Earl Cochrane out?

Printable View

06-08-2012, 05:37 PM
Toronto

Earl Cochrane out?

http://www.canadasoccer.com/canadian...ectors-p150781

On 2 and 3 June, the newly formed Canadian Soccer Association Board of Directors met for the first time since the elections held at the 2012 Annual General Meeting on May 5. In addition to discussing the strategic vision they see for the Association’s future, three remaining positions on the Board were appointed on the recommendation of the Nominations Committee. Ms. Karen O’Neill (3-year term), Dr. Wendy Bedingfield (3-year term), and Mr. Earl Cochrane (2-year term) were selected by the members of the Board for these positions.
06-08-2012, 05:39 PM
Auzzy

It's a board appointment. It's not a full-time job.
06-08-2012, 09:25 PM
Ajax TFC

So the CSA clearly still has no idea what they're doing
06-08-2012, 09:31 PM
Pookie

Earl spent years at CSA. Earl sits on CSA Board. Earl oversees or at least has input on player signings. TFC signs more Canucks than VAN/MTL combined. CSA awards BMO/MLSE WCQ's and Centennial Match as well as friendlies and other events.

Lots of reasons for WCQs to be at BMO but does no one at least see the potential for a conflict of interest here?
06-08-2012, 10:01 PM
WestStandGeoff

MLSE does not profit from National team matches at BMO, so I don't see a conflict of interest even if Earl is influencing that to happen.
06-08-2012, 10:09 PM
Pookie

Quote:

Originally Posted by WestStandGeoff

MLSE does not profit from National team matches at BMO, so I don't see a conflict of interest even if Earl is influencing that to happen.

This is from the agreement (sorry for the fonts, adobe is screwing up...or I am screwing it up:

Through the management agreement, MLSEL, the City/Board, and to a lesser extent the CSA,would participate in the sharing of the stadium’s potential financial outcomes. Net revenuesgenerated by the stadium are to be distributed in the following priority:

1. to the City/Board and MLSEL to the extent of any prior contributions to excess operatingcosts;
2. to the City/Board $250,000 and MLSEL $250,000;

3. thereafter, to:

•
CSA, 33% as a rebate of its user fees, up to the amount of such fees for the year inquestion; and
•
The City/Board and to MLSEL the balance (50:50).

In addition to sharing in stadium net revenues with the Board/City, MLSEL would also receive
an annual management fee of $200,000.

http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...o%20Report.pdf
06-08-2012, 10:29 PM
WestStandGeoff

^^^^ Yeah, but look at the table on page 13 which gives a breakdown of who gets paid depending on what's happening. MLSE doesn't seem to take anything for CSA events.
06-08-2012, 10:48 PM
Pookie

Quote:

Originally Posted by WestStandGeoff

^^^^ Yeah, but look at the table on page 13 which gives a breakdown of who gets paid depending on what's happening. MLSE doesn't seem to take anything for CSA events.

You have to read that chart carefully.

CSA gets 93% of ticket revenue for CSA events while the "Stadium" receives 7%. That "Stadium" revenue is to be split according to the painfully small text that I highlighted above (or p14 of the document).

Presumably, this money is pooled and then distributed according to the clauses outlined. Stadium revenues are collected and then the City/Board get $250k of that while MLSE gets $250k. Whatever is leftover gets distributed 33% back to CSA and then 50/50 on the remainder between MLSE and City/Board.

So, in essence (as I read it after a Guinness or two) that 7% goes into the "Stadium revenue" pool along with 75% of Food and Beverage at the CSA events and 15% of CSA merchandise sales. MLSE then takes a share of that Stadium revenue.
06-09-2012, 02:57 PM
Toronto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auzzy

It's a board appointment. It's not a full-time job.

Ya maybe he should take his full time job more seriously.
06-09-2012, 03:08 PM
Auzzy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toronto

Ya maybe he should take his full time job more seriously.

