Gibbs Revisited...

You catch so much flak from the Euro snobs whenever you bring this subject up ("Gibbs would NEVER come to a lowly hole like MLS when he's used to the magnificent Bundesliga blah, blah, blah") that I have hesitated to bring him up.

However, since hang has taken the proverbial bull by the horns here, and boldly gone where the rest of us feared to tread, then let me add some comments before the aforementioned Germanophiles show up to tell us how dumb we are:

Gibbs' team, which was in the 1 Bundesliga when he arrived, has traveled down through the 2 nd and is currently struggling in the lowly Regionalliga. (Don't bother telling me I misspelled it - I don't care)

He got an offer from a team in the 2nd, Regensberg, for the princely transfer fee of $110,000, and actually reported, got a physical and a uniform and was all set to go when he suddenly told them "No thanks" and left.

The reason is that he was sudenly getting feelers from the LAST PLACE team in 1 Bundesliga, who have no money but need to come up with a cheap player or two in the desperate hope of avoiding relegation.

This offer is currently pending.

Now I'm no expert here, but any idiot can see that it's just not going real well for Cory at the moment. #rd Division clubs are trying to peddle him to 2nd division clubs for a sack of sand while he hopes for an offer from another bottom feeder who'll be coming down in a couple months.

All the while, he's desperate to get Arena's attention and get his ass on the USMNT for 2006. Which he ain't gonna do playing for some ham and egg side in the German hinterland.

In short, it would appear that Mssr. Gibbs NEEDS to come home.

 

He'll surely require a major allocation, won't he? As a US Pool Player who has a transfer cost?

If he came back, I could still see this as a mud-wrestle between Dallas and Columbus for him. My personal opinion is that Columbus' allocation should be worth more, but I could see where the league would want to placate the Dallas fans for missing out on Marshall.

Even if Columbus was put at the head of the line, I'm curious whether or not Crew fans would want him. Given the additions of four new backs, would you be willing to bring in a $150,000-200,000/year defender?

 

He had better. Didn't MLS tell us last season that Gibbs wasn't available as a discovery player?

 

yes they did.

plain and simple, if anyone wants gibbs they better be using an allocation...

 

1) I can't see him costing that much. $100 - 125m tops IMO. It's decent money, and frankly at the moment he needs MLS more than MLS needs him. You sure can't pay him more than Hejduk, for example, who has rpoven he can play. What has Gibbs proven, other than every team he's on sucks?

2) In any case, he likely would see MLS as a stepping stone, a temporary exile until he shines at the 2006 WC and commands serious dollars from overseas. At this point in his young career, if he's smart, he'll know that the right situation is worth a lot more than the absolute last dollar. (See: Kirovski, Jovan)

3) It's true that we've added some new backs, but we still haven't got anybody on the left. If the season started tomorrow, you'd have to say that Eric Denton is still #1 in that spot. Wingert maybe, or possibly Hejduk and slide Marshall wide right but that puts everybody out of what seems to be their natural position. The flip side, Gibbs, lets you dump Clark and his salary, and maybe Denton too.

 

I know the Crew have done some work in the past trying to get Gibbs but remember because of the Adu deal Dallas didn't get Marshall. They did get an allocation for the trade so it seems pretty fair that if they want Gibbs they should have first shot. I understand Crew fans may be hacked (a feeling HSG team fans are accustomed too) so may to even things out a Gibbs - Marshall swap if they feel that they would rather have Cory and that would place both players where they would have gone without league wrangling.

 

That is possibly the single most convoluted piece of logic I've read here since the last time I made the mistake of reading a "superdave" post.

1) Dallas didn't get ADU because of the trade, not Marshall.

2) Dallas was compensated with a major allocation in return for Adu (not Marshall). Why it is therefore "fair" that Dallas get Gibbs or any other particular player escapes me.

3) MLS blocked Columbus from signing Gibbs a couple months ago. If MLS decides that Gibbs is coming to MLS now, what would be "fair" is for the team that was told they couldn't have him in August have the first shot.

4) "Without league wrangling" Gibbs would have been with Columbus last Fall. "Without league wrangling" Adu would be in Dallas. How sending Marshall to Dallas makes all league wrangling moot is beyond me.

