I liked the idea of a big forward with CL experience coming here, it didn't work out, took far too long to get him off the team. http://twitter.com/jeff_lemieux/status/25996749665
Fascinating. Did they pay him out? Why now? What did he cost per minute played this year? What a moronic decision to sign him.
That is really not fair. I bet if I cared enough I could go back into the BigSoccer time machine and there would be posts by you saying that were excited to see what he would bring to the team. Criticism of how long the Revs kept him around is warranted but remember that hindsight in 20/20. Anyways, good riddance Jank. You were awful for the Revs.q
He made $1,633 per minute this year. There's our DP! I'm assuming he can be taken off the IR (or already had been) and so now he can be cut. I'm not sure what the point is of cutting him at this point, may as well get your $$ worth, since his contract is guaranteed.
They are trying to see if they can end this season with the most open roster spots of any MLS team ever! Might be the only thing we win for quite a while.
Stevie may need to lace them up and play sweeper at some point in the next couple of weeks... I agree with Monty...if he's healthy play him and see if there's anything left. At least let the fans get some boos in if he stunk up the place..!!
perhaps the original signing yes, but not the re-signing of him. Remember he was re-signed after we already knew he had health issues
When he was originally signed, people were happy with the signing. After the season many people here, myself included, said he should be bought back but at a lot lower rate. Instead, they brought him back at the $240k ... which to me was dumb back then, and is dumber now.
The decision to re-sign Jankauskas to a large contract was panned by more than a few posters. That's what has made the roster management so frustrating in the last few years. We weren't blindsided by the fact that Jankauskas is old and injury prone and that Twellman wasn't able to get on the field this year. Why didn't the FO see that, too?
They couldn't cut him when he was injured. Now that he is healthy, he's gone. They've already replaced him with Stolica, they need to keep playing Stolica to evaluate him for next year. No reason to keep EJ, they already know he is not in their plans for next year.
Are you rkupp? This is deja vu all over again from a week or two ago. I am 100% certain you'll be able to build an argument for inconsistency on the part of 99.99% of members. That said, from Oct 6, 2009 But hey, those smart REV FO people got the Assengue decision right (most likely Assengue made that decision for them). Just to be clear, the moronic signing was to bring him back for the 2010 season. In this instance, I don't feel guilty at all of 20/20 hindshight. And you are correct. Good riddance because he was no use to the REVS at all because he was NEVER healthy. I probably did express interest or even optimism when he was brought in mid season of 2009.
But his contract is presumably guaranteed, so there's no advantage to cut him now. Maybe he wanted out - that's fair - but if we're paying the guy, I don't see the harm in keeping him around.
Here's a question, how is the decision made to put someone on, or take someone off, the injured list? If for example, Janks wanted out (guaranteed contract notwithstanding), could the Revs have just taken him off the list and sent him on the way earlier? Or, vice-verse, let's say the Revs wanted to be rid of him before the guarantees kicked in (assuming that's how it worked), could they have declared him all better and sent him on his way?
I'm wondering the same. The Stolica reasoning kinda makes sense, but it's not like they're giving Griffiths and Linck (two guys that actually ARE young) a chance.
I would imagine that a player can request to be released for whatever reason. happens all the time in other sports. Sometimes there are conditions, other times its unconditional. I think the Revs tried to release an injured players years ago and found themselves in a sticky situation. Might have been Semedo. Then again I seem to recall Semedo getting himself in a situation by knocking up some chick and bolting the country and failing to pay child support
I think it was Semedo. IIRC the Revs wanted to cut him but he had to sign something saying he was healthy before they could do so and then he/his agent later said that he didn't understand what he was signing.... As for Jankauskas... Like others I don't get the timing. If we wanted to get rid of him before his contract was guaranteed but couldn't because of his injury then just keep him until the contract is up.... What's the point in releasing him now when you can't replace him and your on the hook for his contract anyway?
sounds about right with Semedo. As for janks,,,,I'd be willing to bet it was a mutual thing otherwise releasing someone with 2 or 3 games left in the season makes no sense. Can't see a financial value for doing it
I think it means they should have their bags packed and ready to go round about the 3rd or 4th week of October.