For Manchester United, it makes some sense because it'd allow them to unload an expensive back-up like Saha or an oft-injured veteran like Ole Gunar Solksjaer. For Eddie, the ManU salary in itself may be an good enough incentive. If I were a bit speculative, I'd reckon that PSV may buy/loan GAM for 6 months to 1 year in order allow him to get used to the Euro game and polish his skills. Within that period, Fergie will be able to decide where Solskjaer, Saha and perhaps Giggs stand. If all three go, a huge chunk of ManU salary will be gone and new talent can be brought in. EJ of course can be just one of many options for a team with ManU resources.
for gods sake not kezman I have a hard time seeing utd doing this. Few millions on a position that dosent really need players and might have wp problems. If he could go transfer to utd then saha would most likely be leaving as ruud and rooney arent going anywhere and smith proving to be a steal.
I guess my thing is ... he has 3 caps. He probably won't be able to qualify for a work permit until the beginning of the 2006/7 season. Solskjaer is done. Very sad for him. He was excellent and a fan favorite but he's not expected back and has already been replaced. Giggs is not a front runner - I don't see how his situation would have any bearing on a Johnson signing. ManU plays a lot of games each year. With the Premier League, Champions League, and various cups... they almost need 2 full teams that can play at a high level.
sorry whats the point? if its supposed to mean that it isnt a big deal then i would have to disagree as they wouldnt continue to monitor him if they didnt like what they saw
I agree with RS to a point. I really didn't like seeing Bocanegra leave MLS in the lurch because he refused to sign a contract so he could leave on a free. I really believe that MLS has proven that they will deal in good faith with a fair price. The Convey and Beasley deals illustrate this. But I also think that MLS is proving that it's a valid place for players to really improve - perhaps even more so than they would in reserve competition. Frankly, this kind of stuff makes the off-season exciting. Who will stay and who will go and who will arrive? I honestly believe GAM's future is bright either way.
That's largely irrelevant because EJ didn't exist before this year as a known entity. There is a difference between Noonan's training stint with Chelsea and EJ's with ManU/PSV in that the first is like EJ's previous stints were and the latter are most likely actual trials.
But this isn't a trial at ManU, it is just a training stint. He doesn't even come close to qualifying for a work permit and he doesn't have any grandparent with a euro passport(afaik). The situation in holland might be different but I doubt PSV will be willing to pay what MLS wants. I just think there's too much hype on these training/trial stints. It's impossible for him to go to ManU now. MLS would be smart to try and renegotiate a new contract extending out through 2007 or 2008, give him a raise, and then try and sell after 2006 World Cup.
Just checking but you all know who work permits and the international transfer of children rules work right. It seems that these two things are the most unknown or ignored things about soccer with regards to the YA board. First if EJ can't automatically qualify, 3/4 of a top country's competetive caps in two years, he can still get in on appeal, which I believe Kleberson did. Could EJ win an appeal is the burning question, in my opinion right now EJ would get in on appeal if Sir Alex vouches for him to make the first team. Unfortuneately for EJ for Sir Alex to say this ManU would have to of unloaded a few strikers.
PSV is almost certainly a trial...ManU probably is. Depends on how you define "trial", but ManU might have invited him there with the intention of buying his rights if he really impressed them, and in my mind that is a trial. Regardless of the work permit situation, where an appeal is always possible, perhaps ManU sees an opportunity to buy EJ now on the somewhat cheap (whatever that price may be), and then either sell or loan him elsewhere where he is allowed to play, and make money off him. ManU certainly is know for doing this type of thing.
It's telling that you have to deal with hypotheticals. How about dealing with reality? MLS has exported McBride, Bocanegra, Beasley, Donovan and Mathis, and has imported Sanneh, Hejduk, Gibbs and Stewart. Amazing how reality will make an argument disintegrate, isn't it? Are you suggesting transfer fees will make MLS viable? That's stupifying. Our national team was ******** before MLS came along and it will be ******** again if MLS goes away. The surest way to harm MLS is to send its hottest young stars overseas.
Actually, I'd argue that both Gibbs and Sanneh were great imports. Hejduk sucks regardless of whether he is in Switzerland or MLS so whether he comes or goes doesn't matter. Stewart was a bad import, granted (but what does it say about the quality of mid-table Erevidisie teams vs. MLS that Stewart was, well, very average here??). I might argue that it was good to get rid of Mathis as far as his career path, but financially MLS took a hit by delaying. I'm not sure if MLS got money for McBride, but I think he was certainly a quality player who got away. EDIT: furthermore...wouldn't it be illustrative of this situation if MLS ends up buying Mathis back from Hannover for a transfer fee now?? They lost him for free, and now are buying him back for most likely a somewhat significant fee (if they do indeed buy him back), after he has spoiled his reputation in Europe. That certainly shows that the extreme position of never selling our top players is not a good one to take as it can come back to bite you. END EDIT Overall, sure MLS has exported more quality players than it has imported, but what do you expect? If you can't afford to keep around players who are being offered 0.5 million or more per year overseas, then you just can't. Given what MLS has to work with financially and its long term goals, I think that it has been very business savvy. MLS does not take the extreme views that most BS posters take of either sell all good players/prospects or don't let anyone go...they clearly pick and choose. There have been many MLSers who could've gone abroad but MLS was able to convince them (financially or otherwise) that it was in their best interest to stay (Eddie Pope, Danny Szetela, Freddy Adu etc.). I don't think MLS is irresponsible on this topic as it is obviously crucial that it finds an acceptable balance of buying/selling/holding on to players for it to survive.
