wait til the next loss, then Stewart, Etcheverry, Ivanov and Cerritos will all suck again and Ray will need to be fired.
I still dont like Ray... I dont want him fired, but I still dont like him, his style, or his comments/jokes. Still, he is better than Rongen, I must admit. Ray still hasnt done anything for DCU. The jury is still out... Ask again next season
DC United is da man - - that includes Ray, John, Dave and most of all, players! If you want to see how quickly fans turn vicious, check out the mutt board's thread on the NE game (start on page 3 if you're pressed for time): https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71801 and also check out the "The Hype known as Bob Bradley" thread at: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72313 My oh my! Lisi is the second coming! It couldn't happen to a sweeter bunch of guys. Very, very humorous, if you can appreciate the irony. GM
Ivanov I agree that Namoff should start over him, but he doesn't suck. I don't who you expect to play right back in the MLS. It's not like every other team has someone like Gary Neville or a world class defender at right back. Look at it this way it is better than having Rusty Pierce.
Re: Ivanov Gary Neville and world class used in the same sentence, now that's comedy! Oh yeah, Fire Ray. He could win MLS Cup for all I care I do not like him in any way, I do not like that man called Ray!
I was going to post something about Ray, wittingly or unwittingly having turned the team around, and how he doesn't get enough credit for this because he isn't an orthodox American style coach. Then I read this article at http://www.mlsnet.com/content/03/firstXI0916.html, and decided to share this extract with y'all instead.
Right. Chalk this one up in the "when we lose, it's the coach's fault. When we win, it's because of the players." As one who has been critical of Ray's tactics, I'll admit that the recent form can't just be chalked up to the Cerritos trade. I think the recent run of form (including the Blackburn and ES matches) has helped a lot towards getting the chemistry and confidence that we've lacked this year. DigitalTron has often written that Ray prefers offensive players who don't need to be told what to do, citing his abilities as a player as proof, and I think the recent stretch bears that out. We can disagree, as we do, as to what that says about Ray as a tactician or do, but you can;t deny that the team is finally coming together. What I still have issue with is the difficulty we have had in adapting to the opponent's tactical changes. Ray's idea of a defensive sub is putting on a forward for a midfielder and playing for the breakaway goal on the counter. Fresh legs up top is a good idea, but when the other team puts on an attacker, fresh legs at the back is even better.
"Still, he is better than Rongen, I must admit." in the Sinking Dutchman's own oft-repeated words, "WITHOUT A DOUBT"
Despite DC's recent successes, anyone who was watching the DC bench during the second half of the San Jose would have to wonder about the quality of DC coaching and, in particular, Ray's command of the team. First, DC had four or five players start to warm up midway through the half. And, with Q2 getting pulverised by San Jose, one would have thought a substitute was in order for him at least. Perhaps a substitute for someone else just some fresh legs in a hard fought game. Nope, the potential substitutes ended up spending the last 10-15 minutes just standing around. At a minimum, it isn't good practice to have potential substitutes stop warming up. Second a substitution really did seem to be the right move. All the while, Ray and Hristo were busy have an animated conversation with each other and both shouting instructions to the field. Overall, it didn't look like anyone was in charge. Anyone watching from a distance would not have been impressed by Ray's management skills. OK, they won the game, so no immediate harm, but in the long run, the details matter. MLS is too balanced a league to let any advantage slip away.
This is idiotic. Both the coach and the players have mentioned the lack of subs late in the game and NO ONE has had a problem with it. Obviously, the team won as well, which is so graciously pointed out, but really it shouldn't be noted and such a back-handed way. I personally talked to Martins in the post game, who warmed up for a full 45 minutes and he said he was fine with the situation and that the coach has the final say and he'd do whatever he said. Yes, new guy, but he's also a bit of a star in his own right, so I'd think he knows what he's talking about. Please don't presume Ray doesn't have command of the team. That's a foolish assumption.
