TFC @ Chicago Fire Saturday, August 4th @ 8:30pm on GOLTV

[ManUtd4ever]

They are paying for 4 DPs now (paying for JDG's salary above the cap; still paying Danny K.). They also had a deal with Mellberg, i.e., they got the OK from MLSE to pay for a 5th DP. So that was already in the budget for this season? Ah, you're just knocking yourself out.

I don't even think that Anselmi should be hiring or firing anybody, where did you get that idea?! They (incl. Mariner) should be acting in a careful caretaker role now. Instead they're making a whole bunch of expensive & disruptive long-term decisions. That's why new ownership should immediately can Anselmi & the front office once the sale goes through; keep Mariner to muddle about in the meantime; and hire a top guy who has a freaking clue and he can see from there.

They probably won't, so the Town Halls & SSH renewals will be a disaster. Maybe we can make it to 200 players in less than 7 years by next season.

EDIT and yes I agree TR would have been a better caretaker candidate, to improve our lot a bit for this season w/o upsetting the whole apple cart -- and he would still have the Academy to go back to if the "New Guy" hires a different first-team coach.

Mariner has to get approval from Anselmi and the board regarding the budget for player acquisitions. Mariner must have been given the approval to pay a chunk of JDG's remaining salary for the final few months of his contract in order to acquire another DP in his place, based on the circumstances at the time.

In any case, you stated that my assertion regarding the moratorium on hiring front office personnel was unjustified, and I responded in kind.

[T-boy]

Mariner has to get approval from Anselmi and the board regarding the budget for player acquisitions. Mariner must have been given the approval to pay a chunk of JDG's remaining salary for the final few months of his contract in order to acquire another DP in his place, based on the circumstances at the time.

In any case, you stated that my assertion regarding the moratorium on hiring front office personnel was unjustified, and I responded in kind.

I thought Dallas took JDG's whole salary? So we shouldn't be paying anything of it anymore as far as I'm aware.

[ManUtd4ever]

I thought Dallas took JDG's whole salary? So we shouldn't be paying anything of it anymore as far as I'm aware.

It don't believe that has been clarified.

Anyway, it doesn't change the reality of the situation regarding the front office following the dismissal of Aron Winter.

[Auzzy]

^ I'm saying that most of the supposed "moratoriums" that people have said were in place, were not in fact in place. I'm saying none of us actually has a clue, we're all just talking out of our asses, and it would be best to admit that. The only consistent & reasonable expectation is that Anselmi & Co don't have a clue & just continue screwing the long-term success in favour of saving their asses short-term.

[Oldtimer]

It's a big assumption that Rongen would want the position.

My sources indicate he would have been willing to step in (whether he would want it permanently is another issue). He was available.

[Beach_Red]

The budget for this season already included 3 DPs and the team operates in a league with a salary cap structure. The acquisition of players and the hiring of a brand new front office are hardly analagous situations.

Like I said, if you think that Anslemi had the authority to fire everyone in the front office and hire a new management team with new ownership coming in, knock yourself out.

It may not even have anything to do with the sale. Anselmi said himself he needed board approval to make a coaching change - that's not even to say spend money on a new coach, that's even just a change from within.

But there's ben a pattern with TFC of not spending until the money has been collected - we didn't get a Dp until there were a few years of season ticket revenue in the bank, we didn't get grass intil the Edu sale, etc.. We didn't get the Soccer Solutions/Klinsmann consultation until they were desperate. We shouldn't be at all surprised that when the season started 0-9 changes were made (and we also shouldn't be surprised that two more games were played before the scheduled board meeting came around and "fire the coach" was on the agenda).

It would be very interesting to compare the amount TFC have spent on the FO and coaching staff and scouts ov the last six uears with San Jose, Seattle, Vancouver and other teams. We've been saying since day one here there's no salary cap on manegement...

[Pookie]

Yes, the moratorium on hiring decisions within the FO is speculation on my part, but it is speculation based on sound reasoning and logic. Obviously, Bell, Rogers & Co. will want to make their own determination in that regard in the off season.

If any of you think that Anselmi had the authority and the fiscal flexibility to hire a new management team from outside the organization at the time with a new ownership group about to purchase controlling shares of the corproration within a matter of a few months, you're entitled to believe whatever you want, but it's a notion that is incredibly naive.

Hold up

Anselmi had the authority to fire Winter AND prior to all of that, give Mariner a 3 year contract extension. That would imply a good deal of flexibility to get that approved through the Board.

