Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Yanks Abroad' started by Fah Que, Sep 14, 2003.
Thanks for the BBC story.
There are more in this thread on the subject of the possible move (bad move) for Freddy here.
# International transfers of players under the age of 18 shall only be permitted under the following conditions:
1. as a general rule, when the family of the player moves to the country in which the new club is located for reasons that are not linked to football
2. within the territory of the EU/EEA and in the case of players between the minimum working age in the new training club's country and the age of 18, suitable arrangements are guaranteed for their sports training and academic education by the new training club. For this purpose a code of conduct will be established and enforced by the football authorities.
# The same principles apply to the first registration of players under 18 who have a nationality other than that of the country in which they first request to be registered.
that other thread is filled with 7 pages of the usual Adu rantings (can he be signed, is MLS doomed if he doesn't sign with them, where is the best place for him to develop, etc etc).
At any rate, the BBC does say according "to reports."
If Chelski are after him, it smells of a pissing match with Man U. And if they do sign him, they will loan him to an MLS team for at least a year, mark my words...
I don't see where that has any relevance.Besides you didn't post a link.
I don't believe this report has much value at all (and not for Superdave's insistence that Freddy really isn't above the law written by mortal man).
It's just that £3 million over four years seems kind of low to me.
Wasn't the reason he signed the contract with Nike to be able to ignore such publicity driven yet potentially tempting offers?
In hopes that all the hoopla does not bury Freddy, I hope MLS will pull out all stops in signing him. I'd like to see MLS capitalize on the publicity and notoriety that Freddy generates. In my opinion, any Yank that signs overseas eventually drops off the radar in American sports news. How many US sports fans... check that, how many US soccer fans can tell you who Claudio Reyna is and what club he plays for? I certainly believe a player has the right to go anywere in order to better his situation. I also believe that the movement of any US player overseas has yet, done anything to promote the game here or increased its popularity.
Chris Bergin, who I guess here is mostly famous for idle rumor-mongering, has stated that this report is nothing more than idle rumor-mongering. I think when somebody like this (who does have legitimate connections in both US and UK soccer) says a report is not factually based, it's pretty reliable.
How many first team games d'ya expect Freddy to play for a club like Chelsea over the next 3 years?????
MLS could have trouble getting Freddy with their stupid maximum salary rule.
hah. post of the week, if not the month and year, in fact maybe sig material.
Adu going anywhere but MLS would be a serious mistake. In MLS he will get playing time at age 15 in the EPL he won't. MLS and US soccer need him here for a few years.
Freddy has already stated he wants to PLAY as soon as possible. He also stated he wants to start somewhere where it's easy to adjust. That may or may not mean MLS as far as a place of comfort.
If he is about to sign with Chelsea, or does with another European team, I am fairly confident the deal includes a loan for at least 2 years to MLS.
This would work out best for everyone IMO.
Freddy would be here for his first 2-3 years which would make his mom and most Big Soccer members happy. He would get a much better chance at first team starts and playing time. A big Euro team would have him "locked in".
He would get more time in US Nats friendlies than if he went to Europe right away, perhaps.
There are a lot more reasons I'm sure you can all think of.
Some English are already saying Chelsea would ruin him if they took him in this young, away from home.
Because those MLS types are such sticklers for their rules...
Sponsors can play a role in the process.
They did with Hong to LA, for one example.
Mostly with the cost of buying out his contract.
Money from the MLS coffers is just one way of being paid. If Nike decides it is more in their interest for Freddy to play here for 3 years or so they could "re-do" his endorsement deal.
Others could step in with a bit of cash too.
Sorry, but what does that have to do with child labor laws?
I think Chelsea wants to try to sign him just to make sure ManU doesn't get him.
That would be a silly, silly deal for Chelsea. Since they can only sign him for 3 years, and since by English rules he's a kinda sorta free agent on his 17th birthday, it would be idiotic for an English club to do this.
If Freddy is great, he'll spend 2/3 of the contract in MLS. Plus, if he's REALLY great, some other team can come in and sign him on June 2, 2006 after compensating Chelsea.
And if Freddy isn't great, they just pissed away all the money they've spent on him.
Unless I'm missing something....
Well, if his FAMILY gets 5 million dollars from a transfer fee, since England is a free country, I think the FAMILY could buy a house on the Thames, live there (cuz they are just a rich family at that point), then the whole family rule thing is circumvented.
WHo is to say a rich family can't buy a house where they like--say Monaco, Brasil, London, whatever, and if the mom HAPPENS to choose to live in the london house, who's to tell her "it's only for soccer reasons?"
Europe's liberal courts? LOL
I was just pointing out that spending that kind of money on a player who won't play for you is silly, and saying it's too low is really silly.
On the off chance you're serious, I think the fact that the family only became rich enough to buy said house upon Junior signing the contract would make this a case as easy to win as Fox v. Franken.
In freddy's case, he got a million bucks from Nike. So they can afford a house in London. But most teenage players do not. The Adus can actually find a loophole.
I love MLS but I'm not so sure that MLS is the best situation for Adu.
First of all there are no reserve teams and for most MLS teams they need to win games not develop players. Not that you expect a high success ratio, but the majority of Project 40 players are failures. I'm not criticizing Project 40 or MLS but I don't want Freddy Adu to waste into a Eddie Johnson type of situation either. I know he is better than Eddie Johnson but if you're a coach trying to keep your job or make the playoffs or whatever do you really play him over Ronald Cerritos, Dwayne DeRosario or Chris Brown?
Secondly, I think he'll be treated well in Europe simply because of his contract. Yes expectations will be high but he'll be given lots of attention, quality coaching and opportunity. These clubs are use to developing high potential teenagers.
Lastly, I think there will be more attention gained for US soccer by having a teenager succeeding on a world class club in Europe than yet-another teenager playing in MLS, with no one in Europe remembering who he is, no matter how well he is doing.
Then I guess the whole thing about him going to Chelsea is silly unless they plan to play him in the next couple of years on the first team as him being loaned to MLS would make no difference in the contract situation.
I guess we're all missing something.
asdf...so long as 8 of 10 MLS teams make the playoffs, I don't quite see the imperative to win that you do.
The problem in MLS' structure is that there's no incentive to "grow" a player, since he'll either leave and you get nothing, or he gets better and eats up more cap room, or he doesn't develop.
But I think Freddy's good enough to play in MLS.
This never made any sense anyway. The rule doesn't say the family can live there. The rule says the family can't have moved for reasons related to football. Obviously this move would be related to football.
If FIFA lets Freddy slide on this, in essence, they're doing two things. First, they're ignoring their own rule, and pis*sing off the African confederation. But, second, they're actually making the rule more rational. The avowed purpose of the rule was to protect children from being signed en masse, and then released if they can't make the grade, with no money.
I'm still wondering how Freddy can get a WP and Convey can't. Can someone explain that? Not to mention, what's gonna happen to Freddy II. That's not FIFA's problem, that's Emelia's problem, but she seems like a sensible woman. I don't think it would be sensible either to set Freddy loose at age 15, nor would it make sense as a parent to make Freddy II move to London.
It's not my call, I'm just sayin....