Countess for Garlick????

Say it isn't so!!!

Countess is going to be 10 times the keeper that Garlick ever was. What was the point of the seasoning run of 2002 if we are not going to hang on to him?

 

Was it public knowledge that Salyer and Thompson were training with Werder Bremen and I just missed it?

Back to the rumored deal at hand. Straight up, I don't get a warm fuzzy about Garlick for DJ. But, if this is the beginning of bringing in an upgrade somewhere else, I'm willing to wait and learn. Although I highly rate Alvarez, and would love to see him in red and black one day, I would hope for maybe someone more established as an MLS starter.

 

I'm glad that MLSnet.com is finally getting around to this. It's only been two weeks.

The point is this: Garlick will pressure Countess for the #1 spot. Countess needs someone to push him to get better, plus Garlick will be a good player to help develop the kid. The other part of this is that Countess will be gone for the Olympics and a suitable backup is needed. Nothing is lost by having Garlick move into his position when he's gone.

 

Yeah, the Quakes need a goalie and would like to get rid of their young, up-and-coming left mid who is in line to replace Manny Lagos.

 

It makes sense that CO is shopping Garlick around. But doesn't Garlick want to be a starter?

I don't know why San Jose would want another GK. Conway will be back.

 

It's not because of Conway that San Jose won't be trading for a goalie. Josh Saunders, who played quite well on loan with the Portland Timbers this year, looks to be Onstad's heir apparent.

edit: if we trade Countess, this entire season was even more of a waste. I can't imagine that we would go to all the effort of breaking in a keeper, only to let him go and excel somewhere else. The organization might be well served to look at Adin Brown's career history before making such a move.

 

Maybe Clarke just doesn't like Countess?

God Garlick sucks. This would be awful unless we are just bringing him in to cover for DJ during the Under-23 tourney.

 

Never underestimate the power of "The Pants".

 

Re: Re: Countess for Garlick????

Public? hum... not a secret really.

They are already back, which is when I found out about it.

 

Read it again.

If Garlick comes here, then DJ will be moving on.

 

If they are bringing in Garlick to push and compete with Countess, I think this is a good move. No 22-year old should be unchallenged for his starting spot and Garlick would push DJ every day to keep his starting spot.

Also, with the Olympics next year, DJ is going to miss a good chunk of the season so having a proven veteran as his backup makes sense.

But, giving up DJ just doesn't make sense. Aside from the fact that he has a much higher upside than Garlick - some would argue they're already equal, at least - why did the team take their lumps with the youngest GK in the league only to dumb him once he gets some experience? What was the point of that?

Countess is going to be VERY GOOD. He's already good and he improves constantly. Giving up on him will be something the club will regret later.

 

Garlick for DJ, straight up, is the rumor. I think this would be a poor trade. Garlick is not a bad 'keeper, but he is as good as he is going to get. DJ, on the other hand, will get better and better. Further, note that you can build a team around a goal socrer and a goal stopper. For me, those two were always DJ and EJ. Add decent role players, and ride those horses to cups. Unless the team knows of a better 'keeper than DJ coming up (or over), I think this is a bad idea.

If this is part of a trade with more players involved, it would have to be more that Frazier. To give up DJ, I would want Pablo. Of course, Colorado would not make that trade, and that is fine with me, and should be with the rest of you as well.

I have this funny feeling that I will be dead by Sunday.

 

That may be your rumor but the article linked to above says Galick for pick (s). Then DJ will be packaged with something else to a different team.

 

I've only heard the first part of this and that was weeks ago. The question would be where the heck does he go? Columbus? KC? Chicago? There aren't that many teams that need a new GK (barring injury, retirement, or transfer), and I doubt he would want to be a #2 at another club. Picking up Garlick makes sense if you want a solid #2 that will continually push for a starting job. Colorado doesn't want that trouble again (Joe Bazooka and Scott Salt), but I don't see Dallas having that sort of ego problem.

 

Let's give people the benifit of the doubt. If the Burn are looking to package off DJ, then it best be for someone better than DJ, or for someone with some big time upside to their game that could develop in the short term future better than DJ. I think that all on this board agree that within a year, any trade for DJ should be expected to be an improvement. That is a minimum expectation. DJ and Brad are some of the few commodities that we have left in our future cupboard.

This is my concern. 3rdD states that DJ for Garlick is a trade not a DJ supplement. Now, if this is Elliot or Colin's idea of a good trade? Oh my!

If this indeed is the way they are thinking, how much time until the rest of you feel it is appropriate to join me with the warning flares? When the time comes, I am not one into gloating. I will reserve a nice comfortable chair for the rest of you to join me.

 

I have heard several rumors about DJ, some from people who have been right most of the time. From my stadpoint, none of them look good for the Burn. DJ let in some soft goals and made terrible mistakes, mistakes Garlick would not have. Garlick is at his peak, a steady 'keeper. DJ has the potential to be spectacular, and it would be foolish to trade him right now.

The worst case with DJ is he is as good as Garlick. Solid, steady, will often keep the team in a game. Best case is the second coming of Southill.

 

If this is another deal just for the sake of dealing where we pick up another team's trash in exchange for our best young prospects, then we're not going anywhere for a long, long time.

Sure Countess was inconsistent and made his share of mistakes, but he also single-handedly earned us points on more than one occasion. How many players on this roster can say that?

If trading DJ nets us a solid central midfielder, maybe it's worth it, but if all we wind up with is Garlick and Fraser, the end is near for this franchise.

 

I am also not onboard with this trade. DJ will be a great keeper. This coming year he will be very good. In two or three years he will be the best keeper in the league and will probably move on to Europe. He has extrordinary reflexes and just needs more experience to excel. He started full time a year earlier than Howard but has upside comparable. Please Elliot upgrade the team in a different way. Don't be rash like the Rangers and Stars, don't be a Tom Hicks wanabee.

 

this is devestating to read, I mean this will be the upmost idiotic move we've made so far. DJ will be an amazing keeper, we got glimses of it this season. Sure he had his questionable times but what young keeper doesn't?


All I ever remember of Garlick is us raping him evertime he comes to town.

 

I think you've got to say that, on the whole, DJ lost us a good deal of points this year (more than he earned). However, that's half the reason that I don't want to give him up. We suffered through his inconsistent first season, now it's time for us to be rewarded with a steadily improving, potentially world-class goalkeeper.

The only possible reason that I would understand this deal is if 1. we are giving up less than a first round pick and 2. we only plan on starting Garlick while DJ is at the Olympics. Otherwise, this is just a ridiculous waste of salary cap space and endangerment to DJ's development. I can't possibly understand why we would be abandoning DJ; can the coach and GM possibly be thinking 'win now'? After last season, I think pretty much everybody will be very satisfied if we are simply average and we look like we're building the team the right way. Which is with the increasingly talented American youth (and cheap foreign imports), not with a terminally mediocre, middle-aged goalkeeper.

 

Wo, wo, wo... Slow down there.
I said no such thing.

I said READ THE ARTICLE.

It says Garlick to Dallas for a pick (or picks).

THEN it says if the happens, look for DJ to go SOMEWHERE ELSE in a package.

So MARK CONNLEY of MLSnet.com says those things. NOT ME.

I did not say CRAP about Garlikc or DJ or any kind of trade.

I do like Galick, but I also like DJ. I would be happy to see Garlick here, but WITH DJ. Let them fight it out. I would wnat to see both.

 

After re-reading the article, I've come to the conclusion that Mark Connely has no idea what he's talking about. We may very well get Garlick (as super informant [ish] jason keeps hinting), but DJ isn't going anywhere. Thats pure speculative BS.