http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/6103721.htm Too much info?? Great article about Preki. One week to 40 and maybe people can stop talking about it.
"Preki was devastated. He didn't want to leave Kansas City." I went to the MLS All-Star game in 2001 in San Jose. After the game I saw Preki and I talked to him. I told him that KC missed him, and he said he really wished he could have stayed. We talked for about five minutes and he is a really nice guy. Even though he gets crap for being mean after games, who wouldn't be after a loss? When the Fusion folded after 2001, I thought "The Wizards better pick Preki in the allocation draft". He proved himself all over again in Miami, and now he is back where he wants to be. Preki has been my favorite player since the beginning, and he will always be number 11 for the Wizards.
There you go everybody. The first clear admittal of Gansler that he was wrong in trading Preki. No reading between the lines like you had to do before on quotes of this matter.
That was a terrific article, although I would have liked to see something in there about his contribution to the national team.
They aren't joking about Preki being a prankster. He's the oldest, yet is the most childish at times. I was in the training room one day earlier this season and he came in wearing his warm up and Chet was with Josh Wolff working on his knee. Preki came up and started telling Chet how sexy he is and he was stroking his arms telling him that his hairy arms were sexy. Chet said he's known Preki for so long that while it's still odd, it's become normal.
Star Treatment A little off the subject but I have to say that this is another example about how the KC Star does a good job covering the Wizards. I have to give credit to the star since they are the only media output in the town that gives the Wizards the type of coverage they deserve, and even more sometimes.
He wouldn't be playing this well had he not been traded to Miami. He needed a challenge/wakeup call to revive his career. He's playing better now than in 2000.
BS, I think the articles have been pretty fluffy overall at a consistent level since '98. What I would like to see is someone with a level of understanding that lent itself to writing articles that were able to pick apart the game in a way that lends understanding to the masses. An occasional second-guess article dealing with a trade, decision, or tactic would be interesting as well. I'm not picky, I'd just like a fraction of the same level of hand-wringing minutia rehash given to the Chiefs. Check that, with more intelligence would be good. Simply, just once, I'd like to read an informed opinion on why a given matchup is most important within one phase of a game; just like I have to hear about the left tackle vs the stud rush end being pivotal to a football game's outcome. Someone please have the guts to write an article on why and how if Klein wins his physical matchup v whoever, then that changes the complexion of x team's entire defense in such a way that it will change a game on every level. I'd like to hear ass-kiss Kevin Keitzman have an intelligent thought on something besides Tony Meola's Mom's cooking...something a bit more thought provoking than, "So, how the team doing this season?" IS THIS ASKING TO G D MUCH!!! Sorry, I haven't had breakfast yet.
While I agree that we should have coverage that is willing to pick apart the team, analyze decisions and games, and criticize when necessary, I dont think we're going to get that any time soon. Luder and Boyce dont just cover the Wizards right? Luder is better than Boyce on soccer knowledge, but he still gets things wrong once in a while. This, and his conversation with me at the draft, tells me that while he knows a little about soccer, but not enough to give us what we want. To write a critical article the writer has to have the confidence in his knowledge of the subject to know (or at least think he knows) that he is right. Luder definitely doesnt have that yet. Demand for the sport of soccer and the Wizards (in KC) will improve the coverage. Look at NY and DC for example. They often have critical articles, but many more people read and care about the team in those place (supposibly...). Back to Preki, isnt he cool?
Preki is great, and the trade no doubt gave him motivation for a couple extra years of high-level competition. On star coverage, I think it's pretty good, but the paper isn't making much money on it yet. it does make money (via advertising) on chiefs and royals coverage, thus the extra reporters analyzing games. the star does not have a beat writer traveling with the team either. there's just not enough readers who would be interested in a serious column on tactics on a given game, and there's not many writers who could pull it off anyway. that's why forums like this are valuable. you have to look at it from the star's point of view.
Who's fault is that really? I think it is the Wizards. Why, becuase the kids are the main focus of the marketing prop. Untill the Wizards become more adult driven this will not change. Sure it will cost more $$$ to go that direction but untill then we will be looked as a sport for kids. Until then we will never accepted by the media in town. Unless ofcourse we represent and show that there is a demand for better coverage. That is were shows like "Extratime" need to be swamped with calls.
Preki god or not? "Home-Field doesn't really matter" -Preki Preki agrees with me on the playoff debate I have heard Preki called god here before One can't argue with god, since he is always right Therefore I win playoff debate What sweet logic!
Re: Preki god or not? Yeah, I figured you'd mention this somewhere. I'm pretty sure that Preki would rather play the Wester Conference one game final in KC than LA, SJ or Colorado. Thats pretty much a given. I think his statement is just more of his no nonesense "I'll play anywhere, any time, as long as I think the game is important" attitude. The point was made in the very same article by Luder that last season we lost two playoff games on the road and won our only game at home. There is always home field advantage, and it give you a better chance to win. It does matter. And lastly, your debate, from what I recall, was that there was more of a distinct advantage to the higher seeded team in the "first to five" series than there will be in the home/home series. I don't recall you ever claiming that home field advantage doesn't matter. If you claim that it doesnt matter, you're just dead wrong.
Re: Re: Preki god or not? I did argue that the home/away/home series is bigger advantage than home/away but I also said MANY times that the regular season doesn't matter since there is virtually no home field advantage, at least not until the semis. You can tell me whatever you want about Preki's intentions but until he says otherwise I will take him literally, just as The Star did.
Re: Re: Re: Preki god or not? I see your point and it is well made. But I would like to see a journalist question him about this opinion and have him justify it based on our terrible away record this season. Let's see some real journalism instead of reprinting news releases. Oh wait I wasn't talking about the War in Iraq again was I? ....
Re: Re: Re: Re: Preki god or not? He for sure would rather play at home in the semis than on the road. I do think he is honest when he says it doesn't mean anything in the first round though.
Re: Re: Re: Preki god or not? I think you need to learn how to read.... Preki's direct quote speaks about home field advantage not mattering. It doesn't say anything else. If you're taking his quote literally, then you're saying that you agree that the Wizards (or any other team) see no advantage at home. Their record says the opposite. Preki's quote doesn't talk about the old or new playoff systems, he simply says home field advantage doesnt matter. Thats what you posted, and you (if you agree) and Preki are wrong. You only need to look at the Wizards record this season for proof. And your last post.....he didnt mention first round. He said "home field advantage doesnt matter". He never said "it doesn't mean anything in the first round though", as you stated. He loosly implied that theres no real advantage in the first round, but didn't come out and say it. He simple, again, said that home field advantage doesnt matter.