Aw, crap. I hadn't seen that. But still, out of curiosity, when did Onalfo leave? He filled a similar role after it was announced that Rongen would not be re-signed ("coached" the Unity Games team), but I don't recall if he wound up staying with the team through the 2002 season.
I actually don't find this a problem though like you and others here, I thought that Trask had a lot to do with our dysfunctional offense. Why do I feel this way? Because any new head coach will put his stamp on the team and Trask will play a very subsidiary role, eventually to leave within a year's time. Hudson gave Trask a lot of leeway- much more than the next head coach will.
This is exactly what I wanted to post. The team is better off, but Ray did give his all to the team. A national team job is seen worldwide as better than coaching in MLS. Plus, he's Canadian...if he's patriotic, this could be the chance of a lifetime to him. Even if he doesn't leave for Canada, why the hell would he leave the current champions for anyone else in MLS? Yes, yes they would, as long as they didn't head off to a bar before the game ended. I'd also lean towards Ellinger as an assistant rather than as a head coach. The Post article mentioned Yallop, but only briefly. As for the rest...wishful thinking, I guess. I think the only people with a serious chance from the team's perspective are Ellinger, Johnston, and Brian Bliss. Well, an era of sexy football would be nice. Running us from the top into mediocrity isn't possible, so he's the wrong man for the job. I'd also like to see Onalfo at least be given some thought, even if he is a longshot. He led the team out against CD Aguila at the end of last season and they looked quite good. It seems like everyone Arena trys to keep close with the national team can go into MLS and succeed, so why not Onalfo? On Stoitchkov, you're right...that was his call and it was a mistake. On Etch, though, it seems that Hudson wasn't given a choice there. It was either take him or leave the job. Hudson tried to take him and make it work, and it didn't. I don't think that's his fault. *** I agree with a lot of people in wondering how Kasper stays on if Hudson is out. Trask I can understand, because someone has to run practices for the time being. I think Skip is right...he'll stay around for awhile, maybe even a season, and then quietly move on. Perhaps the new coach will use Trask as strictly a defensive coach? Kasper, though, should probably move along if Hudson is out as well. I guess there's the off chance that we didn't know something that was happening behind the scenes...maybe Kasper and Hudson didn't get along? Who knows?
There's a lot of Hudson apologists on here. I understand not wanting to lose a likable guy, but there's a bottom line: 1) Less goals scored and less attractive soccer (backpass, backpass, backpass) 2) No real improvement in terms of wins/losses. You can say he got United into the playoffs, but come on. He didn't take the team from 10th to 3rd, he took them to 8th. When 80% of the league makes the playoffs, you should get in. Making the postseason should not be the standard, winning should. 3) As for the "The team is better off now than when Rongen left it" line: Big freakin deal. After two years, I would expect more than incremental progress. So we're not mad enough to fly a plane over the stadium . . . that doesn't mean the team is that much better. Somebody's gotta take the fall. The adage that "you can't fire the players" is exactly right. It's also true that accountability starts somewhere. As long as Payne and Kasper are calling the shots (and they're not blameless, but they sign the checks), the coach must produce. He didn't, and now he's gone. Please, folks, nobody at all denies that Ray is a likable guy who worked his ass off (so much so that he's had health problems). Almost every person on this board would say that Hudson is someone that you want to see succeed. He didn't. It's a failed experiment. Lombardi didn't win in DC either. Move on.
I still think this has only been speculated rather than proven. Until then, I will continue to believe that the decision to keep Marco was Ray's.
