Winter Approval Rating - September 2011

[__wowza]

PLEASE READ BEFORE RATING!
(it'll make everything a hell of a lot easier)

Instead of a simple yes or no, you're going to be rating different aspects of Winter as a coach. Each category gets a specific rating, from 5 (being the highest) to 1 (being the lowest). To calculate the average rating, just add your total up and divide by 5, if it's got a decimal point at the end of it, you can round either up or down based on the simple question "did Winter perform up to your expectations for the month". Afterward, you post your total rating on the poll, from 5 - 1.

here's the criteria:

TACTICS
how did you feel about the tactical choices made?
what about his starters? subs? formation?

RESULTS
at the end of the day, how did we do in terms of results? did we tie games we should've lost? lost games we should've won? etc.

EFFICIENCY
how effective was the coach in utilizing the players he has?
did he play some players out of position? did he have a reason to?

COMMUNICATION
how effective was the coach in explaining his outlook and choices in the paper / on torontofc.ca / on TFCtv / in post match interviews?

TRADES & MISC
were the trades made productive or counter-productive?
did he fly off the handle at get a 4 game ban?
was he making eyes at your wife/girlfriend/same-sex partner?


A general guideline: Its how you feel at the moment, not a final assessment. Like a marathon, this is just a snapshot of our support for the month. A low approval rating does not rate him as an overall failure, just like a high approval rating does not mean he's Sir Alex Ferguson. For the sake of context, this is how he / TFC have preformed in September:




LEAGUE PLAY
6 points out of a possible 9
8TH in the East -
16TH out of 18TH overall -
GD: 0

CHAMPIONS LEAGUE PLAY
3RD in CCL Group C ↓
4 points out of a possible 9
GD: -3

*red denotes CCL game


Columbus Crew v Toronto FC
SEPT 10th : WIN 2 - 4

Pumas v Toronto FC
SEPT 14th : LOSS 4 - 0

Toronto FC v Colorado
SEPT 17th : WIN 2 - 1

Toronto FC v Tauro F.C.
SEPT 20th : WIN 1 - 0

Chivas USA v Toronto FC
SEPT 24th : LOSS 3 - 0

Toronto FC v PUMAS
SEPT 27th - TIE: 1-1

OLD THREADS:
*3.21 / Rating: C AUGUST THREAD > http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/sh...ad.php?t=29422
83.44% JULY THREAD > http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=29100
63.55% JUNE THREAD > http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/sh...ad.php?t=28658
46.60% MAY THREAD > http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=28251
77.61% APRIL THREAD > http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/sh...ad.php?t=27878


NOTE: if you'd like to see an update to the criteria you think i may have overlooked, PM me.

[__wowza]

TACTICS: 3
I didn’t enjoy hearing that Danny K was fatigued for the Pumas when we had him starting out against Chivas, it wasn’t a smart move, it shouldn’t have happened and we paid the price through lack of attacking. Aside from that, I’m not enjoying the spilt emphasis I see on league and CCL matches. Yes, we’re winning league games, but they aren’t important. Treat the Young TFC and let them get some MLS games under their belts.

RESULTS: 3
I really wanted that result against PUMAS, a couple more goals going our way against Tauro, but Tauro have really stepped up their game as of late, so maybe it’s good that we stole 3 when we did. League, what can I say? Beating last years champs and finally toppling Columbus gives us a spiritual victory.

EFFICIENCY 4
Surprised that we took the result against PUMAS with so many players out. Going to have to overlap tactics and say Danny K’s fatigue is the only reason he’s not getting a 5. Don’t play the starters when we have important matches coming up, and if we do, don’t lose!

COMMUNICATION 5
Two words: town hall. The man has a wonderful understanding of the game. I think he’s a lot more comfortable with speaking his mind as the seasons progressed. Sticking up for Iro, his views on CONCACAF and reffing all makes for a 5 in my book!!

TRADES & MISC 4
Mix of all of the above, he won me over with the Columbus match, lost me at the Chivas match, then won me over again tying PUMAS with 4 starters out, town hall is included here too.

OVERALL: 3.8 - rounded down to a 3
I’m bumping it down to a 3 this month. I simply can’t wrap my head around the fact that it took a Dallas loss and 2 red cards to give us a fighting chance in the CCL, especially when we could’ve controlled our own fate with a fresh lineup of starters. League wins are good and all, but they didn't move us anywhere in the standings, and frankly, they don't matter to me at this point.

[trane]

^ It is a fair assesement. The Chivs game, not that we lost, but that we played angers me, but I see that we are improving.

