Carlos Cordeiro, agent for change?

MWN

MWN

Mr. Cordeiro is the new USSF President. While my support was for Kyle Martino and I thought Kathy Carter would win, I honestly didn't pay much attention to Cordeiro's platform, thinking Carter had it in the bag.

Is Cordeiro and agent for change? Well, certainly not in the eyes of Hope Solo, but I find it interesting that his platform seemed to attack Guilati's leadership before Guilati announced he would not run. Guilati supported and actively lobbied for Carter and not Cordeiro. Clearly, the guy had some ideas that differed from Guilatis and as an experienced director and officer had his own frustrations with the Federation.

On December 20, 2017, Cordeiro was interviewed by Sports Illustrated:
https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/12/20/carlos-cordeiro-us-soccer-president-election-platform

According to the interview, Cordeiro believes the current all-powerful Presidency is a problem and would weaken the Presidency in favor of empowering USSF's CEO Dan Flynn.
During his tenure as executive VP, Cordeiro said he’s helped create four board-level committees designed to generate additional oversight (three are released to USSF finances and the fourth handles governance and nominations). If elected, he aims to form two more that may be of more interest to the American soccer public—a technical committee and a commercial committee. The former will be chaired by a former athlete and the latter by an independent director, Cordeiro said. And they’ll interact and advise U.S. Soccer’s paid, full-time CEO as much or more than the president.

***​
Cordeiro’s platform calls for the new technical committee to advise the CEO on the hiring of two “general managers” (for lack of an official title). They’ll be the highest soccer officers at the USSF and there’s no current analogous position, although it’s somewhat common abroad. One GM will direct men’s soccer and the other will be in charge of the women’s game, and Cordeiro said, “I would think so, yes, it should be a woman,” when speaking of the latter.

The GMs will report to the CEO, not the president, and ideally they’ll be long-term appointments charged with shaping the direction of the country’s junior and senior national teams and player development initiatives. And that includes hiring and firing coaches.
​
The above seems like a good move in the direction of putting true soccer people in charge of soccer decisions and an indictment on Guilati's leadership.

With regard to the claim that Cordeiro is just a corporate shill from Goldman Sachs, its an unfair charge that ignores his history, but being a banker is probably a good thing. Cordeiro makes the point that US Soccer's expenditures are nowhere near those of Germany, Italy, etc.

On a broader level, however, Cordeiro maintains that clarity and oversight are part of better governance. His platform promises “open, inclusive and transparent leadership.” And better governance is the key component of a “virtuous circle” that will help U.S. Soccer catch up with its peers, he said. It doesn’t just trail on the field. Fiscal year expenses of around $110 million are “probably five times where it was maybe a dozen years ago,” Cordeiro claimed, but still way behind the game’s global powers.

“We need substantially more resources,” he said. “Germany or England—they’re over $500 million in annual expenditures. Even Spain, Italy and France are double or more where we’re at. They’re smaller economies, smaller populations, but it gives you a sense of the scope of those federations.

“By growing the [USSF’s] financial resources, you’re able to invest more in the federation’s activities, including all your members,” he continued. “That’s my fundamental point. To get to that next level, we’re going to have to transform this organization beyond where it’s at.”​

If the idea is to grow our revenue and expenditures by a factor of 5x so we can catch up to the big boys, then having a former banker at the helm, doesn't seem like a bad move.
 
MWN said:
Mr. Cordeiro is the new USSF President. While my support was for Kyle Martino and I thought Kathy Carter would win, I honestly didn't pay much attention to Cordeiro's platform, thinking Carter had it in the bag.

Is Cordeiro and agent for change? Well, certainly not in the eyes of Hope Solo, but I find it interesting that his platform seemed to attack Guilati's leadership before Guilati announced he would not run. Guilati supported and actively lobbied for Carter and not Cordeiro. Clearly, the guy had some ideas that differed from Guilatis and as an experienced director and officer had his own frustrations with the Federation.

