PDA

View Full Version : Anselmi's dig at Mo



Ossington Mental Youth
03-30-2010, 11:16 AM
if anyone questions that MLSE is ok with Mo should look at Anselmi's dig at Mo during the conference. The heat is on, as it should be.

Chevy
03-30-2010, 11:17 AM
lol. Followed by another from the Mayor!

BFin
03-30-2010, 11:17 AM
Is this a new thread? It offers not much more than a post...

Eastend
03-30-2010, 11:19 AM
what's the dig?

drewski
03-30-2010, 11:20 AM
for those of us not watching, what was said?

FluSH
03-30-2010, 11:21 AM
PICTURES or it didn't happen...

Ossington Mental Youth
03-30-2010, 11:22 AM
He said that MLSE done many things (all that ish in the brochure) except bring a competing team and Mo is somewhere sweating (paraphrasing)

Chevy
03-30-2010, 11:22 AM
I'm paraphrasing here but Anselmi mentioned that the goal is to make the playoffs this year then said "I be Mo's squirming around back there". Or something to that effect.

The mayor made two comments - one about not making the playoffs yet and another about goal scoring.

Lucky Strike
03-30-2010, 11:24 AM
He said that MLSE done many things (all that ish in the brochure) except bring a competing team and Mo is somewhere sweating (paraphrasing)


I'm paraphrasing here but Anselmi mentioned that the goal is to make the playoffs this year then said "I be Mo's squirming around back there". Or something to that effect.

The mayor made two comments - one about not making the playoffs yet and another about goal scoring.

*Tents fingers* Excellent.

Ossington Mental Youth
03-30-2010, 11:24 AM
I'm paraphrasing here but Anselmi mentioned that the goal is to make the playoffs this year then said "I be Mo's squirming around back there". Or something to that effect.

The mayor made two comments - one about not making the playoffs yet and another about goal scoring.

yep even better than mine, thanks

drewski
03-30-2010, 11:30 AM
*Tents fingers* Excellent.


+1

this day just keeps gettin better and better

Chevy
03-30-2010, 11:31 AM
They piled on just a little more near the end of the press conference too.

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 11:36 AM
Did Anselmi say he'd be gone if they don't make the playoffs, or is Mo the only one over there who'll say that?

Damien
03-30-2010, 11:39 AM
I think he said squirming... not sweating.

He still shoulda said "Playoffs or he's fuckin fired"

FluSH
03-30-2010, 11:40 AM
I'm paraphrasing here but Anselmi mentioned that the goal is to make the playoffs this year then said "I be Mo's squirming around back there". Or something to that effect.

The mayor made two comments - one about not making the playoffs yet and another about goal scoring.


Well can you imagine how much is at stake... in terms of $$$$ a TFC Playoff bound would be the talk of the city... It would make this city soccer mad especially after a WC

denime
03-30-2010, 11:45 AM
HAHAHAHA Mo has RPB PIN oh his suit.

http://i42.tinypic.com/2dui7p2.png

Waggy
03-30-2010, 11:47 AM
Plans to expand BMO to 28 000 seats? Wonder if those plans involve a roof.... perhaps thats what they're waiting for?

JDG
03-30-2010, 11:48 AM
HAHAHAHA Mo has RPB PIN oh his suit.

What's with all of the RPB schwag?

Mo's pin, The Mayor's scarf, and has anyone seen the picture Luke W. posted on twitter?


http://i41.tinypic.com/1zfl8g7.jpg

http://i41.tinypic.com/34j66c2.jpg

Section225
03-30-2010, 11:54 AM
What's with all of the RPB schwag?

Mo's pin, The Mayor's scarf, and has anyone seen the picture Luke W. posted on twitter?







How do the RPBs feel about them wearing RPB stuff? good? bad? mixed? Just curious...

billyfly
03-30-2010, 11:56 AM
^To me. Mixed emotions.

billyfly
03-30-2010, 11:56 AM
Did I hear BMO expansion to 28,000?

Belfast_Boy
03-30-2010, 11:58 AM
are they paid up members?

flatpicker
03-30-2010, 11:59 AM
Did I hear BMO expansion to 28,000?


I must have missed that... anyone know anything about that?

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 12:00 PM
Actually, I can't believe a guy who works for a company that can't get any of their sports teams into the playoffs - let alone be legitmate contenders for a championship - would have the arrogance to even joke about it like that. There's certainly no "All For One" in the FO is there? Wow, people will be breaking down the doors to come work for this company.

At least we know where the buck stops. The suits will throw any one of their employees under the bus, and we'll back them up.

RPB_RED_NATION_RPB
03-30-2010, 12:01 PM
I must have missed that... anyone know anything about that?

its there long term goal....to expand BMO to 28..29 thousand

gtaguy
03-30-2010, 12:03 PM
I must have missed that... anyone know anything about that?


the director of MlSe facilities stated that ideally they see this stadium being 28 to 29K and that that would be the perfect size to maintain and keep the sport exciting . In other words i think it was the idea to keep the demand going and waiting list growing.

FluSH
03-30-2010, 12:08 PM
What's with all of the RPB schwag?

Mo's pin, The Mayor's scarf, and has anyone seen the picture Luke W. posted on twitter?


http://i41.tinypic.com/1zfl8g7.jpg



NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O

That might be some badluck right there!

OOOOOH NOOOOOOOOOOOOES!

FluSH
03-30-2010, 12:10 PM
How do the RPBs feel about them wearing RPB stuff? good? bad? mixed? Just curious...

Personally,

As long as they keep bringing in the goods... like they did with the grass... I don't care.

Next big spending ticket is a ROOF!!!! :D

Whoop
03-30-2010, 12:10 PM
Yeah... rule of thumb is you don't touch it until you win it.

Wagner
03-30-2010, 12:10 PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O

That might be some badluck right there!

OOOOOH NOOOOOOOOOOOOES!

No way dude.
It's good luck like the lucky loonie in Salt Lake.

FluSH
03-30-2010, 12:10 PM
Yeah... rule of thumb is you don't touch it until you win it.


OOOOOOH NOES

billyfly
03-30-2010, 12:16 PM
Yeah... rule of thumb is you don't touch it until you win it.

I agree with this statement.

Waggy
03-30-2010, 12:17 PM
Wait, Flush, you're saying bad luck is ABOUT to hit TFC on the pitch? Wtf were the past few months/years? If that was good I'll take my chances with bad...

FluSH
03-30-2010, 12:18 PM
Well I'm glad The Mayor was wearing a Danny Dichio scarf... that is a classic scarf.

Parkdale
03-30-2010, 12:23 PM
Mo has heard worse. It's not really a 'dig'. It was a friendly 'barb' like we all trade around here.

Oldtimer
03-30-2010, 12:34 PM
If the team tanks though, you kind of know that Anselmi will be forced to act, and he knows it.

JuliquE
03-30-2010, 12:40 PM
Well can you imagine how much is at stake... in terms of $$$$ a TFC Playoff bound would be the talk of the city... It would make this city soccer mad especially after a WC
Surprised this point hasn't been highlighted already, but this is a HUGE factor as far as motivation to succeed is concerned. It goes along with what I had said in the first "Today's News" thread to unofficially announce the cup being played at BMO; the powers that be would see an opportunity to really strike big ($), as well as our players getting some MUCH needed drive to put it all out on the pitch -- every time.. the culmination of which leading both sides in looking to help each other on the road to the final or, at the very least, a berth.

Our city is a huge melting pot, but we'd all have collectively liked to cheer on La Rouge in this year's big show in South Africa.. and yet another "No Homers" party will be held, with the ONLY permitted "Homer" being the States. *sigh*

After seeing what the Winter Games brought to this country and the aspirations for the beautiful game in North America, what is arguably the most strongly supported club in the league MUST show up with it's feverish fans in droves.. as we can't afford a missed opportunity like this, not especially whilst everyone's still on a World Cup high.

I'm sick of that awkward feeling when you hear or watch the face of someone speaking on our great "success," as they walk around on eggshells -- our post-season shortcomings.

Tschuess

trane
03-30-2010, 01:02 PM
If the team tanks though, you kind of know that Anselmi will be forced to act, and he knows it.

As you know I do not think all of them should be held accountable. They hired him an stood behind him way to long.

Parkdale
03-30-2010, 01:02 PM
Surprised this point hasn't been highlighted already, but this is a HUGE factor as far as motivation to succeed is concerned.


trust me, that was the message we were all saying at the event.

'having he final in your city should be a HUGE motivating factor'

Roogsy
03-30-2010, 01:07 PM
Yeah... rule of thumb is you don't touch it until you win it.


LOL! And none of us did. I made sure I put the scarf around it but did not touch the actual trophy.

Besides...our team couldn't possibly get worse. :D

pekduck
03-30-2010, 01:10 PM
^

stay tuned on CBC news tonight for 'market update' from Roogsy with a MLS twist, lol

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 01:24 PM
Mo has heard worse. It's not really a 'dig'. It was a friendly 'barb' like we all trade around here.


Then they're too chummy. Maybe it doesn't matter, but this organization just doesn't say "winner" to me.

T0R0NT0 FC
03-30-2010, 01:35 PM
Where can this video or whatever be found? 28,000 people expansion? Any blueprints or info on this?

Lucky Strike
03-30-2010, 01:35 PM
LOL! And none of us did. I made sure I put the scarf around it but did not touch the actual trophy.

Besides...our team couldn't possibly get worse. :D

Doesn't work that way for all teams though - for some it's actually lucky to touch it.

FluSH
03-30-2010, 01:38 PM
Mo has heard worse. It's not really a 'dig'. It was a friendly 'barb' like we all trade around here.

can we change the title of this thread then...

canadian_bhoy
03-30-2010, 01:39 PM
The whole "don't touch the trophy" thing is a crock of shit.

