use it or lose it. I forget the exact details from when it was announced, but if they lose it, the team that uses it does have the pay the team that doesn't a set amount (MLS extortion $) for the privilege.
Official (random Player Name) To Nycfc Rumor Thread
- Thread starter BxLio91
- Start date
- Status
use it or lose it. I forget the exact details from when it was announced, but if they lose it, the team that uses it does have the pay the team that doesn't a set amount (MLS extortion $) for the privilege.
Okay. But what if every time a player comes up Columbus says, "Yes. We will sign you." And the player then says, "On second thought, I'll stay in Europe." Then what? Does the second team on the list still get a shot at the player or since Columbus said yes have they essentially blocked that player from coming to the US?
I think it's what Adam said. The player can come but the team that signs has to pay Columbus. What I'm not sure of is of the team that signs is even lower on the list, say 7th, do they have to pay every team above them or just #1.
It's complicated because - as you noted - the player has a say. So it can't just work like a waiver wire, where if the club wants the player it gets him automatically, and if not it passes the option to the next team on the list. Here the team can want the player, but the player can refuse, or maybe they just can't reach terms, and so it gets messier.
Bottom line. Let's all agree. Columbus sucks.
Not sure if it ever expires. It might reorder each season based on how the teams finish. If they don't do this already it seems like a simple solution.
The other way to get around I have read about it is to throw a ton of money at the player. From what I understand the teams higher up in the order can choose to pass. So if we really want a player on the list in the future we can offer to over pay them by an amount that none of the other teams above us are willing to take on. Then they will all pass and the player falls to us. Will be interesting to see if CFG will do something like that in the next coming years and what type of player they are willing to do that for.
Its actually a very nice town. I had to spend 3 months there for work a couple years ago and was not happy I was going to be traveling there. But I was very impressed.
Now, for a European football player coming over to the US, maybe not so much.....
Can't just look at it from an American perspective.
I'm sure Geoff Cameron is very happy, but is Stoke on Trent that much different from Columbus, OH in the grand scheme of things? Maybe einwindir can help me out on that one.
Regardless of similarity in the actual cities one huge difference is accessibility to a large city. 1.5 hours on a train from Stoke ot London vs. a 5.5 hour drive to Chicago and that's without even getting into a discussion about whether Chicago is even a reasonable comparison to London.
It's kind of funny. In the discussions I've read here, I've seen a few people suggesting that Chicago might sneak onto a list of cities players might want to live, whereas everyone denigrates Colorado. As a European (regrettably not a player) with a modicum of knowledge of the US but not really of what your cities are like - my trip to the Revs game in March is the only time I've ever been over - I actually would've probably picked Colorado over Chicago if I'd've been asked to pick one of the two.
I'm sure that just five minutes' research would set me to rights, but I was of the opinion that Chicago was a grimy, smoggy industrial city somewhat like Detroit only not yet in complete collapse, whereas Colorado was like a quaint Swiss skiing resort albeit in the middle of nowhere.
A big difference is that stoke is an hour and a half to london, while columbus is an hour and a half to cincinnati and Akron
Chicago is much nicer than Detroit. I'd liken it to New York if I had to choose a city to compare it to. Granted, it's not nearly as cool as New York.
I'm not sure why Chicago gets that designation. Its very much the opposite. The city is very clean and quite beautiful. In fact, I think it has the best skyline in all of the U.S.
It's the same guy on the left in this picture.
Nor nearly as thin. I like going there. Improves my personal body image.
Certain parts of Chicago are absolutely gorgeous. Cool town, fun people. Nice midwestern people.
But the ghettos of Chicago might as well be Karachi. Terrible murder rates. Real Jekyll and Hyde city.
Denver (Colorado) on the other hand is probably one of the top 4 or 5 coolest, most beautiful big cities in the US. Safe, easy navigable, good sports fans and a unique culture. Denver, San Diego, Austin - all cool major American cities that kind of fly under the radar compared to the behemoth metropolitan areas like New York, LA, Chicago and Philly.
It's just occurred to me that I was getting Columbus and Colorado mixed up the whole time. I'm not quite sure why, because unlike most Europeans I actually do know the difference, so it's a little embarrassing for me. Still, I guess it makes an interesting extension to the example.
Thinking about it - yeah, I know zero about Columbus. I would probably pick Chicago over Columbus purely because I at least know Chicago is a city that has things. I couldn't even say whether Columbus' population is 1 million or 1 thousand.
- Status
