Mo's future comes down to this

[jloome]

It's not a news article, it's a column, so I figured daily news isn't the place to get some reaction to this (plus, it's not getting any; perhaps it's turgid and self-evident, who knows, but I wrote it, so I'm obviously spoiling for discussion/debate.


http://www.rednationonline.ca/The_ve..._09_news.shtml

[wzhxvy]

Interesting perspective Jloome...I dont know if Mo's fate will come down to when he hires the coach and/or who the coach is. I think either his fate is predetermined and Anselmi is waiting for the right time to sack him...or they are going to give him time to screw it up next year and then fire him. I think he will find a coach regardless because he can throw money at that problem. I think the real test is whether he will be able to stop himself from being himself or whether his true colours show and then we end up with a fiasco mid season just like we did this year.

[spezz44]

Interesting perspective Jloome...I dont know if Mo's fate will come down to when he hires the coach and/or who the coach is. I think either his fate is predetermined and Anselmi is waiting for the right time to sack him...or they are going to give him time to screw it up next year and then fire him. I think he will find a coach regardless because he can throw money at that problem. I think the real test is whether he will be able to stop himself from being himself or whether his true colours show and then we end up with a fiasco mid season just like we did this year.

why would his fate be predeterminded, they just gave him a new contract? I really think Anselmi really does believe in him.

[TFCtoMUFC]

Hey, Mo can go to Scotland on me!

[trane]

Nice article Jloome.

[wzhxvy]

why would his fate be predeterminded, they just gave him a new contract? I really think Anselmi really does believe in him.

Only way that is, is if Anselmi has new information or has become convinced because of things he has learned since the extension. IF (BIG IF) that is the case, my guess is that for him to do something about it, after his painfully incompetent move, is to have an excuse. Mo leaves for personal reasons or Mo goes to work for the league...something like that, and he would wait for the right moment to announce that.

How the new coach is announced and by who, might be a hint. I also wonder who leaked the story and who made the decision to post it on the website...sounds like more than MO at play...some business/PR decisions are being made at a high level.

[TFCtoMUFC]

Just read the rest of the article, very well written and very true and intuitive.

[ensco]

I agree with this.

I have bet several people (including someone on this board) $10 that Mo will fail in hiring a credible coach, and will therefore be gone by Feb 1.

If he gets Preki or someone similar, then obviously I lose. Fine with me!

We'll see.

[DOMIN8R]

$10! You get off easy, Ensco.

I bet KD $100 we would make it the playoffs this year. That's KDs drinking money for a whole night.

[wzhxvy]

Shouldn't our future president be more optimistic ?? Note to self :-)

[Beach_Red]

Okay, you want some discussion? That's not journalism and you know it.

"Whether that rash display was what ultimately pushed Johnston to sign with rivals Glasgow Rangers may never be known."

Never? It took me ten minutes and Google to find the quote from Celtic management that they didn't want to pay the eight hundred thousand pounds to the company that held Johnston's contract (a company his agent had a stake in) in addition to the transfer fee to the French team, so what ultimately "pushed" Johnston was money and his sleazy agent. Now, "athlete gets screwed by sleazy agent," is certainly a, "dog bites man," and not much of a story, but that's the way it goes in journalism sometimes.

(I've never heard of a company holding a player's contract, as far as I know it doesn't happen with North American sports but there were rumours about it with Seattle and Montero - is this common in soccer?)

Which adds something to your claim, "Ever since the Celtic incident, Johnston has worn the mantle of being duplicitous. But finding a factual story to support the contention is near impossible." Or not. I'd never heard of the guy till he took the job with TFC and I certainly have no dog in this fight, but it sure looks to an outsider like Celtic management made a calculated decision to not spend the money knowing their fans would back them and always blame the player.

And MLSE will do the same thing on a lesser scale becaue TFC just isn't that important to them in the big picture. They'll ride this guy till the demand for him to go is so huge people won't even care who comes and if he wins or not. And like all fans we'll buy into it.

[jloome]

Okay, you want some discussion? That's not journalism and you know it.

"Whether that rash display was what ultimately pushed Johnston to sign with rivals Glasgow Rangers may never be known."

Never? It took me ten minutes and Google to find the quote from Celtic management that they didn't want to pay the eight hundred thousand pounds to the company that held Johnston's contract (a company his agent had a stake in) in addition to the transfer fee to the French team, so what ultimately "pushed" Johnston was money and his sleazy agent. Now, "athlete gets screwed by sleazy agent," is certainly a, "dog bites man," and not much of a story, but that's the way it goes in journalism sometimes.

