As I said in my previous post, I watched AC Milan-Reggina today; Beckham looked okay, and the talent around him certainly helped, but it seems to me he might actually be out of place on that team. His crosses are still dangerous, and he had a few that threatened Reggina, but they don't seem to fit the way Milan liked to play. Kaka and Pato are so supremely dangerous with the ball at their feet that Beckham whipping in a cross anytime he gets a little space out the right looks like the wrong thing to do. That being said, he has to be more comfortable at Milan than in LA; the time he gets on the ball must seem like hours compared to MLS.
Just some thoughts.
On to Beckham's value. Goal.com is reporting that Milan's initial offer has been rejected by MLS and the Galaxy. If the number is accurate ($5.7 million), then Milan is hoping their big club status will scare LA into selling Beckham to them on the cheap. It's a fairly ridiculous number.
I know that I've intimated recently that the American side needs to be realistic about Beckham's value as a footballer, and leave the extraneous marketing concerns out of it; I was wrong. The more thought I've given to the situation, the more I believe LA/MLS should hold Milan over the proverbial barrel. The Italian giants made the mistake of announcing to the world how badly they want to keep Beckham, something on which the Galaxy should certainly capitalize.
So how much? MLS is said to have rated Beckham at $20 million; Grahame Jones has reported that they'll certainly want more than the current MLS record (Altidore to Villareal) of $10 million. Some bloggers have even suggested that a Beckham for Ronaldinho swap might be in order; if MLS is going to lose their biggest draw, why not bring in a player that can alleviate any drop off? Shevchenko has also been mentioned as a trade possibilty, as his wife is American and he continues to waste away on the Milan bench. The Ukranian doesn't have the international fame of Ronaldinho, but he certainly has a strong pedigree. Dave at sounderatheart.com suggests the league should require Milan to play the All-Star game this year and subsequent friendlies down the line as part of any transfer agreement.
So why not all of the above? A transfer fee north of $10 million is a must, writing into the agreement a number of friendlies really does Milan no harm and shouldn't be an issue, and Milan has several players on their roster that I'm sure they wouldn't mind offloading. Beckham's play is only one part of this equation, with his marketing clout adding significant value to his services; if Milan is not prepared to pay for that premium, then MLS and the Galaxy should walk away.
Let's sum up what MLs and the Galaxy should get for Beckham:
1. $12-15 million (at least)
2. Ronaldinho or Shevchenko (I can settle for Shevchenko)
3. Agreement to play in the MLS All-Star game and subsequent friendlies, number TBD
Now, what I believe MLS and the Galaxy will get for Beckham:
1. A transfer fee between $10-12 million
I hope I'm wrong.
After I wrote this, I found this story, which indicates the rejected bid was $10 million. Hmm, not sure who to believe, but the $5.7 million initial bid seems more likely.'
Wow, just realized what a typo fest that was originally. Serves me right for trying to get the post up so quickly.
Watching Beckham with AC Milan; not sure he looks worth $20 mill, but I also don't think the Galaxy should take any less. They hold all the cards, and if Milan want him, they should pony up.
He was definitely a bit slow on the Reggina goal.
He was definitely a bit slow on the Reggina goal.
To say that fans of the United States National Team are supremely confident heading into next week's World Cup qualifier with Mexico might be a bit of an understatement; an eight year winning streak on American soil can do that for a fan base. Add that recent record of home dominance to the fact that Mexico comes into the match seemingly off-kilter, and American fans may already be planning post-match celebrations.
There are no indications that this over-confidence on the part of the supporters is unjustified; it's hard for many of them to envision Mexico winning a match inside American borders in front of what should be a very vocal, very pro-USA, crowd. That being said, it's clear that Mexico is capable of beating the US, and any shock resulting from a defeat at El Tri's hands would come only from its unfamiliar nature.
So, what if Mexico wins? I don't mean that in the dismissive sense; note the comma. I mean, literally, what if Mexico wins? What will be the fallout? Should any changes be made? Or does the USMNT simply charge ahead, play out what is still likely to be a successful qualifying campaign, and roll the dice in both the Gold and Confederations Cups?
Even if the Mexicans are triumphant in Columbus, there is unlikely to be any repercussions for Bob Bradley, the player pool, or the team structure as it is currently constituted. While Sven-Goran Eriksson's job is certainly in jeopardy (because the Mexico manager's job is always in jeopardy) and he may be forced to manage his team with that fact in mind, Bradley can forge ahead with a grander scheme, comfortable that his position is safe no matter the outcome. Bradley has behind him a strong enough record as the US manager that it would be difficult for Sunil Gulati and the USSF to justify making a change in the midst of the qualification cycle, even if Bradley is at the helm when the remarkable home winning-streak against Mexico is snapped. Additionally, any manager that might be available to the US, as well as amenable to taking the job, could hardly be considered a major upgrade over Bradley. Unfortunately for many who wished it had been him instead, Juergen Klinsmann is tied up at the moment.
