See MLSnet at www.mlsnet.com/content/03/ne0128jmm.html and www.revolutionsoccer.net/news/press_releases/fullStory_240.asp
JMM is a Rev again. http://www.mlsnet.com/content/03/ne0128jmm.html But how? Allocation, Waivers, Gift Certificate, Returning to Old Club Clause, New MLS Rule of the Week? Glad to see him back, though as now on paper United and the Rev's look like the Beasts of the East.
Verrrry Interesting quote from Steve Nicols "Pairing him atop with Taylor or Wolde will give us one of the most dangerous front lines in the league." Serna: Babbbbb-bye!!!!!!
Only through 2003... Another interesting tidbit - his contract "will tie him to the 2002 Eastern Conference Champions though the 2003 season". If Oklahoma gets an expansion franchise for 2004, you can bet that Tulsa-native JMM will be their first marquee allocation.
only a one year deal?....i thought we were led to believe 2 years + before. i'm not sure i like this one and done. if we have to dump serna....t & t gets a transfer somewhere.....jmm's on a one and done....wilt thinks nowak is retiring after '03....no real other youngin' to step in next year from the draft....what the heck happens to our attack in '04? what did the revs REALLY have to (or will have to) give up for this one year deal?
When did we get this?? We certainly didn't have it as of Gazidis letter on MLSnet before the draft. I'm betting on it being either a "discovery" or one of either "Returning to Old Club Clause" or "New MLS Rule of the Week?" Also while I am glad to have him for this season Rev-eler brings up a good question about '04. If JMM is really on a one & done and Nowak retires at the end of this year, and T&T lights it up again this year and presses to leave we could be in trouble for '04. There are a lot of IF's there but it is something to wonder about.
JMM said he'd like to play three more seasons. From both standpoints, a one-year deal is the way to go. Besides, he's probably raking it in hand over fist with his business venture - www.rxofcanada.net. And, for what it's worth [Please, No Henny Pennys], Nowak and Reis are not present - but are accounted for - at The Razor. Serna's not here either. Nowak and Reis were given special dispensations by Nicol.
How did we do it? My understanding was/is that if teams with allocations pass on a player, then placement reverts to order of finish. I still don't know if (officially) that would put us 5th/6th (tied on total pts w/Cbus) or 9th (based on playoff seeding and Conf championship), but it's clear that if all was on the up-and-up some teams had to pass on JMM--and probably would, due to cap concerns and the player's stated desire to play for NE. MLS clearly doesn't like to force players to go places they don't want to go--remember the mess with Caligiuri back in the very beginning?
Re: How did we do it? I'm 99% sure that this is what happened. Based on our being 9th in the draft order I'm guessing we would be 9th in this order as well. That means the Metros passed on taking JMM for next to nothing; Since he is a free transfer they could use their allocation to offset $100K of salary from this years cap, then they passed a second time at full price along with every other team but LA. I just find it hard to believe that all things being equal all of those things would fall into place. My guess is that MLS said JMM wants to go to the Revs so that's what's going to happen, and then they made sure it happened. I am kinda surpirsed they didn't make us trade for Metros allocation to accomplish it though.
Guys, it's right in the middle of the league's release: http://www.mlsnet.com/content/03/ne0128jmm.htm "In order for Moore to fall to the Revs, the teams holding allocations passed, meaning that the "reverse-order-of-finish" process described by MLS Deputy Commissioner Ivan Gazidis prior to the Earnie Stewart signing was instituted. With New England holding the ninth slot, it can be inferred that the eight teams besides New England and Los Angeles passed on Moore, either because of salary budget constraints or competitive chemistry reasons within their squad." Just FYI, The Magpie
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=256179&cc=5901 Wonder what Moore thinks of McBride at Everton? Anyway, it's always great to see a NAT player happy to be in MLS.
A lot of people are going to run around and claim league shenanigans, but I honestly could see all eight teams ahead of the Revs passing on Moore. They either don't need him or they can't afford him. For example, Dallas has precisely zero need for another forward right now. And when you factor in how much Joe-Max will be pulling down...
I dunno.. The way MLSNet is describing it is more like a "see, we did follow the process but no one but the Revs wanted him" type of thing, which immediately makes me think something was up . I am happy about this though, I'm a JMM fan and I think he got shafted on the US National Team because he played at Everton. If he were in MLS with the same '98 output, I know he'd be starting. That was his choice and now I think everyone knows you need to play in MLS if you want to be on the USMNT. Sure the Reynas are still out there but that's the exception. Oh and if you're a GK you can play elsewhere too. LOL. Anyway, I think I'm definitely going to be watching Revs games again this year just to see more somersaults.
Re: I dunno.. I think with a "marquis" player who makes it known where he's willing to play, it doesn't make a lot of sense for any other team to select him - it's really just asking for a headache. Suppose, for instance, Columbus selected him. They could prevent him from playing anywhere else, but they really couldn't force him to play for them. And, in the process, they'd piss off the Revs, Moore, Moore's agent, MLS and probably most other teams that would expect the same courtesy in similiar situations. You really think he should have been starting for the USNT??? I think his main problem with the USNT was that he WASN'T playing at Everton (after his first handful of games).
I think with a "marquis" player who makes it known where he's willing to play, it doesn't make a lot of sense for any other team to select him - it's really just asking for a headache. Exactly. The Magpie
Re: Re: I dunno.. Agreed. Now I don't mean to pick on rkupp, but this use of what MLS calls a star player is almost as maddening as the "Steve Nichols" references. The term is "marquee," as in that big sign made up of lights at a movie theatre. A star is a "marquee" name, one worthy of putting up there on a sign, and in theory, that would be enough to bring the crowds flocking in. "Marquis" usually means some guy with a whip and a leather mask, and strange harness-like devices. Not that I really know a lot about that sort of thing... Tom
Re: I dunno.. When you factor in that the "explanatory paragraph" was only added after a thread here on Bigsoccer mocked the move...Yeah, you all can "infer" that they all "passed"--wink, wink.
MLS had the choice of giving Moore two types of contracts, a league max one (where he wouldnt play for the revs) or one less then the league max (where he does play for the revs). Since no team could fit him if he had the league max salary, they gave him the lesser salary and put him on the revs. Its that simple people.
Re: Re: Re: I dunno.. I thought that marquis was simply some type of French nobleman, and the leather and whips didn't come into play until "de Sade" followed "marquis". Then again, your explanation makes "team designated 'Marquis' player" a much more interesting topic for us bigsoccer posters...