Will the Vancouver Timbers ever Grow UP?

[Unregistered]

This was probably a ploy to rehire the Old DOCs at lower rates....we'll see soon enough.

Letting the REC guy run things, who isn't a *soccer guy*, doesn't exactly bode well for the visionary or track record of being a agent of change parts.

The idiots will probably self perpetuate, and the club goes into receivership.

You are very disconnected if you think the 'REC guy' is poor. That guy works hard, is smart, very likable, and easily earns his keep.

Are you a *ick all the time or just on this board?

[Unregistered]

There is no club called VT and as for your advice... Duh.

I'm sorry that you don't call them the Vancouver Timbers like the majority of posters call the other TA clubs the Westside Timbers or the Eastside Timbers or the Eugene Timbers or the Medford Timbers or the CFC Timbers.

I agree the advice should be filed under "duh" but since they have not taken this approach in the past and have been unable to make any progress toward becoming a professionally organized and managed club and have been failing to realize their potential I thought the Board could use a "reminder" of what their opportunity was/is and what to look for.

[Unregistered]

Painful revelations

You are very disconnected if you think the 'REC guy' is poor. That guy works hard, is smart, very likable, and easily earns his keep.

Are you a *ick all the time or just on this board?

Not at all disconnected, and only a *ick when having to deal with clods like yourself.

He is very likable, smart enough(to stay in the mix), is NOW part of the problem. Politically savvy folks don't make waves or make a difference. He didn't make anyone uncomfortable or propose any changes, that's the real reason he's still there.

On another thread, there was a discussion regarding the Board not dealing with the problem that is VC on the 99 Reds. Those people are still in place and the machine still running as poorly as ever.

If it isn't clear now, it will be soon enough as the status quo will continue to be maintained. If this new hire/s tries to actually make the club function better, they will be summarily removed and replaced with another *Yes* man.

It will be 10 years before this club will get any shot at any real improvement, and only through attrition and the current group of board members cycling out with their children.

I still maintain hope that someone, anyone has the wherewithal to deal with some of these idiotic folks long enough to see them out the door, but that seems very unlikely and a long, long way off.

[Unregistered]

Not at all disconnected, and only a *ick when having to deal with clods like yourself.

He is very likable, smart enough(to stay in the mix), is NOW part of the problem. Politically savvy folks don't make waves or make a difference. He didn't make anyone uncomfortable or propose any changes, that's the real reason he's still there.

On another thread, there was a discussion regarding the Board not dealing with the problem that is VC on the 99 Reds. Those people are still in place and the machine still running as poorly as ever.

If it isn't clear now, it will be soon enough as the status quo will continue to be maintained. If this new hire/s tries to actually make the club function better, they will be summarily removed and replaced with another *Yes* man.

It will be 10 years before this club will get any shot at any real improvement, and only through attrition and the current group of board members cycling out with their children.

I still maintain hope that someone, anyone has the wherewithal to deal with some of these idiotic folks long enough to see them out the door, but that seems very unlikely and a long, long way off.

++ 1, is my short answer.

[Unregistered]

I'm sorry that you don't call them the Vancouver Timbers like the majority of posters call the other TA clubs the Westside Timbers or the Eastside Timbers or the Eugene Timbers or the Medford Timbers or the CFC Timbers.

I agree the advice should be filed under "duh" but since they have not taken this approach in the past and have been unable to make any progress toward becoming a professionally organized and managed club and have been failing to realize their potential I thought the Board could use a "reminder" of what their opportunity was/is and what to look for.

Why wouldn't you call them that are they not the only Timber club in Wa that's in Vancouver . I forget if your not politically correct on here others ain"t gonna understand duh

[Unregistered]

Why wouldn't you call them that are they not the only Timber club in Wa that's in Vancouver . I forget if your not politically correct on here others ain"t gonna understand duh

This is why they will never grow up.

[Unregistered]

It's a Big State

This is why they will never grow up.

The problem is that they represent a tiny slice of a big state. Using this logic which one of the "side" clubs should be called the Oregon Timbers?

Renaming the club to make marketing the club in the community in which their players and sponsors reside should be the FIRST thing the new GM/ED takes on.

Building a brand means building a meaningful identity that players identify with and an identity that can be sold to the sponsors an identity that means something printed on player gear. How do you build that identity and a sense of loyalty to a Washington based club whose main identity is with an Oregon based organization?

One only has to read this forum a week to know there is a strong sense of territorialism so trying to build a club identity and loyalty by spanning the river is a fools errand.

[Unregistered]

How about "Skit-so-to-ho", Chinookan for "Land of the mud turtles". Seems appropriate given the conditions at Harmony.

Maybe the "Skit-so-to-ho White Trash"?

[Unregistered]

The problem is that they represent a tiny slice of a big state. Using this logic which one of the "side" clubs should be called the Oregon Timbers?

Renaming the club to make marketing the club in the community in which their players and sponsors reside should be the FIRST thing the new GM/ED takes on.

Building a brand means building a meaningful identity that players identify with and an identity that can be sold to the sponsors an identity that means something printed on player gear. How do you build that identity and a sense of loyalty to a Washington based club whose main identity is with an Oregon based organization?

One only has to read this forum a week to know there is a strong sense of territorialism so trying to build a club identity and loyalty by spanning the river is a fools errand.

Very elegantly stated.

[Unregistered]

First round of interviews under their belt

The grapevine said they had some very impressive presentations for the two positions.

Say a prayer for the Board to have courage to challenge their comfort zone and opt for a "new approach".

[Unregistered]

The grapevine said they had some very impressive presentations for the two positions.

Say a prayer for the Board to have courage to challenge their comfort zone and opt for a "new approach".

Front runners are Studs for GM and Jim Rilatt for DoC

[Unregistered]

Front runners are Studs for GM and Jim Rilatt for DoC

If true that is NOT "change" and does not come with a demonstrated history of running a club.

Those people are COACHES not GM's or DOC's and do not have track records of leading an organization of that size or in a new direction.

[Unregistered]

Front runners are Studs for GM and Jim Rilatt for DoC

This is not a time for "promotions". This is a time to hire people with TRACK records of success.

[Unregistered]

Third position was added to run the U8-U10 the academy

[Unregistered]

Third position was added to run the U8-U10 the academy

That's for Doug Wolvert, another of Sunny's buddies.