Besides, the superstition is for players, not fans. Although, based on our roster, some of the fans may need to sub in this season.

Either way, it's dumb. Touching the wales trophy didn't seem to hurt Crosby last year.
http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnewssports/2009/05/large_penguins_sweep_hurricanes.jpg

Wagner
03-30-2010, 01:48 PM
The whole "don't touch the trophy" thing is a crock of shit.

Besides, the superstition is for players, not fans. Although, based on our roster, some of the fans may need to sub in this season.

Either way, it's dumb. Touching the wales trophy didn't seem to hurt Crosby last year.
http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnewssports/2009/05/large_penguins_sweep_hurricanes.jpg

Well Put C_B.
Also, both teams pose with the superbowl leading up to the game...
superstition is ridiculous.

Roogsy
03-30-2010, 01:50 PM
Doesn't work that way for all teams though - for some it's actually lucky to touch it.

I didn't want to tempt fate. :lol: Just kidding. They asked if I wanted to hold it and I said "no way, not till we win it..."

And I am not even superstitious. I don't believe in luck. To me, it's the principle.

Lucky Strike
03-30-2010, 01:53 PM
The whole "don't touch the trophy" thing is a crock of shit.

Besides, the superstition is for players, not fans. Although, based on our roster, some of the fans may need to sub in this season.

Either way, it's dumb. Touching the wales trophy didn't seem to hurt Crosby last year.
http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnewssports/2009/05/large_penguins_sweep_hurricanes.jpg

Lol, that's the exact situation I was alluding to, Mario also touched the PoW trophy during his 2 cup runs as well.

FluSH
03-30-2010, 01:54 PM
Well Put C_B.
Also, both teams pose with the superbowl leading up to the game...
superstition is ridiculous.


Both of you guys oooze bad luck!!!!

dclaro
03-30-2010, 01:58 PM
Lol, that's the exact situation I was alluding to, Mario also touched the PoW trophy during his 2 cup runs as well.
i thought the superstition was dont hold it over your head like you would with the cup

DangerRed
03-30-2010, 02:00 PM
Mo has heard worse. It's not really a 'dig'. It was a friendly 'barb' like we all trade around here.

See, and therein lies the problem. This "Aw fucking schucks" kind of joke means that nothing will be done AGAIN if we don't make the post-season.

While the above is conjecture, what is 100 percent certain is that Anselmi won't whack Mo any time before then.

Wagner
03-30-2010, 02:01 PM
Both of you guys oooze bad luck!!!!
i'd like to think I ooze machismo.

http://www.thepensblog.com/images/stories/july2009/wrestlig/razor.jpg

Roogsy
03-30-2010, 02:01 PM
Both of you guys oooze bad luck!!!!

:lol:

And I also didn't want superstitious fans blaming me for anything either! So as far as I know, nobody other than the Mayor touched it.

drewski
03-30-2010, 02:03 PM
i thought the superstition was dont hold it over your head like you would with the cup


I thought the superstition was don't do to it what you did to your wife's drunk sister who passed out in your bed that one night

shaggingscot
03-30-2010, 02:03 PM
I've touched the Stanley Cup, does that mean I won't win it now?

Bloor West FC
03-30-2010, 02:29 PM
When the cup got carried it was wrapped in a green blanket.

Oldtimer
03-30-2010, 02:31 PM
When the cup got carried it was wrapped in a green blanket.

That means Seattle will win it! :lol:

canadian_bhoy
03-30-2010, 02:31 PM
When the cup got carried it was wrapped in a green blanket.

It was a giant blue tiffany bag.


http://www.ustiffanystore.com/images/hz.jpg

FluSH
03-30-2010, 03:05 PM
I've touched the Stanley Cup, does that mean I won't win it now?


I'll put some serious money down betting that you will never win the Stanley Cup!!! :D

Whoop
03-30-2010, 03:15 PM
Well Put C_B.
Also, both teams pose with the superbowl leading up to the game...
superstition is ridiculous.

Posing with it is different that touching it. Can't remember which Colt touched it this year before the game.


Lol, that's the exact situation I was alluding to, Mario also touched the PoW trophy during his 2 cup runs as well.

Umm, yeah that ain't the big trophy they want to win. When was the last time you saw a team do laps with the Prince of Wales trophy.

Yeah, it's a superstition but it's like the SI cover jinx or the EA sports jinx. You just don't tempt fate.

Whoop
03-30-2010, 03:17 PM
I've touched the Stanley Cup, does that mean I won't win it now?

I'm afraid so. LOL

ManUtd4ever
03-30-2010, 03:41 PM
Well if MoJo wasn't feeling the heat already he certainly is now...

DangerRed
03-30-2010, 04:01 PM
Well if MoJo wasn't feeling the heat already he certainly is now...

No, he's not.

jloome
03-30-2010, 04:26 PM
Why, Danger? My understanding is that his name is somewhere close to mud over at MLSE right now.

Davenport
03-30-2010, 04:28 PM
I suppose he thinks mud is better than artificial........

ag futbol
03-30-2010, 04:45 PM
Why, Danger? My understanding is that his name is somewhere close to mud over at MLSE right now.
My guess is after a while someone in the front office looked at Seattle's money tree and said, "wow winning has really helped them expand, we should try that too!"

MLSE has barely scratched the surface of TFC's potential, but it's not going to be realized unless the product on the field gets better.

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 04:57 PM
Mo has heard worse. It's not really a 'dig'. It was a friendly 'barb' like we all trade around here.

Team owners don't trade "friendly barbs" with their general managers in public press conferences - especially when they aren't there. He clearly was taking a small dig at Mo.

I said in another thread that I'm 99% confident that Mo will be fired if this team takes a step back this season (meaning no playoffs), and this has emboldened me even more on that prediction.

Some people here really shit all over MLSE for a variety of reasons (some justified, some conspiratorial, some utter fantasy), but as I said in the other thread, they are sensitive to the growth of their latest investment. They are also well aware that they are treading dangerously close to fan apathy, as they've no doubt noticed that non-ST packages aren't quite selling like hotcakes any more.

Mo has stuck around, much to my chagrin, because he was able to point to a nominal improvement in the team last season - we won the NCC, finished with a slightly better MLS record, and came within one game of the post-season. If he doesn't better that record this season, he will be gone - and that means playoffs.

They will do it a) because it's justified, and b) as a sacrificial lamb to the fans, to keep us energized and renewing our seats. Paul Beirne comes here often, along with God knows who else from MLSE and the TFC FO - they are well are of our very strong feelings on this twat.

- Scott

jloome
03-30-2010, 05:00 PM
Team owners don't trade "friendly barbs" with their general managers in public press conferences - especially when they aren't there. He clearly was taking a small dig at Mo.

I said in another thread that I'm 99% confident that Mo will be fired if this team takes a step back this season (meaning no playoffs), and this has emboldened me even more on that prediction.

Some people here really shit all over MLSE for a variety of reasons (some justified, some conspiratorial, some utter fantasy), but as I said in the other thread, they are sensitive to the growth of their latest investment. They are also well aware that they are treading dangerously close to fan apathy, as they've no doubt noticed that non-ST packages aren't quite selling like hotcakes any more.

Mo has stuck around, much to my chagrin, because he was able to point to a nominal improvement in the team last season - we won the NCC, finished with a slightly better MLS record, and came within one game of the post-season. If he doesn't better that record this season, he will be gone - and that means playoffs.

They will do it a) because it's justified, and b) as a sacrificial lamb to the fans, to keep us energized and renewing our seats. Paul Beirne comes here often, along with God knows who else from MLSE and the TFC FO - they are well are of our very strong feelings on this twat.

- Scott

He's also made them a fair bit of coin off Edu. Probably cost them well more in missed opportunities and blunders, but theoretical never matches up well with cash-in-hand.

Marvell probably cost him some cred; at least part of his rep must be based on the eventual market value of the young players he id'd and drafted, including Edu and Altidore. So with one of those going for next to nothing in order to free up cap space, I can imagine that argument isn't flying too well these days.

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 05:07 PM
He's also made them a fair bit of coin off Edu. Probably cost them well more in missed opportunities and blunders, but theoretical never matches up well with cash-in-hand.

Marvell probably cost him some cred; at least part of his rep must be based on the eventual market value of the young players he id'd and drafted, including Edu and Altidore. So with one of those going for next to nothing in order to free up cap space, I can imagine that argument isn't flying too well these days.

After you remove the money from that deal that went directly to MLS, and the money that went into expanding their cap via allocation, the remaining money was probably around $2-3mil (which had to be spent on improvements to the club and it's facilities). When you compare that to MLSE's overall profitability, I can't imagine it weighed too heavily into the decision to extend Mo. I'm sure it was a plus - but I just can't imagine it was that big of a deal.

I agree with you that part of Mo's "allure" was his seeming ability to uncover diamonds in the draft - I also have no doubt that sheen has worn off, after the failure of a guy like Wynne. His shambolic managing of the cap will not go over well either.

- Scott

Rudi
03-30-2010, 05:11 PM
After you remove the money from that deal that went directly to MLS, and the money that went into expanding their cap via allocation, the remaining money was probably around $2-3mil (which had to be spent on improvements to the club and it's facilities). When you compare that to MLSE's overall profitability, I can't imagine it weighed too heavily into the decision to extend Mo. I'm sure it was a plus - but I just can't imagine it was that big of a deal.
Exactly right.

MLSE cannot simply pocket any transfer money that TFC makes. It's against MLS rules.

The money needs to be plowed back into team infrastructure, and they need to show the league the "receipts".

ensco
03-30-2010, 05:16 PM
^Drafting Edu was nothing. But Mo managed the Edu sale process very well. That's what he got extended for, imho.