(I've never heard of a company holding a player's contract, as far as I know it doesn't happen with North American sports but there were rumours about it with Seattle and Montero - is this common in soccer?)

Which adds something to your claim, "Ever since the Celtic incident, Johnston has worn the mantle of being duplicitous. But finding a factual story to support the contention is near impossible." Or not. I'd never heard of the guy till he took the job with TFC and I certainly have no dog in this fight, but it sure looks to an outsider like Celtic management made a calculated decision to not spend the money knowing their fans would back them and always blame the player.

And MLSE will do the same thing on a lesser scale becaue TFC just isn't that important to them in the big picture. They'll ride this guy till the demand for him to go is so huge people won't even care who comes and if he wins or not. And like all fans we'll buy into it.

1: "That's not journalism and you know it" What you mean is, that's not unbiased reporting and you know it. Journalism is a professional craft, not a standard. And I didn't say it was. I said it was a column, which directly implies opinion.

2: Do some more digging, as it's not cut-and-dried. Bill McNeill made it clear that he believed they already had a contract signed by Johnston, not realizing it was owned by someone else. But nowhere in any of those stories does it clarify that JOHNSTON knew that. He may well have simply been told by his agent he wasn't tied to Celtic, and that he should consider an offer from Rangers. In that scenario, having somone (by his own admission) scream in your face that you'll never play again could well be a catalyat.

3: It's increasingly common, see the whole Tevez/Mascherano debacle.

4: Again, you're concluding Celtic cheaped out at the last minute. Not fair to Celtic, as McNeill stated unequivocably he believed Mo already had a deal with the team. Celtic supporters feel he simply spurned them for a better offer after his agent tried to ring extra money out of the club. Again, it's not cut-and-dried.

5: I'm not sure alienating their fan base is MLSE's objective, so pre-planning to leave a man floundering in his position doesn't seem to make much organizational sense.

[ensco]

Beach, I think it's fair to say that what really happened with Mo in 1989 is not clear. It's not hard to find credible stories that say the opposite of what you found above.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sp...-14397035.html

[spark]

Never? It took me ten minutes and Google to find the quote from Celtic management that they didn't want to pay the eight hundred thousand pounds to the company that held Johnston's contract (a company his agent had a stake in) in addition to the transfer fee to the French team, so what ultimately "pushed" Johnston was money and his sleazy agent. Now, "athlete gets screwed by sleazy agent," is certainly a, "dog bites man," and not much of a story, but that's the way it goes in journalism sometimes.

WTF? can you provide a link from either Mo or his agent saying this? If not how is what you are saying any different - an opinion.

You should also put this into historical context. Players could have left Celtic for better money - but you don't go to Rangers. This is (was) common sense. So you think just money could have pushed him? Are death threats worth that, or perhaps add in a personal grudge?

[Beach_Red]

1: "That's not journalism and you know it" What you mean is, that's not unbiased reporting and you know it. Journalism is a professional craft, not a standard. And I didn't say it was. I said it was a column, which directly implies opinion.

2: Do some more digging, as it's not cut-and-dried. Bill McNeill made it clear that he believed they already had a contract signed by Johnston, not realizing it was owned by someone else. But nowhere in any of those stories does it clarify that JOHNSTON knew that. He may well have simply been told by his agent he wasn't tied to Celtic, and that he should consider an offer from Rangers. In that scenario, having somone (by his own admission) scream in your face that you'll never play again could well be a catalyat.

3: It's increasingly common, see the whole Tevez/Mascherano debacle.

4: Again, you're concluding Celtic cheaped out at the last minute. Not fair to Celtic, as McNeill stated unequivocably he believed Mo already had a deal with the team. Celtic supporters feel he simply spurned them for a better offer after his agent tried to ring extra money out of the club. Again, it's not cut-and-dried.

5: I'm not sure alienating their fan base is MLSE's objective, so pre-planning to leave a man floundering in his position doesn't seem to make much organizational sense.

1. Okay, I admit I just put that in there to watch you get upset. Sometimes you're funny on here. Think of that scene near the end of Bull Durham when Tim Robbins tries to get Kevin Costner pissed. Frankly I'm disaapointed, I expected you to be far less rational, but it's early yet in Edmoton, isn't it?

