Join the conversation as we discuss St. Louis City SC and other soccer topics.
Moderator: STLtoday Forum Moderators
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 12 Apr 2026 09:43 am
I have not seen any improvement over last year.
todd-parker
Forum User
Posts: 1212Joined: 23 May 2024 15:20 pm
Post by todd-parker 12 Apr 2026 10:05 am
On the plus side, CITY SC finally scored a goal at Toyota Stadium. It only took them 4 games.
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 12 Apr 2026 10:10 am
A small plus side.
gpe13579
Forum User
Posts: 525Joined: 28 Jan 2022 12:06 pm
Post by gpe13579 12 Apr 2026 13:19 pm
I think they are much more competitive this year.
mjg
Forum User
Posts: 81Joined: 12 Jun 2024 11:32 am
Post by mjg 13 Apr 2026 09:29 am
Rosthol wrote: ↑ 12 Apr 2026 09:43 am
I have not seen any improvement over last year.
What is disappointing is they could have signed Josh Sargent but sold his discovery rights for General Allocation money.
That would have helped and sent a message City were serious.
I already hate myself for this, but there is a lot more to discovery rights than what your statement implies.
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 14 Apr 2026 07:10 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 13 Apr 2026 09:29 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 12 Apr 2026 09:43 am
I have not seen any improvement over last year.
What is disappointing is they could have signed Josh Sargent but sold his discovery rights for General Allocation money.
That would have helped and sent a message City were serious.
I already hate myself for this, but there is a lot more to discovery rights than what your statement implies.
Would love to hear more.
mjg
Forum User
Posts: 81Joined: 12 Jun 2024 11:32 am
Post by mjg 14 Apr 2026 10:48 am
Rosthol wrote: ↑ 14 Apr 2026 07:10 am mjg wrote: ↑ 13 Apr 2026 09:29 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 12 Apr 2026 09:43 am
I have not seen any improvement over last year.
What is disappointing is they could have signed Josh Sargent but sold his discovery rights for General Allocation money.
That would have helped and sent a message City were serious.
I already hate myself for this, but there is a lot more to discovery rights than what your statement implies.
Would love to hear more.
Plenty of information readily available online, should you be interested. But in short, a player does not have to sign with a club that has their 'discovery rights' should they elect to come to the MLS. And this part is my opinion, its an archaic, obsolete approach to transfers that more often than not, serves as a way for club to generate allocation money (or a transfer fee on a player with whom they do not have contract or interest, which seems to fly in the face of 3rd party ownership rules, but what do I know)
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
winonsports
Forum User
Posts: 2686Joined: 26 Jun 2024 12:49 pm
Post by winonsports 15 Apr 2026 07:12 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 13 Apr 2026 09:29 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 12 Apr 2026 09:43 am
I have not seen any improvement over last year.
What is disappointing is they could have signed Josh Sargent but sold his discovery rights for General Allocation money.
That would have helped and sent a message City were serious.
I already hate myself for this, but there is a lot more to discovery rights than what your statement implies.
You were right about hating yourself.
Sephaxs isn't interested in answers. He just wants to ask questions and remain in the dark.
mjg
Forum User
Posts: 81Joined: 12 Jun 2024 11:32 am
Post by mjg 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am
Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 16 Apr 2026 05:34 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Still disappointing from City.
winonsports
Forum User
Posts: 2686Joined: 26 Jun 2024 12:49 pm
Post by winonsports 16 Apr 2026 08:23 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Always disappointing from Sephaxs
mjg
Forum User
Posts: 81Joined: 12 Jun 2024 11:32 am
Post by mjg 16 Apr 2026 10:03 am
Rosthol wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 05:34 am mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Still disappointing from City.
Being purposely obtuse is no way to go through life.
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 17 Apr 2026 05:33 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 10:03 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 05:34 am mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Still disappointing from City.
Being purposely obtuse is no way to go through life.
How am I being purposely obtuse?
You aren’t disappointed in City not trying to sign Josh Sargent?
mjg
Forum User
Posts: 81Joined: 12 Jun 2024 11:32 am
Post by mjg 17 Apr 2026 09:41 am
Rosthol wrote: ↑ 17 Apr 2026 05:33 am mjg wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 10:03 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 05:34 am mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Still disappointing from City.
Being purposely obtuse is no way to go through life.
How am I being purposely obtuse?
You aren’t disappointed in City not trying to sign Josh Sargent?
No, because it was never a realistic expectation. Again, I think a basic understanding of 'discovery rights' would prove beneficial
Rosthol
Forum User
Posts: 11247Joined: 01 Jun 2018 16:10 pm
Post by Rosthol 18 Apr 2026 08:30 am
mjg wrote: ↑ 17 Apr 2026 09:41 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 17 Apr 2026 05:33 am mjg wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 10:03 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 16 Apr 2026 05:34 am mjg wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 07:59 am Rosthol wrote: ↑ 15 Apr 2026 05:30 am
Why wouldn’t Sargent want to come to Saint Louis?
The bigger question is did City even try to sign him?
Probably not given the transfer fee of 22 million dollars which may go up to 27 million.
He would have filled a glaring need for this team.
Why are long pants long...all great questions (sarcasm)
Still disappointing from City.
Being purposely obtuse is no way to go through life.
How am I being purposely obtuse?
You aren’t disappointed in City not trying to sign Josh Sargent?
No, because it was never a realistic expectation. Again, I think a basic understanding of 'discovery rights' would prove beneficial
Why wasn't it a realistic expectation?
Because CKB doesn’t want to spend the money?