On December 20, 2017, Cordeiro was interviewed by Sports Illustrated:
https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/12/20/carlos-cordeiro-us-soccer-president-election-platform

According to the interview, Cordeiro believes the current all-powerful Presidency is a problem and would weaken the Presidency in favor of empowering USSF's CEO Dan Flynn.
During his tenure as executive VP, Cordeiro said he’s helped create four board-level committees designed to generate additional oversight (three are released to USSF finances and the fourth handles governance and nominations). If elected, he aims to form two more that may be of more interest to the American soccer public—a technical committee and a commercial committee. The former will be chaired by a former athlete and the latter by an independent director, Cordeiro said. And they’ll interact and advise U.S. Soccer’s paid, full-time CEO as much or more than the president.

***​
Cordeiro’s platform calls for the new technical committee to advise the CEO on the hiring of two “general managers” (for lack of an official title). They’ll be the highest soccer officers at the USSF and there’s no current analogous position, although it’s somewhat common abroad. One GM will direct men’s soccer and the other will be in charge of the women’s game, and Cordeiro said, “I would think so, yes, it should be a woman,” when speaking of the latter.

The GMs will report to the CEO, not the president, and ideally they’ll be long-term appointments charged with shaping the direction of the country’s junior and senior national teams and player development initiatives. And that includes hiring and firing coaches.
​
The above seems like a good move in the direction of putting true soccer people in charge of soccer decisions and an indictment on Guilati's leadership.

With regard to the claim that Cordeiro is just a corporate shill from Goldman Sachs, its an unfair charge that ignores his history, but being a banker is probably a good thing. Cordeiro makes the point that US Soccer's expenditures are nowhere near those of Germany, Italy, etc.

On a broader level, however, Cordeiro maintains that clarity and oversight are part of better governance. His platform promises “open, inclusive and transparent leadership.” And better governance is the key component of a “virtuous circle” that will help U.S. Soccer catch up with its peers, he said. It doesn’t just trail on the field. Fiscal year expenses of around $110 million are “probably five times where it was maybe a dozen years ago,” Cordeiro claimed, but still way behind the game’s global powers.

“We need substantially more resources,” he said. “Germany or England—they’re over $500 million in annual expenditures. Even Spain, Italy and France are double or more where we’re at. They’re smaller economies, smaller populations, but it gives you a sense of the scope of those federations.

“By growing the [USSF’s] financial resources, you’re able to invest more in the federation’s activities, including all your members,” he continued. “That’s my fundamental point. To get to that next level, we’re going to have to transform this organization beyond where it’s at.”​

If the idea is to grow our revenue and expenditures by a factor of 5x so we can catch up to the big boys, then having a former banker at the helm, doesn't seem like a bad move.
Click to expand...

Same s___, different day. We needed real change, not more of the same.
 
MWN said:
Mr. Cordeiro is the new USSF President. While my support was for Kyle Martino and I thought Kathy Carter would win, I honestly didn't pay much attention to Cordeiro's platform, thinking Carter had it in the bag.

Is Cordeiro and agent for change? Well, certainly not in the eyes of Hope Solo, but I find it interesting that his platform seemed to attack Guilati's leadership before Guilati announced he would not run. Guilati supported and actively lobbied for Carter and not Cordeiro. Clearly, the guy had some ideas that differed from Guilatis and as an experienced director and officer had his own frustrations with the Federation.

On December 20, 2017, Cordeiro was interviewed by Sports Illustrated:
https://www.si.com/soccer/2017/12/20/carlos-cordeiro-us-soccer-president-election-platform

According to the interview, Cordeiro believes the current all-powerful Presidency is a problem and would weaken the Presidency in favor of empowering USSF's CEO Dan Flynn.
During his tenure as executive VP, Cordeiro said he’s helped create four board-level committees designed to generate additional oversight (three are released to USSF finances and the fourth handles governance and nominations). If elected, he aims to form two more that may be of more interest to the American soccer public—a technical committee and a commercial committee. The former will be chaired by a former athlete and the latter by an independent director, Cordeiro said. And they’ll interact and advise U.S. Soccer’s paid, full-time CEO as much or more than the president.