Sorry, I was hoping not to post yet another diatribe on this, but I can't help it. Credit to everyone who has posted their thoughts either way so far. Let's look at the above ... Payne, Kasper and Zack didn't like the direction the team was going. Aren't they all responsible in some way for where it went? I'm sure none of them are willing to fall in their swords for the team's performances when it's easier to carve up someone else with it. The team needs to move in another direction, yet 3 of the 4 people responsible for the direction it went in get to stay. If, as I believe, Ray has said and others suggest, Ray was barred from releasing or trading Marco last offseason, then who was responsible for that decision? I bet we never find out. Anyone who thinks Ray re-signed Marco by personal choice only doesn't understand the full picture. Or Ray's been lying for two years. Somehow I don't think lying is the reason. So Payne was a part of the firing decision process, yet didn't have the common decency to add a quote to the team press release. That unfortunately confirms a lot of my suspicions. At least when Nebraska AD Steve Pederson made his stupid move to fire football coach Frank Solich, he stood before the press to answer questions. I realize Payne made one comment to the Post, but he should have said something in the release. It is completely Hudson's fault that young players didn't develop? OK, he could have given them more minutes, certainly - point taken. But who's job was it to "coach them up" in practice so that they were actually ready for whatever minutes they got? Again, the practice field was Trask's domain. If the players didn't develop, and he still has a job but Hudson doesn't, something's wrong. Also, let's remember something about these college kids United has drafted. I'd have to do some research, but wasn't one of Kasper's reasons for being the "right" guy for this job his experience on the college level in the Pittsburgh area? His knowledge of the sport, its players and coaches? If United drafted the wrong players, at some point, Kasper shares the blame. If Ray wanted an unsuitable player, Kasper could have negated it, being higher up in KP's food chain. As far as we know, he never did that. If Kasper wanted a player and Ray didn't, and they drafted him anyway, who is at fault? We'll never know if that occurred. I was at United's training ground one morning last year, and Kasper related to both I and John Dyson about how MLS teams didn't do scouting, they didn't have scouting directors, they didn't make an investment in looking at players, etc. Yet, some teams are getting it right with the players they pick up. It almost seemed like Kasper was saying, "No one else does it, so why should we?" His implication was that United wasn't even going to try. Yet Ray gets all the blame. It has to be shared. According to the Post story, it is in fact Kasper who "oversees personnel decisions." If the team needs a new direction, why is he still here? I'm sorry, my leash is going to be really short with the next coach. I don't care who it is. If it's clear to everyone that Hristo, Marco, and Galin are gone this offseason, I don't see what difference changing the head coach makes, when the assistant is still the one "training" the players, and Kasper will not either step in and be heard when a player isn't right for the team, or is recommending players who aren't good fits. According to United's Web site, Kasper's job is the following: "Dave Kasper heads the technical department, working closely with the coaching staff in identifying and signing talent as well as developing a draft strategy and creating closer ties to foreign club teams. Kasper has a wide variety of soccer experience as a player, coach and front office executive. He joined United from the New England Revolution where he had been the Director of Business Development." So it's Kasper's job to develop the draft strategy? Hmm, you wouldn't know it by today's events, would you? If the drafts weren't fruitful, at some point, some of the responsibility lies here, as well. Technically, please remember that Stephen Zack is the General Manager of this club. But for this club, what does that really mean? He obviously isn't a GM in the baseball sense. Yet, through these four years of mediocrity, none of the accountability lies at his desk? Or does he get a hall pass for good attendance numbers? (Which for some games this year, weren't United-like, either) And my leash will be short for Mr. Payne, who as someone pointed out earlier, has now hired and fired 2 coaches whom he thought would turn United in the "right direction." Or, does he get a pass from AEG, since other teams he is responsible are successful, including San Jose winning the league this year? Hey he had both teams in the final and three that lost in the first round. I guess 40% is good enough for KP but not good enough for Hudson, whose winning percentage was higher that this year (.483). One of you fine folks used to have a quote on here about running around in circles trying to turn a corner. Today is more evidence of that, as much as it pains me to say it. If you think Hudson should have been fired today, more power to you, we won't change each other's minds. But to blindly say the club improved today, or will automatically improve when the new coach takes over, you're fooling yourself. You don't fix 100% of the problem by changing 25% of the equation. There are simply too many other known and unknown forces at work and too many people for which accountability is a foreign concept. Ed
I see your point, but Lombardi's only season in Washington was a winning one. Stupid death thing got in the way in the offseason. Ed
If you, as a journalist with access to the team that I don't have, are hiding any information that proves that Ray was forced to re-sign and play Marco, please provide it. All I can go by are the quotes that surfaced (I recall one from a Diceson interview with Kasper) that said that there was no pressure from Payne. Looking at Ray's treatment of Marco this season and saying that it's the only logical solution doesn't wash with me because Ray made many decisions this year that lacked logic. As for Ray lying, or at least making contradicting statements, I leave you with this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...&node=&contentId=A5638-2003Nov5¬Found=true And the quote from the Washington Times, 1/18/03, that monster found:
I said it before the season started, so I'm not piling on here (or maybe I've been piling on all year, take your choice)... In MLS coaching is huge and the good coaches have taken bad teams and turned them around in a single year several times in the last five years. Hudson had two and didn't get the job done. ((I'll agree that whoever selected the players this last year needs to go as well, but don't know enough about the power structure to say if Ray had that authority or not.))
