Hoping our "overhanded mods" (jk, jk) allow me to post this link again since my original posting got buried in the "Holiday Cheer" thread but deserves a standalone thread for wider viewing and educational enjoyment for all of us. http://revsnet1.wordpress.com/2012/12/27/a-question-for-the-revolution-can-you-manage/#more-1246 An off season analysis of player and manager worthiness and other stuff, by Jim Dow. Thanks Jim!
As usual insightful stuff from Jim One of the takeaways that caught my eye as part of his analysis of the Rev roster vs the best eleven by position: "salaries aren’t necessarily the issue with the Revs. They may not supply other amenities (translators, cars, housing, etc.), we don’t know, but their pay packet for the average player is about average." Hopefully Jims analysis puts to rest the meme that the Revs are cheap and pay player less than other teams
But the Revs are cheap and pay less than other teams. It's the amenities that he listed that allow clubs like Red Bull, Seattle, LA, etc. to add quality players while still staying under the cap.
The figures used in the article seem to say the REVs spend 11% less ($156K vs $175K) on average salary to create a portfolio of (quasi) starting players with about 38% less transfer value. Pretty damning IMHO. That would seem to argue the REVs are way overpaying for the starting talent they have. This would put the blame on Burns for not picking up good enough talent or (Nicol then) Heaps for failing to develop talent. The statement, "salaries aren’t necessarily the issue with the Revs. They may not supply other amenities (translators, cars, housing, etc.), we don’t know, but their pay packet for the average player is about average." seems marginally supported by the article data but fully ignores that a team is made up of more than 11 players and that depth is important to overall success. Last I checked the Union publication of player salaries (probably last May), the REVs were in the 13-14 out of 19 places on the list of total compensation. Does that really make them "about average?" Of course, if you are willing to assert that Burns and Heaps are consistent if nothing else, maybe the REVs could reach parity with the rest of the league by exceeding average salaries by enough to overcome that 38% deficit in talent (as measured by Transfer value).