Mo should go, but he's not 100% bad. Mo put his butt on line for grass. He went public early with the idea that the Edu proceeds should be used for grass (which Anselmi slammed down immediately if you recall), for which we should be a little grateful.

He just cannot do this particular job well.

jloome
03-30-2010, 05:18 PM
After you remove the money from that deal that went directly to MLS, and the money that went into expanding their cap via allocation, the remaining money was probably around $2-3mil (which had to be spent on improvements to the club and it's facilities). When you compare that to MLSE's overall profitability, I can't imagine it weighed too heavily into the decision to extend Mo. I'm sure it was a plus - but I just can't imagine it was that big of a deal.

I agree with you that part of Mo's "allure" was his seeming ability to uncover diamonds in the draft - I also have no doubt that sheen has worn off, after the failure of a guy like Wynne. His shambolic managing of the cap will not go over well either.

- Scott

Actually, I'd say a return of $2-3 million would weigh extremely heavily in his favour. For one, you don't compare it to TFC's profitability, you compare to MLSE's. But ff TFC's annual take is onyl $2 million, then it's fair to say the revenue stream -- whether directly to general revenue or used to offset costs -- might be responsible for up to a third of their total profit since the club launched.

Again, the fact that they have to tell the league how they're spending transfer money on their club is irrelevant, since over the long run, they're easily going to budget to spend that money anyway. When it replaces money they're already going to have to spend, it's the same as taking it in profit. It's a semantic argument. MLSE is $2-3 million to the better just because of one player deal, and anyone who doesn't think Mo's trader/draft reputation wasn't a big card for him hasn't been listening very intently.

Dirk Diggler
03-30-2010, 05:20 PM
He might have made MLSE money (sort of) in terms of the Edu sale but he has also lost MLSE a lot of money with his blatant fiscal irresponsibility (Robbo and Gerba being the latest examples).

FluSH
03-30-2010, 05:22 PM
^Drafting Edu was nothing. But Mo managed the Edu sale process very well. That's what he got extended for, imho.

Mo should go, but he's not 100% bad. Mo put his butt on line for grass. He went public early with the idea that the Edu proceeds should be used for grass (which Anselmi slammed down immediately if you recall), for which we should be a little grateful.

He just cannot do this particular job well.

Well said...

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 05:24 PM
Except of course, "Trader Mo's" penchant for wheeling and dealing has now blown up horribly in TFC face, as we've shipped out lots of players for absolutely nothing, been saddled with multiple terrible big money contracts, and are up against the cap with about 70% of a finished roster.

He won't be back after this season, unless this team defies the odds and makes the post-season. Mark my words.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 05:27 PM
^Drafting Edu was nothing. But Mo managed the Edu sale process very well. That's what he got extended for, imho.

Mo should go, but he's not 100% bad. Mo put his butt on line for grass. He went public early with the idea that the Edu proceeds should be used for grass (which Anselmi slammed down immediately if you recall), for which we should be a little grateful.

He just cannot do this particular job well.

I don't recall Anselmi slamming down the grass proposition - I just recall him being very non-committal to the idea at the time (which would make sense, since at the time it wasn't known if they could clear all of the hurdles with the city to make it happen).

I agree that Mo isn't 100% terrible - hell, I saluted the man last season for his handling of the draft, the deal for Edu was fantastic, and we were all happy when he came out in favour of grass.

- Scott

Davenport
03-30-2010, 05:41 PM
"Except of course, "Trader Mo's" penchant for wheeling and dealing has now blown up horribly in TFC face, as we've shipped out lots of players for absolutely nothing, been saddled with multiple terrible big money contracts, and are up against the cap with about 70% of a finished roster.

He won't be back after this season, unless this team defies the odds and makes the post-season. Mark my words."

- Scott

"I agree that Mo isn't 100% terrible - hell, I saluted the man last season for his handling of the draft, the deal for Edu was fantastic, and we were all happy when he came out in favour of grass."

- Scott


Make your mind up Scott.

I have....he's a tosser.

ensco
03-30-2010, 05:46 PM
I don't recall Anselmi slamming down the grass proposition - I just recall him being very non-committal to the idea at the time

It sure seemed like a faceplant at the time. That's the way I remember most people feeling about it. But looking back, he was probably just trying to tamp things down. We were all in a lather about it, mostly because of Mo.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/soccer/article/501277

Ontario Arab
03-30-2010, 05:50 PM
This is MoJos last season....he wont be fired he will step down....heard it here first.

Ossington Mental Youth
03-30-2010, 06:01 PM
This is MoJos last season....he wont be fired he will step down....heard it here first.

im kinda thinking this too. Fingers crossed

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:03 PM
"Except of course, "Trader Mo's" penchant for wheeling and dealing has now blown up horribly in TFC face, as we've shipped out lots of players for absolutely nothing, been saddled with multiple terrible big money contracts, and are up against the cap with about 70% of a finished roster.

He won't be back after this season, unless this team defies the odds and makes the post-season. Mark my words."

- Scott

"I agree that Mo isn't 100% terrible - hell, I saluted the man last season for his handling of the draft, the deal for Edu was fantastic, and we were all happy when he came out in favour of grass."

- Scott


Make your mind up Scott.

I have....he's a tosser.

What do you mean? I can criticize the guy for some of the things he does, and give him credit for others. He has done a good job for us at the draft. He has not done a good job of managing contracts for us. Simple.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:04 PM
This is MoJos last season....he wont be fired he will step down....heard it here first.

"Stepping down" is another option, but make no mistake - if he goes that route, it will be because MLSE have given him the option to either fire himself, or be fired.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:18 PM
It sure seemed like a faceplant at the time. That's the way I remember most people feeling about it. But looking back, he was probably just trying to tamp things down. We were all in a lather about it, mostly because of Mo.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/soccer/article/501277

That is basically my thought too - his statements in the article don't confirm or deny. He just says the issue isn't "hot on their radar". He also used to repeatedly say expanding BMO Field wasn't "on their radar for the foreseeable future" either, and yet here we are with a new stand being built.

Guys like Anselmi will always manage expectations about these kinds of things, because the minute they say anything remotely committal, fan and media expectations ratchet up considerably. At the time, as the article even notes, they were still in the pissing match with Joey Pants about community use, and putting a bubble over Lamport. Things were far from settled, so it wasn't in MLSE's interest to make it sound like a done deal.

Anselmi also craftily says grass wasn't in the plans for the "short term" - which it wasn't. We didn't have grass the next season - we do this season.

With the exception of keeping Mo around too long (in my opinion), I actually think MLSE have been pretty good owners as far as Toronto FC is concerned.

People used to always declare MLSE were too cheap to shell out for a DP - we got one. Then they said MLSE were too cheap to bring in a big club for a friendly - they brought in Real Madrid. Then they said MLSE wouldn't put grass in, because they are all about the bottom line - they installed grass. To a lesser extent, there was also comment about how MLSE would be too cheap to expand BMO, and how the beer garden sucked - they are building a new stand over it.

Considering the club is early into year four of it's existence, I think the level of investment MLSE have made in TFC has been great. With the exception of keeping the Scottish git around too long (a valid complaint), it's been pretty good.

- Scott

Ontario Arab
03-30-2010, 06:21 PM
"Stepping down" is another option, but make no mistake - if he goes that route, it will be because MLSE have given him the option to either fire himself, or be fired.

- Scott
Agreed Scotty, here is how it is...He is MLSE's man, they will not publicly fire him he will "make way" for someone else....defo.:scarf:

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 06:22 PM
Team owners don't trade "friendly barbs" with their general managers in public press conferences - especially when they aren't there. He clearly was taking a small dig at Mo.

I said in another thread that I'm 99% confident that Mo will be fired if this team takes a step back this season (meaning no playoffs), and this has emboldened me even more on that prediction.



The problem, of course, is that this guy isn't the team owner - he's just some guy who isn't worried about his own job - why not? This company has three shitty teams and no above GM is ever responsible and nothing ever changes. And it won't as long as that's where the buck stops.

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 06:26 PM
Considering the club is early into year four of it's existence, I think the level of investment MLSE have made in TFC has been great.


Great compared to what? And how do we know how big an investment they've made? The public stuff like grass and a DP we've seen - and we've seen how reluctant they've been to do it and how long it took and how much they had to be pressured.

How do we know if they've invested nearly as much in the rest of the team infrastructure as Seattle has? Or even as much as Philadelphia. Or even DC? We don't really have any idea and yet we're satisfied with what they've done? Why?

Davenport
03-30-2010, 06:37 PM
What do you mean? I can criticize the guy for some of the things he does, and give him credit for others. He has done a good job for us at the draft. He has not done a good job of managing contracts for us. Simple.

- Scott

But you slagged him off on one post and then said he wasn't 100% terrible on another.
Overall he's done a terrible job.
Edu developed as a player.....wow, one out of how many ?
A good GM (whatever that is in footy) should pick a "player" every year.
The draft is a joke anyway. You're told who you should pick and in what order.
A blind man with a pin would have a better success rate.
He's done well away from that hasn't he...when he's had to choose players that aren't on a list ?
He's a tosser.

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:38 PM
Great compared to what? And how do we know how big an investment they've made? The public stuff like grass and a DP we've seen - and we've seen how reluctant they've been to do it and how long it took and how much they had to be pressured.

How do we know if they've invested nearly as much in the rest of the team infrastructure as Seattle has? Or even as much as Philadelphia. Or even DC? We don't really have any idea and yet we're satisfied with what they've done? Why?

MLSE have expanded our stadium, replaced our playing surface, spent money for a designated player, and brought in a big name friendly opponent, all in three years.