Fire... Somebody I am one of those who thinks that the current coaching staff needs to change. I don't think that the staff, as it is assembled now, is good for the team in the long run. First i give Ray full credit for assembling the team in Miami. He put the pieces in place, players who "knew" how to play, and motiated them to perform. I also give Ray full credit for the team's current winning streak (along with the players of course). They play hard and give their all every game, win or lose. Of course the team in Miami, if memory serves, didn't have any young guys in prominent roles, except maybe for Leo Cullen. And i blame Ray/staff for not filling the holes that we had in the offseason, and for his substitution patterns and starting lineups in some games that started us out in a hole. Starting hristo, etch and chino together in several games comes to mind, and i can't forgive him for playing chino in all those games before giving namoff a chance who has turned out to be a gem. I'm not going to get into the whole Etcheverry thing because that is a tough nut to crack and I think any coach would have a difficult time getting a MLS icon to sit on the bench, not just for team reasons, but for MLS and fan reasons. Not that I agree with how he handled it, just that it was a difficult situation. The issue I have is that Ray and/or his staff cannot build talent. They need players that are already able to play, like earnie, like ronald, like benny, like petke, etc, etc. If you hand them a player that needs a little work, like esky, or stokes, or barclay(admittedly, not much to work with there), Mapp, etc, etc, that player just won't play. instead we see a heavy dose of Chino. They cannot spot young talent either, if you look at the players listed above either they sucked so bad that we made a poor decision in drafting them or we can't coach them the final bit to have them ready to play. i think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. What that means is that we will not be able to build anything thru the draft where cheap talent is available. you can get guys who are roster exempt, like p40s or junior internationals (whatever category chino and q2 fall into) and/or are minor hits on the salary cap, instead of a team full of established vets who require roster spots and higher salaries. we might be good now, but we won't be good later. And i don't know about the other fans here, but i would rather be good every year rather than win a cup and then go into oblivion for 4-5 years. Maybe the change doesn't need to be with Ray. If you get a guy who can pick talent, then give them to an assistant who can coach them up to MLS level, then Ray can motivate them to play with the first team at a top level....
Re: Fire... Somebody First of all, there is nothing wrong with trying to bring in players who are already able to play. Why do you think Bradley brought in Guevara, for example, or Sarachan brought in Bolanos (25 yr old Costa Rican) ? They did it because they know like any good coach that you cannot win championships with a bunch of kids with potential, you need some guys who already have proven ability and experience. Check out all the MLS Cup winning squads and you'll see my point. Why don't you give Ray credit for bringing in some veterans who have made a positive difference to the team, like Petke, Dema, Cerritos and Earnie ? Oh, and Chino hasn't started for a while, either. Secondly, young players have been developed on this team. Again, why don't you give Ray credit for developing Namoff, Quintinilla and even Convey ? And please don't give me the line about Convey would have developed without Ray. Yeah, and maybe Damani Ralph and Ricardo Clark would have done fine without their respective coaches too. If you give credit to Sarachan and Bradley because their young players got better you have to do the same with Ray's young players. Actually, I think you have much better point when you criticize Ray for his tactical decisions and subs. This has been a weak point. And I agree about the off-season moves. What hurt us most at the beginning of the year was not getting a proven striker in the off-season. Ironically, since this suggests Ray was expecting the young guys Eskandarian and Quaranta to be able to step up. However, with the arrival of Cerritos and Martins I think we have this area covered. With the last two matches it seems to me that Ray has finally succeeded in his stated goal for the team, ie to build a ' fist' of a team, a team with toughness and hardness, but also with skill and talent. This is a considerable achievement when you consider what things have been like in the last three years. I agree that he and Trask are perhaps not the best coaches in the league but I think they have done enough to justify staying on beyond the end of the season. The only time I would even consider replacing them would be if Bob Bradley were to wake up one morning and, consumed with self-loathing at working for the Scum, offer his services to DC. And even then I am not convinced that Bradley is as good as his hype suggests.
