Combination of injuries and call-ups will force Sigi's hand on this. The starting line-up against Chicago was patchwork at best. Looks like more of the same this week. In Naperville: Torres was a non-factor. Good energy but very few touches and nothing to show for those. Broome at least "got into it" with Evan Whitfield - I suspect there may have been a bit of Dallas-Chicago bad blood history there. But, Broome did not create anything for anybody else, at least as I remember. The only criticism I have of Sigi now is not giving Memo more time on the field - if Memo is potentially our future, we might as well throw him into the mix and give him some experience.
None of the starters have been impressive either. They should play hard and try to win for the full 90 if possible and not be complacent & suck so much. With our playoff spot secured and 1st place out of reach (a long time ago), I'm in favor of starting some of these benchers just to see what they have. We may get beat bad, but who cares? Our regular season was finished some time ago.
oh i have no problem with starting them or not, in fact i think it's a good idea. what i don't agree with though is that sigi is a bad coach if he doesn't play them (or because he hasn't played them). trading out one underperforming player for another just smacks of change for the sake of change. if anything were i the coach of the galaxy and given some of the bench players some minutes and they stunk it up just as bad as the starters who brought me success in the past, i think i'd stick with the starters at this point (yeah i know i'm contradicting myself) in the hopes that they can put together 4 or 5 good games and hope they're at the right time.
I guess this thread started in a what if mode b/c it is very doubtful that Sigi would be fired next season even if were eliminated in the first round and weren't able to win a single away game. Based on his winning record, he deserves at least another season to right the wrong. Also going back to those Chicago match-ups - the way in which we lost to them have puzzled me. And then it occured to me, that Chicago and the forwards, especially, let us think that we were doing well and then they struck in the second half. They were in first gear in the first half and then moved up to second/third gear in the 2nd.
Sigi should stay. He is a very good coach. He won MLS Cup last year, and he has made the playoffs every season in MLS. LA has always been a good team under Sigi.
You guys won MLS Cup, and you're making the playoffs even w/a relatively bad midfield, and you think about firing the coach? MAN you guys got short memories! That's just cuckoo to want to fire a coach who just won a championship for you.
ROFLMAO! You guys can't see past this can you? Sigi won MLS Cup for us? Sigi....the guy on the bench who, like every other person in the stadium, sat with his mouth open in amazement as CARLOS RUIZ carried the team throughout the season and won MLS Cup 2002. Take away Carlos Ruiz and his 24 goals and Alexi Lalas becomes the leading scorer for the Galaxy last year with 4...that's right...4 goals scored. But hey, I'm sure we still would have won the championship with the combined 20 goals for the rest of the team led by goalscoring sensation Lalas and the brilliant Sigi Schmid. http://www.mlsnet.com/statistics/archive/2002_tmstats.html I can't wait to here about how it was Sigi that discovered the New World and not Columbus. LA has always been a good team PERIOD (1st or second in the conference every season), until this season, with only the disaster in Dallas saving the Galaxy from last place in the Western Conference. Worst season in Galaxy history with the famous Sigi leading the downhill slide. Dallas qualified every team in Western Conference for post season play before a single Eastern team made it....something of a factor guys. But hey, Sigi got us there running dead last among the Western post season teams, so yeah...another coup for Sigi.
Why Sigi is still playing 3-5-2 system is still a mystery, it hasn't worked all year. A 3-5-2 or a 3-4-1-2 system was very popular back in 2001-2002 seasons, Brazil, Italy, AC ROMA, LA Galaxy, Korea etc., used it. Only Brazil and LA Galaxy had success with it in 2002, and all others didn't. However, nearly all opponents have figured the 3 back system, and now find it easy to score against it. Also, the system is weak when it come to attacks from the flanks. Hence, all most all (even Brazil) have gone back to a 4-3-1-2 or 4-4-2 or a 4-2-3-1 system in 2003, but Sigi has not, and the results speaks for itself at the Galaxy. 3-5-2 doesn't work ! It's time for a 4-3-1-2 system (it's good for the defense and it's good for the offense)
who do you think found ruiz? you can bet your ass that any foreign player that the brilliant scouting minds of MLS pick for LA either flops or is a bad fit(hermosillo, hernandez, bo was just not needed although he is good). Sigi found Ruiz. So in your philosophy, when the team does good then its because of the players, but when they do bad its because of the coach? Genius, I dont know why you arent in charge of a team yourself.
you can't use the same logic to state that sigi is both unresponsible for last years success and responsible for this years disaster. btw how exactly did sigi ride carlos ruiz's goal scoring talents to the 1999 and 2001 mls cup final? or the 2001 open cup? or the 2000 champions cup? and if carlos ruiz carried last years team (agreed there), why isn't he carrying the team this year?
