Everton Accepts New York Red Bulls' Bid for Tim Cahill
Another star is set to join MLS, and it might surprise you. It certainly surprised me. According to BBC, Everton have accepted a bid of roughly one million pounds from the New York Red Bulls for Tim Cahill.
The Australian international has been a mainstay at Everton and a fan favorite for years, but he only managed to find the back of the net twice last year.
At only 32 years of age (relatively young for a highly respected European player to make the move to MLS), Cahill is the latest of players to join MLS at a younger age. Scoring 68 goals in 278 appearances in the EPL and 24 goals in 55 caps for Australia shows that Cahill knows how to find the back of the net, something that could be desperately needed come playoff time.
Two of the Red Bulls' designated player spots belong to Thierry Henry and Rafa Marquez (the former has been outstanding this season, the latter not so much), and Cahill would likely occupy the third.
The Red Bulls already made noise this month by trading speedster Dane Richards for the veteran attacker Sebastian Le Toux.
By adding Tim Cahill to the mix, the Red Bulls will be in competition with only the LA Galaxy for the best offensive team in the league. This move solidifies the Red Bulls as a serious contender for the MLS Cup.
Kenny Cooper and Thierry Henry up front with Sebastian Le Toux on one of the flanks and Cahill as the attacking midfielder will give New York a potent offense. Dax McCarty in the defensive midfield will protect a solid back line.
However, Hans Backe does have a tendency to mess up good things, and that would be my main concern for the Red Bulls' MLS Cup hopes.
Tim Cahill will be entering a team that is currently on top of the Eastern Conference table, and it shouldn't take long for him to get integrated into the side. With all the potential this Red Bulls team will have offensively, I really feel sorry for opposing defenders.
It'll be a miracle if anyone can keep a clean sheet against the new-look Red Bulls.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?