If Bradley stays, then his system stays. Without a major shake up at the top, we shouldn't expect any change to the style of play, or the way the team goes about its business. A terrible performance by a player or two could conceivably lead to less-seasoned talent getting a shot; but with young players like Kljestan and Altidore already expected to feature in future hexagonal matches, it would be difficult to determine if any changes were the direct result of a loss to Mexico.
If the Americans do lose, what should be the ramifications? While I wouldn't advocate that Bradley be fired, and I don't want the United States manager's job to be the musical chairs situation that exists in Mexico and other countries, I will say that the heat applied to those in charge of the National Team by the soccer media has never been quite enough. It's not that those who write about the game here aren't critical; it's simply that there aren't enough of them to engender any appreciable reaction. Leadership is allowed to operate free of concern, without the pressure that their peers around the world are forced to cope with on a daily basis. Everyone involved wants to build a winner, and I'm not questioning Bradley or Gulati's desire to do so; I just believe that without the type of oversight we give to coaches and executives in other sports, they are free to grow complacent.
For the American supporters, losing to Mexico inside the US would much more catastrophic. Gone would be their ability to crow to Mexico fans that they simply can't win in this country, and the argument for American predominance in the region would take a serious hit. Not only would bragging rights be lost, but Mexico would have three points in hand to take with them on the rest of their qualifying campaign. While I'm of the opinion that Mexico qualifying for the World Cup benefits the region, and therefore the US, I'm not sure the majority of American supporters agree with me, so those three out-of-the-blocks points in Mexico's column would only make the loss that much more difficult to swallow.
I certainly don't expect a loss on Wednesday, and I know that few Nats fans do; but it's interesting to think about what could (and should) conceivably happen if Mexico does win in the US for the first time since '99. Shake ups occur when results are not consistent with expectations, and American soccer fans have come to expect victory over Mexico when the match take place in the United States. If the team, and the manager, fail in those expectations, I suspect there would be quite a backlash in the National Team's fan base.
None of this matters, of course. When Wednesday rolls around, and the rivalry is renewed once again, the result is likely to be the one to which we've become accustomed. The USA just doesn't lose to Mexico on American soil, so why would this time be any different?
There are no indications that this over-confidence on the part of the supporters is unjustified; it's hard for many of them to envision Mexico winning a match inside American borders in front of what should be a very vocal, very pro-USA, crowd. That being said, it's clear that Mexico is capable of beating the US, and any shock resulting from a defeat at El Tri's hands would come only from its unfamiliar nature.
So, what if Mexico wins? I don't mean that in the dismissive sense; note the comma. I mean, literally, what if Mexico wins? What will be the fallout? Should any changes be made? Or does the USMNT simply charge ahead, play out what is still likely to be a successful qualifying campaign, and roll the dice in both the Gold and Confederations Cups?
Even if the Mexicans are triumphant in Columbus, there is unlikely to be any repercussions for Bob Bradley, the player pool, or the team structure as it is currently constituted. While Sven-Goran Eriksson's job is certainly in jeopardy (because the Mexico manager's job is always in jeopardy) and he may be forced to manage his team with that fact in mind, Bradley can forge ahead with a grander scheme, comfortable that his position is safe no matter the outcome. Bradley has behind him a strong enough record as the US manager that it would be difficult for Sunil Gulati and the USSF to justify making a change in the midst of the qualification cycle, even if Bradley is at the helm when the remarkable home winning-streak against Mexico is snapped. Additionally, any manager that might be available to the US, as well as amenable to taking the job, could hardly be considered a major upgrade over Bradley. Unfortunately for many who wished it had been him instead, Juergen Klinsmann is tied up at the moment.
If Bradley stays, then his system stays. Without a major shake up at the top, we shouldn't expect any change to the style of play, or the way the team goes about its business. A terrible performance by a player or two could conceivably lead to less-seasoned talent getting a shot; but with young players like Kljestan and Altidore already expected to feature in future hexagonal matches, it would be difficult to determine if any changes were the direct result of a loss to Mexico.