Sure I can, and it follows logically. Ruiz scored 24 goals last year. The rest of the team scored 20, with a defender being the leading scorer of the bunch with 4 goals. Take Ruiz's contributions away and the Galaxy don't win crap. On to this year...Ruiz 2002 does not return added to game after game of underperforming veteran starters. Game after game of conservative, defense oriented soccer with the priority being to keep the opponent off the scoreboard and not lose (a tactic that has failed to produce more than sporadic results), rather than just playing the damn game to win. The Galaxy (prior to San Jo game) are tied for least goals scored in season with Dallas (a truly bad, bad team). Despite our goal scoring woes all season and poor performances all season, basically the same starters are trotted out game after game. Hartman and statistics told us that for the Galaxy to win, more than a single goal must be scored per game, a feat the Gs are unable to accomplish with the favored Sigi lineup if one examines the season as a whole. Sigi makes the lineup. Sigi makes the gameplan. Sigi directs the tactics. These mistakes are excusable at the beginning of the season, but here we are in October and we're still whacking the dead horse with the same lineup and tactics. This is 100% coaching/managerial territory. Some changes should have been explored. The bench should have been given a reasonable chance to get a spot on the starting 11 when some the veterans brought their "z" games for most of the season. ...or the 2 first and 1 second place conference finishes in 1996, 1997, and 1998 and 1 MLS Cup runners up. Oh wait...the Galaxy were already a good team before Sigi got there in 1999 or Ruiz in 2002. As a matter of fact, the Galaxy have never placed below second place in conference standings until, lo and behold, this year. As for the Champions Cup...the most recent effort resulted in a 4-0 home drumming at the hands of Necaxa. What does this have to do with anything regarding the topic of keeping or dumping Sigi? Tell you what...I'll take the bait....Ruiz won MLS Cup 2002, any fool can see that. Sigi happened to be the coach. Ruiz is not so good this year and the Gs are locking up the worst regular season in team history. Supposedly, a good or great coach should be able to put a gameplan together at some point in the season to compensate for the star player losing some of his form, but this hasn't happened. A conclusion could be made that without ringers bringing their A game, the cracks in the fascade of the great Sigi Scmid are beginning to show. And this goes to the very heart of the Anti-Sigi movement...his unwillingness to exhaust every option to find a solution to the Galaxy woes. Some fans don't care about the ribbons on his wall, we just care that he tries like hell to get a derailed train back on track by any means necessary, and in the end, if it's all to no avail, he can honestly hold up his hands in bewilderment and say, "I tried everything until there was nothing else left to try." I'll ask again...can anyone honestly tell me that Sigi tried every option and measure available to him to attempt to change the fortunes of the team?
So it's Sigi's fault that LA have had such a poor season....does he get any props from the 'Fire Sigi' gang for Saturday's result? Hell, he even managed to get Elliott on the scoresheet for the first time this year.
Those of you people you want Fat Sigi put out to pasture are just nuts. This is the first bad year the club has had since he was pried away from UCLA. Other than wanting him to look somewhat in shape, there's are no reasons whatsoever to sack him. But if you do get rid of him, I wonder if he would come to Columbus?
* sigh * Perhaps we should just gift Sigi the Galaxy Managerial title for years 1996, 1997, and 1998. I guess it really is impossible to imagine that the Galaxy were already a successful club before Sigi. (cue "Sigi won you the 2002 MLS Cup" from the next non-Galaxy fan, fly-by-night opinion dropper.)
If the criteria for success is limited only to Cup victories, then I suppose anything less than that is failure, and Sigi has been a failure as a coach 3 years out of 5. Tell me...is Sigi the reason we won MLS CUP 2002 or Ruiz? More than one poster has made the claim that Sigi won MLS Cup 2002. That is what I'm refuting, among other things, and a point of debate that has yet to dredge up any credible evidence from the pro-Sigi fans to support this claim. If you could go back to 2002 and had to remove Sigi or Ruiz from the team, yet still give the Galaxy the best opportunity to win the 2002 Cup...who would you pull? And before you jump to "Sigi spotted Ruiz in the first place" clause which has been a cornerstone for your position, let's remember that talent scouting is one thing, managing and coaching a team is another.