 

If we didn't get Gibbs I'm not bothered. I'm more concerned with a ball winning midfielder (IE a replacement for Mais/someone to compliment Martino)

I have only seen Gibbs on a few occaisons so I can't really say how good he is.

 

If the league goes by their past examples governing the worth of allocations, one of two things could happen (neither of which is too good for the Crew).

The last time the league "ranked" allocation worth, the top two allocations were the "You Suck" allocations. Based on that precedent, Dallas' allocation would be the top one.

However

When that situation took place, there were no "old" allocations. When Donovan came to the league, SJ got him because they had the oldest allocation. I'm not sure which allocation is currently the oldest, but it is one of these three:

NE for Danny Hernandez sale
NE for Nowak retirement
Metro for Howard sale

So IF Gibbs is signed by the league, it looks like four teams will be in the running.

 

This doesn't make any sense at all. However, this is MLS we're talking about.

IMO, Gibbs would have to be an allocation, since MLS told the Crew they couldn't use a discovery on him.

So, then the team that can afford his price and submits their allocation application first should get the guy.

What Pegasus and Jacen McCullough are saying is just rediculous. It would be the equivalent of this:

Team A signs Gibbs w/ their allocation, he starts training with them, and people see he's awesome (bare w/ me). Word gets out and Teams B, C, and D all say "Gee, we should have gotten Gibbs". Well Team B & D have older allocations than Team A, and Team C recently got robbed of their #1 draft choice, but were given an allocation instead. Naturally, in litigation happy America, Team C feels they deserve to have their every whim satisfied as equal compensation. So Team A must now give their player back to the league for Teams B, C, and D to fight over.

Why don't we make all allocations retro-active like this? It's stupid, its a sham, its MLS... oh fcuk it, I don't care.

Honestly, I'm not sold that Gibbs would be a great find. Then again, I'm not convinced that Greg going to England and Bob to Poland is going to find us anything better.

I'm praying the unlikely trend of decent moves continues and we luck out w/ our allocations.

 

With all the new backs, I'm more in the mood for an impact SI (read: striker/winger) with one allocation, and probably another mid with the other. Use a discovery for a backup a-mid. Elliot better be the ballwinner since we gave up a #1 for him. Plus, how many freaking D-mids can one team have? (Elliot, Mais, Matteo, Oughton)

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Gibbs on the team, but I think we've done a decent job addressing our needs in the back. Hejduk-Marshall-Akwari-Wingert looks fine to me in 1.5 years or so. Or sooner.

I've never seen Gibbs play outside before, was I out to lunch? Does he play there for St. Pauli or inside?

 

Right now Gibbs would be a waste of one of our allocations. At the end of the season I said go out and get Gibbs with the YS allocation that the league said we had to have to get him OR get Marshall in the draft. The Crew got Marshall and along with Akwari and the veterans they have(though I'm not happy with Fraser) the Crew are fine at CB.

However, something happened in the draft that I don't think anybody thought possible. The Crew got Wingert in the 2nd round. Write it down, take a picture, I don't give a fook, Wingert is ready to start right now at LB. Bill our LB "problem" as you've said it IS solved. Denton is at least a capable backup and Gibbs would be a waste at LB anyway.

Plus as JM has pointed out the Crew have a snowballs chance in hell to get Gibbs right now anyway. Is it fair? I don't know. It was definatly stupid of MLS, who if Gibbs doesn't come to MLS afterall, missed out on a potential Nat.

However, if he does come and Dallas gets him using an allocation. I wouldn't be all that upset. MLS said a team needed an allocation to get him, the Crew didn't have one at the time, when the Crew did get one it's behind Dallas' YS and therefore have first crack. I like it when MLS follows the rules they set. At least then fans have some barometer. It's when they do crap like the Adu trade that I worry about MLS.

 

1) Dallas wouldn't have gotten Adu because Adu was only going to DC. The league legitamized it by giving DC the #1 pick and Dallas an allocation. Dallas would have taken Marshall, as Adu wouldn't have signed with the League if he knew he would go to any other team than DC.

2) It's a MAJOR PLAYER ALLOCATION. That holds more weight than any allocation that Columbus currently holds. Until you get one for McBride, you have nothing that can compete with that.

3) You tried to sign him as a Discovery Player. If you can't see the idiocy in that, then don't bother bringing it up.

