65,000 screaming lunatics at Gillette in two weeks. Fine Bob, Bring Back OZ. I want my t-shirt.
Granted, there were goals which Grafer could not have saved but overall his performances at NE worries me. When Nick Rimando was injuried, back up keeper D.Warren steps in and delivers good perfornmace, if not better. Does anybody see the potential problem with Metrostars? God forbit if Walker was injuried, I don't think we can count on Grafer. Everyone saw how terrible and how easy it was for Rimando to get injuried !
Until MLS teams a) carry bigger squads - and I mean real squads, with real, contributing players in spots 22-26, NOT sub-minimum wage developmental/emergency players in spots 20-24, so that the loss of a starter in a meaningless game isn't a death blow, and b) have some sort of reserve system, so that they can get these 'developmental' players some sort of actual 'development', the idea of fining Bradley for yesterday's lineup is just ludicrous.
Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] It worked but it was an incredibly stupid strategy for the World Cup. They had no way of knowing they would eventually play Hungary in the final and took a really dumb gamble that could have easily backfired and put them out in the first round. That isn't even a close analogy to Bob's strategy if it was meant as that. Bob is paid to do what's best for his team, not what's best for the fans. I think it was a smart move.
I'd like to congratulate the Revolution on their Eastern Conference second place trophy. This would've been a nice piece of silverware to add to our case in Secaucus. Signed, Disgraced and Humiliated.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] 1. I never suggested Pope should not play. He has nagging injuries and of course he should have been left home. You seemed not to notice that. 2. The Marlins Yankee ananlogy is ridculous. Your paranthetical staement is not at all paranthetical. Torre benched Giambi and Soriano because he felt he had a better line up without them. Are you saying that Bradley benched Jolley, Guevara, Williams, Clarke, and Leitch, and Walker so that he could have a better lineup? If not, why even bring up this analogy? Bottom line: Bob has made his choice. It was an exterme choice, an overreaction, that showed no concern for the integrity of the game. Time will tell if Bob was right that home field made no difference in this series. I hope he is right. I still can't help but wonder why Nichols didn't feel the same way. By the way, for those who are saying Bradley played his second string to explore New England's tactical weakness, we have played New England 5 times already this year. If he doesn't know them by now (which I am sure he does), he shouldn't be coaching.
You're starting to remind me of Republicans who start yowling about Bill and Hillary everytime someone raises questions about Bush. At least let's do something interesting like the relative merits of Garfield v Passaic.
I just got home from the Columbus vs. Chicago match. Dave Sarachan robbed me of the 10 bucks I paid with that lineup he put out there. Fine Coach 'Of the Year' Sarachan now.
Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] I believe the German manager was paid to do the same. If the fans showed up to see Weber and co. they left unhappy. But he did what was best for the team. As expected, they cleared the rest of their group with ease. Confidence is what Sarachan brought to the Columbus match today; supreme confidence is another level altogether. Some generals are born commanders, others are born clerks. The rest of us are born to call both 'stupid.' Chicago really annoys me. It's not bad enough they edged us out of the Open Cup, today they beat us in the worst-result-by-a-playoff-team-over-the-final-weekend contest. Furthermore, Chicago's 2nd keeper only played 45 minutes! He out Grafered Grafer! He earned The pants!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] Of course not. That is why I noted that it was for different reasons. The point is the same though. The coach makes a decision, and you go with it. He shouldn't be fined, if he feels this decision is best for the team. For all I know, we get rocked by NE, inspired by the fact that we only sent a B-team to Gilette. I personally feel it was the right decision by Bradley, and I would have done the same thing one hundred times over. As for the statement about the integrity of the game, give me a break. I also do not think sending the b-team was supposed to expose the tactical weaknesses by plan. However, in the end it did expose them. For whatever reason, we had many chances around the goal. I am pretty confident heading into this series.
Yeah fine him for already having won the double and having nothing to gain or lose with this game. The Metro were in exactly the same spot as Chicago. So were the three other teams who were battling for 2nd in their conference and who happened to start the best team they had available. Sure they were. The winner of the double tanking it against a team assured of not making the playoffs threatens the integrity of nothing. I think the fans paying for that game got exactly what they expected. Sometimes the schedule produces a game like this.
Correction There were only two teams alive for second place in the East. The Metros held the tiebreaker over D.C. United so D.C. could not have reached second even with a win Saturday night.
What about Kansas City and Colorado in the other conference? That would make 3 teams besides the Metro battling for second place in their conference.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] The point is not the same. If you can't admit that, how is your argument to be taken seriously? Torre changed his lineup to try to win the game. Are you telling me Bradley was trying to win the game? People who paid for tickets for game 5 of the World Series had no complaint because both sides were honestly trying to win the contest for which tickets had been purchased. People who paid for tickets for Saturday's farce may have seen Bradley doing what was best for his team, but they certainly did not see the Metrostars give a sincere effort to win the game for which they had purchased tickets. Again, I don't have a problem with Bradley resting players who were banged up (Pope, Mathis, Magee). I think, though, that Bradley went too far. Even in this type of playoff format, I am not convinced that 2nd place means nothing.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] Playing the role of dime store psychologist. Ever had a boss offer you a few days off after you've worked hard for a long stretch? "Come back next week refreshed and ready to produce." I have had that happen to me and it made me want to work extra hard for the guy because he was looking out for me. Maybe that's what the coach was thinking. "If I give Eddie and Clint the weekend off, maybe some of the other guys resent it." We'll see Saturday when Clint "That's Why He's Here!" Mathis regains his old touch and carries us to the promised land. The second five-goal game of his career will give us an insurmountable cushion heading into Game 2, and we'll all be psyched that we opened at GS. Mmmm, Kool Aid.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] Your original point was that that the Metrostars should be ashamed of themselves, because they didn't put a top notch lineup on the field to play against the Revs, thus showing no regard for the poor fans of NE who paid so much to see the game. I simply used the example of the Marlins and the Yankees to show times when top players are not played, because I couldn't remember a similar situation, although I have seen it. OF COURSE it was for different reasons. Soriano was absolutely horrendous, and Giambi wasn't much better himself. I stated it twice though, maybe I should have been more forceful in making that clear. But your mentality that the fans didnt' get what they paid for, could be argued by some stupid Florida fan. Bradley didn't play his top players so that he can make sure they are rested up, and insure we have the best chance of performing well. That is the point, end of story. He though this was the right decision, and anyone who stated something as idiotic as he should be fined for not bringing up the full lineup, is wrong. That specifically pissed me off, more then arguing which players should have played or shouldn't have.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 10/25/03 Metros at the Revs [R] You have a different opinion then me, fine. But I can't figure out why apparently are incapable of understanding simple arguments. In the Marlin game, even with Giambi and Soriano resting, the fans watched a game where both teams gave themselves the best chance to win. This was not the case in the Metro-Rev game. Only one team gave themselves the best chance to win. If you want a parallel, look to England. Arsenal is playing their second string (no starters) in their upcoming Carling Cup match to rest their stars for EPL duty, BUT THEY DROPPED THE TICKET PRICES because they feel people shouldn't play full price to see a second string performance. That is a parallel to what we saw the other day. Wenger is doing what is best for the team but also understanding that he could not do this with all integrity if people were paying full price. Here's the link: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/section?id=england&cc=5901