Victor Garcette a Washington Timbers coach?

[Unregistered]

Just watch. Uncle Vic will drag most of the '99 Red team to his Spartan Academy and then hire Sunny Dulai to help coach them. You heard it here first!

[Unregistered]

Just watch. Uncle Vic will drag most of the '99 Red team to his Spartan Academy and then hire Sunny Dulai to help coach them. You heard it here first!

Uncle Vic is a lot of things, but "stupid" ain't one of them

[Unregistered]

Completly missed the point.

If a coach signed a contract for X dollars, with a stipulation of no extra money for training his own team, then it's settled, isn't it? Or is it okay with you that he can toss that agreement out the window and then call anyone that disagrees with that a "free luncher" (whatever that means)?

The problem with Vic and his "privets" is well-known to anyone who lives in Vancouver. You're an idiot if you try to argue that.

If Victor wants to make more money, he will need to be at a club that he can control and where he can write the contract so that it suits him.

The system described would not be OUTSIDE the club control and would be part of the agreement ALL coaches would have to abide by.

The "free lunchers" expect the ADDITIONAL practices to be FREE. There have been numerous posters here in TS over the years that think coaches should provided individual sessions for FREE.

This is not about Vic but about coach compensation and how it should be structured and controlled.

If I'm running a club and trying to build a BRAND that says we have the best coaches and to get the opportunity to access those great coaches you have to JOIN our club you cannot allow those coaches to offer those services to players outside the club or to club members outside the clubs control.

At the same time you need to acknowledge that meager club fees paid that provide the paltry pay for club coaches in this area is NOT how you attract and retain the best coaches. In recognition of those FACTS a club has to develop a FORMAL system to provide extra training AND extra income for the players and coaches.

In this way the club retains control of the BRAND while providing additional services to the members/players of the club and collects a portion of the fees in recognition of who attracts the players and administer their participation.

This is how every member of the relationship wins. The player gets additional structured training, the coach gets additional income and the club retains control of the process and additional income.

What Vic is doing now is neither structured or under control of the club. In effect Vic is stealing money from the club since they could charge a higher fee and provide an additional day of practice and share that additional revenue with the coaches. With Pivets he keeps all the money is not accountable to the club for his actions or methods.

Get it now?

[Unregistered]

Uncle Vic is a lot of things, but "stupid" ain't one of them

More like cunning sociopath...

[Unregistered]

That's fine. Again a contract that was made at the beginning of the year. Here is the cost, this much additional is going to the coach. Now if your player needs private training to keep up, I would hope the coach would refer your player to someone else.

I've coaches at three clubs including the one in question, there is nothing that says a coach can't private train their current players.
This happens at every club Ive been at. Do you live under a rock?

[Unregistered]

I've coaches at three clubs including the one in question, there is nothing that says a coach can't private train their current players.
This happens at every club Ive been at. Do you live under a rock?

Typo
I've coached

[Unregistered]

The system described would not be OUTSIDE the club control and would be part of the agreement ALL coaches would have to abide by.

The "free lunchers" expect the ADDITIONAL practices to be FREE. There have been numerous posters here in TS over the years that think coaches should provided individual sessions for FREE.

This is not about Vic but about coach compensation and how it should be structured and controlled.

If I'm running a club and trying to build a BRAND that says we have the best coaches and to get the opportunity to access those great coaches you have to JOIN our club you cannot allow those coaches to offer those services to players outside the club or to club members outside the clubs control.

At the same time you need to acknowledge that meager club fees paid that provide the paltry pay for club coaches in this area is NOT how you attract and retain the best coaches. In recognition of those FACTS a club has to develop a FORMAL system to provide extra training AND extra income for the players and coaches.

In this way the club retains control of the BRAND while providing additional services to the members/players of the club and collects a portion of the fees in recognition of who attracts the players and administer their participation.

This is how every member of the relationship wins. The player gets additional structured training, the coach gets additional income and the club retains control of the process and additional income.

What Vic is doing now is neither structured or under control of the club. In effect Vic is stealing money from the club since they could charge a higher fee and provide an additional day of practice and share that additional revenue with the coaches. With Pivets he keeps all the money is not accountable to the club for his actions or methods.

Get it now?

Go back and reread your original post. It was damn difficult for anyone to decipher what you meant because of your heavy use of run-on and rambling sentences. And you were talking about your ideal future, rather than the reality of today, so that made it somewhat fictional.