I think I would rather Cochrane is appointed to every board in Canada. ;)
06-09-2012, 03:50 PM
TFC07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pookie

Earl spent years at CSA. Earl sits on CSA Board. Earl oversees or at least has input on player signings. TFC signs more Canucks than VAN/MTL combined. CSA awards BMO/MLSE WCQ's and Centennial Match as well as friendlies and other events.

Lots of reasons for WCQs to be at BMO but does no one at least see the potential for a conflict of interest here?

Or maybe players wanted to play in Toronto. Plus there isn't any other stadiums in Canada with grass field right now.

Also didn't you say in past Earl wanted to get rid of Canadian player requirement?
06-09-2012, 04:16 PM
Greatest Ripoff

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pookie

Earl spent years at CSA. Earl sits on CSA Board. Earl oversees or at least has input on player signings. TFC signs more Canucks than VAN/MTL combined. CSA awards BMO/MLSE WCQ's and Centennial Match as well as friendlies and other events.

Lots of reasons for WCQs to be at BMO but does no one at least see the potential for a conflict of interest here?

The CMNT players only want to play on grass. Name another grass stadium suitable for the qualifiers.
06-09-2012, 04:41 PM
Richard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greatest Ripoff

The CMNT players only want to play on grass. Name another grass stadium suitable for the qualifiers.

Lol yeh its actually pathetic to be honsest, atleast Saputo stadium is looking like a solid place to play.
06-09-2012, 06:01 PM
OgtheDim

CFL doesn't want to play on grass anymore? Geez..the wusses.
06-09-2012, 08:04 PM
Pookie

Quote:

Originally Posted by TFC07

Or maybe players wanted to play in Toronto. Plus there isn't any other stadiums in Canada with grass field right now.

Also didn't you say in past Earl wanted to get rid of Canadian player requirement?

Mo started the lobbying with Vancouver to lower the quota based on competitiveness factor. He was let go and Earl took his seat at the table with MLS. Quota was originally lowered to 0 as the MLS agreed that forcing Canadian teams to employ Canadians based on a quota and not on merit put them at a disadvantage relative to the rest of the teams. But with pressure from CSA it was raised to 3.

As for playing at BMO based on grass, of course there is a preference for grass. I acknowledged that there were plenty of reasons to play here outside of anything shady. That said, even at 13,000 seats Saputo provides a great alternative.

From a conflict of interest perspective though, Earl works for a team that profits from games being held at its home pitch and he sits on the board of the organization that awards the games. I would hope he excuses himself from any decision related to where the CSA p,as its games.
06-09-2012, 10:25 PM
TFC07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pookie

Mo started the lobbying with Vancouver to lower the quota based on competitiveness factor. He was let go and Earl took his seat at the table with MLS. Quota was originally lowered to 0 as the MLS agreed that forcing Canadian teams to employ Canadians based on a quota and not on merit put them at a disadvantage relative to the rest of the teams. But with pressure from CSA it was raised to 3.

As for playing at BMO based on grass, of course there is a preference for grass. I acknowledged that there were plenty of reasons to play here outside of anything shady. That said, even at 13,000 seats Saputo provides a great alternative.

From a conflict of interest perspective though, Earl works for a team that profits from games being held at its home pitch and he sits on the board of the organization that awards the games. I would hope he excuses himself from any decision related to where the CSA p,as its games.

You're way out of it here.

Mo Johnson used Canadian players as a scapegoat for his lack of success even though non-Canadians he bought in weren't exactly great either. You're falling for Mo's lies here. Vancouver aren't exactly accomplished anything with their non-Canadian players so far. In fact, didn't TFC beat Whitecaps in 2-leg series recently? lol

Saputo Stadium had problems with their turf in the past. Plus, fanbase in Montreal isn't greatest (Example: Honduras-Canada game in last WCQ). However, playing in Toronto was decided by Stephan Hart and players. They wanted to play in Toronto! I don't know why you're ignoring this reason.