We have no idea how "reluctant" they were to do these things, or what effect any pressure had one them. You're making huge assumptions. And it didn't take a long time, either. The team has existed for less than half a decade!

With the exception of firing Mo, what else do you want from ownership? Is this where we start complaining about how our stadium isn't as purdy as New York's?

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:40 PM
But you slagged him off on one post and then said he wasn't 100% terrible on another.
Overall he's done a terrible job.
Edu developed as a player.....wow, one out of how many ?
A good GM (whatever that is in footy) should pick a "player" every year.
The draft is a joke anyway. You're told who you should pick and in what order.
A blind man with a pin would have a better success rate.
He's done well away from that hasn't he...when he's had to choose players that aren't on a list ?
He's a tosser.

I've agreed that overall I think he's terrible - again, why does my praise/criticism have to balance out? He's been good at the draft, and selling Edu - he's been shitty at everything else. And that "everything else" constitutes the majority of his major functions as a GM.

Your comments on how easy it is to draft well and strategically I disagree with completely, but that isn't for this thread.

- Scott

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 06:41 PM
With the exception of firing Mo, what else do you want from ownership? Is this where we start complaining about how our stadium isn't as purdy as New York's?

- Scott


I want to know if we spend as much on scouting as Seattle does. I see a gap between our team's ability to rate players coming out of NCAA and foreign player and I wonder why that is. Is it because NCAA scouting is the cheapest to do? Do we have scouts in South America on the payroll?

When Brian Burke said he had to rebuild the Leafs' scouting department it was a real insight into the way this company operates.

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 06:46 PM
I want to know if we spend as much on scouting as Seattle does. I see a gap between our team's ability to rate players coming out of NCAA and foreign player and I wonder why that is. Is it because NCAA scouting is the cheapest to do? Do we have scouts in South America on the payroll?

I have no idea how much we spend on scouting compared to a place like Seattle. None of us do, because those numbers aren't public, so trying to have a substantive argument about how committed we are to scouting, is kind of fruitless.


When Brian Burke said he had to rebuild the Leafs' scouting department it was a real insight into the way this company operates.

It was an insight into how poorly the Leafs were managed, I agree. And the fact that they gave Burke carte blanche to remake the scouting department, should tell you they are trying to "do better" this time around. Finally.

But like I said, I'm not alleging that their management of all of their sports franchises has been exemplary - I specifically said I think they've done a good job as owners of TFC, the continuing employment of Mo notwithstanding.

Which brings me full circle back to my original statement: I think they will fire him this season, if we don't make the playoffs.

- Scott

Davenport
03-30-2010, 06:47 PM
I've agreed that overall I think he's terrible - again, why does my praise/criticism have to balance out? He's been good at the draft, and selling Edu - he's been shitty at everything else. And that "everything else" constitutes the majority of his major functions as a GM.

Your comments on how easy it is to draft well and strategically I disagree with completely, but that isn't for this thread.

- Scott
I didnt say it's easy to draft well and stategically.
What I said is that in 4 attempts he's only got 1 real player out of it.
Not a great success rate.

As you can guess Scott, I think he's way out of his depth and shouldn't have the job and should never have been offered it.
He impressed MLSE with his accent and playing resume and they bought it.

FluSH
03-30-2010, 06:53 PM
Why does this thread feel like the off-season?

ManUtd4ever
03-30-2010, 06:53 PM
That is basically my thought too - his statements in the article don't confirm or deny. He just says the issue isn't "hot on their radar". He also used to repeatedly say expanding BMO Field wasn't "on their radar for the foreseeable future" either, and yet here we are with a new stand being built.

Guys like Anselmi will always manage expectations about these kinds of things, because the minute they say anything remotely committal, fan and media expectations ratchet up considerably. At the time, as the article even notes, they were still in the pissing match with Joey Pants about community use, and putting a bubble over Lamport. Things were far from settled, so it wasn't in MLSE's interest to make it sound like a done deal.

Anselmi also craftily says grass wasn't in the plans for the "short term" - which it wasn't. We didn't have grass the next season - we do this season.

With the exception of keeping Mo around too long (in my opinion), I actually think MLSE have been pretty good owners as far as Toronto FC is concerned.

People used to always declare MLSE were too cheap to shell out for a DP - we got one. Then they said MLSE were too cheap to bring in a big club for a friendly - they brought in Real Madrid. Then they said MLSE wouldn't put grass in, because they are all about the bottom line - they installed grass. To a lesser extent, there was also comment about how MLSE would be too cheap to expand BMO, and how the beer garden sucked - they are building a new stand over it.

Considering the club is early into year four of it's existence, I think the level of investment MLSE have made in TFC has been great. With the exception of keeping the Scottish git around too long (a valid complaint), it's been pretty good.

- Scott

I agree wholeheartedly. The amount of venom spewed towards MLSE is confounding in my opinion considering the progress of the franchise off the pitch in the brief history of the organization. The management issue will obviously need to be addressed if the team falters this season but as a TFC supporter since day one, I have been pleasantly surprised and content with MLSE as the ownership group thus far...

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 06:53 PM
I have no idea how much we spend on scouting compared to a place like Seattle. None of us do, because those numbers aren't public, so trying to have a substantive argument about how committed we are to scouting, is kind of fruitless.

It was an insight into how poorly the Leafs were managed, I agree. And the fact that they gave Burke carte blanche to remake the scouting department, should tell you they are trying to "do better" this time around. Finally.

But like I said, I'm not alleging that their management of all of their sports franchises has been exemplary - I specifically said I think they've done a good job as owners of TFC, the continuing employment of Mo notwithstanding.

Which brings me full circle back to my original statement: I think they will fire him this season, if we don't make the playoffs.

- Scott


All I'm saying is, if we don't know what resources the guy was given, how do we know the next guy will be able to do the job any better? We're oerating from the asumption that it's the guy's ability and not limited at all by the rest of the organization and that may not be correct.

It may be fruitless to try and discuss it, but it' the kind of question we should have the answer to before demanding someone be fired unless we just want a revolving door of underequipped managers.

And Burke had to make it part of the negotiations for his crontract, they weren't going to spend the money unless someone made them (they're a freakin' pension fund, the last thing they want to do is spend money) and he was only able to negotiate because he was in a position of some power - the knowledgeable hockey fans in the city were screaming or him - or someone with his pedigree - to be given the job.

Will the next GM of TFC be able to come in and negotiate form a position of power to make sure he has enough resources to do the job properly? Well, maybe if the fans demand that, but otherwise the ownership is going to offer a short-term contract and limited power and they know they can get away with it because we'll blame the guy and not the organization.

Davenport
03-30-2010, 06:56 PM
I agree wholeheartedly. The amount of venom spewed towards MLSE is confounding in my opinion considering the progress of the franchise off the pitch in the brief history of the organization. The management issue will obviously need to be addressed if the team falters this season but as a TFC supporter since day one, I have been pleasantly surprised and content with MLSE as the ownership group thus far...

The only success story is the fans.
Nothing else.
And MLSE have nothing to do with that.

torontocelt
03-30-2010, 07:05 PM
With the exception of keeping the Scottish git around too long (a valid complaint), it's been pretty good.

- Scott

I don't mean to sound hyper sensitive but what does him being Scottish have to do with anything? Someone else on these boards has something like 'Fire this Scottish idiot' as their signature whenever they put a posting and to be honest I don't really understand why his nationality should even be brought up? Maybe I should have a signature that says 'MLSE - get rid of these Canadian assholes'?:canada:

jazzy
03-30-2010, 07:07 PM
Personally,

As long as they keep bringing in the goods... like they did with the grass... I don't care.

Next big spending ticket is a ROOF!!!! :D

YES!:o sorry for the shouting

Davenport
03-30-2010, 07:08 PM
I don't mean to sound hyper sensitive but what does him being Scottish have to do with anything? Someone else on these boards has something like 'Fire this Scottish idiot' as their signature whenever they put a posting and to be honest I don't really understand why his nationality should even be brought up? Maybe I should have a signature that says 'MLSE - get rid of these Canadian assholes'?:canada:
Sounds about right to me http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 07:18 PM
I don't mean to sound hyper sensitive but what does him being Scottish have to do with anything? Someone else on these boards has something like 'Fire this Scottish idiot' as their signature whenever they put a posting and to be honest I don't really understand why his nationality should even be brought up? Maybe I should have a signature that says 'MLSE - get rid of these Canadian assholes'?:canada:

You are being hyper-sensitive, haha. His nationality has nothing to do with his job performance, but one of the first things many people think of when they think of Mo, is his accent.

I also mentioned he was Scottish, as a set up for calling him a "git".

- Scott

boban
03-30-2010, 07:37 PM
This company has three shitty teams and no above GM is ever responsible and nothing ever changes. And it won't as long as that's where the buck stops.
Here is a man who truly understands this MLSE smokescreen.
I could not have said it better myself.
How is it possible that not even one MLSE shirt has been held responsible for the various teams on field shortcomings? Because truthfully, they don't give a shit.

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 07:46 PM
I don't mean to sound hyper sensitive but what does him being Scottish have to do with anything? Someone else on these boards has something like 'Fire this Scottish idiot' as their signature whenever they put a posting and to be honest I don't really understand why his nationality should even be brought up? Maybe I should have a signature that says 'MLSE - get rid of these Canadian assholes'?:canada:

That's funny, but maybe not as funny as we like to think. There is a "Canadian" attitude that can be a problem, a safe, low-risk attitude (great if you want to invest your pension with them, not so great if you want to win Championships). Sports is very much like the entertainment business and I've worked for both American movie producers and Canadians and it's night and day. The Canadian attitude is all about how can we do this cheaper, do we really need that, it won't mke a big enough difference to spend that money and the American attitude is all about, how can we make better, what do we need to make it bigger, no risk no payoff. And it isn't just the size of the budget, even low-budget American sets have different attitude.