2. This is the kind of thing that drives me nuts. "THOUGHT he had a deal." If Mo claimed he THOUGHT he had a deal for a player to come to TFC and he didn't you'd be all over the guy. What kind of management THINKS they have a deal?

3. It's still sleazy. I'd like to know more about the Montero deal, too.

4. Again, he "believed" he had a deal? Did he have a signed contract or not? This isn't the 18th century, these aren't handshake deals. You'd never forgive Mo for getting a handshake deal with a player who then went and signed with some other team, how come these guys get off so easy?

It's like this: if Mo signed the contract then Celtic didn't. If Celtic signed the contract they'd know Mo didn't. No one can walk away from a contract signed by both parties (if you can find a way to do that for free I have a contract for another book with Harcourt in New York I'd like to get out of and take the book to one of their competitors. They have lawyers, though).

5. What I'm saying here is that MLSE will react to what the fans demand. So far, the fans aren;t demanding a championship, they're demanding a change in management that they THINK will bring about more success. Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but as long as no ne is demanding that MLSE actually win a championship they won't.

The fan base in Toronto is fickle and MLSE know it. They know that the team needs to be as successful as the middle of the pack in the league (which is who? Dallas? RSL?). They know that as long as the league improves Toronto fans will always keep it in the middle of the pack.

They've learned a lot from the Raptors.

[Beach_Red]

Beach, I think it's fair to say that what really happened with Mo in 1989 is not clear. It's not hard to find credible stories that say the opposite of what you found above.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sp...-14397035.html

He looks right at the camera and says it in the "Judas" documentary. I was surprised they didn't even edit that out, but I see it doesn't matter.

[ensco]

He looks right at the camera and says it in the "Judas" documentary. I was surprised they didn't even edit that out, but I see it doesn't matter.

No, the truth matters.

I haven't seen that infamous piece of work. Is it online somewhere?

[Klinsmann]

Yeah, Mo has a contract and the support of MLSE for now. But Ricciardi and Ferguson Jr. had contracts and support as well. This article is right on the money. Mo is definitely feeling the heat after this season and this Head Coach hire will make him or break him. If he hires Preki and the team make the playoffs, the heat will be off and all will be golden. If TFC does not make the playoffs next year, the chorus will be so loud that they will have no choice but to fire him.

[Shakes McQueen]

The contract extension they gave Mo doesn't mean anything. It's just ensuring a continuation of his services for the time being.

Coaches and GM's routinely get fired in the middle of their contracts, and Mo would just be another name on the incredibly long list.

Mo will probably get one last kick at the can here, to make things work. And he very well could do it, if he can get a guy like Preki running things on the pitch, and give him appropriate independence.

But if next season starts off looking like this season, I'd look for Mo to be canned around the 10-12 game mark.

- Scott

[Super]

The problem with Mo is that we all deeply distrust him, and yet we rarely disagree with any of the moves he makes for the club. Also, we worry that he is far too involved in the locker room, when he insists that he isn't. Again - trust issue. Finally, we blame him for Carver and Cummins - when really, at the time of signing we liked Carver, and at the time of hiring Cummins there were basically no good alternative available on the market.

Mo really should be judged on results, but as far as the moves that he has made FEW of them really gave us reason to object.

[Beach_Red]

No, the truth matters.

I haven't seen that infamous piece of work. Is it online somewhere?

It's here:

http://celticunderground.net/index.p...=731&Itemid=65


But back to the originl post, I forgot to say, yes, of course the GM's job will come down to this year. It shouldn't come down to who he hires as coach, it should only come down to if the team makes the playoffs. He could hire the best coach in the world, if they don't make the playoffs he'll be gone.

[ArmenJBX]

They really don't like him...

[wzhxvy]

The problem with Mo is that we all deeply distrust him, and yet we rarely disagree with any of the moves he makes for the club. Also, we worry that he is far too involved in the locker room, when he insists that he isn't. Again - trust issue. Finally, we blame him for Carver and Cummins - when really, at the time of signing we liked Carver, and at the time of hiring Cummins there were basically no good alternative available on the market.

Mo really should be judged on results, but as far as the moves that he has made FEW of them really gave us reason to object.

Super yes and no. I would agree that Mo has made some good draft picks, and some good acquisitions but he has also made mistakes. When he traded Marshall last year with no one coming in return...that was clearly a huge mistake. When he hired CC and essentially gave up on the season...and the list goes on.

