Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Yanks Abroad' started by olafgb, Aug 27, 2002.
Re: Good for MLS
You never get tired of being annoying.
For Pete's Sake, Dave, I've been doing nothing BUT present evidence. NOT every piece of evidence is "black-on-white, clear-cut, thanks for playing" evidence. Much of it is based on inference and detective work.
My working theory is "if it moves like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it's a duck." Connecting the dots, the "duck" in this case is: the non-existence of a buy-out.
What evidence do I have that a buy-out clause DOESN'T exist? Well, Olaf quoted the GM of Bayer as saying categorically, less than a week ago, that there is NO BUY-OUT. What's your evidence? Tim's post? Then we have "he said, she said" garbage with Tim D. on one side and Bayer on the other.
That didn't cut it for me... so I kept looking for clues. Everything points to Landon having a miserable time at Leverkusen. He doesn't like that part of the country (maybe all of Germany; heck, I was raised by Germans in New York, and even I don't always get this country), the climate and, least of all, he doesn't trust management. If he has a real (and by that I mean affordable) buy-out, then why doesn't he exercise that buy-out with NIKE's help? Then it doesn't matter what Bayer, Toppi, Calmund or the Kaiser (no, not that one, Beckenbauer!) has to say, he can stay with MLS as long as he wants and leave for Europe, if ever, when he's good and ready.
Why extend a loan under Bayer's purview if he doesn't have to? My educated guess is that he CAN'T break the contract, any more than Bayer can FORCE him to return against his wishes (and that of MLS). More precisely, I suspect that if MLS didn't want Landon for whatever reason, MLS could force his return to Bayer if Bayer wanted him back in November, but that's not the case -- MLS would admittedly love to keep Landon stateside.
See, my "inference" was, is and remains that MLS has much more of say in Landon's future than Bayer would like to admit, and, in this case, MLS is squarely in Landon's corner.
Believe what you want, but to pretend that I'm a raving Donovan/MLS fanatic without a shred of common sense defies reason.
Re: Good one!
It wasn't Glorious, just pretty good.
Yeah, Landon got so much better in Germany, then has been on a steady decline ever since joining MLS.
Re: Re: Good for MLS
Boo-Yeah, baby: I think I just found another sig line when I buy my premium membership!
Wow, thanks for the newsflash, Ben. Thanks also for stopping by. Here's a tip: don't read my posts if you find them annoying.
Enjoy Big Soccer.
Stop the personal attacks, or the thread is closed.
Re: Good for MLS
Smilies are one thing, but this is tacky, tacky, tacky. Most people read BS for news about players, not posters...
Yeah, keep telling yourself he's better off here as a player. Eventually you start to believe all those lies.
Things have to get a bit more rough around here before we start closing threads, right? I mean, is "annoying" a personal attack right now?
Then again, I can appreciate a good mod -- we don't want this forum to degenerate. I guess it's just a fact that a player of Landon's undeniable talent is going to rouse extreme emotions: "he's great" vs. "he sux"; "go to Nirvana/Europe" vs. "stay home" -- on some level, it's gonna be, "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."
As for my comment "I NEVER get tired of being right" alongside a smilie, if that's not tongue firmly in cheek... c'mon.
How about this "inference?"
Assumption: Buyout clause DOES exist.
Assumption: Buyout price is REALLY low -- say $2 million, absolute chicken-feed for Nike, and veritable pocket change for BL.
Assumption: BL HAS rights to call him back anytime.
Then this conversation ensues...
--Calmund: "Landon, we want you back."
--Landon: "I'll come back if I start."
--Calmund: "I can't guarantee that."
--Landon: "No start, no Deutschland."
--Calmund: "You know, we can force you back."
--Landon: "Do it, and there will be a wire transfer to your offices from Beaverton Oregon in 24 hours."
--Calmund: "Then you ought to do that if you have no intention of coming back."
--Landon: "Who said I don't want to come back? I'll come back if I start."
--Calmund: "I can't guarantee that."
--Landon: "Then I am staying right here...oh, and this piece of paper in my back pocket? It's the provisions of my buyout clause. Don't make me take it out and use it."
--Calmund: "All right, let's keep on doing what we've been doing, and talk later."
--Landon: "Sounds good."
There is a technical negotiating term for this...it's caled having your adversary between a rock and a hard place.
Karl's description fits - almost exactly - what I suspect happened based upon what I know (take with a grain of salt) from reading all of these discussions here.
I would say that the buyout could be significantly higher than 2 mil and we could still be in this situation... as long as it's below BL's estimation of Donovan's market value, then they'd rather continue to loan him than force him to exercise his buyout (if it exists).
And Nike could pay much more than $2 million before it starts to reach the realm of "not worth it".
Donovan's value to BL is the carrot, and the buyout clause is the stick. Threaten the stick, offer the carrot, and you force BL's hand.
Thanks Olaf for the newsflash.