***​
Cordeiro’s platform calls for the new technical committee to advise the CEO on the hiring of two “general managers” (for lack of an official title). They’ll be the highest soccer officers at the USSF and there’s no current analogous position, although it’s somewhat common abroad. One GM will direct men’s soccer and the other will be in charge of the women’s game, and Cordeiro said, “I would think so, yes, it should be a woman,” when speaking of the latter.

The GMs will report to the CEO, not the president, and ideally they’ll be long-term appointments charged with shaping the direction of the country’s junior and senior national teams and player development initiatives. And that includes hiring and firing coaches.
​
The above seems like a good move in the direction of putting true soccer people in charge of soccer decisions and an indictment on Guilati's leadership.

With regard to the claim that Cordeiro is just a corporate shill from Goldman Sachs, its an unfair charge that ignores his history, but being a banker is probably a good thing. Cordeiro makes the point that US Soccer's expenditures are nowhere near those of Germany, Italy, etc.

On a broader level, however, Cordeiro maintains that clarity and oversight are part of better governance. His platform promises “open, inclusive and transparent leadership.” And better governance is the key component of a “virtuous circle” that will help U.S. Soccer catch up with its peers, he said. It doesn’t just trail on the field. Fiscal year expenses of around $110 million are “probably five times where it was maybe a dozen years ago,” Cordeiro claimed, but still way behind the game’s global powers.

“We need substantially more resources,” he said. “Germany or England—they’re over $500 million in annual expenditures. Even Spain, Italy and France are double or more where we’re at. They’re smaller economies, smaller populations, but it gives you a sense of the scope of those federations.

“By growing the [USSF’s] financial resources, you’re able to invest more in the federation’s activities, including all your members,” he continued. “That’s my fundamental point. To get to that next level, we’re going to have to transform this organization beyond where it’s at.”​

If the idea is to grow our revenue and expenditures by a factor of 5x so we can catch up to the big boys, then having a former banker at the helm, doesn't seem like a bad move.
Click to expand...

The reason no one knows much about him is that he understood the election better than anyone else, including Carter. Neither you, me, twitter, your kid's coach, we don't vote. Check out his website. It is 100% geared towards the people that vote.

So do I think things will get better? Yes

Are we getting Pro/Rel before 2050? Not a chance. The pro-council was the king maker on Saturday. They shifted their support from Carter to Cordeiro to put him over the top. He is as much beholden to Garber and MLS as Gulati was.

Look for changes to the technical side and tweaking of the DA and a renewed focus on ODP. Don't look for much in the way of changes on the pro side. Things like calendar, training and solidarity fees, divisional structure, etc. will remain largely as it has been under Gulati.
 
Whole process shows what the priority is...money. Been this way for decades and not going to change. The athletes council vote for a guy who has helped maintain inequalities they openly cry about. I guess now he will help - he was just waiting for the right time these last 10 years. The athletes council response included nonsense like it was an "exercise in power", "we were thorough" & "how dare anyone question our integrity". Very thorough when they only met with 4 candidates in person. All just big money game. Im sure Cordeiro pushed that if he wasnt in charge, they could fail in WC big and fail in capitalizing on making money

article about WC impact on economy: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...lion-in-economic-activity-study-idUSKBN1FS30X

Los Angeles already pumping brakes on bidding on WC games due to it not making financial sense. So first article doesnt mix with what LA Council thinks. With Casey Wasserman, Cordeiro, and Gulati involved Im sure they have the taxpayer and the good of soccer as a top priority.

Ill concede soccer needs more money coming in but the actual issue of SOCCER havent been helped with this guy in the past. Dont want to hear any of the athletes council (10 women and many male minorities), julie foudy and many others ever try to harp about equality again. im sure there will be change, given im sure Cordeiro promised things behind closed door, but not going to be dramatic.
 
From what I have read, the athletes council never backed Carter per se, rather, most support was for either Martino or Cordeiro if they were going to vote as a block and invited Carter and Winograd to make their case (along with Martino and Cordeiro).