Seattle made sense to me when I found out Joe Roth was the big investor - he's made some big, big movies and he has that attitude. of course he looked around and said, who's the number one coach in the league, hire him. Someone said, we can't do that, he's under contract and he said, so what, sign him and pay the fine, it doesn't come out of the salary cap, it won't affect our performance on the field (I doubt he used "pitch" ;)). He hired a DP before they'd played a game.

But MLSE is owned by a pension fund, they just don't think like a Hollywood producer. The difference in attitude seeps down through the whole organization, the same way it does on Canadian vs. American movie sets.

torontocelt
03-30-2010, 07:47 PM
You are being hyper-sensitive, haha. His nationality has nothing to do with his job performance, but one of the first things many people think of when they think of Mo, is his accent.

I also mentioned he was Scottish, as a set up for calling him a "git".

- Scott

Now if you had said 'sack that dirty, turncoat, scumbag Mo' I would have been all in agreement, ha ha. Nice reference on 'git'.

jloome
03-30-2010, 08:02 PM
I have no idea how much we spend on scouting compared to a place like Seattle. None of us do, because those numbers aren't public, so trying to have a substantive argument about how committed we are to scouting, is kind of fruitless.



It was an insight into how poorly the Leafs were managed, I agree. And the fact that they gave Burke carte blanche to remake the scouting department, should tell you they are trying to "do better" this time around. Finally.

But like I said, I'm not alleging that their management of all of their sports franchises has been exemplary - I specifically said I think they've done a good job as owners of TFC, the continuing employment of Mo notwithstanding.

Which brings me full circle back to my original statement: I think they will fire him this season, if we don't make the playoffs.

- Scott

Scouting doesn't have to be expensive, unless you're talking about the phone bill. A scouting network can be freelance, and a lot of the basis for checking someone out in the first place should be commonly available material, such as domestic play statistics, frequency of movement, history of injuries etc.

It's the internet age. There are multiple databses that contain enough stats to reach conclusions going right down to the u19 level and earlier.

Combine that with the domestic contacts in other nations that can be made through football associations, and it's really not that complicated.

TorCanSoc
03-30-2010, 08:06 PM
One winning season and MLSE is a model ownership team aren't they?

Shakes McQueen
03-30-2010, 08:07 PM
Scouting doesn't have to be expensive, unless you're talking about the phone bill. A scouting network can be freelance, and a lot of the basis for checking someone out in the first place should be commonly available material, such as domestic play statistics, frequency of movement, history of injuries etc.

It's the internet age. There are multiple databses that contain enough stats to reach conclusions going right down to the u19 level and earlier.

Combine that with the domestic contacts in other nations that can be made through football associations, and it's really not that complicated.

If that's the case (I really don't know anything about how professional scouting works in football), then it would seem any blame for poor scouting is squarely on Mo, not on a lack of funding (which once again, we can't confirm or deny).

There's also Mo's much ballyhooed reliance on one player agent for most of his signings.

- Scott

Beach_Red
03-30-2010, 08:15 PM
If that's the case (I really don't know anything about how professional scouting works in football), then it would seem any blame for poor scouting is squarely on Mo, not on a lack of funding (which once again, we can't confirm or deny).

There's also Mo's much ballyhooed reliance on one player agent for most of his signings.

- Scott


Sure, but the guy above Mo on the org chart knows his job's not in any danger, whether he provides money for a scouting network or not.

Although it.s true, that reliance on the single player agent would seem to also suit MLE's way of doing business - way cheaper to let someone else provide the players than have to pay to find them.

Sure, it may the internet age, but that works two ways - every so-called agent and scout is calling you and sending you hundreds of highlights. How much can you really rely on people who will get a cut of the action if they make a sale?

Look, for all we know our GM went into the corporate offices and said, I need X amount of money to properly scout and make this a playoff team and they said, you can have half that, get them close (knowing they'd never get any blame) - he did it and got an extension.

We really don't know, but we've made up our minds anyway.

I_AM_CANADIAN
03-30-2010, 08:19 PM
That's funny, but maybe not as funny as we like to think. There is a "Canadian" attitude that can be a problem, a safe, low-risk attitude (great if you want to invest your pension with them, not so great if you want to win Championships). Sports is very much like the entertainment business and I've worked for both American movie producers and Canadians and it's night and day. The Canadian attitude is all about how can we do this cheaper, do we really need that, it won't mke a big enough difference to spend that money and the American attitude is all about, how can we make better, what do we need to make it bigger, no risk no payoff. And it isn't just the size of the budget, even low-budget American sets have different attitude.

Seattle made sense to me when I found out Joe Roth was the big investor - he's made some big, big movies and he has that attitude. of course he looked around and said, who's the number one coach in the league, hire him. Someone said, we can't do that, he's under contract and he said, so what, sign him and pay the fine, it doesn't come out of the salary cap, it won't affect our performance on the field (I doubt he used "pitch" ;)). He hired a DP before they'd played a game.

But MLSE is owned by a pension fund, they just don't think like a Hollywood producer. The difference in attitude seeps down through the whole organization, the same way it does on Canadian vs. American movie sets.
Very interesting, and this makes sense when you look at the Leafs. So far as I can remember, they've never gone out and made a big splash for one of the absolute elite players in the NHL. The Phaneuf trade was probably the biggest since trading Clark for Mats Sundin in 1994. Just not very ambitious at all.

Yohan
03-30-2010, 09:26 PM
I didnt say it's easy to draft well and stategically.
What I said is that in 4 attempts he's only got 1 real player out of it.
Not a great success rate.

As you can guess Scott, I think he's way out of his depth and shouldn't have the job and should never have been offered it.
He impressed MLSE with his accent and playing resume and they bought it.
Just how do you judge success of MLS drafts?

Mo got 3 good MLS players out of 4 first round picks. Granted, 09 class was stacked, but still.

Mo would be great if any 2nd or 3rd round picks turn out to be good. (though arguably, Edwards is good enough to stick around in MLS)

But sometimes draft picks don't show promise few years down the road. Instant success from drafts aren't really the best way to judge draft picks.

Whoop
03-30-2010, 09:33 PM
What happens to Mo if TFC manages to claw it's way into the playoffs by one point?

The way MLSE works... he'd likely get an extension.

I say unless TFC finishes in the top 4 - which by year 4 should be a reality - he should be gone.

torontocelt
03-31-2010, 06:42 AM
Scouting doesn't have to be expensive, unless you're talking about the phone bill. A scouting network can be freelance, and a lot of the basis for checking someone out in the first place should be commonly available material, such as domestic play statistics, frequency of movement, history of injuries etc.

It's the internet age. There are multiple databses that contain enough stats to reach conclusions going right down to the u19 level and earlier.

Combine that with the domestic contacts in other nations that can be made through football associations, and it's really not that complicated.

Scouting through the internet is fine as is receiving DVD's of a players highlights but the problem with these methods is on occasion it does not give you a true reflection of a players ability. Agents will also be quick to point out their man is a world beater and all in all trying to identify a good player can get confusing. I would imagine that this would be even worse in South America etc where to be honest I would not be surprised if some scouts take bungs to identify and big up certain players who may not be that great. On top of that when dealing with foreign players from South America or other places it should be remembered that the football they play is just one part of the deal, how will these people settle in another country, that is information that a computer program might not be able to tell you? I still think the only true way of judging a player is in person or via numerous full length DVD's and stat reports as well as personal recommendation and in the case of those from exotic places perhaps even a trial to see how they adapt to Canada. I have seen managers sign players based solely on a dvd of footage, scout recommendation and the fact the player had a brazil cap (the Brazilian FA are known to cap crap players to raise their value for sales) and he turned out to be shit (Rafael Schidt - celtic - $10m USD). Every year clubs waste money on transfers that just do not work out, scouting has to be thorough or mistakes can and will be made. Also what about when Souness signed George Weah's supposed cousin and it was all a lie. To see a football highlight tape of a guy who looks great see Koki Mizuno. He looks great on video but he has hardly played for celtic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkfJHhqJUrc

It must also be remebered that even the great football managers and the great football teams do get it wrong. Look at Fergie when he was trying to replace Keano, he went out and got Celtic's Liam Miller who now plays for hibs and Eric Jemba Jemba who noe plays in Sweden or Denmark? These two guys along with world cup winner Kleberson were identified as being the future, none of them made it and in the case of Miller and Jemba Jemba their careers have steadily went backwards.

Oldtimer
03-31-2010, 07:30 AM
Why does this thread feel like the off-season?

Because our off-season will come early. The boys will be playing golf long before the MLS Cup is hoisted in Toronto.

rviewmirror
03-31-2010, 07:59 AM
Anselmi was on the fan this morning and reiterated that "fans have been patient for 4 years". I think they're well aware how casual toronto fans tend to drop interested in a few years if you don't put a competing team on the field (leafs excluded).

Mo has to be looking over his shoulder.

drewski
03-31-2010, 08:02 AM
i'm torn on wanting to see Mo fired.

most of me wants to see him gone for obvious reasons, but the rest want to see him stay cause it would mean we made it to the playoffs (though not by the hair of our teeth)

ua-kozak_TFC
03-31-2010, 08:06 AM
HAHAHAHA Mo has RPB PIN oh his suit.

http://i42.tinypic.com/2dui7p2.png
Great way to soften the fans when his sit is under fire and when the shit is hitting the fan...

ua-kozak_TFC
03-31-2010, 08:19 AM
^Drafting Edu was nothing. But Mo managed the Edu sale process very well. That's what he got extended for, imho.