Second paragraph, who would I pull? um, do you mean I only have a choice between having Sigi as coach or Fish on the pitch? Your question doesn't make one bit of since. Here's one, give me a link to a single quote by any member of the Galaxy playing staff that even questions Sigi's abilities as head coach. To the best of my recollection, all I can think about is EZ being unhappy to be traded...and even then he didn't say anything bad about Sigi. So I don't buy your managing talent arguement either.
sigi Everyone is entitled to a bad year. If it happens again..... I don't think you can blame Sigi for a backfield that has no intensity.
you are a man of serious contradiction cl. you keep making arguments that contradict themselves within the confines of your own words. you're saying that the galaxy were a good team when sigi came aboard and that was the reason they succeded (btw as someone who's admitted they didn't follow the team in the 90's you aren't familiar with the dismal 1997 team or the poor 1999 team(first half)). now in 2003, the team is sucking it up and all of a sudden sigi's a major influence. as i said before, sigi either is a major contributing influence on the team (in which case he stays because 3 out 4 years were succesful) or he's not (in which case this season isn't his fault and doesn't deserve to be sacked). the problem with your argument, at least the way you're presenting it, is you're blaming a single person for the poor season, when in fact almost every player, coach, manager, and front office employee needs to hold their hand up and take responsibility for this season. that being the case i won't accept sigi as a scapegoat. this season will be looked back on as an aberration in years to come, there were too many extenuating circumstances this year that when added all together equaled a bad season. the asbolute worst thing la could do at the end of the season is fire sigi.
C'mon...you're wriggling...it's painfully apparent what I'm asking. Sigi or Ruiz...one gets cut from the team. Who do you cut and maintain the best possibility for the Galaxy to win MLS Cup 2002? Let's see here...Sigi is the coach...he makes the lineup...he says who plays and who sits the bench...he decides who his coaching staff will be... Now you want me to find a player or staff member dumb enough to voice his opinions against Sigi...? LOL. I'll locate that quote for you just as soon as I walk into my boss's office and tell him what a dumbass I think he is and then ask him why the hell hasn't he given me a raise. I'm saying that spotting talent is just a portion of a manager's job. I don't know what you're saying.
Straw Man. 1) This is my belief - Sigi walked onto a good team, pre-formed, already one of the best in MLS. End of year 1996, 1997, and 1998 the Galaxy finished first, second, and first respectively in their conference. 2) 2003 situation - Sigi's team started out bad, played the middle of the season in poor form, and here at the end (other than the recent Quakes game) we're still sucking. We're last place among the post season teams in our conference and only in the playoffs because of the meltdown in Dallas. Here is my argument and not the one you've chosen to debate (hence the Straw Man). A) Sigi has made very little effort to change the team's fortunes despite an ever growing list of poor performances by team and veterans. When the veterans continually fail to impress or even put together a minimum standard perfomance, you have to bench these players and give someone else a chance. This is the coaches job. This did not happen. Case in point: Arturo Torres, prior to the last Chicago game, had only seen 35 minutes of MLS action all season, despite our pitiful midfield and offensive displays all season. (note: I'm not claiming anything other than he had not been given an adequate chance.) Same goes for a bunch of the bench sitters. B) His tactic of negative, conservative soccer has come up empty handed repeatedly this season. Here are some telling stats: the Galaxy have not lost a game this season when scoring at least 2 goals. only won one game by a margin of 1-0 (vs. DC in overtime). the rest of the 1 goal Galaxy games have been losses or ties, dominated by losses. What does this tell you? Playing conservative, "try not to lose" soccer by not letting the other team score does not work. The Galaxy have suffered eight 1-0 or 2-0 losses, and six 1-1 draws. The games that have been the offensive exceptions have almost all resulted in victories. Yet still Sigi prefers the defensive posture. This is a tactic chosen by the coach. Not only is it boring, fan repellent soccer, but it invariably has led us to poor game results.
Sigi needs new marquee players to replace Cien and Cobi. Last year Cobi went on a tear at the end of the season after being motivate by the World Cup. Lexi came back with a vengeance and played out of his mind. Ruiz made everyone forget about the Hernandez fiasco. Califf upped his game to the next level. This year Califf has been good but hasn't improved as much as I would have hoped. Cobi and Lexi had their big run to glory and don't seem to have quite the magic they did last year. Ruiz shows flashes of brillance but seems frustrated and a bit immature.