And, with Sarachan, this year continued the trend of at least one coach at MLS Cup being in his first full season with the club.
I'm not going to convince you of anything because we've never agreed ... but ... Ray told me on a number of occasions (more than 10) that he was handcuffed in regards to particular moves he wanted to make. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who he was talking about, especially after Williams, Moreno and Pope were dealt. You wouldn't expect Kasper to say, "We wanted to make a move, but Kevin said no so we'll keep Player X instead," do you? That would put the player involved in an unnecessarily uncomfortable position. I feel very, very comfortable in thinking that it was Ray's desire to not have Marco around for 2003, and that someone higher than him in the food chain said otherwise, based purely on conversations with Ray and others. Thus, the statements early in this season about Marco being the fulcrum of this year's team. I think Ray did that to prove a point. I don't think that's right, mind you, but I think that's why he did it. I really wonder sometimes if Ray even wanted Marco in 2002 ... but that's purely speculatory at that point. If my opinion stands alone on this board, fine. I don't really care. My point is, the blame for the last four seasons bears on the shoulders of a lot more people than only Ray Hudson, and many of them were involved in this decision today. And as long as those people are in place and making decisions, I don't know that it really matters who the coach is. In terms of Stewart, I think Hudson was just plain wrong. All I go on with people is how they deal with me, and I'm not buying the lying bit based on my personal experience. If you feel differently, that's fine. Ed
I thought Zack's main job was the business side of this, one reason they hired Kasper in the first place. Also, haven't season ticket sales gone up every season Steven's been in this position?
Todd, I wasn't saying that Yallop cannot develop talent, I was only saying that his track record is spotty. Yes there are some definite success stories (i.e. Donovan, Dunivant, and as you pointed out Walker), but there are also stories that haven't found success. I feel that a coach like Bob Bradley is a total success in the talent-development area. I didn't mean to imply that Yallop wasn't able to do so, just that there are examples of both. Also, Yallop, like Hudson, went with a very veteran team, even benching Dunivant for the playoffs. Walker was a necessity, and when he started producing, Yallop correctly left him in the first team. As for Trask, I have no information that Trask will be let go, but I would be shocked if he remained. Why? Because in essence, Trask was the coach of last year's team. He made the tactical choices, he trained the team, he carried more weight than any other Assistant Coach in MLS last year. Any new coach would be a fool to keep someone who had possessed that much power. One bad string of results or a few key players who don't want to adjust to the new coach's style, or are just pissed off at the coach for some reason (practices too hard, too much restriction on my game, etc.), and all of a sudden the new Head Coach has lost the team and the players are clamoring for Trask again. I can guarantee you that if Yallop or Ellinger take over that Trask will not be retained. Whomever becomes the next coach, IMHO, they need to institute an attacking style of play. People want to come to the games and the Freddy curiosity will bring them to a few early in the season, but if they continue to watch bore-ball (negative passing and fear of both attacking and shooting), then these fans will not return, Freddy or not. -Digital
writered21 - I read your post and in certain respects I can't disagree with what you write. Still, I can't help but recall that old joke: What do you call 500 lawyers at the bottom of the sea? A good start. What do I call declining Hudson's third year option? A good start.