Mo should go, but he's not 100% bad. Mo put his butt on line for grass. He went public early with the idea that the Edu proceeds should be used for grass (which Anselmi slammed down immediately if you recall), for which we should be a little grateful.

He just cannot do this particular job well.
I think that was long after it was a unanimous desicion that the turf should be changed. If you remember well he did the opposite all season long and saying how amazing the turf was even when someplayers thought differently...
Don't forget that Mo has a great talent to lie and keep a straight face, and everything is meant to deliberately improove his image among fans.

jloome
03-31-2010, 09:11 AM
Scouting through the internet is fine as is receiving DVD's of a players highlights but the problem with these methods is on occasion it does not give you a true reflection of a players ability. Agents will also be quick to point out their man is a world beater and all in all trying to identify a good player can get confusing. I would imagine that this would be even worse in South America etc where to be honest I would not be surprised if some scouts take bungs to identify and big up certain players who may not be that great. On top of that when dealing with foreign players from South America or other places it should be remembered that the football they play is just one part of the deal, how will these people settle in another country, that is information that a computer program might not be able to tell you? I still think the only true way of judging a player is in person or via numerous full length DVD's and stat reports as well as personal recommendation and in the case of those from exotic places perhaps even a trial to see how they adapt to Canada. I have seen managers sign players based solely on a dvd of footage, scout recommendation and the fact the player had a brazil cap (the Brazilian FA are known to cap crap players to raise their value for sales) and he turned out to be shit (Rafael Schidt - celtic - $10m USD). Every year clubs waste money on transfers that just do not work out, scouting has to be thorough or mistakes can and will be made. Also what about when Souness signed George Weah's supposed cousin and it was all a lie. To see a football highlight tape of a guy who looks great see Koki Mizuno. He looks great on video but he has hardly played for celtic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkfJHhqJUrc

It must also be remebered that even the great football managers and the great football teams do get it wrong. Look at Fergie when he was trying to replace Keano, he went out and got Celtic's Liam Miller who now plays for hibs and Eric Jemba Jemba who noe plays in Sweden or Denmark? These two guys along with world cup winner Kleberson were identified as being the future, none of them made it and in the case of Miller and Jemba Jemba their careers have steadily went backwards.

You missed a pretty big part of my post. I didn't endorse "scouting through the internet," I suggested narrowing down your targets using statistical information available commonly, which you can now easily get through the internet.

MLS runs its season at a different time of year than most other leagues. While this has complications with respect to Bosman signings, it also allows them to see how players are doing who have just finished a domestic season or are in the process of finishing one.

And if a guy has scored 12 goals in 14 appearanes in the Uruguayan league, and had a minimum of 12 goals for three prior seasons, it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's a goalscorer.

The question of whether someone can adapt to a new league is much bigger than just watching them on video, and you're much more likely to develop, at the very least, a regionalized short list of prospects using ACTUAL PERFORMANCE STATS than going on word of mouth.

In fact, word of mouth -- and trusting agents who profit by frequently moving marginal players (and getting contract buyouts along the way -- is what leads to the scenario you're describing, not what I'm suggesting.

Hope that clarifies what I meant.

torontocelt
03-31-2010, 12:11 PM
You missed a pretty big part of my post. I didn't endorse "scouting through the internet," I suggested narrowing down your targets using statistical information available commonly, which you can now easily get through the internet.

MLS runs its season at a different time of year than most other leagues. While this has complications with respect to Bosman signings, it also allows them to see how players are doing who have just finished a domestic season or are in the process of finishing one.

And if a guy has scored 12 goals in 14 appearanes in the Uruguayan league, and had a minimum of 12 goals for three prior seasons, it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's a goalscorer.

The question of whether someone can adapt to a new league is much bigger than just watching them on video, and you're much more likely to develop, at the very least, a regionalized short list of prospects using ACTUAL PERFORMANCE STATS than going on word of mouth.

In fact, word of mouth -- and trusting agents who profit by frequently moving marginal players (and getting contract buyouts along the way -- is what leads to the scenario you're describing, not what I'm suggesting.

Hope that clarifies what I meant.

Sure does but even goal scoring stats can be misleading, see Filip Sebo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filip_%C5%A0ebo

22 goals in 33 games for Artmedia and 5 goals in 8 games for Slovakia and then a whopping 13 goals in 113 matches for his next teams.

Kezman is another although not to the same degree as he was playing in a better league however 105 goals in 122 games for PSV and then the next season 4 goals in 25 games for Chelsea. He did find his scoring touch again in Turkey though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mateja_Ke%C5%BEman

Compare Kezman's stats with another player who ran amok in the Dutch league Ruud Van Nistelrooy and he pales in comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Nistelrooy

Like you indiacted good scouting comes from a combination of many different methods, some of the best clubs int he world get it completely wrong even when they have tons of money to plough into it. I am not surprised that TFC gets it wrong sometimes considering the players they can realistically attract and the resouces available.

Whoop
03-31-2010, 01:15 PM
Internet or video scouting does not beat the live thing.

You might get a feel for a player using the internet or video, but there is a bias when looking through a camera.

You need to see a player play live to get a grasp of everything else around him. How a player reacts in various situation(s), how that player deals with adversity, body language, interactions with teammates, etc.

The hardest part of scouting is being able to get into someone's head. A video won't allow you to do that.

There are organizations who can do that for you, but if I'm going to shell out big money for a player I'd want to go see that player play live. Or at least have someone in the organization see the player play live.

Scouting is more than just stats. There are so many things that go with it. At the basic level, scouting is easy - can a player play or not? That doesn't take a lot of work. It's the other stuff that requires a lot of work.

If I was MLSE I would have a dozen guys on the payroll scouring the globe for players.

jloome
03-31-2010, 01:33 PM
Sure does but even goal scoring stats can be misleading, see Filip Sebo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filip_%C5%A0ebo

22 goals in 33 games for Artmedia and 5 goals in 8 games for Slovakia and then a whopping 13 goals in 113 matches for his next teams.

Kezman is another although not to the same degree as he was playing in a better league however 105 goals in 122 games for PSV and then the next season 4 goals in 25 games for Chelsea. He did find his scoring touch again in Turkey though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mateja_Ke%C5%BEman

Compare Kezman's stats with another player who ran amok in the Dutch league Ruud Van Nistelrooy and he pales in comparison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Nistelrooy

Like you indiacted good scouting comes from a combination of many different methods, some of the best clubs int he world get it completely wrong even when they have tons of money to plough into it. I am not surprised that TFC gets it wrong sometimes considering the players they can realistically attract and the resouces available.

Reasonable point, although I think you can mitigate the chance of a washout somewhat by being careful where you take someone from. Marlon James is a decent USL striker, but he scored something like a goal a game (or better) in Malaysia. Obviously, that's not a stat that can be taken too seriously.

But if a guy's been in the top five in scoring in Colombia for three straight years, he's probably worth trying to get. See: Montero, Fredy.

He's not the only guy with those skills in that league. Or the Uruguayan League. Or the Argentine League, or the Paraguayan. There's more of a dropoff in Concacaf, but we already know from CCL which leagues here compare fairly. Sure, a guy whose only success was in the Slovak domestic league isn't going to do that well elsewhere. But that's not that surprisng, as it's not that highly regarded when it comes to producing strikers.

Plus, it's easy to nail down which leagues produce more genuine product: follow the money. The same player databases list league transfer ups and downs, total profit or loss on transfers etc.

Honestly, where do people think International scouting starts for top clubs, word of mouth? Sure they've often got people on the ground. But even those people are smart enough to start at the top of the local stat table, not the bottom.

So all I'm saying is, it's not hard to identify where our scouting efforts are breaking down. We seem to have an extremely minimal set of standards for developing realistic expectations of eventual player performance.

Beach_Red
03-31-2010, 01:37 PM
So all I'm saying is, it's not hard to identify where our scouting efforts are breaking down. We seem to have an extremely minimal set of standards for developing realistic expectations of eventual player performance.

Um, what does this mean? And at what point is the scouting system breaking down, exactly?

jloome
03-31-2010, 01:46 PM
Um, what does this mean? And at what point is the scouting system breaking down, exactly?

If you look at the players we've brought in from overseas they've mostly been:

'a) statistically unimpressive
b) roster unstable, jumping from team to team

Those are enormous warning signs that they're footie journeymen, guys who go for a contract, use a good agent and some hyped-up cred to keep getting resigned then released, then resigned then released.

They can build a whole career on it, and sometimes -- thanks to contract buyouts -- make more money than they would have made if they had automatically gravitated to the level at which they should actually play.

It's a huge aspect of the world football transfer market, and it's an increasing byproduct of chumminess between agents and management.

The same logic often applies in North American minor league sports: "Oh well, so-and-so seems like such a sharp guy/nice guy/generous guy/amazing guy, that I just invested a million bucks in him." I've actually heard this from at least a half dozen investors in failed soccer ventures.

Now apply that kind of lack of corporate best practice control to a sports conglomerate like MLSE, where the bottom line involves millions of dollars and massive egos are also at play.

Boom, it's a recipe for shortsightedness and the triumph of networking and self-promotion over the product.

In footie, it's particulary true of players who've started at their (relatively large) domestic league's top level, either from a youth system or signed directly, but never lived up to expectations because their work ethic/game intelligence never matched their technical abilities.

jloome
03-31-2010, 01:47 PM
Internet or video scouting does not beat the live thing.

You might get a feel for a player using the internet or video, but there is a bias when looking through a camera.

You need to see a player play live to get a grasp of everything else around him. How a player reacts in various situation(s), how that player deals with adversity, body language, interactions with teammates, etc.

The hardest part of scouting is being able to get into someone's head. A video won't allow you to do that.

