Anyone want to go in with me on the NYCFC MasterCard dinner?

It probably should be. I guess the dignified thing to do would be to let Txiki (or somebody further up the chain from Claudio) figure it out.

I hope they have a plan in place. Otherwise it's just something to add to the list of team fuck ups. How do you hire a GM/sporting director with such a HUGE conflict of interest looming in the near future and not at least have a set of protocols to deal with the obviously unavoidable situation?
 
I hope they have a plan in place. Otherwise it's just something to add to the list of team fuck ups. How do you hire a GM/sporting director with such a HUGE conflict of interest looming in the near future and not at least have a set of protocols to deal with the obviously unavoidable situation?
I know this is a rhetorical question and I agree with the sentiment. But there are lots of reasons:
  1. They figured they'd figure it out later.
  2. They figured that even if the worst possible thing, or the most likely possible thing happened RE: Gio, the consequences of this were still smaller than the consequences of not hiring Claudio (IOW the delta between Claudio and the #2 choice is > than the worst / most-likely possible thing happening with Gio).
  3. They undervalued Gio's potential.
  4. ...
In general it's really hard to make decisions that stand the test of time. I'm hoping it's #2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam
I hope they have a plan in place. Otherwise it's just something to add to the list of team fuck ups. How do you hire a GM/sporting director with such a HUGE conflict of interest looming in the near future and not at least have a set of protocols to deal with the obviously unavoidable situation?

I understand what you're saying, but what's the opportunity cost here? They're hardly *less* likely to get Gio than they would be with a different sporting director.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christopher Jee
I know this is a rhetorical question and I agree with the sentiment. But there are lots of reasons:
  1. They figured they'd figure it out later.
  2. They figured that even if the worst possible thing, or the most likely possible thing happened RE: Gio, the consequences of this were still smaller than the consequences of not hiring Claudio (IOW the delta between Claudio and the #2 choice is > than the worst / most-likely possible thing happening with Gio).
  3. They undervalued Gio's potential.
  4. ...
In general it's really hard to make decisions that stand the test of time. I'm hoping it's #2.
I understand what you're saying, but what's the opportunity cost here? They're hardly *less* likely to get Gio than they would be with a different sporting director.

I wasn't saying don't hire Claudio because of it. But have a protocol in place, where in this instance Claudio has to step aside and only represent his son. Have someone else from the club represent the club's interest. Hopefully, if Gio wants to go straight to Europe, they can at least sign him and sell him to get the GAM. But you need someone with the club's interests in mind to suggest that and maybe even leverage Claudio a little to do it.
 
Dang, sounds like I missed a party.
Only if you aren't afraid of him without filters!

Seriously though, we aren't sure how he got the whiskey since when I ordered one at dinner, the waitress said ok and never delivered it.
 
I went to a top school, have a grad degree and work on Wall Street. None of those things make a person interesting in my opinion.

But did you have a MacNaMullet and play professional soccer despite looking like you shouldn't.