[Beach_Red]

Hold up

Anselmi had the authority to fire Winter AND prior to all of that, give Mariner a 3 year contract extension. That would imply a good deal of flexibility to get that approved through the Board.

Anselmi said in an interview he needed board approval for any "coaching change." are you sure he didn't?

[Canary10]

I thought Dallas took JDG's whole salary? So we shouldn't be paying anything of it anymore as far as I'm aware.

They took the cap hit, not the full salary. The cap hit is for half a season is $175,000. Really, the main thing TFC got out of that trade is the DP spot, which it appears they couldn't really use anyway.

[Richard]

Hold up

Anselmi had the authority to fire Winter AND prior to all of that, give Mariner a 3 year contract extension. That would imply a good deal of flexibility to get that approved through the Board.

Yeh its sad things like this dont get any press. It seems lile this whole organization is built upon taking fans for granted and making sure everyones buddies is well covered financialy when its time for axing. Its like when Mr.Cock traded a first round pick, i bet you before MO came in they promissed him the GM job when he would get fired. This whole thing stinks too much and us fans are getting taken for ride.

[T-boy]

They took the cap hit, not the full salary. The cap hit is for half a season is $175,000. Really, the main thing TFC got out of that trade is the DP spot, which it appears they couldn't really use anyway.

But we got the 175 in salary space, correct? So DP spot and the salary space we can use on somebody else, I assume?

[ManUtd4ever]

Hold up

Anselmi had the authority to fire Winter AND prior to all of that, give Mariner a 3 year contract extension. That would imply a good deal of flexibility to get that approved through the Board.

Once again, it's speculation on my part, but firing Winter and promoting Mariner from within is a far cry from being given the authority to dismantle an entire front office and rebuild it one month into the season with new ownership coming in.

[Super]

But we got the 175 in salary space, correct? So DP spot and the salary space we can use on somebody else, I assume?

Exactly. So we were free and clear to go ahead and sign Mellberg - all within the rules of 3 DP's allowed per season. Unfortunately the league didn't agree with our decision and squashed the deal. Mellberg-gate was born. And with it most of my respect for this league. Thankfully we're not entirely sure that this is indeed how it played out, so fortunately I can live in a bit of denial and pretend that we don't support a team in a Mickey Mouse league. I'd almost rather they made up wierd and typical North American Sawker rules of counting down the clock, kick-in's instead of throw-in's, automatic penalties instead of draws, etc., than trying to dominate and tell individual clubs how to run things - outside of the rules at least.

[Derko]

Hey Guys,

I was away for the weekend and couldn't get the match.

It's too bad you have to go back 53 posts to actually hear a comment about the game itself.

[Pookie]

Once again, it's speculation on my part, but firing Winter and promoting Mariner from within is a far cry from being given the authority to dismantle an entire front office and rebuild it one month into the season with new ownership coming in.

But a 3 year extension is less than a far cry from offering the job to a new manager. It is committing term and dollars to an individual beyond this pending sale. If that was indeed a barrier, then Anselmi appears to have fond a way around it.

[Pookie]

Hey Guys,

I was away for the weekend and couldn't get the match.

It's too bad you have to go back 53 posts to actually hear a comment about the game itself.

Game was the same story from virtually every game ths far under Mariner. Out shot. Out possessed.

Goal came from a gift. Foul on Hall was BS but when you give up 22 shots odds are that one of them is going to go in eventually. No one to blame but the game plan itself.

Hurts to say it but Chicago was the better team and deserved the 3 points.

[Canary10]

But we got the 175 in salary space, correct? So DP spot and the salary space we can use on somebody else, I assume?

You'd think we could use the space, but whether it's JDG's space of Koefs' space, for some reason we have one extra one and we can't use it. Only the league and TFC know why.

[brad]

They took the cap hit, not the full salary. The cap hit is for half a season is $175,000. Really, the main thing TFC got out of that trade is the DP spot, which it appears they couldn't really use anyway.

I think we did use the DP slot. Frings takes one, Koevs takes one, and the one we freed up with the JDG trade allowed Hassli to come in. I think if we kept JDG we wouldn't have gotten Hassli. We didn't get Koevs DP slot back if I recall correctly.

[Derko]

Game was the same story from virtually every game ths far under Mariner. Out shot. Out possessed.

Goal came from a gift. Foul on Hall was BS but when you give up 22 shots odds are that one of them is going to go in eventually. No one to blame but the game plan itself.

Hurts to say it but Chicago was the better team and deserved the 3 points.