4) No, because Gibbs wouldn't have played for the $75,000 max Columbus would have offered him. No, because Adu was only going to DC and never would have signed with the League if there was even a remote chance of him going to any other club. He wanted to stay close to home and the League found a way to do that, similar to what they have done in the past. If Adu didn't sign with MLS, Dallas would still have held the #1 pick (and #4 and #6) and would have taken Marshall. Dallas got screwed out of that first pick and Columbus benefitted. That's the short story.


Now, about Gibbs: He wants to stay in Europe. He has shown a desire to play in the German leagues and compete against better players and teams. He progresses as a player by playing against those teams and wouldn't get the same experience by playing in MLS. His odds of playing in the US are pretty slim and don't improve now that there is a new deadline for transfers (March 1st). Don't expect to see him playing stateside anytime this season.

 

Thanks Actually, I knew it was convoluted and that was the point. The league does convoluted things and when they do someone gets screwed. If LA, NY or DC had wanted Gibbs and made the same claim Columbus did, they would have him. My point was that Dallas wouldn't have needed Gibbs had the Adu convoluted deal not happened. We would have taken Marshall leaving the Crew still going after Gibbs. Dallas got a major player allocation (that is supposed to be behind the "you suck" allocations). The only way they can use both (since they already have two senior int's) is to grab a USian with one. They need a defender hence needing Gibbs. Good ol' MLS intrigue.

 

But who says MLS will follow the rules. Based on a scenario where Columbus, Dallas, NE and NY can go after a player, a secret lottery will be held, as always, in the men's room of MLS HQ. Three of the four clubs have a typo on their invitation and the fourth club ends up "winning" another one of these "lotteries".

But like you said, with Wingert and Marshall in the fold, and the acquisition of Lagos and Elliott, our defense should be much improved and we should be going after a-mids and strikers.

 

Well not if the rules, as stated last year by Grazidis, are upheld. The rule states:

Based on that the order this year would be, by my understanding:

DAL(YS)
CLB(YS)
CLB(McBride)
DAL(From DC--Etch)
Metros(Howard)
Metros(Mathis)
NE(From CHI--Nowak)
CHI(Boca)

Now I think JM suggested that NE got an allocation for Hernandez but the press release didn't say NE recieved an allocation and usually they do if an allocation is awarded(Hernandez Transferred to Necaxa) Also Someone else said LA might get one for Cienfaugos retiring, it would be understandable to anyone who saw LA with Cien playing limited minutes last year, although I can't find anywhere that LA did get one.

 

I've looked around for even one article that has an allocation going to NE for Hernandez, but I haven't found one. If someone has one post it.

 

Honestly, it seems shadey at best to give teams an allocation when a player signs for another team when they are out of contract. It's not like w/ McBride where they'll get transfer money from England, which can then be applied towards the allocation. With Boca and Mathis allocations, the league is just losing money. The same could be said for retiring players.

I figure the whole allocation BS will disapear once free agency is allowed into the league and clubs are allowed to sign whomever they want and can afford.

 

The players who leave on free transfers but still merit allocations are the kind who used to be called "marquee" players. It's only the big stars, who are leaving because not even MLS maximum will be nearly enough to keep them, who seem to be replaced with allocations.

I hear you about the economics of it. But Bocanegra and Mathis are the kind of star players who people pay money to see. Every team in the league has a player or two or three like this. To tell teams that they'll have to do without any marquee attractions as a result of the league's unwillingness to pay more than $280k for a guy's salary is bad business. That's why a bit of extra money comes in to try to help replace the big stars, even if they don't get a transfer fee.

Daniel Hernandez is a weird case, though. The Revs didn't want him, but when he went looking for a new team, Necaxa was willing to pay a small transfer fee for him. On his own, there's no way he was worth an allocation, but the $75k or so that the league got from his sale means that New England had a case for some sort of compensation. But don't expect it to be worth much-- probably the most minor of what used to be called "minor allocations."

 

A few things here.

First, Metro - Howard. They used that allocation to get Walker.

