Page 104 of 191 FirstFirst ... 45494100101102103104105106107108114154 ... LastLast
Results 3,091 to 3,120 of 5705
  1. #3091
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,655
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeForbes View Post
    Been busy all day so I just wanted to come say that Ali Curtis is absolute dogshit. 300k for Dom Dwyer? Ridiculous. He tried his hardest to ruin this franchise.
    It really seems that way.

  2. #3092
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,940
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Soteldo news has been all over the place.

    Here are what has been confirmed to be facts about the original transfer. I've seen so much confusion on how much we own of his rights.
    1) We currently own 75% of Soteldo's rights. (Huachipato in Chile, Soteldo's former club, owns the other 25%).

    2) Santos only ever owned 50% of his rights. They bought 50% of his rights from Huachipato.

    3) Santos never paid their original $3.5 million fee to Huachipato.

    4) When we bought Soteldo, we bought 50% from Santos and 25% from Huachipato. Those were two separate negotiations. One negotiation with Huachipato. One negotiation with Santos. They did not need to be comparable and proportional values. Apparently Toronto sent $3 million to each of Santos and Huachipato for their 50% and 25% shares respectively.

    5) Santos was facing a transfer ban from FIFA for not paying Huachipato. All of the $6 million fee Toronto paid went to Huachipato. Santos sent their entire proceeds to Huachipato, plus will pay an additional $500,000 (in installments) - which matches with the reported $3 million Santos got in point 4, plus $500k = $3.5 original fee. The sale covered the never-paid payment and eliminated the transfer ban because they no longer owed another club money.

    6) Santos retained a 12.5% sell-on clause on a future Soteldo sale. (So Santos should get a portion of this transfer fee if we sell to Sao Paulo, which they'll probably end up sending to Huachipato again as one of their "installments")

    Here are speculations and explanations for the current transfer rumours.
    - Sao Paulo wants to buy 50%. We'd remain with 25% (Huachipato still owns 25%) That's not a loan. That's not a sell-on clause. It's asset ownership. See point 4 above. A sell-on clause is what we did with Richie and Nottingham Forest. If Nottingham sells Richie, we get whatever X% we agreed to now - we are not involved in the negotiation. We get whatever X% of what Nottingham negotiates in their sale. If Sao Paulo sells Soteldo, we can negotiate our own price with the buying club for our 25% in a negotiation we are involved in.

    -If Sao Paulo *buys* 50%, Soteldo is not our player. It's not a loan. A purchase is a purchase, he would not return to being a TFC player. If it's a *loan* he'd come back, unless it's a loan with an obligation to buy (like PSG with Mbappe, which happens when a team wants to buy a player but due to FFP regulations, they might not be able to buy him this window, so they defer it to next year as a loophole)

    -Sao Paulo is offering a contract worth less than the $1.9 million we are paying him. This does not necessarily mean we have to pay the difference. When there is a transfer, a new contract is written, it's not a straight takeover of the contract. Richie was due to be paid $200,000 by us in 2022. Richie is going to make a hell of a lot more in Nottingham. His TFC contract was ripped up and replaced. Since a new contract gets written, just like a higher salary can be negotiated, theoretically a lower salary can be negotiated as well - Pique did that for Barcelona (not a transfer, but he still ripped up the old contract and took less)

    -With that said, Soteldo is entitled to his current $1.9 million in the sense that he does not have to agree to a transfer. He can stay and he is perfectly entitled to stay with Toronto and collect his $1.9 million. He can say I want $1.9 million. I don't care who pays it, but I want $1.9 million. This is what you hear about all the time where a former team pays part of a player's salary after a transfer. The new team doesn't want to pay his current salary, the player doesn't want to take a lower salary, the old team really wants out of the contract, so they agree to pay the difference between the new and old contract. It's kind of like the Julio Cesar loan here, we only paid a portion of his contract, while QPR paid the balance (although since that was a loan it was still his QPR contract)