Maverick connects his dots in quite an interesting, and perhaps overly intricate, fashion.
But in my view, this is all very very simple. Donovan is worth lots more to BL -- and even more important, to Nike -- than the price of his buyout clause.
Everybody knows it, and everyone is acting accordingly.
Common rule of negotiating -- NEVER give up your leverage until you get EXACTLY what you want.
What Karl said. Ooops, that is what I said, Karl just said it coherently. Or perphaps given Maverick's ... well singlemindedness on this point, in an easy-to-follow form.
What a lovely story. Just misses one little item: who guarantees Bayer that Landon doesn't use the option next time if he has one? If he'd do the same thing on and on until 2007 he'd be worthless for Bayer and in this case they'd be better off to take the money, don't you think?
What about this little story:
Some people meet in a conference room. All people belong to what's called "Bayer 04 Leverkusen Fußball GmbH". Some of these people listen to the names Reiner Calmund, Ilja Kaenzig and Wolfgang Holzhäuser - these bunch is known to be the best soccer management trio in Germany. The door opens again and now some people called Klaus Toppmöller, Peter Hermann, Ralf Minge and Toni Schumacher enter the room.
The management trio asks them the question: "What do we do with this guy from California? He doesn't want to return, how do we deal with that?".
Klaus Toppmöller is consulting with his fellows and comes to the conclusion: "Don't know, this guy is talented, but I can't guarantee that he's getting the playing time he wants. I'd like to have him, but I also don't want trouble in my team".
The management trio is asking again: "So, you've got to decide: have him or loan him?"
Toppmöller answers: "Let him play some further time the MLS, maybe he develops and matures. We can still see how good he is in one or two years".
The management trio: "Mr Toppmöller, you're so wise, we'll do exactly what you're saying"
I think it's a nice exaggerated story with some elements of reality.
Btw, the next nice thing will be the length of the new loan; specifically end of MLS season or start of Bundesliga season (plus year of course).
Those are actually the same story, depending on the point-of-view.
If I have an asset -- say a talented 20 year old soccer player -- who is worth, say, $5 million, and I have given someone an option to buy him away from me at, say, $2 million, why would I encourage the holder of that option to exercise that option?
Sometimes, in the negotiating game, especially if the leverage is being used AGAINST you, it is simply better to wait. Remember, you will still have opportunities to force the hand, and consequently can get the money when you need to get it -- so why rush it??
Add the leverage of the buyout clause to your story, and I think it makes perfect sense.
Well i thought Karl had spelled it out S L O W L Y, but I guess Maverick is not the only one.
Olaf, the reason why the scenario is logical is that Bayer is able to defer the problem for a couple of years. In other words, they don't want to give up on Donovan now, keep him happy and maybe in two years the situation will be better. If not, the money from the buy-out clause will be there.
If the buyout clause exists, this is a win/win scenario for both sides.
I don't deny that your scenario is plausible, maybe as plausible, though it does clash with your statements a couple of days before that given Bayer's traumatic start to the season, it was unlikely that Bayer would not recall Donovan right away.
When he plays consistently for a 1st division, 1st place team here compared to playing with a youth team there, yeah, I'd say he's better off here than he was there.
If he goes back and plays consistently for Bayer, maybe he's better off there, but there's no evidence that will happen, and plenty of evidence it won't.
I'm not bragging about how right I am, so I don't really need it, do I?
To me, either Bayer doesn't want Landon or can't get him on their terms. The former seems unlikely, given what I know, and the latter implies a cheapish buyout clause.
(edited to say, it appears someone else has already crossed this river)
Re: Good for MLS
Actually sir, you're very wrong !
Gees, between the legalese, the self-congratulations, the namecalling and the strange and odd posts, I'm still confused.
Is it or isn't it true? I just found out about Frankie being shifted to Switzerland...it sounds like Bayer just wants to get on with their season and get rid of the distraction of the "is he or isn't he" question about Landon.
I'm all for getting on with the last few weeks in MLS too. See some of you in Cowlumbus Saturday. Maybe this will all be straightened out by Thanksgiving break and there will be truth afoot, at which time we will all breathe a big sigh of relief at knowing the answer.
Unless, you're like me and have a "fake" life and will be buried too deep in books to notice.
"Great, here's to the new era of sacrificing our best players for the well being of Nike"
It's not like it's our kids or anything..
Just a second, you got to differ: it was my opinion that they'd better wait what's happening in the near future. Leverkusen is talking about loaning him since middle of July when the season start was no topic at all.
Thank God some others decided to post on this thread other than "Maverick". Nice job keeping yourself emotionly detached from the world of Bigsoccer.
Anyway. Now that it is decided, I guess it is the right decision for now. Players develop best when happy.
However, I hope he does have the desire to take on the Euro challenge at some point in his career. Not so much for his development sake, as much as I think he could be the best american player ever, and from a fans point of view, it would be hard give that title to anyone who hasn't gone against the best week in and week out for many years.