Brandt - Another surgery

Don't be so quick to say it wasn't a ploy. If there wasn't subterfuge going on, why did NYCFC and Kreis dance around the topic and list him in the injury reports? Being a ploy doesn't have to enlist additional STH, but they weren't truthful for a reason.
To keep other teams from signing him, no? Particularly early in the year, when there was still hope he would recover, if all they had was a handshake agreement to cover the costs of his rehab, another team could easily have signed him had they known he was available.
 
A coach being untruthfully about an injury report is not a conspiracy. Its what coaches do.
You really missed the point. It's not that Kreis was untruthful about an injury, it's that he put out a report on a player not signed to the team. Teams are only supposed to comment on their own players, in any sport. It is a big difference that you're not opening your eyes to.
 
You really missed the point. It's not that Kreis was untruthful about an injury, it's that he put out a report on a player not signed to the team. Teams are only supposed to comment on their own players, in any sport. It is a big difference that you're not opening your eyes to.
That's nothing new to us. We advertised with Lampard while he was signed to MCFC and even used pictures of him 'signing' a contract that wasn't a contract.
 
To keep other teams from signing him, no? Particularly early in the year, when there was still hope he would recover, if all they had was a handshake agreement to cover the costs of his rehab, another team could easily have signed him had they known he was available.

We were the only MLS team that could sign him because we had his rights after the expansion draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert
You really missed the point. It's not that Kreis was untruthful about an injury, it's that he put out a report on a player not signed to the team. Teams are only supposed to comment on their own players, in any sport. It is a big difference that you're not opening your eyes to.

Eyes are very open. Welcome to the shady player deals of MLS. We still don't even know where one of our international slots came from.
 
That's nothing new to us. We advertised with Lampard while he was signed to MCFC and even used pictures of him 'signing' a contract that wasn't a contract.
But that's the point, and Lampard reinforces it, that the club conducts PR (GJ)/Marketing (Lampard) that is not accurate and serves another, unpublished purpose. If it didn't, they wouldn't do it, because it's extra work and nobody in this business world does anything without an end goal/compensation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NYCFC_Dan
We were the only MLS team that could sign him because we had his rights after the expansion draft.

Exactly. This is why I don't understand why people are believing there was major subterfuge here. We held his rights. We didn't sign him to a contract, because why pay someone who can't play. We let him rehab and work out with the team, and if he were able to get healthy, we certainly would have put him on contract. A lot of this was being respectful to a good guy and good player who was going through a really bad break.
 
Eyes are very open. Welcome to the shady player deals of MLS. We still don't even know where one of our international slots came from.
Your example is still off-base, because as far as fans go, where they got the extra international spot is secondary since MLS approved it. That's completely different from the team commenting on a player's health/status as if they're part of the team when they legally are not. That's also different from insinuating a player has transferred to the team and subsequently loaned out when they were never signed at that juncture.
 
Exactly. This is why I don't understand why people are believing there was major subterfuge here. We held his rights. We didn't sign him to a contract, because why pay someone who can't play. We let him rehab and work out with the team, and if he were able to get healthy, we certainly would have put him on contract. A lot of this was being respectful to a good guy and good player who was going through a really bad break.
Holding rights and having a contract though are two different things - I'm sure the team would have signed him if he overcame his injuries, but the pressers all made it seem as if he was a full-fledged member of the team but that he was not ready to play matches, and that was not the case. Hell, he was even signing autographs at Adidas with the rest of the team - That's a farce if I've ever seen one, and having his signature on a shirt really muddies the object. Any other team in any other sport that held a players rights but didn't have them signed would never comment on them from a "status of ready to play or not," they would comment that the player is not part of the team and therefore cannot be considered for selection.
 
We were the only MLS team that could sign him because we had his rights after the expansion draft.
"If NYCFC or Orlando City SC selects a Supplemental Roster Player, it must offer him a Senior Roster position and he must remain on the Senior Roster as of Roster Compliance Date."

Penalty isn't specified, but I'd say we lost rights to him when we didn't offer a Senior Roster position by the RCD.
 
Lampard went to Chelsea to be treated. Drobga is also heading to London to be treated for his injury. Hmm. Maybe America doesn't have the best sports medicine?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert