Worst run FO in the league?

dow's been up right? maybe jay sugardaddy can start spending some $$

 

Chivas has us beat by a mile in the "Worst FO" category.

 

And they are still better than Toronto.

 

Couple of points I disagree with. First: Horrible drafting. They've actually drafted pretty well until this season. Gaddis, JackMac, Marfan, Okugo and Hoppenot were all acquired by the Super/Supplemental drafts. MacMath as well, though his stock seems to be falling. Their discovery claims are sterling as well, Valdes, Keon, Garfan, Torres and Williams. Their problem isn't creating the team, it's managing the team.

Second: The fact that you failed to put this whole Chik-Fil-A thing in the PR section shows that this thread is the worst-run "worst-run FO in the league" thread on BigSoccer.

 

agreed with everything except this point. celebrating a company that had its employees roll uruanium rods with out protection and were pretty viscious union busters, actually makes me like the team MORE.

 

I think the front office may have misread the Philly sports fan. Their plan in building a team core based on young players (and cheaper vets) expected to mature may have quenched the fan momentum gained from announcing the team and building a stadium. Waiting for these kids to grow can be, at some point, rewarding (a la RSL); but it may also turn out to be a mis-calculation in that Philly sports fans demand competitiveness in order to remain relevant. Failing to capitalize on early momentum may prove detrimental in the near term.

 

I think its more-so the fact that we expect everyone to be giving their everything to win, owners included. Say what you want about Lurie, but he tries his damnest to build a winner. Can we really say the same about these owners? They seem more like Toronto: just happy to have money coming while making vague promises to fans. We in this city hate it when plays slag off. Why did they think owners would be any different?

 

Ease up a bit. Fully documenting the FO's stupidity would require a much more exhaustive list. I think local136RiverRat was only interested in starting a discussion.

I'm not really sure that I'd agree w/ you RE: Lurie, but it's obvious that the Union ownership doesn't GAFF. The word that continues to stick with me is ambition, or rather the complete lack of it.

 

Sorry, I think using red text is idiotic. I thought I made my sarcasm pretty clear. I'm not really interested in debating the whole chik fil a thing again, but I think that it definitely is one of this season's bigger PR blunders.

 

I agree with parts of this sentiment (although many have made the case against Lurie for not always putting winning as top priority). I do not know if the reason is willful or circumstantial (financial) in sensing a lack of "giving it your all" from the ownership, but I have questioned their ambition quite a bit. There is a reason why Ed Snyder is a popular owner in town, despite the Flyers not winning the Cup in forever. Everyone knows he tries very hard to assemble the best team and that results in near league-topping attendance even in bad years. I have never sensed that from this ownship group. I think it is more realistic, though, to compare the Union ownership to the ownership groups of other MLS expansion teams such as Seattle, Montreal, or even Portland. The noticeable differences in "trying hard" are many.

 

The chuckles at TFC's expense are going to turn to frowns when they roll over us in league play this year. Don't think it won't happen.

 

but... but... but... how about the family 4 pack? think of the children! (of hetero couples)

 

Half - Empty --> Worst FO in the league, bad coach, bad sponsor name, sub par players
Half - Full --> We have a stadium, a team, a stadium sponsor, a shirt sponsor and some nice shirts

We have nowehere to go but up from here. (Crosses fingers in hopes that this is true).

 

The thing with the Chick-fil-a family 4 pack, apart from the obvious, is I bet they'll be a fair few people who pick that deal up, come down PPL Park and fully expect to be able to get their Chick-fil-a meals in the stadium. We know there isn't a Chick-fil-a concession stand in PPL Park, but I bet there'll be a few who fail spot the "Valid at any participating Chick-fil-A restaurant in Philadelphia, New Jersey, and Delaware" in the email.

 

So make sure you leave the stadium as soon as the game's over and spend your money somewhere else!

