Top Stories

Sounders and Crew reach agreement, freeing Seattle to hire Schmid

Sigi Schmid 1 (ISIphotos.com)

                                                      Photo by ISIphotos.com

Sigi Schmid is free at last.

Here is the announcement from MLS regarding an agreement reached between Columbus and Seattle over Schmid:

"Major League Soccer announced today that the Columbus Crew and Seattle Sounders FC resolved a potential contractual issue regarding former Crew coach Sigi Schmid. Columbus acquired allocation money and cash from Seattle, thus releasing Schmid from contractual obligations and allowing him to proceed with his contract negotiations with Seattle."

The best part of the league's release is this final line:

"In connection with this matter, Major League Soccer found no evidence of tampering by Seattle Sounders FC."

Right, so Seattle gave Columbus allocation money AND cash for the right to talk to a coach already out of contract because? Perhaps it was a gift for Columbus winning MLS Cup.

Now that this is out of the way we can get to the business of announcing the most drawn-out and anti-climactic coaching hire in MLS history. Schmid should be introduced shortly and the Seattle Sounders can move on to the business of continuing to build its team.

What do you think of this development? Give Columbus credit for squeezing an allocation and cash out of Seattle? Think the Sounders mishandled the courtship of Schmid? Do you believe MLS' claim that they no found no evidence of tampering? Are you buying the floated story about a non-compete clause in Schmid's Crew contract that would have extended beyond the life of his contract (a clause that multiple sources tell me didn't exist)?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. If you and I can figure out who Sigi wants then how hard do you think it is for Hanauer and Henderson?

    Getting players Sigi likes does not prove he was involved.

    Reply
  2. All you have to do is look at the expansion draft picks and that tells you Sigi was involved. There was tampering and the Crew has the right to be compensated.

    Reply
  3. The punchline here is that Seattle seems to think they’re hiring a coach who’ll take them to the Cup.

    I doubt it.

    First of all, Sigi’s biggest problem in LA was having to fight with Doug Hamilton over pler acquisitions. When he moved to CBus he demanded, and got, total control over his roster and built a winner.

    In Seattle three or four guys are assembling the team and Sigi only gets on vote.

    Which leads me to ask: how many Cups has Joe Roth, Adrian Hanauer and Chris Henderson won? If you have Sigi, you let him do his thing. They aren’t going to. They just want him to stick to the coaching while they handle the roster.

    It’s not gonna work.

    Second, Sigi wanted to be closer to his family on the West Coast. It may have been the biggest factor in this move.

    So tell me – is there anything much closer to Manhattan Beach CA than Carson? You know, where the USMNT is based? It’s maybe a 10 minute drive.

    Sigi wanted the US job, badly, when Bradley got it. It was mostly his losing record with the Crew up until then which kept him from getting it. He had an out clause in his Crew contract.

    Tell me quick: wouldn’t you rather have Sigi running that team right now? Wouldn’t just about anybody?

    At the most, Sigi is in Seattle for two years. If Bradley royally screws up and the US doesn’t make the finals, it could be one year.

    Either way, Seattle is just a way station on the trip home.

    Manhattan Beach (and next door Carson) is his goal, and he’ll be there long before we see Seattle in the Cup.

    Reply
  4. i still thinnk mls should ban seattle for cheatin and ban the crew for cryin. and let the red bulls choose wateva playas they want

    Reply
  5. “The allocation money penalty is crap.”

    Agreed, extremely dumb rule. You have a guy who everybody knows is good in MLS and doesn’t want to sign with his old team, what happens? He has to leave the league because a team that has ZERO contractual rights on the player outside of MLS drives up the price for an MLS team to sign him.

    Reply
  6. “I don’t think Seattle will need to look far for a rival. They have a history of being reviled by everyone due to the conduct of their players and fans.”

