The window does not open until Aug 15: http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/about/league.jsp?section=regulations&content=overview Remember that transfer windows are for inbound transfers not outbound transfers. The September 15 date is also the roster freeze date, including trade deadline.
As far as I know he has a guarenteed contract (re pay) at this point and there is no reason to cut him unless we wanted to use his roster slot. With two open slots I doubt they would do that at this point. IMO, Smith will be a Rev till the end of 2005.
I suggest you stop off and plant a microphone in SN's office which may be the only way we find out whats in the mill till the new player(s) show up in the lineup.
Smith may not have produced in matches, but he MUST be showing something in training. SN and PM see potential in him and will give him at least the entire year to develop....you can count on that.
My greatest fear is that there is nothing in the works I think he's still with us because: 1) We have nobody else 2) He does in fact have a contract that is guarenteed so we pay him anyways I also believe SN is very slow to admit he made a mistake and Smith is a mistake. Unless someone gets hurt, I only expect to see him in spot, late game duty from now on and gone at the end of the season.
My own guess is that they will give him another season. I liken his situation to an NBA team that drafts a player based on size/speed and potential. Since he's only been playing/practicing "full time" as a professional for 3+ months, I think they will give him a little more time. That being said, he needs to step up his game or he will be gone.
I tend to agree, but I don't think he's that secure for next year. I don't think the coaches ever expected him to step in and be a scorer this year. They needed a backup forward, liked his physical ability and saw some potential. For all of those convinced that they've seen all he can do and have written him off, I ask this - how many foreign players, particularly at his age, came in and played well? Very few. MLS is a big adjustment for most of these guys. Smith didn't play well when the Revs were basically playing their 'B' team. When he played with most of the starters (as a mid and a forward), he did okay - not great, but not a disaster either. He still has all kinds of potential - to give up on a guy who was put in a tough position for a few games is very shortsighted. Keep in mind that in those same games, Twellman struggled for goals also. For one, he's a seasoned veteran. The expectations are much higher (as is the salary). For whatever reasons that most of us will probably never be privy to, he never really showed that he could be a difference maker. The fact that he didn't get more opportunities makes me think that he never convinced Nicol that he was the best at his position in practice. Perhaps in his experience, players didn't have to be the best in practice if they were the best in games? Since you brought up Cassio, I think what the Revs really need is more midfield depth. Losing Dempsey and Ralston at the same time (as well as Joseph for a game) really exposed that. Having another solid midfielder (lets not mention Flores, he's a "project" at this point), would give them the depth to cover for missing players and move a few guys around a bit (Dempsey to forward on occasion). The fact that they needed to have Franchino play in the middle cries out for another alternative.
It's interesting if you read through this thread you find good reason for the Revs to add a player at almpst every position. The only one I think that hasn't been mentioned is a better back up keeper than Warren. One of the things I take away from the whole discussion is the difficulty of having such small rosters of first team players. If a team has injuries or call-ups they struggle. I understand why MLS is keeping rosters small (for now) but the lack of quality depth is an issue across the board
Actually, in a much earlier thread, I believe I mentioned that we would really be in bad shape if we lost Reis for any period of time. After watching Warren in a Reserves game, I was even more sure of it. I think we have a great team, but even from the start of the season, I was worried about our depth. It seems that many of the other MLS teams can't match us "star for star", but then they don't drop off so drastically talent wise when they go to their bench. Yes, I think we are weak if we have to play Warren instead of Reis. We are weak if we have to go to a 5th defender (Parkhurst, Heaps, John, Franchino). We are weak on the left wing, and very weak if Ralston is out (Leonard?, Riley?, Smith?) I'd take almost any team's third wing over these players. And ... I don't think we have an acceptable 3rd striker (Dempsey belongs in the midfield). Hopefully the team has learned from it's past mistakes, (Howey, Cassio ... the list is long if you go back all 10 years) and has scouted a group of players that could come in and CONTRIBUTE during the stretch run. We have the CAP money (if Kraft wants to spend it). If we are looking to add one player, then I'd like to see them add SPEED to a forward or flank position (left mid), and hope that everyone else stays healthy. We are not the fastest team, and some speed might open up more holes for Twellman to drop into. Fast players require constant defensive attention, and give everyone else on their team a little more space and time on the ball. If we are looking to add two players, then anyone who can play on the back line would be good for depth.
Well there you go---it's now 100%---we could use an better depth player at every position I guess I don't have a strong feelings about what field positions we fill just as long as we fill the two open roster slots with players that are ready for first team ball.
I don't have a clue. Maybe an attitude problem? He's certainly tolerated players that didn't work out for longer periods of time (Brilliant, that Brit 'Hovey" or something). I don't think Cassio was costing a ton of money. Casssio had to be better then Smith or Riley and he could have held him a little longer to be sure he couldn't cut it. My GUESS is that he's in a corner with Smith and there's no advantage to cutting him. If his salary is guarenteed then he might as well earn it My other theory is that he really doesn't like South American players.
??? what an odd thing to say. what facts lead you to entertain this theory? cancela? fact is he has trialed or signed plenty of SA players. why would he sign, (you have to sign them before you can bench them or cut them) players he 'doesn't like' for racial reasons? re-goddamn-diculous. unless he signed those 'undesireables' so he could 'stick it to them' by benching them. My theory is that you think all South American players have silky smooth skills, play jogo bonito and toca toca - except when they are diving and cheating. and that all brits are still bitter about teaching those damn south americans how to play the game. and that you have plenty of other racial stereo types up your sleve, but upon being accused of harboring such feelings, will renounce them. (note when I say "odd" i really mean to say something much meaner about your stereotypical bs but for some reason couldn't be bothered to be more bothered about it)
Calm down. This is not a racial issue but a "style of play" issue. I am simply saying I don't thnk he likes the SA style of play and since South Americans usually play that style, he doesn't like them .... as players. I really think he prefers bangers and muckers over the "beautiful game" and that would come from his own experience. English soccer is very different then South American soccer and I believe Nicol favors what he knows best.
At this point I would be happy if we just picked up some MLS journeymen. We need "bodies" who've played in the league. Right now we've got too many projects out there when our starters are out.
Myth = There is a South American style of play. its like saying all black people look alike. keep up the stereo types. While youre at it - explain why he keeps trialing and signing players that play a style he doesn't favor?
i think this would make sense. though the projects aruabley have held thier own (at least haven't lost us any ground). yet.
Curious: Are you suggesting -- rather strongly I might add -- that South America does not have its own style of play? Or are you suggesting that it is a myth to think any region in the world has its own style of play? Can you explain? (Trying to learn here, not chopping your post.)