From Soccer America Confidential: "MOELLER FIRE: Former German international midfielder Andy Moeller is still in the sights of MLS, according to a source. Moeller, 35, wouldn't be available until the German season ends in May but he and his representatives have been in discussions with MLS for more than a month. New England and Chicago are the teams jockeying for his services with the Fire in the lead despite its recent acquisition of Jamaican attacker Andy Williams." Hey, it's something. The Magpie
I still think that the Nowak allocation should be ours or there should be none at all. Chicago traded him to us in order to comply with the same rules everyone has to comply with. Lots of teams unload high salary, high impact players every year. We may have "traded him back" in order to allow him to say he "retired in red", but we took him fair and square and any allocation should be coming our way. Also in MLS Confidential... For big cities with large stadiums in its expansion list, MLS has formulated a business plan modeled after Kansas City and New England, where the local NFL owners (Lamar Hunt and Robert Kraft, respectively) also own and/or operate the stadium. then... Onerous lease terms for the Crew, Revs, Metros, Galaxy, Rapids and D.C. United that were in place when the league launched in 1996 have spurred MLS and its teams to work out better deals in larger facilities as well as plan and build smaller stadiums for Columbus, Los Angeles and Dallas. So. Kraft was milking MLS for every penny he could get with "onerous lease terms", but is now a model large stadium MLS/NFL owner. Things that make you hmmmm.
The Fire keeping the allocation if he retired right away had to have been in the original deal, and it might have included them getting the allocation if he retired after a year. Why would Chicago trade a player with an allocation attached to him for a conditional draft pick? Why would we trade his allocation back, along with a 3rd rounder, for a pick in the 6-15 range? The Fire figured out a way to keep their allocation while, for all intents and purposes, exceeding the cap (they didn't waive Nowak or trade someone else to get under the cap). The Revs tried to get Nowak for a year, and got a decent draft pick for parking him on their roster for a few weeks. Not having him on the roster when they were hoping to have him play hurts, but based on the lack of effort they've put into replacing him we'd still probably be right where we are now if we hadn't made the trade.
I'm not so cranky about the Nowak situation. He was a Fire player throughout and Fire deserves the allocation. I'm somewhat more miffed that we traded Diallo, who became an allocation for Metro when he was taken by Al Ahli (sp?). We got Serna for Diallo, who left the team, was taken by a Columbian team, and I doubt we get anything for him. Yes, I know, we got JMM, but I thought that was a separate process, however murky. Spilt milk, I guess.
This was all negotiated and agreed to in advance. The Revs benefited from their willing participation and the risk they agreed to take. If you look at it from the other side, Fire fans may wonder why they have to give up a draft pick when they didn't receive anything in return! It was a win/win proposition (albeit small wins).
Perhaps that should be chalked up to the vagaries of injury. IF Serna hadn't torn up his knee, maybe he'd have some transfer value as Diallo did. So, I guess the ever-changing scorecard of the infamous mega-deal is now: Revs: 1 key starter and 1 versatile, semi-starter; MS: whatever they got for their allocation (Guevara?).
True enough, but also - Revs make the MLS cup, Metros don't make the playoffs in 2002. This has to play a big role in the equation. All in all, a pretty good deal for the Revs. BTW, even if the Revs had gotten an allocation, there's no way they would have gotten Guevara. Up until now, it's been pretty clear that The Bob has had first dibs on any players coming through the MLS pipeline.
Revs made the final last year as a sub-.500 team. In fact, we were only separated from Metro by 1 win--3 points--in the table. Five teams in the league tied or were ahead of us on points at the end of last season. I'm not sure there are very good arguments to put Metro, or any other MLS team for that matter, ahead of the Revs in the allocation suck-up order--certainly not very far ahead. My point is simply that we're as deserving as any, and more so than some, for consideration for help from the home office.