Do you have a source to back up your claim there? I highly doubt MLSE gets any money for non-TFC games played at BMO Field. Maybe you're confusing MLSE with City of Toronto here?
06-09-2012, 11:10 PM
Pookie

I missed all the trophies we won with our Canadian model.

All Mo lies eh? so Vancouver was hoodwinked as was the league who heard the case of being unable to compete and then agrred and lowered the quota to 0?

Look, it's not unCanadian to suggest that players on the MLS team, which really has no national basis other than MLS markets a flag on their kits, have to compete for their jobs.

If I want to watch Canadian development I can go to a CSL game or see the national team. Both of whom charge a hell of a lot less for tickets. I'm paying to see the best Club team we can put together not watch training sessions for the National Team.

As for the financial deal, the link is there for you to read above. Clearly laid out that MLSE shares in the stadium revenue for MLS and CSA events.
06-09-2012, 11:26 PM
TFC07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pookie

I missed all the trophies we won with our Canadian model.

All Mo lies eh? so Vancouver was hoodwinked as was the league who heard the case of being unable to compete and then agrred and lowered the quota to 0?

Look, it's not unCanadian to suggest that players on the MLS team, which really has no national basis other than MLS markets a flag on their kits, have to compete for their jobs.

If I want to watch Canadian development I can go to a CSL game or see the national team. Both of whom charge a hell of a lot less for tickets. I'm paying to see the best Club team we can put together not watch training sessions for the National Team.

As for the financial deal, the link is there for you to read above. Clearly laid out that MLSE shares in the stadium revenue for MLS and CSA events.

Well you're not looking hard enough with our Voyageurs Cup. Not only that but look how this Canadian team played against best in CONCACAF. They almost made it to the finals. Like I asked before, what has Vancouver accomplish so far with unCanadian team?

So in your logic, then why not tell MLS drop all Canadian and American slots so we can have best players in the world playing in MLS regardless of nationality? Reality is that MLS was created to develop American (now Canadian) players.

I can't find the source where it says MLSE gets some revenue from non-TFC events held at BMO field.
06-11-2012, 03:14 PM
WestStandGeoff

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pookie

You have to read that chart carefully.

CSA gets 93% of ticket revenue for CSA events while the "Stadium" receives 7%. That "Stadium" revenue is to be split according to the painfully small text that I highlighted above (or p14 of the document).

Presumably, this money is pooled and then distributed according to the clauses outlined. Stadium revenues are collected and then the City/Board get $250k of that while MLSE gets $250k. Whatever is leftover gets distributed 33% back to CSA and then 50/50 on the remainder between MLSE and City/Board.

So, in essence (as I read it after a Guinness or two) that 7% goes into the "Stadium revenue" pool along with 75% of Food and Beverage at the CSA events and 15% of CSA merchandise sales. MLSE then takes a share of that Stadium revenue.

OK, agree that there's at least a perceived conflict, but I still don't think there's much money floating ML$E's way based on the distribution of funds.

First off, the 7% of ticket revenue is capped at $15k per game. Next, Stadium revenue isn't 75% on concessions, it's the 75% of the remaining net profit after CSA took 25% of the gross... and yes, we all know there's a very healthy profit margin on BMO concessions, but even assuming a 300% markup across the board, that still puts the "stadium" take closer to 25% of gross. Same logic for the Merchandise, but definitely way less markup... in fact, "stadium" cut of merchandise is probably less than 5% of gross sales (I would bet closer to 2%).

And sure, MLSE and the City each take $250k before the CSA starts taking their 33%, but the sharing includes all events at BMO, meaning that those caps are probably easily reached after a few MLS games, so the CSA is still taking 1/3 of the stadium revenues for MNT games, as well as taking a decent cut for TFC matches. Again, not disputing your statement that ML$E is taking a cut, I just don't think it's as big a cut/controversy.

And for the record, I think the guiding factor - as TFC07 points out - is that the players want to play in Toronto, particularly those who are contracted to European clubs and for whom travel to Toronto (or maybe Montreal) is significantly easier than going just about anywhere else in Canada.