Fire Anselmi!

The sad thing is that this team HAD a plan. Then they gave up on it and went back to the standard MLSE plan: the revolving door. Keep changing the coach and the players and hope for the best. The plan hasn't worked in any of their teams in the past 40 years, but that doesn't stop them from doing it again and again.

 

Name me one thing in Aron Winter's resume that makes him an appropriate choice to run an entire professional soccer organization ANYWHERE(!) let alone one in North America. Even if you now consider him as having MLS experience actually promoting him to club president, or even keeping him as Technical Director, would be exactly like allowing Mo to avoid responsibility for results after 2007.

Are we actually trying to repeat the same mistakes TFC made in the past?

 

And what was "the plan" exactly? In my view it can be summed up in about six words: "Get better players; play better football." That's it. When you boil it right down that's what the Klinsmann consultation amounted to: a monumentally self evident truism that could be sold to fans during a turbulent renewal period in a lot of fancy marketing dress about 4-3-3, academy development (that had already started), and all fronted by a reasonably famous foreign player with little coaching pedigree and NO direct experience of MLS. Other than than all we were gonna do was exactly what every club everywhere is always trying to do.

Were there nuances? Of course. Sadly, they only made the whole thing less likely to be successful. And that was pretty obvious to anyone who'd seen what happened to Chivas USA in 2005 or LA under Ruud Gullit. Was it guaranteed to fail? No, of course not, nothing is. But it certainly upped the risk/reward ante.

You want a plan? How's this:

1) Hire a coach with a reasonably large body of MLS experience inside a winning organization (either as a player or coach) AND a good reputation around the league. (ie. NOT Mo!)

2) Let that coach adapt his tactics and formation and player selection to what is available and organically come up with solutions in the complex, evolving environment TFC operates in WITHOUT setting a priori expectations about style of play.

3) After a reasonable amount of time, starting about 1 year in, regularly evaluate his job performance. That's where having an actual football man as club president would help significantly.

Complicated? No. Sexy? No. More likely to be successful? Yes, in my opinion, absolutely. It's what works just about everywhere else in the league historically. It's what's working in Montreal right now. Like any strategy employed by enough actors there are failures too: Spencer in Portland and Fraser (mostly) so far at Chivas. Maybe Heaps (or Mariner) will be next on the list. In comparison though teams that set out trying to innovate or import a "better" football culture, rather than adapting organically to the context of MLS, have been some of the biggest failures ever. Our last season and Winter's time in charge at the start of this one will just get added to that pile. It's not a new story though.

And if a guy who happens to meet my criteria from step 1 is available inside your organization when you decide to acknowledge the obvious and stop pretending that TFC is the next Barca or Ajax all the better. Give him his shot. It almost certainly won't be worse than 1-0-9 and 7 league wins from 44 games.

 

Put together, I find the bolded parts very intersting. We have seen how football works in the rest of the world (ie. where there are no salary caps, and allocation rules and roster restrictions, and designated players, and single entity league structures) ambitous owner/chairman hires bright manager with eye for talent who then goes out and assembles a squad to play the style of play that he thinks will make him (and the club) successful.

A couple of days before Winter was fired I was golfing with a guy from Holland who was working here on assignment for his employer. He asked me why I thought Winter was not doing well with TFC. I said it probably came down to just not having a clue (when he accepted the job) what was involved with MLS. I said we all know the language of new managers around the world ....."we are a big club, with huge resources and we can build something special here"..... regardless of what language it is spoken in, it comes down to "I have the backing to buy players".....it does not work that way in MLS and, at the time, I wondered just how much Winter knew about the differences.

In some respects, Winter was just Carver with a different accent. I guy that had played some, had some management experience with big clubs....but never in the #1 seat. I was never a JC fan but we should have used that general experience to ask the question "is an untested Euro guy the right choice".

The other examples you point out are similar......do you think Gullit was ever at a club (as a player or manager) that could not just buy their way to success....if he was, he moved on. Do you think the Mexican investors in Chivas thought it was going to be any more difficult than just "bring players in, win, sell tickets, make money, rinse, repeat"?

