Joselito gets his pick of DC United
Finally, DC United can offload some of the horror-show that is Nick-the-wonder-dwarf Rimando, Brian Carroll, Brandon Prideaux, and David Stokes. If only we could have held on to Dema Kovalenko long enough to deliver that poisoned chalice as well.
'Course what they're after is the likes of Adu with this move, I'd love to see Nick compete with Cech
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,1742281,00.html
Rock the Crossbar
posted by gooner71 at
3/29/2006 11:50:00 AM
5 Comments:
Four questions: 1) Aren't MLS players signed to the league so a tie-up between AEG and Chelsea would not give Chelsea first option on MLS players at those clubs? 2) Along Tom's point, who would want to be loaned out in the offseason? At most, maybe send some Academy kids over. 3) I assume DC United can offload players to Rochester or wherever because Chelsea loanees will make up the numbers? 4) Tom, can Chelsea loan players to an MLS club without going through the league?
By
Chris P, at 12:27 PM
Looks like Chelsea are also setting up some crap bi-annual tourney in America - could be decent for American development this but ultimately Chelsea are just trying to market much like United and Madrid do. Cant begrudge them for it. And whoever collects Edu will guarantee shirt sales in America, watch Chelsea/United and Madrid try to sign him just for that reason alone.
As for Chris' comment, i wonder too where MLS fits into this as I thought they have a lot of control over player contracts???
By
WhatsupWheaton Simon, at 2:44 PM
As history has proven, MLS officials have no problem bending/changing the rules as they go along - sometimes for the betterment of the league, sometimes not. I think that the idea of individual clubs or ownership groups making their own deals (with Chelsea, etc.) is the way to go because it will increase the competition factor among those very clubs. It will also allow more American players to get in the crosshairs of European scouts which, in turn, will benefit senior and youth national squads (is anyone else tired of the cookie-cutter players that the IMG academy in Florida is turning out?). I know that most of you here are sick and tired of my bad-mouthing my own country's soccer structure, but this move is one that I've been waiting for my entire adult life.
The key question is transfer fees: will the league as a whole enjoy the benefit if, say, Chelsea decide to sign a 17-year old phenom from Los Angeles or Chicago? Or, will that money be negligible because of the marketing association between the clubs? Yes, the single-entity concept for MLS exists now, but the league is going to face the same situation as Major League Baseball when certain clubs become major transfer money breadwinners and have to share it with teams that aren't producing talented juniors (like the television revenue issue in baseball). Grab a pint, sit back and enjoy the show!
By
GAC, at 6:39 PM
This is interesting as the agreement isnt with MLS but an entity that really affects 4 MLS clubs so I can see conflict in the future. Definitely a better model for the league which will soon have decent soccer stadia for the mostpart (DC needs one as a half empty RFK does nothing for me) - hope for the future if they can find/create the fans.
By
WhatsupWheaton Simon, at 9:47 AM
Despite all the abuse I give MLS, most of it to get a rise out of Tom and Andras, I would definitely go to see the Revs if they played in Nickerson Field. 15,000 capacity and located on the T. Would be a good atmosphere and you would get more inner-city folk who understand football attending rather than the suburban folk who go to Foxboro to reward their soccer-playing teenage daughter who got an A in Math.
http://football.ballparks.com/NCAA/Atlantic10/Boston/index.htm
By
TheBusbyBoy, at 11:48 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home