@Not_that_Serious, you are correct, its about money. Without money soccer will not grow. It has to be about money, because we cannot invest in any aspects of soccer if we don't have money. Cordeiro (a retired banker) obviously understands this better than most. That said, he holds the VP position in soccer under a scheme that vests the President with full control. I don't think its fair to say that Cordeiro had much of a role with anything in the past, other than to be a passive observer to Sunil Gulati's unilateral management of the organization because the USSF Directors vested Gulati with carte blanc power. Under the USSF Bylaws, the VP does nothing but assist the President when the President wants him too.

In light of the fact that the National Team represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives, I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals (The English Federation makes $261M in this category).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 300

The fact the athletes council ultimately swayed the vote is actually pretty fair, when you look at the economics of the USSF. The US National Team (men and women) represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives. Youth soccer represents $4.2M (3%). I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals. For the record, the English Federation makes $261M in this category.

According to this article (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-world-cup-bid-20180210-story.html) the problem with the LA bid is not financial per se, but contract terms that are impossible/illegal (LA Police to provide security at the Rose Bowl, which is in the City of Pasadena and their police department).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 250k viewers per game in television ratings and the Dr. Phil Show brings in 4.7M viewers (18x as many).

It is about money and if the USSF is going to be a true force to grow the game, its need a whole lot more money.
 
Not_that_Serious said:
According to this article (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-world-cup-bid-20180210-story.html) the problem with the LA bid is not financial per se, but contract terms that are impossible/illegal (LA Police to provide security at the Rose Bowl, which is in the City of Pasadena and their police department).
Click to expand...

Sunil in his speech about the bid mentioned something along the lines of "Many cities have signed agreements they probably shouldn't have." I thought that was odd to say. After reading the article, it makes sense.
 
A question...

Anyone here have a good handle on the actual power structure at USSF? I know I don't. I assumed that USSF President was the "King", but apparently there is a CEO and Secretary General, Dan Flynn. Been in the job since 2000. He's been flying under the radar for years. How important is he?

https://www.ussoccer.com/about/governance/board-of-directors/secretary-general-ceo-dan-flynn

Have we all been spinning our wheels here worried about an election that ultimately didn't mean shit? Can someone shed some light? I wanna know who's really in charge of this fiasco.
 
soloyosh said:
Sunil in his speech about the bid mentioned something along the lines of "Many cities have signed agreements they probably shouldn't have." I thought that was odd to say. After reading the article, it makes sense.
Click to expand...
something as odd, but not surprising is how Cordeiro came into US Soccer. He was introduced by Chuck Blazer. Cordeiro knows Blazer from his work on a committee on trying to get olympics in NY in 2012. On the only podcast interview he has ever given with Grant Wahl he acts like he barely knew the guy. So people who barely know each other meet with Sunil Gulati in order to recommend him for a job - makes sense. All these guys get on nonpaid committees just out of the goodness of their hearts? all to gain access to network and get paid. Yes soccer needs to make more money, but dont have to do it at the expensive of youth soccer or growing the game further. some things are very simple, but not a priority because they dont make the Fed money
 
MWN said:
From what I have read, the athletes council never backed Carter per se, rather, most support was for either Martino or Cordeiro if they were going to vote as a block and invited Carter and Winograd to make their case (along with Martino and Cordeiro).

@Not_that_Serious, you are correct, its about money. Without money soccer will not grow. It has to be about money, because we cannot invest in any aspects of soccer if we don't have money. Cordeiro (a retired banker) obviously understands this better than most. That said, he holds the VP position in soccer under a scheme that vests the President with full control. I don't think its fair to say that Cordeiro had much of a role with anything in the past, other than to be a passive observer to Sunil Gulati's unilateral management of the organization because the USSF Directors vested Gulati with carte blanc power. Under the USSF Bylaws, the VP does nothing but assist the President when the President wants him too.

