Change

Discussion in 'Chicago Fire' started by Meggie, Sep 30, 2002.

  1. Jaquie

    Jaquie New Member

    Sep 30, 2000
    Chicago
    Re: Re: No Change Needed

    Your point was and is well taken. I did object to people saying we didn't DESERVE to make it. The Fire is in the playoffs due to HARD work. The team has an amazing work ethic and it shows.

    "I wouldn't trade it, of course . . ."

    Of course you wouldn't trade it! We wouldn't allow it and the off season sucks!
     
  2. pettyfog

    pettyfog Member

    Jan 30, 2000
    Enon OH Exit 49
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    I'm sure you guys have been watching Crew games... we picked up Garcia in early JULY.

    He didnt show us much either... Greg let him soak up the Crew game dynamics (whatever that is).

    Result: Dead lock starter for however long the little one stays here. One thing you have to say about Andrulis... he looks for the right time to put in a player.

    We often dont agree with him - we think he waits tooo long to sub- but he seems to be getting more on our (CrewFans) wavelength with each match.
    ;)

    BTW: Disregard my byline for today... Rather play Fire ....mainly because of HomeField.

    So, Fire... play out your arses tonight!
     
  3. Fanaddict

    Fanaddict Member+

    Mar 9, 2000
    streamwood IL USA
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Thank You for making my point. It's not like we have been winning every game and yes then you wouldn't want to make a change but when you have people on this team who have not contributed to the scoring in game after game why not replace him with someone who might.
     
  4. krolpolski

    krolpolski Member+

    First, kudos to Bob for putting together a line-up that immediately produced such intense pressure on NE. He didn't hold back Hristo for later insertion and started Gray in the midfield to ensure that NE had to cover all the Fire's offensive players. They couldn't double anybody up without getting burned.

    Next, I have been ragging on Dema the last couple seasons. If he would play every game like the last one, I would have no problem with him. He was all over the field and generally made wise decisions.

    As to Gray, he did look a little lost out there. But he's a rookie who hasn't played a whole lot and it was a do-or-die playoff game. I think he could've been overwhelmed a little. That will pass as he plays more and I think Bob will start him tonight and the others who started Sunday.
     
  5. Jaquie

    Jaquie New Member

    Sep 30, 2000
    Chicago
    BIG difference between JULY and OCTOBER - there is no time for soaking!!!

    DIPSEY should not be a starter - for all of the reasons previously stated.
     
  6. Mad Header

    Mad Header Member

    Mar 8, 2001
    Mt Prospect
    It's not often I disagree with the Fanaddict, but I think you're alone on an island on this one, John.
     
  7. Fanaddict

    Fanaddict Member+

    Mar 9, 2000
    streamwood IL USA
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm glad Dipsey didn't start because then maybe our offensive juggernaut might have scored less goals.
    Oh wait we didn't score any did we?
    I wanted to see Dipsey start while Stoitchkov was also in the game so he could feed him. Maybe we would have still lost but we couldn't have scored less goals.
     
  8. jjayg

    jjayg New Member

    May 9, 2002
    Rolling Ghettos, IL
    Your right bro, Dipsey was so incredibly effective in his 30 minutes with everybody else on the pitch already tired. He would have made the difference had he started. :rolleyes:
     
  9. Fanaddict

    Fanaddict Member+

    Mar 9, 2000
    streamwood IL USA
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Maybe he wouldn't have scored but we won't ever know will we? He couldn't have scored less than those that did start and if he started instead of kovalenko maybe New England wouldn't have scored that first goal.
     

Share This Page