    Here is my complete speculation and own thoughts based on the whole mess of conflicting and confusing reports (and I could be completely wrong):

    -Now if Soteldo really wants out, he might agree to a lower salary. If Sao Paulo is offering say $1 million, Toronto might be telling Soteldo, we're not paying you the 900k. We'll either pay you $1.9 million to play for Toronto or pay you Zero and you go to Sao Paulo. That's the negotiation. How much does he want out? This is what I think is happening and makes sense given the reports of the "Toronto debt" aka the bonus. Soteldo might be okay with the lower salary to get out of Toronto, if he can get his deferred signing bonus. There is no way Toronto will retain a DP/TAM level salary on the books (which would count to the salary cap and take up space), so Toronto is playing hardball since they know Soteldo wants out. They're probably trying to convince MLS to let that signing bonus count to last year's cap because it's a "signing bonus" so should be allocated to the year of signing. MLSPA says his base salary is $1.5 million and guaranteed is $1.965 million That $465,000 might be the signing bonuses (it's never been clarified what the difference between base and guaranteed on the MLSPA site).
    Last edited by rydermike; 01-10-2022 at 09:19 PM. Reason: typos

  3. #3093
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    5,657
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redskiesatnight View Post
    So if we bought 75% of soteldo’s rights and sold 50% does that leave us with 25% of his rights?

    (As a West Ham fan, this crap gives me ptsd)
    That's how I see it.

  4. #3094
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Burlington
    Posts
    4,150
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Soteldo reporting in Brazil is all over the place. I really want this to be over quick.

  5. #3095
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15,864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ag futbol View Post
    It’s really not a big enough decision where it should have merited Manning’s involvement. To me it looks like a once over, eye-roller “sure you want to do this? If you say so…” type conversation.

    President has to be able to delegate at some level and trust the people under him. I can find plenty of other bigger things Manning should should be blasted for but this is just Curtis’s stupidity
    Disagree vehemently. Not buying it. This is a screw up with monumental implications. If Dwyer’s salary was big enough to cause this , Manning has to have signed off. Or it’s a dereliction of duty.

    These President/GM structures, which I have derided many times over the years, are just clusterf$&@$s- ways for people to create a way to blame others for things that properly belong to them. At least we sort of got rid of that.
    “What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”

  6. #3096
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    Disagree vehemently. Not buying it. This is a screw up with monumental implications. If Dwyer’s salary was big enough to cause this , Manning has to have signed off. Or it’s a dereliction of duty.

    These President/GM structures, which I have derided many times over the years, are just clusterf$&@$s- ways for people to create a way to blame others for things that properly belong to them. At least we sort of got rid of that.
    In ag's defense, once it came out that Dwyer was on $300k+ (rather than $80k), ag took back their comment.

  7. #3097
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    3,211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  8. #3098
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    12,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeForbes View Post
    I'm not sure how much I trust these reports, as others have also said that while three clubs (including us) are interested, they've lowered their asking price from $5M to $3M already (dollars, not Euros). Wolves would easily be able to pull that off if they were really in on this, and Palmeiras has had serious money problems for months, so it's hard to believe they'd ever be in on the bidding.

    It seems like Tigres is trying to play this as a big-money transfer and we may be the only ones actually interested.

  9. #3099
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    4,141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jloome View Post
    There was no merit to the signing at all. Curtis gambled that he was a good striker who had lost form when in fact his main advantage, his speed, was long gone and he'd been in decline for several seasons. It looks like he backended the contract because he thought Dwyer would come good, score goals and look like a bargain.

    In other words, utterly fucking clueless.

    Astonishing. Astonishing not only that someone with such bad judgement could be in that job but also that he was left in it for so long.

    Really, Gallardo should've been his end.
    Good fucking riddance to Curtis. Abysmal at everything.

  10. #3100
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Section 111 Row 8
    Posts
    9,064
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    Disagree vehemently. Not buying it. This is a screw up with monumental implications. If Dwyer’s salary was big enough to cause this , Manning has to have signed off. Or it’s a dereliction of duty.