In light of the fact that the National Team represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives, I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals (The English Federation makes $261M in this category).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 300

The fact the athletes council ultimately swayed the vote is actually pretty fair, when you look at the economics of the USSF. The US National Team (men and women) represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives. Youth soccer represents $4.2M (3%). I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals. For the record, the English Federation makes $261M in this category.

According to this article (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-world-cup-bid-20180210-story.html) the problem with the LA bid is not financial per se, but contract terms that are impossible/illegal (LA Police to provide security at the Rose Bowl, which is in the City of Pasadena and their police department).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 250k viewers per game in television ratings and the Dr. Phil Show brings in 4.7M viewers (18x as many).

It is about money and if the USSF is going to be a true force to grow the game, its need a whole lot more money.
Click to expand...

my issue isnt with the guy's ability to make money, he should be in soccer to help. i have a bigger issue with people like Arena, Lalas, Carter, Gulati who say "its all good", we know what are doing, just support us blindly - Lalas would make you think if you dont support you are not patriotic. All attempts to guilt people or brainwash people into accepting a poor product. Here people will consume the national teams regardless of what is going on.

The AC wasnt being honest. If they said "Hey we need more money and Cordeiro can make it" - id respect that. They dont want the backlash but still want to pretend the things (like equal pay, growing youth soccer, helping minorities) they where shouting about for years are the most important things to fix. just isnt true and they dont want people calling them out on it.

Last i saw England was spending almost half a billion on soccer, we are at 110 million. Ways to fix aspects without spending a ton of money, but again when you hear Carter, Cordeiro, Gulati they light up when they talk finances.
 
MWN said:
From what I have read, the athletes council never backed Carter per se, rather, most support was for either Martino or Cordeiro if they were going to vote as a block and invited Carter and Winograd to make their case (along with Martino and Cordeiro).

@Not_that_Serious, you are correct, its about money. Without money soccer will not grow. It has to be about money, because we cannot invest in any aspects of soccer if we don't have money. Cordeiro (a retired banker) obviously understands this better than most. That said, he holds the VP position in soccer under a scheme that vests the President with full control. I don't think its fair to say that Cordeiro had much of a role with anything in the past, other than to be a passive observer to Sunil Gulati's unilateral management of the organization because the USSF Directors vested Gulati with carte blanc power. Under the USSF Bylaws, the VP does nothing but assist the President when the President wants him too.

In light of the fact that the National Team represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives, I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals (The English Federation makes $261M in this category).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 300

The fact the athletes council ultimately swayed the vote is actually pretty fair, when you look at the economics of the USSF. The US National Team (men and women) represents 88% of the $125M revenue the USSF receives. Youth soccer represents $4.2M (3%). I can appreciate why Cordeiro (and Carter) were the only choices under consideration. Of that $125M, $50M is related to TV and licensing deals. For the record, the English Federation makes $261M in this category.

According to this article (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-world-cup-bid-20180210-story.html) the problem with the LA bid is not financial per se, but contract terms that are impossible/illegal (LA Police to provide security at the Rose Bowl, which is in the City of Pasadena and their police department).

Bottom line, the structure of the USSF is such that the affiliates (MLS, US Youth Soccer/Cal South, etc.) are given significant autonomy to raise revenue and program their own activities. The call by many of the candidates to change the MLS is unrealistic when we have a league that can barely manage 250k viewers per game in television ratings and the Dr. Phil Show brings in 4.7M viewers (18x as many).

It is about money and if the USSF is going to be a true force to grow the game, its need a whole lot more money.
Click to expand...

did want to note. If you look at this from profit earning and losses. Gulati/Cordeiro did help the situation where the US is now going to lose the revenue they would have earned if they made the World Cup. Im sure Cordeiro emphasized this loss and convinced voters he is the only person who could mitigate the losses.
 
boomer said:
A question...