If the Americans do lose, what should be the ramifications? While I wouldn't advocate that Bradley be fired, and I don't want the United States manager's job to be the musical chairs situation that exists in Mexico and other countries, I will say that the heat applied to those in charge of the National Team by the soccer media has never been quite enough. It's not that those who write about the game here aren't critical; it's simply that there aren't enough of them to engender any appreciable reaction. Leadership is allowed to operate free of concern, without the pressure that their peers around the world are forced to cope with on a daily basis. Everyone involved wants to build a winner, and I'm not questioning Bradley or Gulati's desire to do so; I just believe that without the type of oversight we give to coaches and executives in other sports, they are free to grow complacent.
For the American supporters, losing to Mexico inside the US would much more catastrophic. Gone would be their ability to crow to Mexico fans that they simply can't win in this country, and the argument for American predominance in the region would take a serious hit. Not only would bragging rights be lost, but Mexico would have three points in hand to take with them on the rest of their qualifying campaign. While I'm of the opinion that Mexico qualifying for the World Cup benefits the region, and therefore the US, I'm not sure the majority of American supporters agree with me, so those three out-of-the-blocks points in Mexico's column would only make the loss that much more difficult to swallow.
I certainly don't expect a loss on Wednesday, and I know that few Nats fans do; but it's interesting to think about what could (and should) conceivably happen if Mexico does win in the US for the first time since '99. Shake ups occur when results are not consistent with expectations, and American soccer fans have come to expect victory over Mexico when the match take place in the United States. If the team, and the manager, fail in those expectations, I suspect there would be quite a backlash in the National Team's fan base.
None of this matters, of course. When Wednesday rolls around, and the rivalry is renewed once again, the result is likely to be the one to which we've become accustomed. The USA just doesn't lose to Mexico on American soil, so why would this time be any different?
Every sports fan in American knows the power of sports talk radio; fans are insatiable when it comes to consuming information and idle opinion. The empire ESPN has built on both television and radio is a testament to this fact. The average sports talk radio show consists of a couple of blithering idiots armed with microphones, uninformed opinions, and a proclivity to yell. And yet, despite the idiocy, these shows thrive. Millions of Americans tune in every day, to both local and national shows, to hear every sports story available analyzed from every angle imaginable.
And yet, again despite the idiocy, I myself am a sports talk radio addict. I can't help it: every day on my hour long commute to and from my tedious, brain numbing job, I scan the dial for anything related to sports. The stations and shows I tune in to cover everything the average American sports fan could want: football, basketball, baseball, hockey, even tennis and golf. But because I'm not the average American sports fan, they leave me wanting. Rarely, if ever, do they even mention the word "soccer", and if they do it's because DC United has purchased an ad or two, or has a promotion running with the station. On the odd chance one of the hosts has a passing interest in the game and attempts to discuss it beyond a brief mention, he's shouted down with vitriol.
My morning commuting routine includes The Junkies (formally the Sports Junkies; originally just a sports talk show, they've remade themselves as morning drive shock jock types), a local show on the Washington, D.C. airwaves. I've been a fan of The Junkies for years, and I'm very aware that soccer simply doesn't exist in their sports fan world. Their daily "sports page" segment includes national stories, local scores, and other items deemed worthy by the hosts; I simply can't remember any soccer story, much less something not involving DC United, making the "sports page". Imagine my shock today when one of the more frustratingly idiotic hosts mentions the Beckham drama. While he butchered the story completely, I was momentarily delighted to hear my favorite radio show talking about the beautiful game.
Now, I should have known better than to get my hopes up once the subject was broached. Short of a mention, a snide comment, and a quick transition to another story, there was simply nothing the four DJs had to give when it came to soccer. When the discussion turned to one of the hosts expressing his bafflement over the "loan" as it exists in club football, I knew it wasn't going to end well. After attempting to muddle their way through the circumstances of Beckham's Milan adventure, and summarily dismissing the loan concept as both too foreign and unfathomable, one host summed up the American sports talk radio attitude towards soccer perfectly. He said, "It's a stupid sport, anyway."
Ouch.
After taking a moment to compose myself, I shot off a tongue-in-cheek text message to the show, carefully stating my opinion that the host in question was a (choice word) moron. Still, despite exacting my pissant-listener revenge through an anonymous electronic communication device, I was left with an empty feeling in the pit of my stomach. Although I am supremely aware of the status of the game in my country, his words saddened me. Soccer fans in the United States, and those who actively try to spread the gospel of the game, are like Sisyphus, forever pushing our boulder up the hill, only to watch it roll back down again. Even when we feel as though we're making progress, there's always something or someone there to bring us back to the reality that for most Americans, soccer simply doesn't matter.
