Welcome back, and break out your mullet wigs. http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...ar-toja-signs-mls-deal-be-assigned-allocation
Always loved Toja. Skillful player- throwback to the slower, skillful player days of 80's and (partly) 90's. New England who is #1 on the pick is great fit, but this could push Feilhaber to the bench.
Colorado has one, and a Colombian coach. Though I don't know how they could move up far enough in the order to claim him. (Still bullsh!t that a guy with 2 caps 5 years ago that nobody else in the league wanted forced us to use our allocation spot given what some other teams have gotten away with in recent years.)
maybe nobody else (in Allocation spots 1-16 currently) wants him? Damn MLS bullsh!t. What a joke it is for the league having written and publicly available rules on Allocation procedures (and which players qualify for that process) and then following those written rules and regulations. any links to support the idea that "nobody else in the league wanted" Kamani Hill? (Sure he fell to 11th team on the Allocation list at the time, but was Colorado really "forced" to take that player?) fwiw:
Maybe DCU should make a move for him. He and Pajoy could be besties. http://www.brotherlygame.com/2012/1...gned-lionard-pajoy-has-drug-test-muddied-past http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/513135/pajoy-suspended-for-six-months
And reportedly DC has (positive) experience with dealing with mullet-haired (in the 90s) and tattooed (in the 2000s) midfielders who may also have been (or certainly were) users. And I've got no problem with DC (and MLS as a whole) being a location where players/people can get second-chances.
http://www.soccerbyives.net/soccer_by_ives/2012/03/rapids-sign-former-us-forward-hill.html Here's some mroe information about the Rapids going through the lottery process (which I thought was seperate from the allocation process but now the Rapids are listed as having dropped to the back of the allocation pack because they used their allocation order on Hill), despite being the only interested team. (3rd item) http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20120402/mls-week-4/index.html?eref=sircrc (And yes, I realize its the same author for both links)
Revs have 2 available. This has to be a no brainer for them, though you could reasonably question whether Heaps is the right coach to take advantage of Toja's capabilities.
a bit confusing on the differences between a lottery and an allocation (and I wouldn't necessarily expect Ives to note and explain the differences). Nor would I take the word from some SI blogger, referenced here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/rapids-sign-kamani-hill.1923736/page-2#post-25450990 Was there ever clarification (earlier) from the league that Hill was a player acquired by Colorado via allocation (or via the lottery)? edit: http://www.burgundywave.com/2012/3/28/2909082/kamani-hill-mls-allocation-process-rapids (or course that assumes that Steven Goff might have a better understanding of MLS's roster mechanisms than either Ives Galercep or Avi Creditor. Or Goff simply might have gotten the correct/accurate report from the league source(s), or interpreted and relayed it correctly.) clearly now, MLS has Hill as an allocated player this season. would MLS have signed Hill if Colorado weren't interested in the player? did MLS "force" Colorado to acquire Hill? Or did Colorado want Hill? since they apparently wanted the player, he had to go through the Allocation process. (Don't call bs on MLS properly enforcing their own rules and regulations.) perhaps some league source wasn't clear (or misspoke and said "lottery" to Galarcep and/or Creditor) when "allocation" was the accurate reality for Hill. (Those MLS roster rules and regulations sure can be confusing, even for a dedicated league spokesperson or an established blogger of the league news.)
And yet, as referenced in the second link, the U-20 player Portland wanted didn't have to go through any process despite having National experience at the U-20 level, not even a lottery, because nobody else was interested. That's what I mean about things being murky at best, BS at worst.
Is NE, at this point in the season (or ever), the "right franchise" to take advantage of any player's capabilities?
