I think what happened here is that mlsnet.com and SoccerAmerica saw that Acosta called up Etch and quickly wrote up stories about Etch playing for Bolivia again without considering that DCU might not release him (notice the link to the mlsnet article that was posted earlier no longer works). As was mentioned previously, if Goff says Marco'll be in Foxboro that's it. Cherno
I think DC should certainly have every opportunity to replace their injured starting goalkeeper going into the last few games and then the playoffs. But I know and you know that if the Metros were trying to line up a replacement player on such short notice, and said replacement player had recently been named as one of the top two A-League keepers... ... that a set of DC fans would exhibit such histrionics and accusations of league favoritism that all other discussion would cease for a day or two. So by what mechanism would Cullen be acquired? Sarcastic answers that seek to imply that this is a corrective measure for your hallucinations of front-office manipulation and Dob Garber favoritism will be taken as a frank admission of total hypocrisy, intellectual bankruptcy, and an immedate loss of any credibility you imagine you might have.
You're totally right. I had written on another thread that our aquiring of Baumstark was odd, regardless of if he waws already being paid by the league. I have no idea how we get Cullen, and yes, if this were the metros, the MLS N&A board would be all over it.
1) I don't see folks complimenting Hudson here. Nor do I see dissing. 2) Maybe he got his shot. Maybe he was told when he signed that he wouldn't be seeing any MLS action this year period. I think we are really in the dark here. So much so that we can't even really find a way to diss Marco! (Yes that's a joke.) Seriously, we know so little at this point that there is no way to really get upset, except via the Haig angle of how we are getting Cullen.
I would think the mechanism would be the exact same one that was used three weeks ago to get Martins for putting Reyes on the shelf. The ever so MLS ovbious emergency-discovery-for a hurt guy-allocation.
I for one have given up guessing which "method" the MLS will claim to allocate players throughout the league. Especially after they have now started to hire "league players" whereby a player doesn't have a team and gets sent to anyone that has a need. I'm guessing they will start refering to these types of trades as the "Pick Up Exclusion". Named such after the rule in a pick up game where if one team is clearly dominating - at the half the teams will be reorganized for balance. I fully expect the next rule change to be the "Next Goal Wins"... Note I did not call this a Mickey Mouse league...because that would be an insult to the integrity of the Mouse...
Are you saying it's unfair? Because I am going to take that pathetic little charge apart, so you can shuffle off with your head down and pretend you didn't say nothin', because otherwise you're a fool. The USSF wanted the final at Soldier Field, but the Fire had already booked a friendly featuring a Mexican team, and a Peter Nowak testimonial match for that night. The Fire could not, or would not, rearrange the schedule to allow the cup final to be played when Fox Sports World was contracted to show the game, at 8pm. They offered to play the game at 5pm local time. Because the game, by contract, had to be played so that it could be shown live in the pre-arranged FSW television slot, it was moved to Giants Stadium. Why did the Metros get to play the prior two Open Cup games at home? Well, they played their first two Open Cup games this year away, in Detroit and in Columbus. So it was pretty reasonable to give them a home slot, no? Especially considering New England opted not to book Lusitano Stadium again, handing home field advantage to the Metros. So it's clearly not unfair that the Metros got to host the final, and it's clearly not unfair that the Metros got to host the quarterfinal-- both times, home field advantage was handed to them. So that leaves the DC game. Up to the semifinals, DC had played three games, hosting two, and the Metros had played three games, hosting one. It would have been unfair to give DC home field advantage, wouldn't it?
Just don't be a hypocrite, okay? Case in point, Bud's utterly off-the-mark post above. You need a player because your guy got hurt and MLS has pathetically small rosters... so you get a player. No conspiracy, no nothing. This guy isn't going to seriously throw off the balance of power in the league any more than Jonny Walker or Joey DiGiamarino did, despite all the phony outrage.
The Metros have the quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals at home. Read into that what you will. Unfair, no. Slanted to help the Metros, there's NO denying that. The Fire could not, or would not, rearrange the schedule to allow the cup final to be played when Fox Sports World was contracted to show the game, at 8pm And Fox Sports World is inflexible? And Open Cup game times and dates haven't been changed before? C'mon man. What you could say is Chicago got to play the quarterfinals and semifinals at home, just like the Metros. Then GEEZ, WHAT A COINCIDENCE that both teams are now in the finals Up to the semifinals, DC had played three games, hosting two The 2 DC hosted were against A-League teams. DC had to play the quarterfinals and semifinals on the road.
I really don't think that DC United losing in the Open Cup had much to do with playing the semi-final game in NJ. The Open Cup loss probably had more to do with United's inconsistent play (for various reasons, including most importantly, injuries...) than whether or not they had home field advantage. With the way DC United played in some of those games, I'm pretty surpised that they got as far as they did. Also, as much as I hate saying it, a fair amount of credit should go to Bradley and the Metros, who often seem to be able to capitalize on DCU's mistakes. Besides, a week earlier at Giants Stadium (in a very important league game, standings and playoffs-wise...), DC United easily stomped the Metros in what was possibly DC's most solid game of the year. In the process, DCU also dispensed with any home field advantage that the Metros may have had.
You need to understand something. Actually, I'm sure you already understand it, but you're deliberately misstating what you understand in order to try to put this on a continuum with other alleged Metro favoritism (and to change the subject from the fact that DC fans who constantly whine about conspiracy look silly when things like this Cullen deal happen). Something things happen that favor one team or another, not because the agency in charge is trying to favor one team, but because a game has to be played, a player has to go somewhere, etc. Either Chicago or the Metros were going to host the final. Both had hosted the previous two games. So one team was going to be the beneficiary of "conspiracy." The only reason that Chicago didn't get the final is because USSF signed a deal with FSW to show some games. FSW had already set the time. Chicago couldn't, or wouldn't, rearrange the schedule to play the cup final at 8. If Giants Stadium couldn't host the game, it would have been at Rutgers. The only agency that wanted the game in the Meadowlands was FSW. They have no incentive whatsoever to see the Metros win-- they have an incentive to play the game at a certain time. So why do you think there was favoritism towards the Metros in particular? The television deal won out-- NOT because FSW has any reason to "favor" the Metrostars, but because they had already worked out their schedule. You do your case a disservice-- making it look paranoid and irrational-- when you claim that anything that goes the Metros' way is designed to tilt the playing field in their favor. As for your other point: yeah, there's an advantage in hosting cup games. Could be why DC lost. By the same token, it contributed to DC winning the cup in 1996. But ultimately, a team knows it has to win, wherever the match is played, and if there's any fault to be assigned, it's with the losing team. Looking for an excuse for losing is whining, and it's sour grapes. But you're changing the subject. If it's clear that players are assigned to DC based on genuine positional need, will you stop blasting the league for assigning players similarly to other teams?
How can you say that this is not MAE's fault. If MAE played more defense we would not even need a goalie. If MAE was not so slow our forwards would score 10 goals a game and we could put Nelsen or Convey in goal. This is clearly MAE's fault.
Honestly, it's not so much that players are assigned to teams. Hell, that's what happens every day in every sport. With MLS is just that player movement goes through HQ. What gets me is that MLS seems to invent mechanisms to make what should be simple seem extremely complex. To wit, Tim Howard leaves Metro for Man U, ergo, there is a vacancy. Jonny Walker fills with by signing a contract with MLS/Metrostars. That's all that needed to happen. No bogus lotteries, no Discovery Picks hidden in the bottom of Nick's briefcase, etc. The situation with the Metro was similar to United losing Rimando. Yet it seems that MLS comes up with Rube Goldberg contrapions to justify a team filling a space on the roster. The end result of all this is that it would seem that MLS attempts to favor one team over another. The reality is far more banal, where MLS feels like they have to justify one set of moves and not another. Sachin
I have always agreed that the byzantine, ad hoc "system" for signing players is more trouble than it is worth. But it's a self-sustaining mess. Fans of a given team have a selective memory for examples of their team getting the stick and another team getting treasure. The ridiculous outcry leads MLS to come up with stupid rationalizations for mundane player transactions. I'm not here to defend the stupidity of MLS' system, just to point out the hypocrisy of a few shrill, incessant whiners, and to make them look as foolish as possible.
That's right. I wouldn't be surprised if MLS wants to see the Metros win the Open Cup, because the Metros haven't won a thing. Am I against that as a soccer fan? Absolutely not. The Metros desperately need something to get their fans to come to the game, more respect for the team would help, as well as more excitement (hosting an Open Cup Final). Attracting fans is important because in the big picture, $ is what MLS headquarters is all about right now. Because $ is what MLS needs to survive. As a DC fan, I will say with complete conviction that the Metros suck. I want DC to beat the living crap out of the Metros for all time-call it the "curse of the Diablo" (like the "curse of the Bambino") where DC just OWNS the Metros for all time. But under single-entity, that probably won't happen, because even though the DC fans are better, and their organization better, and so on, MLS headquarters will not allow DC to dominate. Still, this year, I hope DC plays the Metros in the playoffs and beats the living crap out of them and forces MLS headquarters to make another move to improve the Metros. Don't tell us DC fans politics isn't involved in the decisions being made. The fans on this DC forum won't get fooled by some of the ridiculous justifications for moves coming out of league headquarters. This IS single-entity which means BY DEFINITION the teams aren't completely independent of each other. AEG, Hunt, Garber, they talk about how the league's going to look next year, and so on. In no other sport in the US will you get as extensive a hands-on approach from headquarters.
Oh, no! I will happily admit that some of the machinations of MLS designed to favour NJ and LA (perhaps most of them) have blown up in their face (Branco, anyone? Luis Hernandez, of the very nice hairdo?) That's what makes the obvious favoritism all the more laughable. I'm with you on this one, Mr Bud. BTW, Haig, OT, but I've always been curious: is your handle a reference to the field marshal or the former secretary of state? or the whiskey? or something much more banal? Jan shrill, incessant whiner and Mr Obscure Reference
Oh yeah, Luis just HAPPENED to be Mexican and end up in LA, not pandering to Mexicans. Bo just HAPPENS to be Korean and the business community there supports him. Shocking-what a coincidence!! Cerritos and Quintanilla play on DC, where DC is trying to get El Salvadorans back to the game? There just so happened to be a DC-El Salvador game scheduled? Polish players play in Chicago? Metros win the lottery twice, and get who's supposed to be the best coach? And on, and on, and on and on and on.........sure there's fairness, but to say the league doesn't take into account $ signs in almost every move it makes is just denying the obvious
I agree with Haig here and it is time to stop caring if anyone wants the Metros to win this game and start cheering for the Fire to kick their asses. (And that is pretty hard to say!!!)