    These President/GM structures, which I have derided many times over the years, are just clusterf$&@$s- ways for people to create a way to blame others for things that properly belong to them. At least we sort of got rid of that.
    It's normally a Charlie Foxtrot without proper risk & governance and clear roles and responsibilities at the senior levels. It's beyond Manning to be honest. It's the MLSE organizational dysfunction on display.

    Manning was busy with other non-TFC activities and power plays, didn't have priority and went what's quick and worked in the past in Curtis. Gave him the key to TFC kingdom and resumed his other pursuits.

    Curtis found an equally qualified person he sees in his own image Armas. It hit the fan on such spectacular level that Manning had to immediately seize control to rectify the situation.

    Manning did fix the situation rather effectively with what he can, and what he thinks Bob Bradley can with dual roles.

    HOWEVER, the lack of risk & governance and due process still remains in MLSE. It's like a roulette on what you end up with. That's not a predictable and sustainable operating model for long term dynasty level play.

    It could change, but we are in no vantage points to ever find out.
    RPB Road Warrior: supporting Toronto FC anywhere on planet earth

    TM: YYZ Red Patch Army #18, FC

  11. #3101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    4,141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am now formally changing my rating of Curtis from F+ to Z-.

    He can sit right next to Mo Johnston as one of the two worst GM's in our history. This off-season really has shed light to just how badly the team was run, and run off a cliff.

  12. #3102
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15,864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noxx98 View Post
    In ag's defense, once it came out that Dwyer was on $300k+ (rather than $80k), ag took back their comment.
    Ahh. Hard to keep up. Thanks
    “What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”

  13. #3103
    RPB Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  14. #3104
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    114
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I am now formally changing my rating of Curtis from F+ to Z-.

    He can sit right next to Mo Johnston as one of the two worst GM's in our history. This off-season really has shed light to just how badly the team was run, and run off a cliff.
    Who hired Curtis? I just can’t believe how easy most fans are giving Manning a pass, he is much more responsible then Curtis

  15. #3105
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15,864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also, not that it matters, but Armas deserves a lot of blame for this. This whole story will be too subtle for 97% of Manchester United fans to understand, but he should be fired today from that job, just because of what happened here.

    Do they actually want the guy who made this call to tell Cristiano Ronaldo about football?
    “What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”

  16. #3106
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    12,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    Also, not that it matters, but Armas deserves a lot of blame for this. This whole story will be too subtle for 97% of Manchester United fans to understand, but he should be fired today from that job, just because of what happened here.

    Do they actually want the guy who made this call to tell Cristiano Ronaldo about football?
    The English papers are all reporting that the same shit is just happening there. The Express and the Guardian both had stories that the team has split into cliques, and the pricier players who don't want to gegenpress are already saying Armas can't teach them.

    https://www.theguardian.com/football...chester-united

    The specific concern was that while he's teaching them to press, he's not teaching them how to convert that into offensive movement once they have the ball back. They don't respect him so they're not learning, basically. But that locker room is an egotistical shitshow, sort of the EPL version of us.

    It was precisely the wrong environment for him to go into.
    Last edited by jloome; 01-10-2022 at 11:04 PM.

  17. #3107
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    4,141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was shaking my head when watching the FA cup game today. Armas was all up in Rangnick's ear giving him advice on the touchline. Rangnick must really be naïve, I just cant understand what the hell ManU are doing.

  18. #3108
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    F5
    Posts
    13,193
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jloome View Post
    The specific concern was that while he's teaching them to press, he's not teaching them how to convert that into offensive movement once they have the ball back. They don't respect him so they're not learning, basically. But that locker room is an egotistical shitshow, sort of the EPL version of us.
    This is like the exact thing that I observed here. I saw lots of other similarities too. When they played Newcastle, the midfield was entirely ineffective at stopping the counter and there were massive gaps between the lines.