Not hardly. His entire rant was based upon a half-truth. I never said Gibbs, Sanneh, etc were of equal value to Donovan, Beasley, etc. I said things go in cycles and pretty soon we'll be seeing the likes of Reyna, Keller, Lewis, McBride, etc. And how can it be wrong to suggest that as experienced Euro pros come back to MLS they won't have a positive impact on the young guys in MLS? While we're at it, what is so wrong about saying that as MLS sends its best to Europe, its perceived value will increase. I wasn't just talking about transfer fees. In addition, a respected MLS could get some cash from merchandising and TV rights overseas. Sounds crazy but it is a possibility.
What a qualifier. "Sounds crazy" is right. And now for your next trick... Who in Europe is going to purchase the TV rights of a league that has no stars when they can watch the leagues that have raided the league of those stars? Find me some data where respect is quantified and we'll talk.
Also, I'd like to add that it could be argued as necessary for MLS to occasionally (though I know that if the potential exodus being talked about happening this winter occurs it is no longer occasional) deal players away to top Euro leagues so that MLS has a measuring stick to see where it stands with regard to player quality. From what we've seen, average MLS players like Nick Garcia, are probably on par with players on an average 2nd-level Euro squad like Norway's league. Same with Clint Dempsey...deemed a "good footballer" by Feyenoord but not worth the asking price. Since MLS teams basically never play Euro teams in earnest in meaningful competitions, it is difficult to convince ourselves or Europeans that MLS is on par with leagues like the Portugal's, Switzerland's, Sweden's, Norway's, Greece's or even Mexico, though there have been some cases of MLS teams playing Mexican teams with mixed results (LA Galaxy and DC United doing well in the past, but lately MLS has come up short). As an MLS fan I guess I'd just like to know how good is the soccer I'm watching on TV every week? Knowing that McBride was a superstar in MLS and a benchwarmer in the EPL is disheartening, but then Bocanegra succeeded so that made me feel better about MLS. The more MLSers who go to Europe the more accurate and well rounded the measuring stick becomes and, frankly, if MLS proves to be quite a breeding ground for players that can make it in Europe I am much, much more likely to watch. I think many others, particularly Euro-snobs (of which I am NOT), would only watch MLS (and believe me, we need more people watching) if they were convinced that what they were watching on the field was not just a bunch of yank amateurs running around in a crap league (because that is what they think, those fvcking snobs).
Anybody hear anything from Ferguson about what he thinks of EJ's abilities? I'd really like to know if he thinks he's: A) awesome...we want him but can't get him because of the work permit problem B) good, maybe a benchwarmer or reserve, and we can't get him anyway C) let PSV look at him because we don't want him, he's not ready D) we don't want him, ever.
Then we disagree. MLS keeping its star talent is another thread altogether, but I know of no uninitiated fan (and in the largest untapped market for soccer in the world, that's who MLS should be after, not Eurosnobs who wouldn't go to a game for free) who says they would be more inclined to watch if it meant seeing the players they see on the field someday play in Europe. These arguments only take place among the most ardent soccer fans, of which there are not many in America.
OK that is a good point...if we are after the uninitiated fans (i.e. stealing them away from football, basketball, or just general sports fans etc.) then sure, the actual quality of the players in the league probably doesn't matter that much. The question is, are we more likely to pick up the hispanic and euro populations' interest in MLS or the non-soccer fan altogether? I think it will be very tough, at least in the short run, to convince people to watch soccer. Hell, they've been trying to do it at least since j'94 and certainly since MLS started, and it just isn't so easy. But the US has lots and lots of people, and even if you remove all the people who don't know anything about or care about soccer, there are still millions who do like soccer in the US. Only a small fraction of them actually watch it. Of that fraction, an even smaller fraction regularly watch MLS, as many watch EPL, Mexican league etc. I guess I'm saying that if we start with convincing the people who already watch soccer, just not MLS, that MLS is worth their while (which would depend on the quality of players) then we could immediately pick up the number of people who watch MLS. It is arguably easier to convince the huge hispanic-american poplulation to watch MLS than it is to convince football or basketball fans to watch. So I guess that is my point.