According to McCarthy, the Revs have essentially used their allocation to secure Toja. Whether they keep or trade him is the hot topic. 239007098707521538 is not a valid tweet id
Charlie Renken went through the Waiver process. That is mechanism H of 12 listed at the II. PLAYER ACQUISITION MECHANISMS at http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/roster-rules-and-regulations potentially via this subsection listing: it is not BS if some bloggers get the story (initially) wrong, though. (or use the wrong word "lottery" instead of "allocation.") but I do agree that it is murky -- or could be murky, even for those who take the time to try to wade through all of the roster rules and regulations (which admittedly might not have been posted yet in 2012 by MLS at the time of the signings of Hill or Renken). (although I have no issue with MLS drawing a distinction for "Allocation process" purposes between the senior USMNT and the youth US teams and what classifies someone as "a U.S. National Team player who signs with MLS." are there examples of US youth players without senior team caps having to go through MLS's allocation process?) also, it might be fair to note that "no other teams wanted Hill" could also be read to imply only of those teams ahead of Colorado in the Allocation order at the time, none of those teams wanted Hill. we have no real way of knowing if the same number of teams described by a blogger as "nobody else" wanted Renken and those teams ahead of Colorado in the Allocation order at the time of Hill's signing. We do know that Renken was not subjected to the Allocation process, and we do know that Hill was. One can read up on the separate Waiver and Allocation processes at http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/roster-rules-and-regulations, and why the Renken and Hill acquisitions/distributions fall into those different categories. And we do know that Toja was as well properly classified as a player to be distributed via the allocation process. And it appears NE has claimed him.
Sammy Ochoa. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/soundersfcblog/2016026224_sounders_fc_acquires_sammy_och.html
Good info. Wonder the logic (if any) as to why Ochoa qualified for the Allocation mechanism per MLS's rules/regulations. (or why Renken went the Waiver route.) would/could the age of the player (or years of professional experience) be a determining factor, in MLS's view? or is it based on the number (or lack) of teams interested in a player? if no MLS team wanted Renken (potentially via Allocation), could Portland have then picked him up via Waivers? if multiple teams wanted Ochoa, is that why the Allocation process had to be used? not that Ochoa was discovered/signed by the league during the Dec discovery period. but I would guess that there were more teams interested in Ochoa than in Renken.
Thanks, I knew there was one last year but I was having a hard time tracking it down. Again a murky process at best...
yes. quite murky (as to when MLS uses or not the Allocation mechanism for players such as Ochoa and Renken). But for the case of this thread, for Toja the Allocation process absolutely makes sense (and is clear) given that he is "a former MLS player who returns to the League after having gone to a club abroad for a transfer fee."
Jason, you and I have had this discussion in the past. I don't think the process is murky at all. I also don't think any of the four we have discussed were done incorrectly. It doesn't matter if it is one team or 10 interested, if you want to sign the player that qualifies for allocation then you use your spot or you pass. Now you can pass with the hopes no one takes him and he goes to waivers as happened to Renkin but MLS isn't likely to have that happen often (where they sign a player no one will take in allocation). * The one part that does need more explanation is simply what defines a returning national team player. Youth? One cap four years prior? Youth probably not, but u-23 is not really youth as defined by FIFA so maybe that counts? That is the part that I would like more clarity, but the process itself is fairly clear and there is no distinction between one team and 19 being interested in a player. 1. Renkin - Signed with league, likely due to interest but not enough interest to use an allocation spot. Think of it like this, he essentially went through the allocation process and no one picked him up. So he was available on waivers. Makes sense although I doubt they sign too many folks without a team lined up in the future *remember these guys are signed prior to the allocation/lottery process - so they would follow the same process of a waived player. They still have their rights under the CBA once signed with the league regardless of a team picking them up or not. 2. Hill - Again despite dubious reporting, it appear allocation is correct as former national team player. 3. Ochoa - Allocation based on national team experience, albeit U-23 4. Toja - Case of allocation per the rules of former MLS player for which transfer was paid. The lottery is only used when a late GA signing occurs (after draft) or for a player that wants to come back to the league after having a contract offered but never had a team. Beyond that; it is discovery signing/DP, allocation, or draft (waivers after they have already signed with league).
I think that, more than anything, is the problem. If MLS would actually announce what method was used consistently and how many (if any) teams were interested we wouldn't have as many questions.