But a start implies they are going to do something else. I just don't feel they are going to pull the moves necessary to really turn around the fortunes of this club. I just feel like there's too much scapegoating at work here, though I understand the other side's opinion. Ed
Short of looking it up, I'm going to base my response on your point being correct. However, if Zack is on the business side, how does he decide who the coach is? Did the Director of Marketing in Boston decide whether or not the Red Sox fired Grady Little? I don't know the answer. I'd guess, no. Four years ago, DCU averaged 18580 in attendance. In 2001, it was 21518 (I believe, though not sure, that this had something to do with the two Freedom DH's) .... In 2002, it was 16519, this year it was 15543. I suppose Zack could say that the product was no good, the coach should go, so they can sell more tickets. But they should be held accountable somehow, as well, if their job is in fact to sell tickets. I have no knowledge of the innerworkings of the club on that side of the ball, as it were. It just intrigued me that he was part of the "decision making process." Cheers, Ed
I wouldn't know how he decides who the coach is. Possibly his job focuses on the business aspect while still giving him say in all operations of the team. This could also be where Kevin Payne comes into play although I've never understood how involved he could be with DC United while heading up AEG. 2000 and 2001 also had the World Cup Qualifyers, adding a game of 56,000+ (in the case of 2001) to the attendence, surely padding the numbers as well. I think that season tickets are still used as the measuring stick to how a teams business side is going, and if I was correct in saying that season ticket sales have increased each year Zack has been the man, then I see no problem with what he's doing.
You are not alone. Your eloquence has clearly stated some of the points I have been trying to make for the past few weeks. If one of the decision makers is fired when things go bad, then the others with similar responsibility should go as well. Oh wait, the others happen to be the guys making the decision and that would mean firing themselves. That would never do. This management group are a bunch of clowns that take us for fools and tell us not to peak behind the curtain to see who is really running the show. We are also to believe that this trio (Payne, Kasper and Zack) takes three weeks to decide which direction the team should go. This is a Payne decision and should take three minutes. They should have been talking to likely candidates already and have a new coach in a matter of days.
I feel Ray should have stayed on for another year. That said, I don't think there's a very strong case that he should stay. I don't see how people can get that upset about it. If he didn't want Marco around, he's got major problems. 1) He's going to fight w/Marco throughout the year because Marco doesn't do what he wants him to do-which happened-the benchings, the taking away his armband, looking back like I said he should have just played him all the time and maybe let him retire at the end. Instead it was a circus for one of the greatest players in MLS and DC United history. There were calls for benchings all the time on this board-doesn't mean he had to listen to 'em. 2) He's already fighting w/Kevin Payne and who knows who else. It's ok to fight some of the time, but in the end he has to accept authority. It's not his team, which is especially true in single-entity In addition you look at what happened (a lot of this has been said already): -We're now left w/5 attacking midfielders (Quintanilla, Stewart, Kovalenko, Convey, Adu), no consistently productive forwards, and maybe Nelsen gone -The players seemed out of control at times. Fighting w/the refs every single game. -Guys were brought in all the time, and most of them weren't signed -He didn't develop the young first year players-whether it was Trask's fault, bad draft picks, or whatever. And when Nike is paying a contract for a 14-year-old kid superstar, that's the last thing they want a coach to be like. I would tend to believe more than just Payne is making the coaching decision here -What the hell was going on behind the scenes. Guys throwing bottles at halftime, team supposedly split, Stewart complaining about his teammates. Sometimes it just seemed they weren't all together. Hudson made $300,000 over 2 years to coach a soccer team. He'll most probably coach again. I'd say it's time to drop any disappointment about the firing and just move on. The next guy is going to have to make major changes to this team to make it a contender, and it's not going to be easy. A roster overhaul may be required to make the team more balanced. I am damn concerned about who they hire next-they better get somebody in here good.