Yet it was when Reyna was in charge that the Lampard/Pirlo fiascos were imposed on us. Deciding we are a dumpster fire coming off a 64 point season and somehow worse off than back then because an anonymous internet poster cites an anonymous FO person making vague charges* puts indirect evidence over actual events. Might it be worse to have Manchester folks in charge? Absolutely. But let's wait until we see something like a reply of 2014-15 and not even being in charge of our DP selections to decide it's true. Like maybe if they foist Claudio Bravo on us. That would get my attention. I'm also waiting to see who the coach is. Folks might remember that a couple of days before Torrent was announced there was a very strong rumor that a CFG guy named Borrell was going to replace Vieira. Some folks liked it but I hated it because he had to that point only been a development coach and I hated the idea that we would have 2x in a row been assigned a dev coach instead of someone with coach-to-win experience. Torrent had at least been a HC for teams in competition and an AC competing at the very highest levels. If Torrent's replacement is in the Borrell mold I again will be down on the team because I think it would show that CFG is treating us as a hybrid dev/first team and I want no part of that. But that's what I mean. I judge based on the moves, not vage unsourced smoke about a lack of independence.
* Hey
K
Kjbert - can your source put any meat on those bones? Did Claudio not want to sell Scally? Did he not want Mitri or Heber, or what? Or going the other way, can we maybe get a name of a player Domé or Claudio wanted that Manchester vetoed? Right now all I see is vague shit from Torrent with zero details and more vague shit from "anonymous" that the people in NY can't do what they want yet there's not a single example offered by anyone and we just had our best roster and it's hard for me to GAF.
Forgive me if we've already gone over all of this and decided that it's irrelevant - we live in a time of fractured attention.
It's funny that
Ulrich mentioned my name in association with Occam's Razor style arguments because I feel like I'm pretty skeptical of pseudo-objective measurements like "simplicity". I think it's one of many tools. It may be simplicity is our sub-rational, pattern-matching brains finding threads that connect various points of data and giving them the label of "simplicity" as post-justification.
Whatever it is, I think in this case:
Dome complained about our salary spending and he has left. He complained about how long it took for us to get a striker. How much his resentment of their grooming a replacement played into his decision is difficult to say but the fact that he complained often about MLS yet is still content to continue working here says a lot about his estimation of the club.
The idea that mid table salary spending might have played into Claudio's decision to leave is also very plausible. The parts of the Win! documentary that showed him angrily and resignedly at odds with the message coming from the mothership lend further weight to this idea.
We've already talked about the reasons why Lee might want to stay that don't conflict with the idea that CFG is putting less than their all behind NYCFC.
I'm curious what sort of evidence would be dispositive when it comes to the question of whether we are "being run out of Manchester". I'm not even sure if that's the criteria I'm interested in.
If we were being run out of Manchester but I felt that we were being run to win and give this city what it deserves, I think I'd be OK with it. But I don't think the reasoning I laid out above leads me to that conclusion.
I've sensed that our club is a means to the ends of a broader strategy for a long time. But I'm no longer sure that that's concordant with the idea of doing this city proud.