Anyone here have a good handle on the actual power structure at USSF? I know I don't. I assumed that USSF President was the "King", but apparently there is a CEO and Secretary General, Dan Flynn. Been in the job since 2000. He's been flying under the radar for years. How important is he?

https://www.ussoccer.com/about/governance/board-of-directors/secretary-general-ceo-dan-flynn

Have we all been spinning our wheels here worried about an election that ultimately didn't mean shit? Can someone shed some light? I wanna know who's really in charge of this fiasco.
Click to expand...

The CEO does what the board tells him to do, or else they will fire him.
 
Not_that_Serious said:
something as odd, but not surprising is how Cordeiro came into US Soccer. He was introduced by Chuck Blazer. Cordeiro knows Blazer from his work on a committee on trying to get olympics in NY in 2012. On the only podcast interview he has ever given with Grant Wahl he acts like he barely knew the guy. So people who barely know each other meet with Sunil Gulati in order to recommend him for a job - makes sense. All these guys get on nonpaid committees just out of the goodness of their hearts? all to gain access to network and get paid. Yes soccer needs to make more money, but dont have to do it at the expensive of youth soccer or growing the game further. some things are very simple, but not a priority because they dont make the Fed money
Click to expand...

Never a player or coach, Chuck Blazer skills as an adminstrator led to where he "volunteered" to handle marketing for USSF for a small cut of the funds that were earned due to his efforts, at a time when that didn't look like much. Then he organized the heck out of it, initiating the new women's team and the 94 World Cup. He made so much from that that he got greedy, hooking up with Jack Warner's corrupt schemes. I see his death from colorectal cancer as fitting punishment.
 
boomer said:
A question...

Anyone here have a good handle on the actual power structure at USSF? I know I don't. I assumed that USSF President was the "King", but apparently there is a CEO and Secretary General, Dan Flynn. Been in the job since 2000. He's been flying under the radar for years. How important is he?

https://www.ussoccer.com/about/governance/board-of-directors/secretary-general-ceo-dan-flynn

Have we all been spinning our wheels here worried about an election that ultimately didn't mean shit? Can someone shed some light? I wanna know who's really in charge of this fiasco.
Click to expand...

Boomer,
The way the USSF currently works is you have your Directors and your Officers. The Directors oversee the "macro" / big-picture and the Officers execute on the "micro" / day-to-day. Normally in "for-profit" companies, the President and CEO are one and the same and lead the day-to-day operations. The CEO (if there is one) is usually over the President, but sometimes that is not the case. In a non-profit, the President is often the Chairman of the Board and the highest ranking Officer. Depending on the non-profit, the board is made up of other directors that may have day-to-day roles, such as the President. In the case of the USSF, the Bylaws (click here) define the roles.

So to your question. There are 4 basic groups at the USSF:
  1. National Council, which is essentially the voting membership made up of various soccer related interested parties. MLS, Athletes, Youth Affiliates, etc. These guys have no real say in the day-to-day and just vote on the big picture stuff (Bylaw 301).
  2. Directors (Bylaws Part 4, Sub B). These guys are are the power in the USSF and the ultimate authority, but only meet 4 times a year. Where things get wonky, is the President (and VP) are also directors, but the VP has no "day-to-day" responsibilities, unless the President gives it too him (see, Officers below). The USSF Directors who have "votes" are made up of the following:
    • 1 President
    • 1 VP
    • 1 Youth Council Chair
    • 1 Adult Council Chair
    • 1 Pro Council Chair
    • 3 Athlete Council Reps
    • 3 Independent Directors
    • 1 "At-Large" Director.
  3. Officers (Bylaw Part 4, Sub A). Under the USSF there are only two officers, which is an unpaid position. President and Vice President. Normally the CEO and Treasurer and Secretary are also Officers (in normal corporations), but the USSF isn't exactly normal. The President wields enormous power (not the VP ... i.e. Cordeiro), to appoint members of the various committees (Bylaw 431).
  4. Administrative (Bylaw Part V). The Secretary General / CEO. These guys go and execute on the Officer directives (i.e. whatever the President says) and run the day-to-day.
Now the way it works with the USSF, is the Board approves the budget and general direction of the USSF and says to the President ... go make it happen. The President then makes it happen by giving instructions to the Administrative staff (who is paid to execute the President's orders).