[__wowza]

^ It is a fair assesement. The Chivs game, not that we lost, but that we played angers me, but I see that we are improving.

i agree wholeheartedly that we're improving, but for the sake of the poll i look at it this way: we won games we shouldn't care about, and we tied games we should've gone all in on. eyes on the 18th.

in others news, i'd kinda like to see people justify their rating. it doesn't have to be like mine, but i'd like to understand the mindset of anyone who votes a 5 (which i'd do if we were taking 9 out of 12 points and sitting atop group C) and anyone who votes 1 (which i'd do if we were tanking the month and sitting at the bottom of C with some shitty tactical choices).

again, this isn't a thread to see if we're improving, i believe the majority of us will believe they've seen a mid-season turnaround. this is a thread to say "regardless of how good we'll be in the future, how were we last month". let's base our decisions on that (ie: the facts), instead of how we see the team performing next month, ya know?

[ag futbol]

TACTICS -
sticking to his system, but maybe to a fault. Even the best teams in the world know when to role up the windows a bit when they come up against a superior side.

RESULTS
Just enough to make me want to keep watching. Maybe slightly on the downside.

EFFICIENCY
Definitely gets the most out of his roster. Is comfortable rotating more players than any manager we've had previously.

COMMUNICATION
Hard to judge. There have been a few WTF? moments but I find it hard to say too much since what we are seeing comes through a narrow lens

TRADES & MISC
Trades and signings below par, will need to be addressed in the off season.

Wears the same clothing too much. Needs to round out the wardrobe. Avoid using the word "youngers".

[Detroit_TFC]

I voted 3. Briefly thought about 4. Chivas game a reality check but other than that I sense progress on the players internalizing the type of game that AW is trying to instill.

Glad we are talking about last month and not next month, our last few games, without the services of Mr. Eckersley, could be unpleasant.

[Waggy]

I love the idea of having an actual metric to evaluate our thoughts on Winter, and most months I'm all for it. This month though.... I loved every single thing except the Chivas game. The decision to not rest anyone for the Chivas game, then admit that the players were tired when they played 48 hours later (shocker) overrides the math that I'd done (which would have rounded up to a 5). I gave him a 4. I still am confident, and I hope Winter learned a little something going forward about how to manage a compact schedule with lots of travel.

[Waggy]

Also, considering our 2 losses were on the road in Mexico and in Los Angeles, with our wins coming over Columbus and Colorado, plus the gutty draw against Pumas at home when the team was dead tired and missing our best player, this WAS the best month TFC has ever had, right? I can't think of when we've had a record in a month like against that sort of competition. Last years champs, the conference leader, one of the contenders in Mexico (twice), that's pretty tough.

[Oldtimer]

He maturing and showing some good tactical decisions. I dare say no one here thought of the "Frings as sweeper" short-term solution to a CB problem, but it worked. I mean, when did we last see any team use a sweeper?

I disagree with the "play the best squad every game" approach, but that is more a philosophical than a reflection on Winter's abilities.

Next year will be the time to really judge, but I like what I am seeing.

3.8 rounded up to 4 for me.

[Wull]

He maturing and showing some good tactical decisions. I dare say no one here thought of the "Frings as sweeper" short-term solution to a CB problem, but it worked. I mean, when did we last see any team use a sweeper?

I actually did call that at one point when he first got here.


i would have gone with a 3 for some good games and some bad games but I was very impressed with the whole setup last night from Aron through to Earl so I bumped it to a 4

[MisterMacphisto]

Not to get off topic, but I didn't want to start a new thread on my own...

I sincerely love this idea of having a monthly approval rating on whomever is the current head coach of TFC and the discussions that ensue regarding the decisions from the person that is in charge of performance on the pitch.

I think it would be great to have monthly or yearly approval rating thread for whomever is the current Senior Director for Business Operations at TFC and the discussions that would ensue regarding the decisions from the position that is in charge of performance and issues off the pitch. Like topics of Tactics, Results, Efficiency etc.. for coaches, topics of business director ratings could be topics like Security, Stadium Entry, Marketing, Supporter relations (Just a few ideas of top of my head)

The coach threads have been good for coaching ratings for on field performance with both critiques for some questionable decisions made as well as praise for things going right on the pitch.

I think it'd be beneficial and equally fair to also have critiques and praise for whoever is currently holding the position in charge for off-field items relating to TFC, which are also hugely important. Don't assume this would be a bitch-fest, there is opportunity for praise when good decisions are made. Example in the past, with things like the grass pitch, academy facilities... I even like the little soccer ball shooting things in the urinals. The coach ratings threads have been fair and I think its equally fair to have threads for position of off-field matters. It's simply a discussion about the position and the decisions made from that position.

