USA supporters and MLS fans: Not mutually exclusive

I don't know Paul Gardner, and I'm guessing he'd be a very interesting guy to talk to, but he he seems like a pretty angry man. Today's Soccer America screed is on the effect the World Cup might have on MLS, an effect Gardner says "is likely to be close to zero".


Gardner's contention that the World Cup won't have any real effect on MLS' popularity is reasonable, and somewhat based on precedent (precedent Gardner admits he was too lazy to actually research, but whatever). The U.S. run to the quarterfinals in 2002 didn't really push Major League Soccer to marvelous new heights, and 2006's disaster didn't pull it back. Not that it's just about the U.S. National Team and their fortunes, of course; the World Cup is a global event, the story lines are interesting across the tourney's field, and the simple display of soccer on such a magnificent scale might entice a few more people to head out to their local MLS stadium.


One would think, anyway.


But even if that logic fails, and the reality of the matter is that there is no real bump, it would be ridiculous to fault MLS for not at least trying to swing things to their advantage. The World Cup break, something that I was in favor of as a matter of appearances and legitimacy, indicates that the league has changed its tactics; for the most part, this is viewed as a good thing, and as a sign that the league is staring to "get it".


MLS has hired a creative agency called Dentsu America to help them leverage World Cup interest. A smart move, in my opinion, even if the agency has an uphill battle ahead of them. I suspect in the past, the league simply assumed the World Cup would help them. Hiring an agency is a proactive step, and therefore laudable.


Major League Soccer isn't the World Cup. Major League Soccer isn't the Premier League, Serie A, La Liga, the Bundesliga, the Mexican Primera, or any number of other more visible and better supported leagues. Selling fans of those leagues on a lesser quality product that doesn't involve cultured English accents or century of history is difficult. There are also millions of Americans for whom the World Cup is the only soccer they'll be watching, on TV or in person, until the next one comes around. But there's certainly room for improvement in both areas, because not everyone is completely intransigent, and I disagree with Gardner that the overlap between passionate USMNT fans and prospective MLS fans is less than one would think; looking for the worst in the group (he singles out Sam's Army specifically), he boils down these fans to xenophobic pro-USA cheerleaders rather than soccer fans, making them unlikely to gravitate to the world of club soccer.


I'm certain that element exists, and they might be some of the more annoyingly loud members of the group. But I doubt seriously they represent a majority, and I reject the notion that they should be allowed to dictate the image of all supporters group members. I know they don't reflect my views.


My biggest problem with "the World Cup effect is untrue" argument is that is doesn't allow for changing variables; the world is a different place, particularly in terms of the Internet and social media, than it was in 1998, 2002, and 2006. Just because nothing significant happened then doesn't mean it can't happen now. Will the World Cup lead to a bump this time? I have no idea. But I do the logic Gardner's uses for saying it won't is clearly flawed.


As for Gardner's views on ESPN's coverage and the British voices, I'm going to leave that alone. Besides, I've already had my say.