Because the President is also a Director, the President has the ability to build a consensus and his rubber stamp team that will ratify the President's actions and lot's of actions can be kept out of public view until the consensus is built.

The Directors are not paid for their work, so most of them are of the opinion "Ok, Prez, whatever you say ... sounds good to me."

As far as the CEO ... he isn't empowered to make policy (hire Coach, pay women's team, etc.), rather, he is administers the programs the President tells him to administer.
 
Not_that_Serious said:
something as odd, but not surprising is how Cordeiro came into US Soccer. He was introduced by Chuck Blazer. Cordeiro knows Blazer from his work on a committee on trying to get olympics in NY in 2012. On the only podcast interview he has ever given with Grant Wahl he acts like he barely knew the guy. So people who barely know each other meet with Sunil Gulati in order to recommend him for a job - makes sense. All these guys get on nonpaid committees just out of the goodness of their hearts? all to gain access to network and get paid. Yes soccer needs to make more money, but dont have to do it at the expensive of youth soccer or growing the game further. some things are very simple, but not a priority because they dont make the Fed money
Click to expand...

This is what Cordeiro says about Blazer, Gulati and coming to the USSF (https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/02/0...-election-president-chuck-blazer-sunil-gulati)

One of the things that has been put out there about you is that Chuck Blazer, the disgraced former FIFA executive, is the guy that you were his personal banker and that’s how you got connected to U.S. Soccer. And I don’t think that is accurate, but I wanted to give you the opportunity to address that.

Cordeiro: Thank you for asking that question. I mean, yes, I have been subject to some of these anonymous videos. The one you’re referring to played heavily during the convention in Philadelphia. But look, of course I knew Chuck Blazer. Anyone and everyone that matters in U.S. Soccer knew Chuck Blazer. He was our man, the American, at FIFA House. A long time ago, long before I got involved, he was vice president of the federation. He had the seat I occupy. So most anyone and everyone who’s been involved with the sport would have met Chuck in one form or another.

I actually met Chuck, funny enough, we were both volunteers for New York’s City’s Olympic bid back in the 2003 or ’04 or ’05 period. When I volunteered I was on that board, and Chuck was on that board, and I think a few others. I don’t remember, maybe [Don] Garber was on it, maybe Sunil [Gulati]. Basically anyone who had anything to do with New York, from the cardinal to a bunch of other luminaries were on that board. That’s how I met Chuck initially. And I was two or three years later invited by Sunil to become U.S. Soccer’s first independent director.

But the suggestion that I was some close personal friend of [Blazer] … in fact, I was living in Asia those years. Or that I was his private banker, that confuses what I did at Goldman Sachs. My role at Goldman Sachs, I ran some very large businesses that had as clients governments, major corporations around the world. I wasn’t involved in private banking in the slightest. So I think it was a bit unfair, whoever put that video together, to suggest what they did.​
 
Here is an interesting article discussing that Carter's entrance into the Presidential race was likely due to Cordeiro's questioning of the SUM deal. https://worldsoccertalk.com/2018/02...l-judged-handles-soccer-united-marketing-sum/

I found this interesting:

For example, in calendar year 2017, an estimated 65% of English-language viewers for programs covered by the SUM media deal were watching US Men’s (USMNT) or Women’s National (USWNT) team matches covered by the package. But the general consensus is that the USSF only receives somewhere between 20% and 33% of the revenue from this deal on a yearly basis. While Gulati has argued in the past that having a steady, reliable check coming into the USSF every year allows the Federation to plan effectively and not worry about the volatility of the market, it’s pretty clear the rights for the men’s and women’s national team are worth far more than they are currently yielding.
​
On the above (English language) viewership, we know that $75M per year is paid by ESPN and FOX. If that 75M were to be divided equitably between MLS and USSF based on the 65% number, then $48.7M should go to the USSF for the English language viewership. If only 33% is coming to the USSF that means we are getting $24.7M. Being shorted 24M over the 8 year life of the deal is $192M for just the english language package. Univision is paying $15M/year ($120M total) of which 44% of Spanish-language viewers watched the US National team, thus, the USSF's fair share would be roughly $52M. If these assumption are accurate then the USSF should have received around $434M, but according to Carter the USSF receives a guaranteed $30M/year (which is $240M) or $194M short (before taking out the standard 15% agency commission).