We've had 6 coaches in 5 seasons at TFC, and the trigger has been quickly pulled for poor performance on the pitch, but I think there could be more discussion regarding decisions made of the director of business operations. In recent past, the president of MLS Don Garber publicly addressed a large mistake made (That to me, was never really addressed besides a 1 year "freeze" on those raised prices)

This position is certainly not going to be held by just one person forever, so it'd be good thread to track the performance, the ups and downs over the years. A current or new director may even find the threads extremely useful.

Sorry for off-topc, hope new ratings thread can be created or at least this discussion split-off about creating another ratings thread.

[Pookie]

Thanks for that link. I missed the story the first time around.

I generally like to remind folks that MLSE is the owner-operator, not the owner and that the league has a vested interest in this franchise.

Garber's quote is telling:

Toronto FC “has made mistakes” as a Major League Soccer franchise this past year, commissioner Don Garber said Tuesday.

However, he allowed “this is not an easy business” and that steps are being taken to address the on-field and off-field misplays.

In Toronto to promote the league's championship game at BMO Field on Nov. 21, the MLS boss addressed the lacklustre performance of Toronto FC and the unrest among fans of the franchise.

Garber said that one of the mistakes was raising ticket prices, which have almost doubled since the club's first season.

“They made a mistake,” and the team is “working to address it,” he said.


Rare that you see a Commissioner commenting on pricing strategies for teams, unless of course they have a vested interest and are influencing the solution.

Sometimes the anger and/or solutions proposed to our issues would do well to focus on the league itself.

[Waggy]

Thanks for that link. I missed the story the first time around.

I generally like to remind folks that MLSE is the owner-operator, not the owner and that the league has a vested interest in this franchise.

Garber's quote is telling:

Toronto FC “has made mistakes” as a Major League Soccer franchise this past year, commissioner Don Garber said Tuesday.

However, he allowed “this is not an easy business” and that steps are being taken to address the on-field and off-field misplays.

In Toronto to promote the league's championship game at BMO Field on Nov. 21, the MLS boss addressed the lacklustre performance of Toronto FC and the unrest among fans of the franchise.

Garber said that one of the mistakes was raising ticket prices, which have almost doubled since the club's first season.

“They made a mistake,” and the team is “working to address it,” he said.


Rare that you see a Commissioner commenting on pricing strategies for teams, unless of course they have a vested interest and are influencing the solution.

Sometimes the anger and/or solutions proposed to our issues would do well to focus on the league itself.

If the league is that responsible for our failures, then by definition they should with our successes as well. And given their track record of success (and even the failure record is nothing like what happened here), I'd assume MLS is sort of a silent partner at most. If not just a straight financier/investor. I'd have a hard time blaming the league for our pricing structure, or the treatment of the SG's by the FO (consider how other teams SG's are treated/catered to), or our inability to see that Mo was retarded, or our inability to find a decent back 4.

[MisterMacphisto]

There's a lot of league decisions and rules that affect Winter's job too, but the buck still stops with him and we compare his performance with other coaches and teams that have the same rules. Our director of business has those same league rules and influences that other directors and teams have so we can compare and rate the same as we do the coach.

[Shakes McQueen]

He maturing and showing some good tactical decisions. I dare say no one here thought of the "Frings as sweeper" short-term solution to a CB problem, but it worked. I mean, when did we last see any team use a sweeper?

I disagree with the "play the best squad every game" approach, but that is more a philosophical than a reflection on Winter's abilities.

Next year will be the time to really judge, but I like what I am seeing.

3.8 rounded up to 4 for me.

Same here. 3.8 rounded up to 4. I like our chances as a team if Winter can keep the majority of these guys together, and make some serious improvements to our defense.

- Scott

[__wowza]

just a snapshot after 56 votes:

winter currently sits at 74.38%
which is a 3.71 star average rating
and that translates to a B


edit: goddamit ossington, you just had to go and vote after i did this fancy pants summary didnt you?

[Dkolish3]

just a snapshot after 56 votes:

winter currently sits at 74.38%
which is a 3.71 star average rating
and that translates to a B


edit: goddamit ossington, you just had to go and vote after i did this fancy pants summary didnt you?

Surely the fact that he commits sexual harassment whenever he's faced with a certain female reporter puts him up to at least a B+

[Shakes McQueen]

just a snapshot after 56 votes:

winter currently sits at 74.38%
which is a 3.71 star average rating
and that translates to a B


edit: goddamit ossington, you just had to go and vote after i did this fancy pants summary didnt you?

I'd say 3.7 stars is about right for a rating of Winter's performance, funnily enough.

- Scott

[mastermixer]

I originally voted a 4 but after saturdays game and the game against Pumas, I am beginning to question his tactics. After being up a goal early in both games he falls back to 5 defenders. For a team that has the worst defence in the league putting the weight on your defence is sure to backfire every time. What the heck was Borman doing playing forward last game? Strange... but I guess that's why he's the coach and I'm not.