    This whole philosophy, whether it’s Armas or Rangnick, it’s just all nonsense. You don’t dogmatically drop into a team and suddenly take a formation or style of play out of the box and expect to be successful. You have to look at what you have to work with, what the environment is, and what the opportunities are. Then figure out a direction for the team that suits it’s strengths or otherwise gives you the best chance to be successful. That doesn’t mean you abandon what you know entirely but it’s more complicated than some cookie-cutter setup.

    I still remember Curtis and Armas and all their Red Bull references. What a couple of clueless dolts. You wouldn’t show up in the kitchen in a Michelin Star restaurant and make hay about how you ran the grill at McDonalds.

  19. #3109
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    12,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    I was shaking my head when watching the FA cup game today. Armas was all up in Rangnick's ear giving him advice on the touchline. Rangnick must really be naïve, I just cant understand what the hell ManU are doing.
    He's one of Klopp's mentors, that was all they needed to hear. The fact that he's never won a league title or coached a major team to success was secondary to his tactical nous.

    I mean, it's the Glazers. They're just awful.

  20. #3110
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    12,507
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ag futbol View Post
    This is like the exact thing that I observed here. I saw lots of other similarities too. When they played Newcastle, the midfield was entirely ineffective at stopping the counter and there were massive gaps between the lines.

    This whole philosophy, whether it’s Armas or Rangnick, it’s just all nonsense. You don’t dogmatically drop into a team and suddenly take a formation or style of play out of the box and expect to be successful. You have to look at what you have to work with, what the environment is, and what the opportunities are. Then figure out a direction for the team that suits it’s strengths or otherwise gives you the best chance to be successful. That doesn’t mean you abandon what you know entirely but it’s more complicated than some cookie-cutter setup.

    I still remember Curtis and Armas and all their Red Bull references. What a couple of clueless dolts. You wouldn’t show up in the kitchen in a Michelin Star restaurant and make hay about how you ran the grill at McDonalds.
    Yeah, exactly. The times gegenpress has been successful falls into two camps: overwhelmingly strong teams that would probably win even without it, and minnows where the players are all so mediocre at a pro level that they'll take a lemming-like approach to following instruction (the NYRB effect).

    His prior career successes, other than one cup win, were all in getting low-level clubs promoted. When the team will behave like a singular automaton (and he learned it off a Soviet Club, so...) it works. When they have the talent to make up for its tactical and coaching shortfalls, it works.

    Every other instance (Us, Liepzig, now Man utd) it creates more problems than it helps resolve.

    EDIT: Worth noting that Bruce Arena, Bob's mentor, teaches a high recovery press to his players as well. But it's disciplined.

  21. #3111
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15,864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The Tajon outcome is an outlier, Superdraft isn't what it used to be, but have a look at good teams, most of them of have 2-3 key, cheap drafted players, making an important contribution on low wages. Making the draft work is critical to the model.

    This Dwyer thing, it's Knicks/Dolan level bad (this won't make sense to non-NBA types here).

    I haven't felt this down about TFC leadership since Anselmi/Cochrane. I hope the outcome of all this is that only Bob has his hands on the steering wheel now.

    I appreciate Insigne, but MLSE basically sent over a draft contract and told Insigne to fill in the number. I know who to thank for that, thank you Larry (and maybe Masai) and I am genuinely excited to see him in TFC red. But nothing in that tells me anything about anyone's ability to figure anything out.
    “What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”

  22. #3112
    RPB Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    7,123
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Man U thought they were getting a Klopp/Tuchel like manager but both of them have adapted gegenpress tactics and moved beyond it. Plus they can man manage. Or at least Klopp can. Man U is playing a 4-2-2-2. No wonder the players don’t know what to do. Ragnarok is a dolt.