    I think Garrett is from Portland! You go son! : )

    Reply
  7. “I don’t think Seattle will need to look far for a rival. They have a history of being reviled by everyone due to the conduct of their players and fans.
    Seattle tampered and paid money to keep it quiet. Sounds right up their alley. Get used to it.” – Garrett

    OK. At least provide some examples of Seattle’s past corruption. For an organization that hasn’t played a game yet and has only existed a short time, you seem to be quite familiar with a seemingly non-existent past. What else have the Sounders FC done? Please elaborate.

    Reply
  8. Seattle (like NY with Osorio) broke the rules and had to pay up (NY gave picks in a “trade”).

    We all know the findings statement is BS, boilerplate whenever there is a “settlemlent.”

    By the way, anyone who knows anything about soccer or sports knows you can’t talk to someone w/out permission. Seattle screwed up/cheated.

    Have fun on your plastic pitch with Pete V running your midfield. In two years you’ll still suck and Sigi will be coaching the Nats.

    Reply
  9. I’ve been reading on numerous blogs and message boards that the Crew were a bunch of whiners. I tried to think better of them until I read this article. If there was no tampering then why does Seattle have to pay allocation money and cash?

    Reply
  10. Wow. I mean… Man. Columbus sure know how to play the MLS system. They always have. This brings things to a whole new level of cheapness.

    Reply
  11. im with ya Ives, even if the clause exsited it would be unenforceable if put before a judge, i think the Crew just whined their way into some compensation for nothing because they lost signing an out of contract coach and felt gard done.

    Seattl ejust bought them off so the could get on with it and get the penny pinching HSG peeps off them.

    Reply
  12. Yes how horrible of the Crew for following the laws Jessmt.

    Even if MLS found something do you think they’d admit it and risk embarrassing their new darling team? No, they pry found incidental contact that The Crew could legit bitch about but took an easy way out and settled it quickly.

    Good luck Sigi (except when you play us)

    Reply
  13. I don’t think Seattle will need to look far for a rival. They have a history of being reviled by everyone due to the conduct of their players and fans.

    Seattle tampered and paid money to keep it quiet. Sounds right up their alley. Get used to it.

    Reply
  14. I don’t buy the MLS’s no evidence statement. If it’s anything like the legal process, the Crew probably had enough evidence such that the MLS would have denied Seattle’s “summary judgment motion,” causing the parties to settle. The MLS saying no evidence is like a court saying no evidence of the alleged actions because the parties settled. Technically it’s true, the case never went to trial so no evidence was officially presented, but the way the parties settled indicates that there were some truth to the allegations.

    Reply
  15. JesseMT – ooooo and a solid rival that will be, nearly on the OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE COUNTRY…. honestly 😀

    Joseph D’hippolito- you act as though this type of “politics” doesnt occur in every sport…

    Reply
  16. The allocation money penalty is crap. The Crew basically got a competitive advantage for being whiners.

    I think SSFC found their new rival.

    Reply
  17. I’m guessing that Don Garber “asked” Seattle to give Columbus and allocation and cash so the Crew would *not* file tampering charges. Can you say Chicago-style politics, anyone?

    Reply
  18. What do you think of this development?
    Anti-Climatic is right.

    Give Columbus credit for squeezing an allocation and cash out of Seattle?
    Absolutely.

    Think the Sounders mishandled the courtship of Schmid?
    Obviously, it’s the only thing that explains it.

    Do you believe MLS’ claim that they no found no evidence of tampering?
    100% NO!

    Are you buying the floated story about a non-compete clause in Schmid’s Crew contract that would have extended beyond the life of his contract (a clause that multiple sources tell me didn’t exist)?
    No way, Jose!

    Reply
  19. True that it is an anticlimactic hire but it is still a good hire. Echoing earlier comments, the MLS needs this controversy to keep the news wires hot. Look at the NFL, NBA, and MLB and the offseason fodder that fills the hour on SportsCenter. Its good for the MLS. Seattle itself seems to be very calculated in its use of the media (eg Keller, Ljunberg, Draft, Jerseys, Schmid). I wouldn’t be surprised if we hear something from them every two weeks until kickoff of the first game.

    Reply

Leave a Comment