Thanks for the rundown Pookie

[jazzy]

^ You are just making that up, that they couldn't hire a new management team now due to the impending sale of MLSE. We have no idea what is & what isn't allowed in the current situation. Many people were also saying that they couldn't make DP changes & other major player transactions due to the impending sale: not true as it turns out. Further people (incl. Mariner himself) were saying they would only make minor tweaks, which would make sense also given the impending sale and that we were in mid-season -- also not true as we see. Then people were saying: the long-term vision will stay regardless, the academy will continue training & developing under the plan that was extensively laid out to us & the world -- now we hear that things are also changing at that end.


It's all pretty nuts. Anselmi & everyone below him should really only be acting as caretakers now given the impending sale. I've been hot & cold about Mariner at different times. On the best days, I was hoping he would do some of the things that Winter had trouble with: be pragmatic; tweak things; play every game flexibly in a way that best fits TFC's available players as well as the opposition; do a better job preparing & motivating the players; be a little smarter with PR; etc.


Instead Mariner makes major long-term changes in roster & playing style; he also seems inflexible, sticking with a formation, playing style & certain players even when it isn't working (e.g., always subbing in Maund in the 2nd half, regardless of the score, the opposition, and the way the game is going); playing in a way that marginalizes some of our best players (and then dumping or benching some of those players). Vs. Chicago it didn't even look like he could motivate the players any more: many of them looked disinterested for large portions of the game. And Mariners PR -- he's mostly avoided trashing (i.e. motivating) the opposition, which was sometimes comical under Winter; but Mariner also gives the "up-yours" to the West stand, is starting to throw players under the bus, etc...


Aron Winter should never have been hired: much too inexperienced & unproven at the top pro level (especially for a long-suffering club like TFC). And Mariner should never have been hired as the backup & the player acquisition guy for a attacking/ possession-based style. Nor should he be taking over the ship in this situation. I don't know what that means, we're obviously stuck with the guy for this season. But they have to start cleaning house from way at the top, starting within the next month or two, or this whole thing is going down. The Town Halls & SSH renewals are going to be an absolute shit show this year.

well thought out but some of us may not even care to go to "town house"......exercise in futility,...only way i'm going if fo is gone.............ya right.....it's simply maple leaf soccer club until rogers/bell grow some

[Super]

I think we did use the DP slot. Frings takes one, Koevs takes one, and the one we freed up with the JDG trade allowed Hassli to come in. I think if we kept JDG we wouldn't have gotten Hassli. We didn't get Koevs DP slot back if I recall correctly.

That may be true, but that was never the explanation given by either Garber or TFC. Garber said that TFC looked at the deal and just couldn't make the numbers fit. Mellberg's agent said that the league nixed it. TFC said that the league nixed it. I'm sure that if indeed it was just a simple issue such as "TFC had used up their 3 DP slots" I'm sure Garber, TFC or Mellberg's agent would have said that. Why leave it open to interpretation, especially considering how fed up the Toronto supporters are with the state of things. I think we all would've accepted that explanation, it is after all a rule of the league and equal for all (officially at least). No one said that. In fact, if you're to believe Soccer by Ives a 2-year $1.5 million deal (meaning DP) was ready to go - but the league nixed it. Everyone but Garber says that. Moreover, according to Ives, the reason why the league nixed the deal is because they do not want to pay centerbacks BIG money, it would set a precedent they don't want. Remember, there's only one DP CB in the league, Rafa Marquez, but TONS of midfielders and strikers. In the case of Rafa, he's Mexican, and poorly attended NYRB (and the league) probably hoped this would bring out more Hispanics. It didn't. Also, I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that defenders just don't make headlines - so why spend so much money on a guy that'll likely never be a highlight of his team. He is after all a defender, the unsong heroes of the game.

Either way I feel like we got seriously shafted on a deal that could have immediately improved our club - unlike our current dealings in CB that is just more hoping for the best.

[jazzy]

But we got the 175 in salary space, correct? So DP spot and the salary space we can use on somebody else, I assume?

it seems on the DP spot apparently not....but at time the powers to be thought otherwise

[narduch]

MLS did TFC a favour by nixing that deal with Mellberg. The money we were reported to be paying him was insane. I'm sure he wasn't making even close to that in the Greek league the last 3 seasons.

Besides, blaming MLS is an easy answer for the FO apologists (look up who was the first to report it and continues to call Garber a liar). I don't think that's really the case. The way I read the situation is that TFC simply didn't have the cap space to pull off the deal (ie. TFC didn't have room for the non-DP portion of the salarly). The idiot's in the TFC FO were to blame. Blaming the league is a way for Mariner and Cochrane to cover their asses.