In many respects, MLS is the hardest league in the world to build/manage a squad. That is not meant to excuse MLSE/Anselmi in anyway (after all, teams do do it every year and they haven't done it at all in their 6 years).....it is just a fact.

The only quibble I have with your plan is the singling out of Mo (as opposed to the other managers)....essentially your plan is, hire a guy with MLS experience/knowledge, give him some time and then evaluate them.

3 of our managers have met your first, basic, criteria....and Mo is one of them. Mo/Preki/Mariner are the only guys we have had in management that came with any knowledge of the league.

Then you have to consider that Mo/Preki were part of the same regime (ie. Mo hired him as, likely, his last chance to stay around).

This is not meant as a defense of Mo...I just never understood what the hatred for him was. I will say that my impression (from reading various board discussions over the life of this club) is that ALL of the new managers were met with a general "this is the guy" sentiment and there was very little day one criticisms of any of them.

In the end, though, I think your "plan" has a lot of merit.....it is basically, hire MLS knowledge and stick with it for a while.

I do, however, sense that some segments of the support have drawn pretty strong "Winter/Mariner" lines in the sand and Mariner (for ticket sales reasons if nothing else) may not be the MLS experienced guy that gets that time.

 

I don't think "hardest" is the correct word to use. "Different" fits better. It's a weird hybrid of North American sports league convention (draft, trades), without intra-league free agency, a global marketplace to also deal with, and some really particular budget quirks (Generation adidas, designated player, and now homegrown player rules).

With the big emphasis on domestic players the league has always had the most useful talent a coach can have, historically, is an intimate knowledge of the North American player pool, development system, and, for lack of a better word, "style". Being strong with tactics and man management seperates the wheat from the chaff but the above seems like almost a basic necessity to be successful in the league. Only really Hans Backe has managed to buck that trend.

Definitionally, every league is equally hard to win. There can only be one winner but there must always be one winner. It just depends on your perspective. It's "easier" win a duopoly league if you're part of the duopoly but nearly impossible if you're not. MLS roster rules and budget constraints give every team some chance to win but limit the chance of any particular team to dominate. What's really hard in MLS is being really good or really bad; particularly for long periods of time.

That's why were sorta incredible. We've literally been the worst team in the league over our six cumulative years of existence and never even managed to finish in the top half once. People have a right to be frustrated and upset. I was frustrated and upset about this club being needlessly bad WAAAYYYYY back in 2008! What it points to to me though is that not only have we had bad leadership, that's indisputable, their biggest mistake has been a flawed understanding of what it takes to succeed in MLS and no way of evaluating what's happening other than by listening to the fans and media.

I single out Mo preemptively to avoid the inevitable "but Mo had MLS experience" response.

Mo had winning experience inside an MLS organization from his playing days in KC around the turn of the millennium (in a very different MLS). Before his hire though his more relevant experience was a brief stint in the New York gong show of the last decade. He did not come out of that period with a good reputation and was not really considered a candidate for any other position around the league. There were a lot of raised eyebrows when he was hired and subsequently promoted and kept on for so long.

In Mo's defence he was forced to innovate in 2007. There had never been a Canadian MLS team before and the roster rules of the time basically forced him to create a new time of MLS squad. I don't think he handled the job particularly well but that had more to do with how he reacted when his initial plan backfired.

For me it was always the roster instability. By the start of 2008, when we started the season completely unprepared and thinner than the end of 2007, I'd had enough. I wanted him gone then and thought it would have been appropriate after the inaugural V-Cup failure and long summer home winless streak. To me, everything after that was a slow unfolding and inevitable nightmare.

(And you'll notice my evaluation period gave him a full year and two off seasons. Just like I gave Winter and would prefer to give Mariner).

 

You're not gonna get an argument from me there.