Bottom line is Cordeiro should mine this relationship to clawback that which was given away by the former leadership. If we could get half of that back ($12M) and shared 50% of that 50% ($6M) with the National Team, each athlete would make an additional $115k
 
MWN said:
This is what Cordeiro says about Blazer, Gulati and coming to the USSF (https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/02/0...-election-president-chuck-blazer-sunil-gulati)

One of the things that has been put out there about you is that Chuck Blazer, the disgraced former FIFA executive, is the guy that you were his personal banker and that’s how you got connected to U.S. Soccer. And I don’t think that is accurate, but I wanted to give you the opportunity to address that.

Cordeiro: Thank you for asking that question. I mean, yes, I have been subject to some of these anonymous videos. The one you’re referring to played heavily during the convention in Philadelphia. But look, of course I knew Chuck Blazer. Anyone and everyone that matters in U.S. Soccer knew Chuck Blazer. He was our man, the American, at FIFA House. A long time ago, long before I got involved, he was vice president of the federation. He had the seat I occupy. So most anyone and everyone who’s been involved with the sport would have met Chuck in one form or another.

I actually met Chuck, funny enough, we were both volunteers for New York’s City’s Olympic bid back in the 2003 or ’04 or ’05 period. When I volunteered I was on that board, and Chuck was on that board, and I think a few others. I don’t remember, maybe [Don] Garber was on it, maybe Sunil [Gulati]. Basically anyone who had anything to do with New York, from the cardinal to a bunch of other luminaries were on that board. That’s how I met Chuck initially. And I was two or three years later invited by Sunil to become U.S. Soccer’s first independent director.

But the suggestion that I was some close personal friend of [Blazer] … in fact, I was living in Asia those years. Or that I was his private banker, that confuses what I did at Goldman Sachs. My role at Goldman Sachs, I ran some very large businesses that had as clients governments, major corporations around the world. I wasn’t involved in private banking in the slightest. So I think it was a bit unfair, whoever put that video together, to suggest what they did.​
Click to expand...
that was what i was referencing. he mentions yes he knows him but plays down his relationship - for obvious reasons.


this was a decent breakdown for those who didnt follow the election or. dont know why Sebastian Salazar tries to playdown things like Julie Foudy calling in favors. Just shows how deep the problems go. https://player.fm/series/1203986/197971634

Another thing i noticed is all these people know one another from other places or tied to MLS or Sum. Sunil Gulati was given a farewell at the point of tears by Kevin Payne who is US Club SOccer CEO - who was also former GM & Pres of DC United, Founding member of MLS board of gov, USSF Board Member, Exec at AEG, US Tech Committee, some FIFA committee and on and on. These guys are networked into everything. They keep a tight grip on everything down to youth play.
 
Articles are 3 years old, blames parents and focus on winning. Yet issue is still here 3 years after he came in.

http://goalnation.com/paynes-plan-us-club-soccer/
https://www.socceramerica.com/publi...-payne-qa-part-2-competing-groups-create.html

This is the mentality of these folks:
KEVIN PAYNE: You still have clubs in the U.S. who will be resentful if one of their players goes to play for an MLS team’s Academy … and they’ll talk about boycotting MLS games.

That would never happen in Munich or Manchester or Barcelona. That thought wouldn’t cross people’s minds.​
MLS suppose to get fed talent without having to pay clubs for development - and like it. Pushing this premise it is a privilege to get your talent poached. This goes back to the discussion of money. This is all as system to feed MLS. The members of the various associations want change, but the ones in charge are often these types who have ties (financially or via friendships) to US Soccer/MLS/SUM. This guy conveniently ignores solidarity payments
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top