[PopePouri]

I don't proceed to know what tactics work because I don't know what resources are available to him during gameday or have a strong knowledge of coaching. I assume he knows what he's doing.

[Detroit_TFC]

We really do need to learn how to close out games. Personally I think you defend a lead by keeping up the attack. But the defensive lapses in the Pumas and NJRB games weren't that bad. Now the Chivas game...

[Carts]

We really do need to learn how to close out games. Personally I think you defend a lead by keeping up the attack. But the defensive lapses in the Pumas and NJRB games weren't that bad. Now the Chivas game...

I have always hated the full, 180-degree turn, you see football clubs do when up by a goal...

I understand changing the formation to be more defensive, but don't change the urgency in play...

In defending, I personally believe that you press the ball - always. Don't give them time and space at all. I'm not saying push forward, but have even more urgency in your to take away the time and space that often leads to goals...

But then again, lets be honest, I'm not a professional manager so what the **** do I know LOL!

[Pookie]

^ not just football either. All sports.

NFL teams, dominating on D all game with a pass rush, go into a "prevent" mode only to give up yards and a TD.

NHL teams, jump out to a 2-0 lead and then send one man in to forecheck while the other 4 station themselves between the blue lines. The "hardest lead to defend" usually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Outside of injury, I don't get the decision to abandon what has been working because it is "the thing to do"

[__wowza]

We really do need to learn how to close out games. Personally I think you defend a lead by keeping up the attack. But the defensive lapses in the Pumas and NJRB games weren't that bad. Now the Chivas game...

the best defense is a good offense, the adage is true.
you either play possession in the midfield and make for some boring passes between the defense and the mid, or you push up and force your opponents back or run the risk of conceding a goal.

i havent seen either, then again, i dont think we're used to having a lead to defend this season.

[Canary10]

I think a big part of the reason is we don't have a good back-up for Koevermans. Whenever he goes out in a game, we have no target man up front to get the ball and hold it in the opponent's end. So we end up playing a game of hoofing it as far upfield as we can and defending in numbers. Koevs went out of both the Pumas and NYRB games, and it went downhill after that in both.

[Carts]

I think a big part of the reason is we don't have a good back-up for Koevermans. Whenever he goes out in a game, we have no target man up front to get the ball and hold it in the opponent's end. So we end up playing a game of hoofing it as far upfield as we can and defending in numbers. Koevs went out of both the Pumas and NYRB games, and it went downhill after that in both.

You know that's a good point...

We need a "defensive striker" almost to close out matches...

Sounds weird, but its true...

A tall target man with good size is perfect for holding up the ball as a target man on clearance - and doubles as a central defender during late game set pieces...

Always a good option to have another big man when the opposition is whipping in crosses and corners...

[Stouffville_RPB]

You know that's a good point...

We need a "defensive striker" almost to close out matches...

Sounds weird, but its true...

A tall target man with good size is perfect for holding up the ball as a target man on clearance - and doubles as a central defender during late game set pieces...

Always a good option to have another big man when the opposition is whipping in crosses and corners...

Alan Gordon?

He really is a like for like comparison with DK (though less talented) but if that is what you are looking for than he was your man.

I don't know the reason why he was let go but he couldn't have been on too much money and would fit in when DK needs a rest.

[Ossington Mental Youth]

maybe wage? he was oft injured
also we got johnson in that trade who can play that position (but hasnt excelled as of late). wouldnt be surprised if we did get another of that sort.

[brad]

I think a big part of the reason is we don't have a good back-up for Koevermans. Whenever he goes out in a game, we have no target man up front to get the ball and hold it in the opponent's end. So we end up playing a game of hoofing it as far upfield as we can and defending in numbers. Koevs went out of both the Pumas and NYRB games, and it went downhill after that in both.

This is basically what De Klerk said. When Koevs comes off we have no one else to come onto fill his role. We have to put on another defender because we lose that ability to hold play in the attacking third and if we don't add that defender we will get killed 1-v-1 with our two CB's.

So we stay with an attacking formation when we can't actually do the job up front to keep the attack up and concede, or we put on an extra defender and hope for the best.

I think that a fit Gordon on the bench would alleviate this issue.

[ensco]

TFC got 6 of 9 points in league matches, didn't spit the bit against Tauro, took the point from Pumas at home, finally beat Columbus.

I'd give the 3.7 stars to MLSE for spending the dough on Frings and Koevermans, but yeah, people are right to feel a little better.

But I'm just so tired of MLSE teams playing better down the stretch once they're out of it. God it annoys me.