There are organizations who can do that for you, but if I'm going to shell out big money for a player I'd want to go see that player play live. Or at least have someone in the organization see the player play live.

Scouting is more than just stats. There are so many things that go with it. At the basic level, scouting is easy - can a player play or not? That doesn't take a lot of work. It's the other stuff that requires a lot of work.

If I was MLSE I would have a dozen guys on the payroll scouring the globe for players.

Unless you're looking for talent at its youngest, this is irrational. It makes far more sense to base someone's future performance on their performances to date than it does to simply size them up visually.

But that's moot anyway, because the point I"m trying to make is that they should be using ALL Of these things, and obviously arent'.

Whoop
03-31-2010, 01:53 PM
Unless you're looking for talent at its youngest, this is irrational. It makes far more sense to base someone's future performance on their performances to date than it does to simply size them up visually.

But that's moot anyway, because the point I"m trying to make is that they should be using ALL Of these things, and obviously arent'.

Umm... that's a given.

Still you have to see them play... and a live setting is still better than seeing some highlight package.

I mean it's easy to see guys like Kezman or van Nistelrooy but with MLS you're looking for more obscure players so seeing them live is even more imperative.

Beach_Red
03-31-2010, 01:57 PM
Now apply that kind of lack of corporate best practice control to a sports conglomerate like MLSE, where the bottom line involves millions of dollars and massive egos are also at play.



Yes, it seems the team-agent chuminess is a big factor. Here it really looks like MLSE just turned over the running of the team to another company, kind of sub-contracted it out like the food concessions.

Batman
03-31-2010, 02:07 PM
It's interesting. About a season and a half ago I was specifically told by a Senior MLSE exec that even though TFC was very restricted by salary cap, no such restrictions were in place for hiring of coachs, managers and a quality scouting staff. They thought they could take advantage of that significantly given the revenue they generate.

Even though I consider Preki a positive move forward, I certainly am not aware of any significant investment in scouting, and a lot of this thread is an example of doing it on the cheap. In essence, it doesn't really sound like they went forward with that plan.

Ossington Mental Youth
03-31-2010, 02:40 PM
theres nothing to suggest one way or the other batman

Whoop
03-31-2010, 03:15 PM
With the Leafs at least you can name the staff members.

Scouting Staff
Mike Penny Pro Scout
Tom Watt Pro Scout
Rob Cowie Pro Scout
Steve Kasper Pro Scout
Dave Morrison Director of Amateur Scouting
Mike Palmateer Amateur Scout
George Armstrong Amateur Scout
John Lilley Amateur Scout
Garth Malarchuk Amateur Scout
Alan Power Amateur Scout
Gary Harker Amateur Scout
Scott Carter Amateur Scout
Pierre Rioux Amateur Scout
Roy Stasiuk Amateur Scout
John McMorrow Amateur Scout
Frank Neal Amateur Scout
Darryl Stanley Amateur Scout
Bud Stefanski Amateur Scout
Dave Starman Amateur Scout
Joe Gibbs European Scout
Thommie Bergman European Scout
Jari Gronstrand European Scout
Peter Ihnacak European Scout
Nikolai Ladygin European Scout

^^
that's one of the larger staffs in the NHL

Other than Mo and Tim Regan who else works for TFC in a player identification capacity? This is where they can separate themselves from other MLS clubs.

Beach_Red
03-31-2010, 03:32 PM
^ What a great name, "Ladygin." Is it pronounced, Lady-Jin?

And remember, Tim Regan never knows when he has to suit up to play, so he must spend some time staying in shape ;).

olegunnar
03-31-2010, 03:44 PM
Yes, it seems the team-agent chuminess is a big factor. Here it really looks like MLSE just turned over the running of the team to another company, kind of sub-contracted it out like the food concessions.

Or

They turned it over to Mo, who worked out his own deal with Firstwave.

Beach_Red
03-31-2010, 03:51 PM
Or

They turned it over to Mo, who worked out his own deal with Firstwave.

Make up your mind - is he a lousy deal maker or a great one? Let's face it, he's an employee and when he gets fired the next guy from the company (Preki) will take over and continue to toe the company line.

jloome
03-31-2010, 05:21 PM
Umm... that's a given.

Still you have to see them play... and a live setting is still better than seeing some highlight package.

I mean it's easy to see guys like Kezman or van Nistelrooy but with MLS you're looking for more obscure players so seeing them live is even more imperative.

No argument there.

torontocelt
03-31-2010, 06:49 PM
Umm... that's a given.

Still you have to see them play... and a live setting is still better than seeing some highlight package.

I mean it's easy to see guys like Kezman or van Nistelrooy but with MLS you're looking for more obscure players so seeing them live is even more imperative.

Totally, the comparison with Kezman and Van Nistelrooy was to show that although a striker can be prolific in one league and his stats for scoring goals are crazy, it does not mean that this will be the case if they move leagues. Obviously Kezman and Van Nistelrooy came to prominence in the same league but one went on to score bucket loads everywhere he has went and the other still had a good career but did not score as much as he did in Holland. I am in no way delusional about the kind of players TFC can attract and that is why for TFC they will always have a lot of hit and miss players as they cannot look at great players plus there is so many crazy rules in the MLS. I myself would not fancy being a scout for TFC, it must be a pretty hard job with all the restriction that they would have.

jloome
03-31-2010, 09:29 PM
Totally, the comparison with Kezman and Van Nistelrooy was to show that although a striker can be prolific in one league and his stats for scoring goals are crazy, it does not mean that this will be the case if they move leagues. Obviously Kezman and Van Nistelrooy came to prominence in the same league but one went on to score bucket loads everywhere he has went and the other still had a good career but did not score as much as he did in Holland. I am in no way delusional about the kind of players TFC can attract and that is why for TFC they will always have a lot of hit and miss players as they cannot look at great players plus there is so many crazy rules in the MLS. I myself would not fancy being a scout for TFC, it must be a pretty hard job with all the restriction that they would have.

Sure, goals don't always transfer. But common sense, obviously, dictates that you're not going to ignore stats while scouting. TFC seems to have done exactly that.

Whoop
03-31-2010, 09:33 PM
I'm going to be interested to see how a guy like Collins John does in Chicago for example.

MLS is quirky though. Sometimes I get the impression even a prolific goal scorer from another league could somehow struggle to score in MLS.

Though I would rather place money on the prolific striker than a guy who shows promise.

Dirk Diggler
03-31-2010, 10:03 PM
Sure, goals don't always transfer. But common sense, obviously, dictates that you're not going to ignore stats while scouting. TFC seems to have done exactly that.

We can't be sure that TFC ignored statistics when making such signings. What if TFC knew exactly what kind of numbers they were putting up and signed them knowing fully well that they could expect similar numbers here in MLS? I've never gotten the impression that they signed anyone thinking that they've found a diamond in the rough or that they've secured a coup. It seems to me that they have always been content with signing mediocre players.

Ossington Mental Youth
03-31-2010, 10:08 PM
thats mo youre speaking about, hes whos been making the signings

Dirk Diggler
03-31-2010, 10:13 PM
I know that.

Ossington Mental Youth
03-31-2010, 10:20 PM
sorry just making sure

ag futbol
03-31-2010, 11:09 PM
Sure, goals don't always transfer. But common sense, obviously, dictates that you're not going to ignore stats while scouting. TFC seems to have done exactly that.
I wouldn't necessarily say this is just about stats.

As you stated previously, how many times have we been liked with players other teams would simply consider poison? And it's other common sense things as well. England (and europe) is a place where you can find talent. But you have to get around the fact that it has the strongest lower league system in the world and therefor the players command high salaries. Shouldn't stop you from doing deals, but you need to be mindful of it. We simply threw money on the fire. Hell you could use our "dealings" in south america as another example. River Plate put the excess shop wares on display and Johnston bit, hook line and sinker. We could have got a much better prospect than Vitti if we'd just dug a little deeper.

I like the idea of scraping the best of the bottom of the barrel on the way up rather than trying to catch some falling star, which inevitably lands our head like an anvil.

Phily has Christian Arrieta on trial. Guy is going to step in and be a solid MLS defender (obvioius to anyone who watched). It's an embarrassment that Mo Johnston can't even identify talent that's sitting right in front of his face.

It seems to me Mo Johnston just simply takes what some agent drops on his plate rather than look for it himself. If you don't dig for what's good, you're always going to be offered crap.

jloome
04-01-2010, 01:04 AM
I wouldn't necessarily say this is just about stats.

As you stated previously, how many times have we been liked with players other teams would simply consider poison? And it's other common sense things as well. England (and europe) is a place where you can find talent. But you have to get around the fact that it has the strongest lower league system in the world and therefor the players command high salaries. Shouldn't stop you from doing deals, but you need to be mindful of it. We simply threw money on the fire. Hell you could use our "dealings" in south america as another example. River Plate put the excess shop wares on display and Johnston bit, hook line and sinker. We could have got a much better prospect than Vitti if we'd just dug a little deeper.

I like the idea of scraping the best of the bottom of the barrel on the way up rather than trying to catch some falling star, which inevitably lands our head like an anvil.

Phily has Christian Arrieta on trial. Guy is going to step in and be a solid MLS defender (obvioius to anyone who watched). It's an embarrassment that Mo Johnston can't even identify talent that's sitting right in front of his face.

It seems to me Mo Johnston just simply takes what some agent drops on his plate rather than look for it himself. If you don't dig for what's good, you're always going to be offered crap.

holy shit, this thread is, like, epidemically putting words into my ...er, "mouth", as it were.

I didn't say it was JUST about the stats. And I'd agree entirely with your assessment of how they seem to have found players. The point was that they could have pegged most of those deals as dumb by pure past performance data alone.