John Carver was in charge for over a season. He didn't get the team anywhere near the playoffs in his one full season (but they improved from a weak expansion season before people saw what Seattle did so it was considered good enough) and only won one out of four games against USL opposition on his way to losing the inaugural Canadian Championship. He alienated decent MLS (but hard to work with) performers like Jeff Cunningham and Carlos Ruiz (not that I wanted him on TFC) and made bizarre selection decisions like dropping Danny Dichio and starting a rookie Brian Edwards ahead of Greg Sutton in our season opener.

But he came from a big club, played to the mob, insulted the league we play in, and knows Alan Shearer so he still walks on water and is remembered wistfully in some quarters. Right now, he's getting the fewest votes on the "Worst coach since Mo" poll on the RPB forum. Mariner leads with a majority and Preki is just ahead of Winter.

The implication is clear: a big part of our vocal active fan base doesn't value MLS experience and places greater emphasis on "association with more famous clubs" than actual wins.

And there's the saddest, most tragic irony of all.

Many of the VERY SAME PEOPLE who accuse Mariner of being a short term hire designed to sell season tickets this fall are threatening to not renew their tickets if he's still in charge. And not making any sort of connection in their head.

By moving Winter out by late spring 2012, after the season was a write off, TFC have given Mariner a good chance to build his squad and be prepared for 2013 but already a "we've blown 2013 too" narrative is forming in the desire to purge everything, go nuclear, and start all over AGAIN. It's sad, it's frustrating, and maybe for once our senior leadership will have the guts to NOT try to appease the loudest fans and stick with a guy the rest of the league respects but you're probably right... this is TFC after all.

 

The problem I have with Mariner is that I can't bring myself to fully trust him. He's got MLS experience, yes, but how important is that if MLS is changing so quickly.
Because it is, and I'm not sure we're giving the league's evolution enough credit. MLS used to be all about ahtleticism, kick-and-run, that sort of thing. The quality is getting increasingly stronger and now there's a more balanced approach. I think this will only continue, and I can't see kick and run working in MLS in a few years like it does now. Academies across MLS are concentrating on technique and ball control, and a lot of them are experimenting with the 4-3-3 (I hope our academy at least hasnt given up on teaching the technical aspect of the game). Seattle and RSL play really attractive football, and most of the league actually isn't very far at all behind them. Even Dominic Kinnear and Houston have started playing 4-3-3 and it's worked pretty well for them (they were the hottest team in the league at one point). MLS isn't ready for total football...at least not yet. As early as a few years from now, that might not be the case. We could've been leading the league towards the future if the Winter experiement had worked, instead we might be getting left behind. Of course, no one can say for sure where the league is really going, but I'd be shocked if the best teams of MLS in 2020 were still playing kick-and-run. And everything I've seen of mariner as a coach points to kick-and-run as being his goal. All of his talk is about effort and the boys givin it their all, nothing at all regarding tactics or anything resembling objectivity. And look at how he's built the team since taking charge. Eckersley in the middle, little offense provided by the fullbacks, everyone at the back is encouraged to get the ball out ASAP (this changes a bit against low-pressure teams like Columbus mind you, but against most MLS sides, TFC seem intent on just kicking the ball away). No attacking midfielders, the two center mids (Frings and Dunfield) are both ball-winning DM's, and we play with traditional wingers. Two strikers expected to hold the ball up (our new signing hassli excels at this). Lots of action for mediocre "plumbers" (Wiedeman, Amarikwa, Maund, etc.) and little for players with technical ability (Avila, plus Soolsma is already gone). Sure looks like our direction is hoofball. Kick and run is enough to possibly make us decent for a couple of years and then lose ground as the rest of the league smartens up their play. We don't have to be a perfect technical passing machine like Winter wanted us to be (in fact, we definitely shouldnt try to do that), but we need a decent amount of skill on the ball and a willingness to keep possession to stay relevant in a league that'll almost certainly be much stronger and more balanced a few years from now.
Mariner needs to resist the temptation to go full-on hoofball and do more than just sign all Bermudans and play like Plymouth Argyle. To be fair, he probably knows that to a certain extent, but I don't know if he actually has the ability to have his team play beyond hoofball and adapt to the changing MLS. I worry that he's out of his depth in a coaching position and that he's unable to teach anything except "Give it yer all boys and get stuck in!")
I guess a lot of this depends on where you think MLS will be in a few years. Anyone who doesn't see MLS' quality of play improving too much will probably side with Mariner and anyone who thinks MLS will soon be challenging the European top leagues would most likely prefer a Winter type. Me, I think the league is steadily improving, enough so that hoofball won't be an efficient enough tactic in a few years from now, and that's why as it is, I hate what Mariner's doing and find it difficult to trust he can lead us to success. But with time he may very well prove me and his other doubters wrong. Hey, I'm glad I'm not the one making the decisions
Sorry if some of all that was unclear, I'm flippin exhausted