  23. #3113
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Section 119
    Posts
    11,614
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gracos View Post
    And people wonder why Curtis/Armas was the worst decision our club ever made trade a 3rd pick overall and contract of Dom Dwyer for 50k to clean up the mess; so frustrated with this decision
    This is on par with the Leafs (Dubas) having to give up a 1st round pick to get rid of the final year of Patrick Marleau's contract (signed by Lamiorello) a few years ago. Just brutal.
    Last edited by ManUtd4ever; 01-10-2022 at 09:03 PM.

  24. #3114
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Section 119
    Posts
    11,614
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    So it's official.

    Why is everyone pinning this on Curtis?

    Who do you think either signed off on the Dwyer signing, or delegated authority of this magnitude?

    (Gotta hand it to Manning, he is very good at exactly this kind of razzle dazzle)
    That's fair. Manning has to shoulder some of the blame for this as well.

  25. #3115
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    5,529
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rydermike View Post
    Soteldo news has been all over the place.

    Here are what has been confirmed to be facts about the original transfer. I've seen so much confusion on how much we own of his rights.
    1) We currently own 75% of Soteldo's rights. (Huachipato in Chile, Soteldo's former club, owns the other 25%).

    2) Santos only ever owned 50% of his rights. They bought 50% of his rights from Huachipato.

    3) Santos never paid their original $3.5 million fee to Huachipato.

    4) When we bought bought Soteldo, we bought 50% from Santos and 25% from Huachipato. Those were two separate negotiations. One negotiation with Huachipato. One negotiation with Santos. They did not need to be comparable and proportional values. Apparently Toronto sent $3 million to each of Santos and Huachipato for their 50% and 25% shares respectively.

    5) Santos was facing a transfer ban from FIFA for not paying Huachipato. All of the $6 million fee went to Huachipato. Santos sent their entire proceeds to Huachipato, plus will pay an additional $500,000 (in installments) - which matches with the reported $3 million Santos got in point 4, plus $500k = $3.5 original fee. The sale covered the never-paid payment and eliminated the transfer ban because they no longer owed another club money.

    6) Santos retained a 12.5% sell-on clause on a future Soteldo sale. (So Santos should get a portion of this transfer fee if we sell to Sao Paulo, which they'll probably end up sending to Huachipato again as one of their "installments")

    Here are speculations and explanations.
    - Sao Paulo wants to buy 50%. We'd remain with 25% (Huachipato still owns 25%) That's not a loan. That's not a sell-on clause. It's asset ownership. See point 4 above. A sell-on clause is what we did with Richie and Nottingham Forest. If Nottingham sells Richie, we get whatever percentage we agreed to now - we are not involved in the negotiation. We get whatever Nottingham negotiates. If Sao Paulo sells Soteldo, we can negotiate our own price with the buying club for our 25% in a negotiation we are involved in.

    -If Sao Paulo *buys* 50%, Soteldo is not our player. It's not a loan. A purchase is a purchase, he would not return to being a TFC player. If it's a *loan* he'd come back, unless it's a loan with an obligation to buy (like PSG with Mbappe, which happens when a team wants to buy a player but due to FFP regulations, they might not be able to buy him this window, so they defer it to next year as a loophole)

    -Sao Paulo if offering a contract worth less than the $1.9 million we are paying him. This does not necessarily mean we have to pay the difference. When there is a transfer, a new contract is written, it's not a straight takeover of the contract. Richie was due to be paid $200,000 by us in 2022. Richie is going to make a hell of a lot more in Nottingham. His TFC contract was ripped up and replaced. Since a new contract gets written, just like a higher salary can be negotiated, theoretically a lower salary can be negotiated as well - Pique did that for Barcelona (not a transfer, but he still ripped up the old contract and took less)

    -With that said, Soteldo is entitled to his current $1.9 million in the sense that he does not have to agree to a transfer. He can stay and he is perfectly entitled to stay with Toronto and collect his $1.9 million. He can say I want $1.9 million. I don't care who pays it, but I want $1.9 million. This is what you hear about all the time where a former team pays part of a player's salary after a transfer. The new team doesn't want to pay his current salary, the player doesn't want to take a lower salary, the old team really wants out of the contract, so they agree to pay the difference between the new and old contract. It's kind of like the Julio Cesar loan here, we only paid a portion of his contract, while QPR paid the balance (although since that was a loan it was still his QPR contract)

