ESPN's Canales: league organizers bungled scheduling ensures LA will not make playoffs

Back towards the beginning of the season there was talk that the Gals schedule was unfair in their favor since they'd have Beckham for more games than they should.

They're not going to make the playoffs because they're not good enough, that's it.

 

Shocking, isn't it?

MLS began the year talking about how there was going to be "Fixture Congestion" in the summer.

Everybody knew it was coming.

Is this the first dear sweet Andrea has noticed this? Too busy whining about Marcos Gonzalez not letting her see his bare ass to pick up a schedule?

Lalas is an idiot, and as a result LA stinks. It ain't the schedule, toots. It's that red-haired fool up front.

Why don't you get some courage up and write about what HIS stupid ass has done to that team? Oh, that's right, 'cause writing a piece about everything being MLS' fault doesn't get you in hot water with the guys who pass out press credentials and free food.

 

LA won't make the playoff because they have the quality of a Pub team.

 

So our national soccer media includes NY apologist Ives Galarcep, LA apologist Andrea Canales, and Bob Bradley apologist Jeff Bradley?

 

lol, but you stole apologist from me

It's my word and you cant have it.

 

Canales is stupid. LA isn't going to make the playoffs because they suck. They sucked before they got Becks and they still suck even after they got him.

Oh shit soccer isn't a one man sport? Go figure!

 

Can somebody make the argument that LA's schedule is equal to the rest of the league's? That it doesn't put them at a competitive disadvantage?

That 19 games in 10 weeks is completely rational and causes no problems whatsoever?



It seems to me that THAT is the point... that pimpin' out the G's has had a major effect on the team.

 

On GM Lalas's list of concerns, quality of play on the field seems to be well down the list below all kinds of off the field concerns - PR, putting on a show, outrageous quotes to get media attenation, attendance, sucking up to the boss, selling MLS, etc...

It's no wonder that gets reflected in the results.

 

Carlos, do you think that has any correlation to mid-season trades, especially two for ones?

You say that like no one in the Galaxy organization had any impact on the resulting line-ups.

This is exactly the point of most posters - this has been self-induced so there's a bit of a lack of sympathy.

 

And that's pure bull shit.

The desire to have Becks play in every market wasn't done out of the goodness of AEG's heart.

It was done b/c the league lives and dies by parity, "fairness" and single entity.

What Canales is pointing out is that that "fairness" is biting the Galaxy more than any other team b/c it's simply too many games in too short of a span.

NOBODY ELSE is even close to that. Not Houston. Not even Dallas (14 games in 10 weeks to start) in the early season.

This goes beyond what LA and Chicago had to go through when opening their stadia. The wear and tear on the body is quite different.

Then how on earth did they make it to the Superliga final?

By the way, during those Superliga games is when we've had our lineups that most resemble the true starting XI.

NOT a coincidence.

The schedule is NOT self-induced. That's league-induced.

And I'd say that even w/o any trades, the Galaxy would be dipping extremely low into its developmental roster in order to field a team. That was my point.

 

I am sure Landon Donovan is ecstatic that he skipped Copa America for that.

 

Completely incorrect, according to Don Garber.

I watched him in a live interview (FSC pre-match show? espn Thurs.-night game? don't recall....surely someone else saw this and can identify the specifics...), where he was asked whether or not the Galaxy had been placed at a disadvantage b/c of all the later games.

He responded that LA had come to the league and requested the back-weighted schedule! He went on to point out that there would likely be some "lessons learned" that could be applied to future scheduling.

But he specifically stated that LA wanted to have a back-weighted schedule.

And this wasn't in the last couple of weeks, where it has become obvious that Beckham's hurting. This was around the time Beckham was introduced...maybe around the All-Star game? Just sayin....

So either Don Garber is lying, or the focus of the Canales article is completely off base.

 

I think she's hot.

 

I don't see United bitching about the 19 games they're playing over a 10 week period (July 22-October 5th). 10 games into this stretch and United is 6-3-1 in all competitions.

 

That would be a smart decision, if you care about on-field results. Unfortunately, that's not how AEG/the Galaxy management does things.

 

The won three games, so what, even RSL has a couple points.


LA was near the bottom of the table before the back-ended schedule came into effect, why is that?

 

I pity you.

 

In fairness to Lalas, if you are trying to win games, why wouldn't you want to have more games scheduled after the arrival of your franchise player?

Back loading the schedule is one thing, but I doubt AEG asked to play at each stadium and extra travel it required just so each team got a big crowd. That sound's like the league to me.

 

If true, I stand corrected.

Rep owed.