Re: Re: Fire... Somebody Actually, i did give Ray credit for the teams current streak, and getting those guys who already "knew" how to play to play to a top level. I totally agree with you that you have to have vets on a team to win anything other than the Youngest Team award. My point is that you need young guys to flesh out the squad both as starters and as subs. You can't afford to have vets all up and down the bench, its impossible. You need to have those youngsters perform and that is where the coaching staff has failed the team. I could be wrong (probably am), but my impression is that Ray hasn't had much to do with the growth of bobby and q2 other than challenging them to perform. If that is all you needed to get someone to play good ball then why doesn't he use that tactic with esky and stokes and carrol? You can't because those guys still need to be taught how to play, positionally, tactically, mentally. Ray only knows how to push one button (motivation) and if that button doesn't work, where does he turn? I think if Ray had other options he would never have used namoff and he would still be languishing on the bench or with Richmond. Ray couldn't spot the talent that was sitting on his bench and a lot of posters here were wondering why too. Everytime he played last year and this he has performed well. You can also look at the play of q1 who I think has regressed, and the fact that he couldn't get anything out of mapp. And unless i hear otherwise, Cullen is the only youngster I can recal (with admittedly faulty memory) playing with miami. this speaks about the eye for talent that i mentioned... i agree with you wholeheartedly except for justifying them staying on for another year. And again, I'm not saying specifically that Ray has to go, just that we need to improve in the areas that i mentioned which are spotting and developing young talent. if that means replacing an assistant coach or management staff, or even Ray then that is where we need to go... having said that, i don't want us to get rid of them unless there is a better option. who is that better option? i don't know...
Bradley needs to first cram his 3+1 sub up his rear sphincter and apologize. He's got a real bad case of metrostink on him. You know, this criticism of Ray, John and Dave would strike me as funny were it not so pathetic. Y'all should check out the very funny mutt forum to see just how much scumbag Bradley is appreciated. GM
The job of a coach is to win, and lately we've been pretty good at that- certainly better than the past 3 seasons. I'm not saying there aren't valid criticisms, but if we're going to blame Ray when we lose, then we have to give him the credit he deserves when we win. If we say DCU loses because of Ray, then we certainly can't turn around and say that a win is a lucky break that happened despite Ray's management. After the past three seasons, I'm quite happy now. Even if we exit in the first round of the playoffs, this team has guts and confidence.
I think this "Ray only knows how to motivate, and cannot teach" thory should be scrapped. I've been to practices and seen Ray, Trask, Stoitchkov, etc. all teaching specific players many times. So, they do indeed teach players to be better. Also players like Convey and Quaranta have flat out said they've learned from Ray. However, they also must spend the majority of the time in practice getting the players to work together so that they can actually win games, which is obviously the main goal of any coach esp. in the wacky MLS world. And to criticize playing Chino over Namoff is really armchair coaching. The fact is Namoff had to improve his consistency, and cut out his one huge gaff per game tendency, in order to bump Chino to the bench. The moment he did that Chino became a memory. As soon as Esky, Stokes, etc. do that they'll find themselves in the starting lineup too. He didn't get anything from Mapp, but I doubt anyone would have got anything from Mapp last year. He simply was not ready last year. Hudson did have young players in Miami besides Cullen too. Mastroeni became a star under Hudson. Nicky started in goal over the older Cassar. Alavanja was even starting in the 2001 playoffs over Ian Woan. Even Beckerman scored against DC, remember as I recall. As for spotting talent, Ray and Co. certainly have as good a track record as any staff in the league. Everybody in the league goofed on letting Ralph fall so far in the draft. And everybody in the league agreed Esky was the nmmber one pick. Still wouldn't surprise me to see Esky turn out better than Ralph in the long run. And his tactical plans and substitution patterns are always going to be a bone of contention with fans no matter who the coach is. Just because someone thinks his tactics and substituions suck doesn't make that true. There will be just as many people who think they're good. I think all these stereotypes about Ray need to end. He's as good, if not better than any coach in the league. For every presumed fault, you can find just as many examples for every other coach. Sorry, for the long-winded response, but I think a lot of what's said about Ray is too much guesswork and speculation rather than based in cold hard facts.
To quote Grillmaster: "You know, this criticism of Ray, John and Dave would strike me as funny were it not so pathetic." It is very, very pathetic. Enjoy the last few games of the season. Enjoy the U.S. Open Cup semi-final. Maybe,...at the end of the 2004 season you (the critics) should reflect on the job that Mr. Hudson and his staff have done with the team.