 

While they should be compared to Seattle, Montreal, Portland and Vancouver to a large extent they still had to build the team and brand from scratch. The other teams all had NASL teams that got promoted to MLS so a large portion of their organization was already there. Seattle is a different animal all together as they quickly became the leader in attendance as they were thought of when that stadium was built, also helps that they have Microsoft money to play with. Our FO has made mistakes and made some good decisions. Unfortunately we do not know the extent that Nowak damaged the club from top to bottom, we saw the big implosion of a playoff roster and ill-advised moves but what else happened? Sure part of the blame goes on management as they didn't have checks and balances and let Nowak do what he did.

To the money side, I find it unlikely that the Union is turning a profit yet. There are so many new franchises in an American sport that don't start operating in the black for years. The costs to start the club are very high from the Stadium to entrance fees and a wide range of other expenses. Also, I am not sure what revenue sharing system MLS has setup as I am sure MLS themselves gets something from every team as they 'pay' the salaries sans DP. To simply say that the FO is all about money and doesn't care is disregarding the fact that we are only a franchise that is four years old. Sure it would be great if we signed a DP that could help the team, though I would like them to be cautious as a fair number of DP players have failed to live up to their billing. I don't believe we are currently in the position to push for the big name DPs like Keane, Henry and such but if they can find the right player at a lower DP cost that can become an integral part of the team would be huge.

 

This has been my assumption for a while. The reality is that our ownership does not have the same depth of pocket as do the other expansion franchises. The news about the 2010 taxes does not help this perception. The costs are very high for such enterprises.

 

Why is that every time one of us complains about the FO being cheap/unambitious, everyone assumes its because we don't sign DP's? You realize we can sign foreign players for less than DP wages who would likely be far better than most of the players on the team? While I don't speak for everyone, I know that my problem isn't DP's, so stop assuming it is. You can bring in Argentinians/Brazilians/Colombians/Europeans on frees or loans without paying them DP money. Look at Mondragon, Valdes, or Torres. The problem is the FO doesn't look for these players. They are fine picking up players from the 20 million different drafts in MLS, despite these players being cast-offs for one reason or another. Considering non-DP's are paid by the league, there is legitimately no excuse to bring someone in other than the FO is too lazy to look.

We aren't complaining because they don't sign DP's. We are complaining because they consider Conner Casey and Le Toux to be significant upgrades while the rest of the league looks for players who aren't MLS retreads.

 

If "punching Aurelien Collin in his ugly, smug bald head" was a tracked stat, then Casey would be a statistical upgrade.

 

of those guys, i believe only okugo would get serious interest from other teams. not to say other teams wouldnt take the others. but they simply arent impact players, at least not yet

 

Well then that isn't necessarily being cheap is it? Since MLS is responsible for all non-dp salaries how can not looking outside MLS be cheap? Also, to your point about not looking for players outside MLS and then naming several players signed from outside the US doesn't that prove your point wrong? This is the first offseason that the FO didn't sign a foreign player of note. So is this the first year they are being cheap? They signed 4 players last offseason from SA leagues, how many of them contributed? Now the year before they got two quality players that worked well so I am not saying they should not look but to call them cheap for not signing a foreign player this offseason is not logical. If it becomes a habit then sure but one offseason?

Also, was I quoting you or someone else in my post? My post was in response to someone else so how am I assuming what you mean when I didn't comment on your post? Guess someone was assuming that I was talking about something I wasn't.

 

Say what you want about Toronto and Chivas, it might never pan out for them, but at least they have ambition and identity.

Toronto at least gives the appearance of trying. They spend money on players. They perform an actual search for a coach.

Chivas' vision is often joked about, but at least you can look at that team and see what their plans are, what their identity is. Even if it fails in the end.

If I'm mistaken and the Union has an identity or any ambition at all, please point it out to me.

 

2012 season called and says "Remember me?"

 

It is always better to try to find an identity than to have an identity that is steeped in mediocrity. Be careful what you wish for applies.