And yeah, Arrieta's suitability to this level should have been obvious to a whole lot of people. I'd say the same of Leonardo Di Lorenzo with Montreal.

jloome
04-01-2010, 01:05 AM
We can't be sure that TFC ignored statistics when making such signings. What if TFC knew exactly what kind of numbers they were putting up and signed them knowing fully well that they could expect similar numbers here in MLS? I've never gotten the impression that they signed anyone thinking that they've found a diamond in the rough or that they've secured a coup. It seems to me that they have always been content with signing mediocre players.

Eek, that's a frighteningly bleak thought.

Beach_Red
04-01-2010, 08:16 AM
I wouldn't necessarily say this is just about stats.

As you stated previously, how many times have we been liked with players other teams would simply consider poison? And it's other common sense things as well. England (and europe) is a place where you can find talent. But you have to get around the fact that it has the strongest lower league system in the world and therefor the players command high salaries. Shouldn't stop you from doing deals, but you need to be mindful of it. We simply threw money on the fire. Hell you could use our "dealings" in south america as another example. River Plate put the excess shop wares on display and Johnston bit, hook line and sinker. We could have got a much better prospect than Vitti if we'd just dug a little deeper.

I like the idea of scraping the best of the bottom of the barrel on the way up rather than trying to catch some falling star, which inevitably lands our head like an anvil.

Phily has Christian Arrieta on trial. Guy is going to step in and be a solid MLS defender (obvioius to anyone who watched). It's an embarrassment that Mo Johnston can't even identify talent that's sitting right in front of his face.

It seems to me Mo Johnston just simply takes what some agent drops on his plate rather than look for it himself. If you don't dig for what's good, you're always going to be offered crap.


This is a good analysis. The only thing we need to make sure is that the next guy to get the job doesn't also simply rely on agents and take what's right in front of him. We have to be sure the fault is in the guy and not in the system he's working in here.

Section 117
04-01-2010, 08:37 AM
IMO Mo is the only one that does that. Look at how the Shite Bulls have organized their front office now. They brought a coach and a GM with European pedigree and then brought in people with MLS experience to help out.

This is great example of corporate ownership doing their due dillegence and spending the money properly.

just my 2 cents

Steve
04-01-2010, 08:54 AM
We can't be sure that TFC ignored statistics when making such signings. What if TFC knew exactly what kind of numbers they were putting up and signed them knowing fully well that they could expect similar numbers here in MLS? I've never gotten the impression that they signed anyone thinking that they've found a diamond in the rough or that they've secured a coup. It seems to me that they have always been content with signing mediocre players.

What is this, "loose change"? I can't understand the motivation people seem to ascribe to TFC and MLSE. Really, I mean, what is your theory? That TFC don't care about winning? How does that make any sense at all? So, MLS are paying for the salaries of all of our players (except one notable exception). That means that TFC has no costs associated with players. Now your theory is what, that since they don't have to pay for the players they'd rather get poor players than good ones for the same money? For what reason?

The fact is, TFC and MLSE want to win. Full stop. Do they want to win for the same reason we do? Possibly partially, but that's not the main driving factor. The main driving factor is, the more they win, the more people buy merchandise, the more people watch on TV, the more add revenue they get, the more games they get (in the playoffs), the more profit they get, etc. There is absolutely no downside to them winning, and since they don't pay for the roster, there isn't even any cost to them. So again, tell me why they would be content with "mediocore players"?

boban
04-01-2010, 09:02 AM
The fact is, TFC and MLSE want to win. Full stop. Do they want to win for the same reason we do? Possibly partially, but that's not the main driving factor. The main driving factor is, the more they win, the more people buy merchandise, the more people watch on TV, the more add revenue they get, the more games they get (in the playoffs), the more profit they get, etc. There is absolutely no downside to them winning, and since they don't pay for the roster, there isn't even any cost to them. So again, tell me why they would be content with "mediocore players"?
You are smoking something heavy if you believe the shit you just spewed here.

MLSE cares only about corporate growth. growth for the Pension fund. Winning is a byproduct for them. There are so many suits in that board office that they only know about corporate profits through regular business means. In other words, they know fuck all about sports and sports winning. They do know and understand about selling ad space on TV, jacking broadcasts rates up, selling wall space and everything related to things of that nature. The main driving force is business growth from year to year. They don't rely or factor in winning to get them there.

Kevvv
04-01-2010, 09:06 AM
And you're implying that winning isn't profitable? That they know everything about growth and profit, yet somehow don't make the connection that winning makes good business sense?

Winning is not a byproduct, it's a means to growth. It could be true that they don't know how to win, or what it takes to put together a winning sports team. But that's not the same as not being interested in winning.

Beach_Red
04-01-2010, 09:07 AM
So again, tell me why they would be content with "mediocore players"?


Because the player's salary is only part of the "cost" of acquiring him.

New York is actually a good example. Their corporate owners are experienced at running a soccer team and they may even share the costs of scouting between teams.

boban
04-01-2010, 09:12 AM
And you're implying that winning isn't profitable?
I didn't say that.
MLSE's prime motivator is not winning. It's corporate profit. That's why you see things like Maple Leaf Square and condos and not Stanley Cups and MLS Playoff appearances.

Steve
04-01-2010, 09:20 AM
You are smoking something heavy if you believe the shit you just spewed here.

MLSE cares only about corporate growth. growth for the Pension fund. Winning is a byproduct for them. There are so many suits in that board office that they only know about corporate profits through regular business means. In other words, they know fuck all about sports and sports winning. They do know and understand about selling ad space on TV, jacking broadcasts rates up, selling wall space and everything related to things of that nature. The main driving force is business growth from year to year. They don't rely or factor in winning to get them there.

Umm, nowhere did I imply their prime motivator wasn't growth and profit. The problem you seem to be having is you don't think they make the connection between winning and profit. Of course they do. Not only would winning directly impact their revenue (getting into the playoffs means more games you can charge people for, which is a direct revenue stream), but winning also contributes to growth of the brand, which increases the worth of the company as well as other revenue streams (more people watching, more merchandise sold, etc). Winning in sports = increase in revenue. They understand that as much as anyone. Sure, you can make the argument that they aren't very good at winning, but it's difficult to make the argument that they don't want to win.

Beach_Red
04-01-2010, 09:29 AM
Umm, nowhere did I imply their prime motivator wasn't growth and profit. The problem you seem to be having is you don't think they make the connection between winning and profit. Of course they do. Not only would winning directly impact their revenue (getting into the playoffs means more games you can charge people for, which is a direct revenue stream), but winning also contributes to growth of the brand, which increases the worth of the company as well as other revenue streams (more people watching, more merchandise sold, etc). Winning in sports = increase in revenue. They understand that as much as anyone. Sure, you can make the argument that they aren't very good at winning, but it's difficult to make the argument that they don't want to win.

But it's not enough more profit to make the risk of spending more to get it worthwhile.

You have to think like a pension fund, slow and steady return on investment, no risk. They have a monopoly business, no competition for the sports dollar in the city and the leagues themselves are what generate most of the interest.

Winning generates more income, sure, but as they've seen for decades in Toronto, losing generates enough income to keep theshareholders happy.

The reason they aren't good at winning is because it isn't a very high priority for them.

And because they never get blamed for losing, there's always a scapegoat lower down the corporate ladder. That's really what this thread is about.

boban
04-01-2010, 10:19 AM
Umm, nowhere did I imply their prime motivator wasn't growth and profit. The problem you seem to be having is you don't think they make the connection between winning and profit. Of course they do. Not only would winning directly impact their revenue (getting into the playoffs means more games you can charge people for, which is a direct revenue stream), but winning also contributes to growth of the brand, which increases the worth of the company as well as other revenue streams (more people watching, more merchandise sold, etc). Winning in sports = increase in revenue. They understand that as much as anyone. Sure, you can make the argument that they aren't very good at winning, but it's difficult to make the argument that they don't want to win.
No they don't. If they did they would spend more time on it ad make it a priority. But you and I both know they don't. All they give a shit about is 'the brand' and how will that make money for them. They win just enough to keep the people interested. You only have so many hours in a day, and they spend most of it on driving corp. profits than on on field product.
And like Beach_red mentions above me, winning at a higher level is too much of a risk for the return. Less teams win at that rate.

boban
04-01-2010, 10:24 AM
And because they never get blamed for losing, there's always a scapegoat lower down the corporate ladder. That's really what this thread is about.
This is something that nobody seems to get in this city. The fans nor the media anywhere touch on this angle. You hit the nail right on the head here.
We have gone through 4 or 5 GMs in Laugh land, 3 GMS in Raptors in the last dozen years, yet Peddie, the board, Anselmi, Hunter, et. al all remain in their seats and take no blame for the mediocrity they feed us.

Whoop
04-01-2010, 10:59 AM
Because the player's salary is only part of the "cost" of acquiring him.

New York is actually a good example. Their corporate owners are experienced at running a soccer team and they may even share the costs of scouting between teams.

Possibly.

Even though he was cut, there was a link between Red Bull Salzburg and NYRB.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_%C3%96bster

Whoop
04-01-2010, 11:06 AM
Put it this way, the board will never say "Fuck it, we're going all out to win this year. We can't spend more money on player salaries, but lets spend $10 million to get the best coaches, spend another $15 million on team operations - get the best scouts, the best therapists, state of the art medical equipment - spend another $50 million on facility upgrades for players, etc."

If they do that stuff, it's to get a return on their investment, not necessarily to win.

Even though the New York Yankees may be worth more than the Leafs, they are not as profitable as the Leafs for example on a year to year basis. While winning would increase the value of the franchise, winning requires taking risks, risks that shareholders might not be comfortable with.

So you do enough to appease the masses. At that, they are probably the best in the game.