[jazzy]

Hey Guys,

I was away for the weekend and couldn't get the match.

It's too bad you have to go back 53 posts to actually hear a comment about the game itself.

true but what's to say.......compared to the women;s national team's game,..lets say, it was tiring, 2007,.revisited....blah blah...we're all tired of banging our heads on the wall,..and trying to find something ,..anything of interest.......we're not very good are we!

[Pookie]

That may be true, but that was never the explanation given by either Garber or TFC. Garber said that TFC looked at the deal and just couldn't make the numbers fit. Mellberg's agent said that the league nixed it. TFC said that the league nixed it. I'm sure that if indeed it was just a simple issue such as "TFC had used up their 3 DP slots" I'm sure Garber, TFC or Mellberg's agent would have said that. Why leave it open to interpretation, especially considering how fed up the Toronto supporters are with the state of things. I think we all would've accepted that explanation, it is after all a rule of the league and equal for all (officially at least). No one said that. In fact, if you're to believe Soccer by Ives a 2-year $1.5 million deal (meaning DP) was ready to go - but the league nixed it. Everyone but Garber says that. Moreover, according to Ives, the reason why the league nixed the deal is because they do not want to pay centerbacks BIG money, it would set a precedent they don't want. Remember, there's only one DP CB in the league, Rafa Marquez, but TONS of midfielders and strikers. In the case of Rafa, he's Mexican, and poorly attended NYRB (and the league) probably hoped this would bring out more Hispanics. It didn't. Also, I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that defenders just don't make headlines - so why spend so much money on a guy that'll likely never be a highlight of his team. He is after all a defender, the unsong heroes of the game.

Either way I feel like we got seriously shafted on a deal that could have immediately improved our club - unlike our current dealings in CB that is just more hoping for the best.

BayernTFC provide a really good link to Mellberg's agent's view of the situation. MLS didn't like the salary negotiated but it was clear that when they grabbed Hassli, there was no room for Mellberg.


This is from the link that bayernTFC shared: (google translate)

Olof Mellberg was on his way to Toronto.
But now experiencing fotbollskanalen.se that the transition looks to crack.

Toronto wanted Olof Mellberg - and the Swedish center-back was keen on a move to Canada.

- Why should we not be interested in Mellberg? He is a fantastic player who made an incredible Championship, said the club's sporting director Paul Mariner to fotbollskanalen.se last week.

But now övegången out to crack. Fotbollskanalen.se experience that it depends on two things. For one thing MLS negative about the high salary that Toronto and Mellberg negotiated (all contracts must be approved by the league) and injured Striker Danny Koevermans which meant that the club was forced to recruit a new striker as his tedje Designated player.

Two weeks ago, in the 1-0 victory against New England, injured Danny Koevermans left knee so badly that he misses the rest of the season. Therefore forced Toronto to act quickly and acquire Vancouver's French striker Eric Hassli as a replacement. Thus he became the club's third Designated Player, and it means that the current situation is no place for Olof Mellberg on the team.

Team in MLS will have three so-called "Designated players", who may have higher salaries than 350 $ 000 (2 500 000 million) a year.

[Canary10]

It was reported when Koef got hurt that we got the DP spot back but no cap relief. So we should still have one DP spot now, but I can imagine we don't have the cap room to actually use it. Of course, it all gets complicated if/when Koef returns as the spot would be taken up again. Any DP contract, I would think, could only be for the rest of this year.

[Super]

BayernTFC provide a really good link to Mellberg's agent's view of the situation. MLS didn't like the salary negotiated but it was clear that when they grabbed Hassli, there was no room for Mellberg.


This is from the link that bayernTFC shared: (google translate)

Olof Mellberg was on his way to Toronto.
But now experiencing fotbollskanalen.se that the transition looks to crack.

Toronto wanted Olof Mellberg - and the Swedish center-back was keen on a move to Canada.

- Why should we not be interested in Mellberg? He is a fantastic player who made an incredible Championship, said the club's sporting director Paul Mariner to fotbollskanalen.se last week.

But now övegången out to crack. Fotbollskanalen.se experience that it depends on two things. For one thing MLS negative about the high salary that Toronto and Mellberg negotiated (all contracts must be approved by the league) and injured Striker Danny Koevermans which meant that the club was forced to recruit a new striker as his tedje Designated player.

Two weeks ago, in the 1-0 victory against New England, injured Danny Koevermans left knee so badly that he misses the rest of the season. Therefore forced Toronto to act quickly and acquire Vancouver's French striker Eric Hassli as a replacement. Thus he became the club's third Designated Player, and it means that the current situation is no place for Olof Mellberg on the team.

Team in MLS will have three so-called "Designated players", who may have higher salaries than 350 $ 000 (2 500 000 million) a year.

So what you're saying is that Kouvermans, even injured, will sit on that third DP spot (Frings and Hassli being the other 2)? That was NEVER communicated to us by either Garber, TFC or the Toronto media - at least that I've seen. I still hold the belief that the league nixed it, not because we couldn't come up with the money, but because they just didn't like the deal - effectively killing any chance of us fixing our number one problem (the defense). Like I've said before, if it comes out officially that the league nixed the deal then that is totally not acceptable, and I will seriously think about turning my back on this league. Why bother supporting a team when we're at the mercy of Garber and his lawyers?

But let's do the math here. When we cut De Guzman, didn't Dallas take over his cap cost? We just have to pay his salary above the cap. Either way we got the DP spot back. So De Guzman was an even swap with Hassli - at least as far as the cap is concerned. Following this we cut quite a few players, freeing up a lot of salary. Surely we had $175k cleared, didn't we? If we did, then we could have made the deal.

[ag futbol]

Said it before, I'll say it again: absolutely no way Dallas is paying JDG's salary. I would keep that in mind before savaging the league office over giving us the use of what would effectively be the 5th designated player on payroll.

MLS did TFC a favour by nixing that deal with Mellberg. The money we were reported to be paying him was insane. I'm sure he wasn't making even close to that in the Greek league the last 3 seasons.

Besides, blaming MLS is an easy answer for the FO apologists (look up who was the first to report it and continues to call Garber a liar). I don't think that's really the case. The way I read the situation is that TFC simply didn't have the cap space to pull off the deal (ie. TFC didn't have room for the non-DP portion of the salarly). The idiot's in the TFC FO were to blame. Blaming the league is a way for Mariner and Cochrane to cover their asses.

Exactly. We've seen enough of how our bumbling management team conducts themselves to take an educated guess at who dropped the ball.

[BayernTFC]

Why bother supporting a team when we're at the mercy of Garber and his lawyers?

It's a good question. I don't mean to burst your bubble, but:

Like all MLS contracts, they would be subject to league approval.

http://www.sounderatheart.com/2012/8...the-salary-cap

Under applicable player assignment policies, MLS centrally allocates the top or “marquee” players among the teams, aiming to prevent talent imbalances and assure a degree of comparability of team strength in order to promote competitive soccer matches. These assignments are effective unless disapproved by a two-thirds vote of the subcommittee of the Management Committee. Most of the rest of the players-the non-”marquee” players-are selected for teams by the individual operator-investors through player drafts and the like. The league allows player trades between teams, but MLS's central league office must approve (and routinely does approve) such trades.

MLS's player policies, in particular, do not call for application of the independent personal stake exception. The operator-investors benefit from these policies because centralized contracting for player services results in lower salaries. However, that benefit is, in the MLS structure, a derivative one. No operator has an individual player payroll to worry about; the league pays the salaries. Moreover, the MLS investor gets the lower-cost benefits in exchange for having surrendered the degree of autonomy that team owners in “plural entity” leagues typically enjoy. The reason an individual team owner in one of the other leagues is willing to bid up players' salaries to get the particular players it wants is because by paying high salaries to get desirable players, the owner can achieve other substantial benefits, such as increased sales of tickets and promotional goods, media revenues, and the like. The MLS operator-investors have largely yielded that opportunity to the central league.

http://books.google.ca/books?id=YO80DTGw1MEC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=all+mls+ player+contracts+need+league+approval&source=bl&ot s=Jh3O4HbRc2&sig=qoBrUvhjicS2XYBTB_FVI2sVDko&hl=en &sa=X&ei=GYEiUO7CC47gtQaM-4DYBw&ved=0CFIQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=all mls player contracts need league approval&f=false

[Canary10]

"Said it before, I'll say it again: absolutely no way Dallas is paying JDG's salary. I would keep that in mind before savaging the league office over giving us the use of what would effectively be the 5th designated player on payroll."

It was stated that Dallas were taking the cap hit of $175,000. I'm sure that's the case. Everything over and above is TFC's.

I think we do have the DP space available, but I would love to know how we could structure a contract so that it isn't a DP one when Koevermans comes back. I imagine the league politely asked Cochrane what was going to happen when we have 4 DPs on the books at the start of next year.