But getting passed that, your latest post makes your point far better. I can't say that I've seen too many posts by the "free lunchers" you refer to--but people expect a set level of coaching because they were promised that at tryout. I don't know a single person that expects coaches to do extra coaching above and beyond that but I suppose on this forum you will find everything if you look hard enough. (Google "rule 34")

Vic is a special case, of course. The main issue that many people here have with his "privates" is that he REQUIRES them from his own team.

YES, a GOOD CLUB will fix these things. One day.

[Unregistered]

I've coaches at three clubs including the one in question, there is nothing that says a coach can't private train their current players.
This happens at every club Ive been at. Do you live under a rock?

You possibly don't see the ethical issues here, maybe because you are an honest fellow. You are probably the one politician that can accept a gift from a lobbyist and not give any favors in return. A rare bird.

If my DD's track coach offered extra lessons for a fee, I know they could not favor her because it's just her against the clock. But if the soccer coach did this, and the other players on the team all did extra private lessons, then there is , at minimum, the appearance of a problem. Do you agree?

[Unregistered]

You possibly don't see the ethical issues here, maybe because you are an honest fellow. You are probably the one politician that can accept a gift from a lobbyist and not give any favors in return. A rare bird.

If my DD's track coach offered extra lessons for a fee, I know they could not favor her because it's just her against the clock. But if the soccer coach did this, and the other players on the team all did extra private lessons, then there is , at minimum, the appearance of a problem. Do you agree?

Most coaches are working for free anyways so this is mood point.

We are talking about coaches making $4,000-$5,000 per year...
Most coaches are losing money at that wage. Doing privets beyond that isn't a big deal. My dad does privets with another coach simply because I think it's better to hear a different voice.
I have no issues with someone paying their club coach for extra training. They are dumb to do so.
This is America baby 😃

[Unregistered]

Wow, your dad rocks!

[Unregistered]

Everyone Does It

You possibly don't see the ethical issues here, maybe because you are an honest fellow. You are probably the one politician that can accept a gift from a lobbyist and not give any favors in return. A rare bird.

If my DD's track coach offered extra lessons for a fee, I know they could not favor her because it's just her against the clock. But if the soccer coach did this, and the other players on the team all did extra private lessons, then there is , at minimum, the appearance of a problem. Do you agree?

So by the same standard all the RTC coaches that coach there TA teams and then pick those players are in the right, also the ODP keeper coach taking money for private sessions then picking those same kids as ODP keepers thats ok but Victor isnt?

Im not really a Victor fan but is seems to me there is a double standard here. He does no more than the RTC/ODP coaches are doing.

As a previous poster wrote all coaches do it to a larger or less extent. If your only income is from soccer privates must be part of your earning capabilities. Though we all want to live in a Utopian world reality bites sometimes.

[Unregistered]

So by the same standard all the RTC coaches that coach there TA teams and then pick those players are in the right, also the ODP keeper coach taking money for private sessions then picking those same kids as ODP keepers thats ok but Victor isnt?

Im not really a Victor fan but is seems to me there is a double standard here. He does no more than the RTC/ODP coaches are doing.

As a previous poster wrote all coaches do it to a larger or less extent. If your only income is from soccer privates must be part of your earning capabilities. Though we all want to live in a Utopian world reality bites sometimes.

agreed...the previous poster was nothing more than Portlandia Liberal Dribble

[Unregistered]

So by the same standard all the RTC coaches that coach there TA teams and then pick those players are in the right, also the ODP keeper coach taking money for private sessions then picking those same kids as ODP keepers thats ok but Victor isnt?

Im not really a Victor fan but is seems to me there is a double standard here. He does no more than the RTC/ODP coaches are doing.

As a previous poster wrote all coaches do it to a larger or less extent. If your only income is from soccer privates must be part of your earning capabilities. Though we all want to live in a Utopian world reality bites sometimes.

The standard for those selecting ODP players *should* be the same as for judges: you recuse yourself from evaluating your own players (or those you have a financial interest in).

You are making the valid point that TA evaluations are also not fair.

[Unregistered]

agreed...the previous poster was nothing more than Portlandia Liberal Dribble

Ha! Apparently, the system in Portland is benefiting you or your kid. Good job on figuring out how to get your kid ahead--too bad your kid doesn't have a chance once they are away from you.

[Unregistered]

Reality Check

Ha! Apparently, the system in Portland is benefiting you or your kid. Good job on figuring out how to get your kid ahead--too bad your kid doesn't have a chance once they are away from you.

You've hit this on the head. Once these kids have to move on and into the real world sans nepotistic assistance, things will be different.

I've watched players I'm not associated with in any form, and not having the most favored status get "overlooked". These weren't players of *crazy parents* either.

This is why true player development doesn't happen here, it's an upside down perverted version of there own self created reality.