Well, here's one scenario to possibly consider: The Fire have picked up Andy Williams, and while it's reported he'll play at a much reduced salary, I find it hard to believe that Chicago could afford Moller, even if they could sign him in using their allocation. On the other hand, they could sign Moller, then send him to New England for perhaps a player or two, combination of one and picks, etc., giving the Revs the central midfielder they need while also freeing up the cap space to sign him. There are one or two Rev players with trade value that I could see included. The Magpie
The thing is, Chicago is pretty well maxed out at the cap. Even if Williams is playing at $50,000, I can't imagine they'd have even that much left for any future manouverings. For argument's sake, let's say Chicago are $25,000 under the cap (which may be generous) and NE is $100,000 under. Let's say Moeller is willing to play for $125,000 net, after the reimbursement from the allocation. If Chicago signs him, they are over the cap and have to trade $100,000 net in salary. If they trade the allocation to the Revs for a $75,000 player, they have to cut $50,000 in salary. If they sign him, and temporarily go over the cap (which the league may allow if the players don't play in any games), and then trade with the Revs, who ever the Revs give up must be at most $25,000 in salary to fit under the cap. But now everyone is maxed out, but can fit under the cap. Chicago has traded their allocation for a $25,000 player (and maybe a future pick or two, like the ones we got in the Nowak deal) and we get our man. The Fire get something for the future, which is better than letting the allocation sit on the shelf and collect dust. And MLS gets a quality player into the league. Tom
Who do you see us trading? We don't have a ton of depth, unless we have a lot of confidence in Joseph and Noonan. Chicago would be looking for relatively cheap players, and we'd still probably have to cut players beyond that to come up with cap space. If we do have confidence in Joseph's ability to play right away, then they were foolish to have signed Llamosa to a big money deal. With over twice as much money to offer, we might have been able to look at someone decent to play attacking mid, and we wouldn't be talking about losing multiple players to try and sign a 35 year old midfielder. Then again, they still probably wouldn't have expended too many resources looking for players...
Tom, Putting the numbers aside for a minute let's think about this: how badly would Peter Wilt and Dave Sarachan want Moller? You have to admit he (Moller) does fit a certain aesthetic that's appealed to Wilt in the past, and is a type of player, not dissimilar to Nowak, who'd likely be a hit in Chicago. Also, what's to suggest that any team would necessarily need an allocation to sign him? It could also be argued that Gilles Grimandi might also have been worthy of an allocation, but he signed as a discovery; guessit comes down to the salary Moller might be willing to accept. So considering the supposed lack of cap space in Chicago, also that they've recently signed Andy Williams... could or would Chicago even be in play for Moller at this point, at least in terms with an eye for signing him to the Fire, which one would assume thet can't at present, not unless they somehow free up a big chunk of cap space... yet there they sit with an allocation. So do they use it, or not, and if they don't, can they bank it or will the league tell them "use it or lose it." If I'm Peter Wilt I'm thinking, "why would I willingly commit to a plan of action that doesn't really help us, but significantly improves a conference rival? Thoughts?
Maybe a bigger question is--Would Steve N want to sign a end of career player with a lot of emotional and social baggage? Nowak was at the end of his career but known as a team player. From what I hear, Moller is a pony of a different stripe. Right now SN has a roster of players that work for each other. Would he be willing to risk the harmony of his locker room to sign another German looking for a place to retire? George
I'm not sure what plan of action you mean here. Seems to em that the Fire can either make a bid for Moeller and cut some players (tough choice), trade the allocation to New England for a pick and a player (not too expensive), or simply pass and hold onto the allocation. If they choose the third course, does anyone else have an allocation? If not, I'd think he (Moeller) would be up for grabs between anyone who had the interest in signing him and the cash to pay him. Honestly I don't see where the Fire have that many options.
Many of the players who have played in the MLS in the past have bios on mlsnet.com, but there aren't any links to them. If you click on rosters, then onto a team roster (like the Revs), and click on a player link, it will take you to his bio page. You can modify the location to another player. For instance, if your location is http://www.mlsnet.com/bios/adin_brown.html, you can just change it from adin_brown to jason_moore to view his bio. I hope this was somewhat clear.
My goodness, it works--thanks BTW, does anyone think Jason Moore has any hope of finding a roster slot. Right now we have Kamler, Noonan, leonard and Griffith-all who are left sided mids. Is there a story as to why Moore never worked out? He was a hot prospect that never seemed to get past his rookie success.