[Shakes McQueen]

Super yes and no. I would agree that Mo has made some good draft picks, and some good acquisitions but he has also made mistakes. When he traded Marshall last year with no one coming in return...that was clearly a huge mistake. When he hired CC and essentially gave up on the season...and the list goes on.

I am no longer a Mo supporter, but even I don't blame him for giving Cummins the coaching job.

Carver left the team in a tough spot, and there was not going to be any prime coaches with decent MLS experience available in the middle of the season. Plus, I think most people here agreed at the time that Cummins deserved a shot.

Remember how everyone theorized that it was Cummins' tactics that got us those wins in the couple of weeks prior to Carver leaving?

- Scott

[Super]

Super yes and no. I would agree that Mo has made some good draft picks, and some good acquisitions but he has also made mistakes. When he traded Marshall last year with no one coming in return...that was clearly a huge mistake. When he hired CC and essentially gave up on the season...and the list goes on.

Yes, and while I agree with that I would submit that most managers/coaches in this league makes the same amount of mistakes. At the end of the day it's telling that we were only 10 points shy of top spot - and 1 point shy of the play-offs. After 30 games that's pretty crazy.

I've had some time to calm down and really think this thing through, and I honestly don't know who we could've signed at the time when Carver left. Mo thought: let's give Cummins a chance, and if things work out - then great. If not - then at least I'll be able to sign a coach with MLS experience in the off-season. A gamble, yes, but honestly: who could we have signed when Carver left? Another coach with ZERO understanding of the MLS? Not sure that's a great idea several games into a season.

I guess my point is that every move Mo makes SEEM to have full support from supporters on here. Cummins, while not experienced, was probably the best solution at the time - and at least he knew the players, the league, and was able to pretty much carry on the work that Carver left behind. In fact, he did better than Carver as well. And as one of the Montreal roadtrippers I sure as hell remember that we loved Cummins on that special night in June.

With regards to Marshall (who is now 35 btw) then yes, it may have been a mistake to trade him. He was an okay defender. Not great, not even all that good for us during last season where we sucked worse than this year. But an okay defender, sure. So that was Mo's mistake? Trading a guy who was OK - and with just one season to go (I gather he is retiring after this season). If trading one player should get you fired then you'd have no managers or coaches left in football.

[Beach_Red]

A question people might want to kick around, is Mo being trying to hard to shed this "hard to work with" label? He said he tried hard to talk Carver into staying (and for all the things Carver complained about - and that was practically everything - he never complained about interference from Mo), he was the one who gave Cummins the whole season (and again says he asked him to stay, even though it was quite obvious the guy had left before the season ended) and he's insisted the assistant coaches keep their jobs and Dichio be added to the staff in some way.

These all seem like the actions of someone who's too easy to work for.

[ensco]

Why was the Cummins battlefield promote so obvious? Mo had MLS coaching experience. Mo had a pretty good thing going in 2007 until we got all those injuries. Sure he was tactically inept, but was he worse than Cummins?

Why was Cummins, whose sole coaching credential was at the Watford Academy, really such an obviously better choice than Mo?

Mo put CC in so that, in case it failed, he wouldn't take the blame. The suits upstairs fell for it.

[Carts]

I think Mo will be judged (by his superiors) on two things...

1. Team success. If we become a contender & MLSE sees a lift in revenue with playoff game or games, the city getting behind a winner - he's fine.

2. If the team isn't successfull, he'll be judged on JDG and if he's a success or not. JDG cost MLSE $$$$. So if they don't see some kind of return - either in team success or personal success (jerseys, all-star games, top-11 aka all the things they get in Dero for much less) Mo will be releived of his duties...

Carts...

[Beach_Red]

Why was the Cummins battlefield promote so obvious? Mo had MLS coaching experience. Mo had a pretty good thing going in 2007 until we got all those injuries. Sure he was tactically inept, but was he worse than Cummins?

Why was Cummins, whose sole coaching credential was at the Watford Academy, really such an obviously better choice than Mo?

Mo put CC in so that, in case it failed, he wouldn't take the blame. The suits upstairs fell for it.

That might work if the suits upstairs weren't in the sports business. You can say they don't know anything about soccer, but they know about hockey and basketball and they know about the coach-GM relationship.

More worrisome might be that Mo actually wanted to give a young guy a full shot.

[jimmyjazz]

I do not understand the "without a coach who knows Major League Soccer" issue.

Can you help me out, with this? What's the difference in this league - 11 men, dont use your hands, than any other league?

Concrete examples of how this makes a difference to a coach (not GM) would help me out.

Jim