 

Agree completely. The inability to stick to any short of plan is one of the biggest reasons for this teams struggles. You want to fire Winter fine, why not hire another coach to continue to implement the 4-3-3? Hiring a guy that coaches a completely different style is the worst thing you could do. At least had to maintained the philosophy you wouldnt be starting from scratch.

 

Was this the "promote" Anselmi thread?

 

can anyone think of anywhere else where you can become the head of a multi-billion dollar corporation by being the most incompetent person in it?

On a side note, this may result in them appointing a competent person as his replacement at TFC. But of course the chances of that are about as high as them appointing a competent person as Peddie's replacement

 

I know it is not a very popular opinion....but a "multi-billion dollar corporation" (not sure MLSE is such a thing....it recently sold at a valuation of around 1.5B.....is that "multi" bllion, perhaps?) probably does not view a COO as incompetent when he has the various divisons in the company making them money. Sure, on-field success has been oh so limited....but a COO that can produce steadily growing revenues is hardly "the most incompetent" of people...is he?

 

If you think TFC is making more money now than any time in it's history, I'd really like to know where that money is coming from. TV viewership can't be up as the product is more unwatchable than any other time, attendance is an all time low, SSH are at an all time low and their waiting list is gone. Any one in charge of this organization could have made money with it. But I don't think there can be much doubt that if Tommy boy had done a better job running this team it would be making a lot more money right now than it is.
The valuation's I've seen of MLSE put it at 2.25 billion

 

Bell/Rogers paid $1.07B for 75% stake....that equates to a total valuation of $1.426B...call it $1.5B.

Are TFC making more money now than in the past....no one knows as no one knows how much they ever made.....overall, the league is doing much better, S.U.M. appears to be having a better time of it....my bet, the gains in non-specific TFC revenues has offset any slump (if any) in revenues that TFC themselves have seen. I think next year will be a real challenge for them.....but TAs overall responsibilities (Leafs, Marlies, Raptors, TFC) are doing very well and that, I think, would have convinced the board that not only is he not "incompetant" but that he is a pretty good candidate for the top job.

 

Not sure what to make of this move just yet. At least not until they announce a replacement. This could very well be just window dressing to get fans thinking that MLSE is actually making some changes whereas TA is just doing essentially the same job as before but with a different title. Until they announce a replacement, I'm not getting my hopes up too high.

 

Replacement? The story I read said that he is keeping the Chief Operating Officer position (the one he has had for several years) and adding, permanently, the title of President (the role he has been babysitting since RP retired). Likely there will be a bit of a shuffle, mostly as it relates to TFC as it is the only team that does not have its own "head" and he has dedicated an inordinate amount of his time (relative to the size of the business) to the club.

I could see some re-org there so that he does not have specific TFC duties but they won't be significant.

 

So, it's pretty much as I suspected. He's still doing the same job as before, only he'll now be devoting less time to the team.

 

And I think this all but confermed what we all feared. That bell/Rogers taking over won't change a single thing

 

let's see before we pass judgment. This is a great opportunity for them to hire a president for the club. A knowldegable soccer person.