Second, as far as Gibbs - I think it comes down to this - the YS allocations would probably be ordered by the finish last season, where Dallas certainly would come in first/last. Add to that the Adu situation (which I would characterize as a Super Allocation - because come on, how often does the Future of the Game come into the league?), and Dallas should have first dibs no matter how you slice it. On top of all that, you have the simple fact that Dallas has never had a true US national team players. Chad Deering? Are you kidding me? I would think it is about time that we had someone who had a legitimate shot at wearing the national colors on a regular basis. (Trust me, boys and girls, you don't want to mess with me on this one.)

And it isn't going to take some huge transfer fee to get him, or even salary, although if the league said you have to use an allocation to get him, then that should be what is used.

 

New York did not use an allocation for Walker. Howard played after the date that the rosters were to be frozen then was transferred to Man U. His salary was removed from the Metros, even though the deadline passed and the league signed Walker. San Jose had tried to sign to sign Walker in pre season but HQ said no, so they went out and signed Onstad. In a show of friendship the Quakes traded a dicovery pick to the Metros even though this is against league rules.
MLS needed a way to get Walker to the Metros so they held a lottery. Somehow the Metros won this, the second lottery of the year they won (DiGiamarino being the first) but the story was called BS fast. The league then used the returning national player rule which sent Walker to the Metros in July or August. A few months later Walker earned his first cap with the MNT against Denmark, which makes you wonder who is considered a national team player in the eyes of MLS. Metros received an allocation for Howard and now one for Mathis.

Also, the league received a small transfer for Torres when he returned to Saprissa but I understand why an allocation would not be given in that case.

Also Haig the league does pay more than 280K for players. Remember, LA had a pair of million dollar forwards in Hernandez and Jones and many others have made more. Adu will be making more and not one dime will count against DC's salary. Bad business? How about Etch having to take a 96% paycut when he returns to the free market. You think MLS was overpaying a little? Does he deserve to be allocation material given his play the past few years? It is just one more reason these hidden rules, allocations, and lotteries all seem fishy.

 

First, no. The Metros didn't use the Howard allocation to get Walker. They got Walker through one of those lotteries.

Second, them are the rules as they are stated. If Dallas, who has first crack at whatever allocation worthy player they want, passes on Cory Gibbs or any other player Dallas wants, that's Dallas' fault. Take it up with them. I'm sorry your team has been put apon, but get over it. Columbus has a list a mile lone itself. Just ask anyone of the Crew fans opinions of the Stern John transfer money, then step back and get out of the storm.

 

You may be right about Walker - it is crap, if so, but there you have it - but I warned you about this, and you didn't listen, so here goes:

Name me one true blue US International that has played for the Burn.

(pregnant pause to listen to the crickets)

Now - in 1996, the Burn had one allocation left. What happened to it? It became Brad Friedel. For what? A good player - but nothing to market the league on - and a useless pick.

Since then, all we got was Chad Deering. And you know all about getting useless allocations (Brian Maisonneuve, anyone?).

But between Brian McBride and Brad Friedel, you're two up on us.

And I know Brian was a draft pick - but at the end of the day, the reality is this: every team was promised a US International to help give their team credibility in the local community and nationally. Every team but the Burn got one.

Nine years later, is that really too much to ask?

You talk about Stern John - well, what about Leonel Alvarez? He was the heart and soul of our team in '96, and he got sold for cash.

Trust me, while I do have sympathy for the Crew (only non-Burn MLS kit I've ever bought), you won't win this contest.

And fwiw, it isn't about winning. We've won, we've had good seasons, won playoff series, won the USOC in 1997. I take pride in being there when the Burn were the first team to deny DC United any sort of hardware.

But we have always done it from behind.

And with the Earnie debacle last season, I think it is about freakin' time that we got at least ONE US International to call our own. Is that REALLY so much to ask?

Now I will say this - I don't want the rules bent too far for this. We have two allocations, and one of them should be used for the first US International coming back, and the second should be on whatever money is left. But to sit here and give Metro ANOTHER EFFIN' NATIONAL TEAM PLAYER (Walker) and then say they get first crack at ANOTHER NAT? You've got to be kidding me.

As for the Crew - if the Galaxy lost their rights to the guy (they drafted him in '02), and if the Crew put in for him and were told no, I can understand how they would be in line to get a shot at him. And if the Burn need to give some consideration for that, so be it. But for crying out loud, will we finally get to the point where what has gone around finally comes around to Dallas?

With all the crap that has gone on, is it really too much to ask to have one of "our own"?