    Here is my complete speculation and own thoughts based on the whole mess of conflicting and confusing reports (and I could be completely wrong):

    -Now if Soteldo really wants out, he might agree to a lower salary. If Sao Paulo is offering say $1 million, Toronto might be telling Soteldo, we're not paying you the 900k. We'll either pay you $1.9 million to play for Toronto or pay you Zero and you go to Sao Paulo. That's the negotiation. How much does he want out? This is what I think is happening and makes sense given the reports of the "Toronto debt" aka the bonus. Soteldo might be okay with the lower salary to get out of Toronto, if he can get his deferred signing bonus. There is no way Toronto will retain a DP/TAM level salary on the books (which would count to the salary cap and take up space), so Toronto is playing hardball since they know Soteldo wants out. They're probably trying to convince MLS to let that signing bonus count to last year's cap because it's a "signing bonus" so should be allocated to the year of signing. MLSPA says his base salary is $1.5 million and guaranteed is $1.965 million That $465,000 might be the signing bonuses (it's never been clarified what the difference between base and guaranteed on the MLSPA site).
    Interesting and shows how opaque MLS rules are, because a signing bonus for CAP purposes is allocated over the life of a contract. How that plays into a sale I have no idea.

  26. #3116
    RPB Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    221
    Posts
    18,671
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My first thought about Dwyer was, "He only effin joined in the summer!"

    Apparently it was May but still.

    My gawd, that has to be in the top 10 stupidest moves ever at TFC

  27. #3117
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15,864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OgtheDim View Post
    My first thought about Dwyer was, "He only effin joined in the summer!"

    Apparently it was May but still.

    My gawd, that has to be in the top 1 stupidest moves ever at TFC
    You had a typo
    “What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”

  28. #3118
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Scarborough
    Posts
    4,141
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    You had a typo
    Lol. I think Mista is still #1. His $1 million for only one goal is pretty hard to beat.

  29. #3119
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    949
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    The Tajon outcome is an outlier, Superdraft isn't what it used to be, but have a look at good teams, most of them of have 2-3 key, cheap drafted players, making an important contribution on low wages. Making the draft work is critical to the model.

    This Dwyer thing, it's Knicks/Dolan level bad (this won't make sense to non-NBA types here).

    I haven't felt this down about TFC leadership since Anselmi/Cochrane. I hope the outcome of all this is that only Bob has his hands on the steering wheel now.

    I appreciate Insigne, but MLSE basically sent over a draft contract and told Insigne to fill in the number. I know who to thank for that, thank you Larry (and maybe Masai) and I am genuinely excited to see him in TFC red. But nothing in that tells me anything about anyone's ability to figure anything out.
    New England set an MLS points record on the back of a team primarily built through the draft.

    Giving up the #3 pick could really hurt in the future. Hell, remember the Kyle Bekker and Emery Welshman draft year? Andrew Farrell, everyone's consensus #1 pick that year, and the player TFC had to be brain dead not to select, has played 272 games for New England since being drafted in 2013. That's not even getting into the fact Walker Zimmerman was drafted #7.

    The draft may not be what it once was, but man oh man can players still find some gems there.

    That reminds me, Kevin Payne was an idiot.

  30. #3120
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ensco View Post
    Disagree vehemently. Not buying it. This is a screw up with monumental implications. If Dwyer’s salary was big enough to cause this , Manning has to have signed off. Or it’s a dereliction of duty.
    Ensco do you know what the delegations of authority are within MLSE’s governance structure? I wouldn’t say that Manning has to sign off. Based on my experience, granted it’s a different setting, I could easily see this being within a threshold that does not require Mannings approval. But I’m also speculating.

    Absolutely horrendous contract though.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •