Off-Season Player Rumors & Movement 2013

Discussion in 'Philadelphia Union' started by UnionBulldog, Sep 25, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dills

    Dills Moderator
    Staff Member

    Philadelphia Union
    United States
    Jun 6, 2006
    Southampton|PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm with you on this, but I don't think it's really as simple as you claim. Didn't Carlisle's article state that Adu's contract buyout would be something like $1.3M? That's money that comes out of the ownership's pockets. If they're not willing to spend their own money - that above and beyond the salary cap/budget - on a player who CAN contribute to the team (i.e. DP), what makes you think they'd spend that exorbitant amount on someone who will not be an on-field contribution just to sever ties? Leaving him on the roster, and having the league pay for a large portion of his contract, is less impactful on their wallets.

    I'm not saying I agree with what they're doing, but I can understand why they're doing it.
     
  2. usfutbol12

    usfutbol12 Member

    Oct 15, 2009
    Connecticut
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I get where you're coming from and I understand why they're doing it as well but I think we as a fan base deserve better from our ownership. We deserve ownership that will put up the million plus to get rid of Adu and keep this team a max competitiveness. Frankly we also deserve ownership that would put up a million plus to get a DP as well but its all part of the same argument.

    Basically I'm tired of our ownership operating with an FC Dallas mentality while our supporters are right up there with the best in the league. Since we've been in the league no other team in MLS as well supported as the Union has had as pathetic a financial commitment from their owners as we have. And its time for that to end. What can we say that our ownership does best? Are we as transparent as Portland? No. Do we make big moves like New York, LA or Seattle? No. Do we even make a legit effort to do either of these things like SKC? Not really. Yes, its true that our ownership is pretty open and receptive to fans which is nice but when half of that openness is complete BS fed to us by Sack its hard for me to get to excited about that.
     
    UnionTillIDie, aztec21bas, Dills and 2 others repped this.
  3. R1PP

    R1PP Member

    Dec 3, 2007
    Swarthmore, PA
    Pretty quickly one could tell that the Union's handling of the Adu situation was going to end badly. Hack making the spat public and personal was pretty unprofessional and only made Adu's value drop more. Now MLS teams are looking at a player without a preseason. No one is going to want to touch him now.
     
  4. UnionBulldog

    UnionBulldog Member+

    Jun 27, 2011
    Ridley Park
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I could understand wanting more from the Union, as we all do. But to disregard that this is a business and it most likely will take time for them to earn a profit from this. We are in the 4th year of a new franchise. Other teams like Seattle, Portland and even Montreal had pre-existing structure in place before coming to MLS. Seattle also did not have to build their own stadium. To state that the Union owners are pathetic in their financial commitment is asinine and completely ignoring that this is just our 4th year existing. The stadium wasn't free, the MLS entrance fee wasn't paid for by someone else.

    Are the Rapids shortchanging their fans because they never had a DP? Are the skimping on quality players because they are cheap? Would you rather the U be like the Pink cows where they throw money at someone before thinking if he will work on the team?

    I want the Union to compete for the MLS cup, I want them to build a quality team that other teams don't like to play but I don't think that going out and buying a DP just for the sake of it is the way to go. If they can find a player who compliments the current squad and adds an extra dimension then by all means go after them. But if you are signing someone just because he is/was good somewhere in Europe without actually benefiting the team then that is a bad move. The core of this team is young with most being under 25 and several starters or key subs are under 22. The front office has an idea and it may or may not work in the long run but it sacrifices something right now for the long term. Maybe we would have been better off if they didn't make the playoffs in 2011.

    He made it public because the pre-season was starting and it nipped it before it was every reporters question every day. Was it the best option? No, but Adu made it harder on the U (if reports are even close to being right) by not accepting available trades or a reasonable buyout. Adu wants to be selective on where to go and not take a cheaper buyout which is his right but what other answer did the Union have?
     
    jaykoz3, usfutbol12 and Dills repped this.
  5. DaMunk

    DaMunk Member

    Feb 7, 2003
    Philadelphia/STX
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    US Virgin Islands
    DEMAND SUGARMAN SELL NOW!!!

    Not much more than five years ago all we had was a supporters group. That support attracted an I/O who put up the money for the franchise fee and a pretty nice stadium. Now that's not enough? They went "big" signing Freddy and it didn't give us much in return.

    I share the frustration but perhaps I'm a bit more patient. I have no idea what goes on in the board meetings, but it seems the team is willing to give up immediate glory in exchange for having a team in 3-5 years that will be a perennial competitor. Hack has referred to the Farfans as the "older" guys at 24!!!

    To put it another way, it seems their strategy is based on investing and developing undervalued talent now to develop a core group that will peak in talent and value and win hardware in the future.

    Buying top talent now is a gamble of sorts. Since we're near capacity in terms of attendance, the only reward is winning MLS, Open Cup or grabbing one of the other 2 CL spots. From an investment standpoint, I can see how building slowly seems wiser and less risky than laying out big cash gambling on winning prize money w/in 2-3 years of a big signing.
     
    jaykoz3 repped this.
  6. usfutbol12

    usfutbol12 Member

    Oct 15, 2009
    Connecticut
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I do understand that there are a lot of expenses still being paid off for such a young franchise, does that mean that criticism should be much more muted at this point? Perhaps, but I'm not entirely convinced. My opinion is that the best way for the Union to pay off their debts is not to sacrifice the on-field product in the short term because then they are losing all the momentum that the fan base started with in year one, all the passion it had. Will that come back in a few years if we're winning MLS Cups? Of course. But at some point the team is going to have to make a financial commitment. We have a good young core, thats part A of every good team. Part B is going out and getting established guys who are just that last piece or two that completes the puzzle. Guys like Mondragon and Valdes. Neither of those guys were DP's but obviously a DP could be that player.

    To your second point, are the Rapids being cheap? I would argue yes. But perhaps they're justified because they've only averaged 13, 807 fans per game since 2005 and as I noted in another discussion have about 1,500 STH's so maybe the interest just isn't there for a proper return on investment. But the Union far surpass the Rapids in both categories so essentially you have made my point. Which is that we shouldn't be operating on the same level as the Rapids or FC Dallas are fan base deserves a larger commitment from the FO.
     
  7. drewuke

    drewuke Member+

    Jul 19, 2012
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Oh so now we're anti-Ukrainian? -_-
     
    Doop repped this.
  8. BuddhaWake

    BuddhaWake Member+

    Aug 13, 2010
    Philadelphia
    I'm not french and I'm not Jesus. I don't know what you're talking about.
     
  9. drewuke

    drewuke Member+

    Jul 19, 2012
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    :p
     
  10. Tyr

    Tyr Member+

    Nov 7, 2009
    Lawrenceville
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Let's not forget Freddy fell in our laps. It's not like we orchestrated the move. The only reason we landed him was because Chivas passed him up.
     
    DaMunk, UnionDues and BuddhaWake repped this.
  11. Dills

    Dills Moderator
    Staff Member

    Philadelphia Union
    United States
    Jun 6, 2006
    Southampton|PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I doubt he "fell" into our laps. I find it more than just a little coincidental that Chivas couldn't use him, just like how 15-16 teams passed on Carlos Ruiz and he "fell" to DCU.
     
  12. Tyr

    Tyr Member+

    Nov 7, 2009
    Lawrenceville
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I say fell into our laps because it was another summer transfer window where Nick promised us a headspinner. Had Chivas not passed on Freddy, we would have signed no one. Plus, I do believe Chivas passed on him not so much because we had a deal with them as because his name is not Federico Adu.
     
    BuddhaWake repped this.
  13. EmeraldDawn

    EmeraldDawn Member+

    May 11, 2008
    Brick, NJ
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Orale.
     
  14. ImissTHEheat

    ImissTHEheat Member

    Jan 18, 2009
    Pennsylvania
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And yet the reports contradict that. Freddy and his people have quashed multiple offers according to the reports - plenty of suitors, just not one in a spotlight league in Europe. If you mean that a team in one of those leagues is less likely to bite given his current status and fitness, that I don't disagree with. One wonders if Freddy would accept a spot in the Spanish 2nd should someone seeking a low cost, high potential move make an offer on him.
     
  15. Amscray

    Amscray Member+

    Philadelphia Union
    United States
    Aug 24, 2007
    Arlington, VA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Oh what fools we were
     
  16. billf

    billf Member+

    May 22, 2001
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think this is fair, but I would be far more receptive to the owners putting 1.3 million into a DP than I would in it paying off Adu. The way things work now, the owners are on the hook for something like $560k over two years. The money angle makes sense to me and I think icing him will force his to give ground at some point, costing the team even less.
     
  17. EmeraldDawn

    EmeraldDawn Member+

    May 11, 2008
    Brick, NJ
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Except they don't have the salary cap space to sign a DP without getting Freddy off the books. Remember, the first $365k of a DP money counts towards the cap.
     
  18. BuddhaWake

    BuddhaWake Member+

    Aug 13, 2010
    Philadelphia
    my interpretation of billf statemate is that IF the team were to spend $1mil that he would preffer that it was spent on getting a player/s in not out.
     
  19. EmeraldDawn

    EmeraldDawn Member+

    May 11, 2008
    Brick, NJ
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I got that impression too, I just wanted to point out that they can't do that until the Adu situation is taken care of. So if you want to do X, you have to do Y first. That's all I'm saying.
     
  20. BuddhaWake

    BuddhaWake Member+

    Aug 13, 2010
    Philadelphia
    I don't want to belong to a world where Y comes before X.
     
    Handsome Pete, US Spurs and derek750 repped this.
  21. billf

    billf Member+

    May 22, 2001
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Exactly. They are in the same situation one way or another, but I still believe that saving 800k give them more flexibility once the situation is resolved and it gives them some leverage, IMO, to solve it sooner rather than later.
     
  22. Tyr

    Tyr Member+

    Nov 7, 2009
    Lawrenceville
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Freddy's cap space could have been spent on someone who can actually play this year and would force Cruz or Daniel to the bench. At this point, it is embarrassing that we are just going to bench Freddy for two years. JDG x 2
     
  23. SmashtheVan

    SmashtheVan Member+

    Jan 13, 2009
    South Jersey
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Is the 2nd year not an option year? Since when was he locked down past this season?
     
  24. Dills

    Dills Moderator
    Staff Member

    Philadelphia Union
    United States
    Jun 6, 2006
    Southampton|PA
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Maybe it's how the buyout would work. I thought common knowledge was his contract was guaranteed through 2013 (2 1/2 years total), but maybe the/a buyout clause includes 2014 as well?
     
  25. derek750

    derek750 Member+

    Apr 16, 2007
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    Philadelphia Union
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's been reported in several places that Adu has more than $1 million left on his contract (the most specific figure I've seen was $1.3 million). With a salary of around $600K, he must have 2 years remaining since it doesn't make much sense to have a team option bought out.

    Here's one link:
    http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/...rst-kick-freddy-adu-still-stuck-in-bad-place/
     

Share This Page