It clear to me that it's a far distant future that includes regular discussion of soccer on sports talk radio. The game has two strikes against it on the terrestrial radio landscape; the hosts are always the uninitiated, Americans whose exposure to the sport has never gone beyond their kids rec soccer games, and the sport is simply not relevant enough in the United States so as to force them to discuss it. Until the time comes that Americans cry out for soccer talk from their favorite idiots with microphones, those of us who love the game will simply have to rely on the internet for our footy fix.
Thank goodness for podcasts.
And yet, again despite the idiocy, I myself am a sports talk radio addict. I can't help it: every day on my hour long commute to and from my tedious, brain numbing job, I scan the dial for anything related to sports. The stations and shows I tune in to cover everything the average American sports fan could want: football, basketball, baseball, hockey, even tennis and golf. But because I'm not the average American sports fan, they leave me wanting. Rarely, if ever, do they even mention the word "soccer", and if they do it's because DC United has purchased an ad or two, or has a promotion running with the station. On the odd chance one of the hosts has a passing interest in the game and attempts to discuss it beyond a brief mention, he's shouted down with vitriol.
My morning commuting routine includes The Junkies (formally the Sports Junkies; originally just a sports talk show, they've remade themselves as morning drive shock jock types), a local show on the Washington, D.C. airwaves. I've been a fan of The Junkies for years, and I'm very aware that soccer simply doesn't exist in their sports fan world. Their daily "sports page" segment includes national stories, local scores, and other items deemed worthy by the hosts; I simply can't remember any soccer story, much less something not involving DC United, making the "sports page". Imagine my shock today when one of the more frustratingly idiotic hosts mentions the Beckham drama. While he butchered the story completely, I was momentarily delighted to hear my favorite radio show talking about the beautiful game.
Now, I should have known better than to get my hopes up once the subject was broached. Short of a mention, a snide comment, and a quick transition to another story, there was simply nothing the four DJs had to give when it came to soccer. When the discussion turned to one of the hosts expressing his bafflement over the "loan" as it exists in club football, I knew it wasn't going to end well. After attempting to muddle their way through the circumstances of Beckham's Milan adventure, and summarily dismissing the loan concept as both too foreign and unfathomable, one host summed up the American sports talk radio attitude towards soccer perfectly. He said, "It's a stupid sport, anyway."
Ouch.
After taking a moment to compose myself, I shot off a tongue-in-cheek text message to the show, carefully stating my opinion that the host in question was a (choice word) moron. Still, despite exacting my pissant-listener revenge through an anonymous electronic communication device, I was left with an empty feeling in the pit of my stomach. Although I am supremely aware of the status of the game in my country, his words saddened me. Soccer fans in the United States, and those who actively try to spread the gospel of the game, are like Sisyphus, forever pushing our boulder up the hill, only to watch it roll back down again. Even when we feel as though we're making progress, there's always something or someone there to bring us back to the reality that for most Americans, soccer simply doesn't matter.
It clear to me that it's a far distant future that includes regular discussion of soccer on sports talk radio. The game has two strikes against it on the terrestrial radio landscape; the hosts are always the uninitiated, Americans whose exposure to the sport has never gone beyond their kids rec soccer games, and the sport is simply not relevant enough in the United States so as to force them to discuss it. Until the time comes that Americans cry out for soccer talk from their favorite idiots with microphones, those of us who love the game will simply have to rely on the internet for our footy fix.
Thank goodness for podcasts.
Let me preface this post by saying that I put absolutely zero thought into the preperation; it's simply a ranting, rambling reaction to all of the stuff I've been reading today.
Far be it for me to tell Galaxy fans how to feel, but shouldn't there be a parade ambling through Carson right about now? While signing Beckham meant immediate name recognition for the team and the league, it quickly turned into a farce on the field. The Galaxy have never been as bad as they've been the last few years, and some of that certainly falls directly on Beckham's shoulders. Forget the monetary effect Beckham's salary had on the makeup of the team; his presence in LA and the circus that followed him were not conducive to a strong team atmosphere. Comments made by Galaxy players in the days since Beckham's loan deal started indicated a split locker room at the HDC; it's easy to conclude that Beck's presence only amplified the distinction between the "haves" and "havenots" in MLS. When special considerations are made for one player, no matter that players stature, egos become raw.
If Beckham is truly gone, the Galaxy can get back to the business of putting together a proper football team. Bruce Arena is a proven MLS manager, and if given the chance to do so, he can make LA a winner again. If a majority of Galaxy fans aren't jumping up and down over the departure of their proverbial albatross, then there's something rotten in LA. It would be easy to say good riddance to those who bought in simply because Beckham arrived; but in a country where every soccer fan is a precious flower, MLS can't afford to lose anyone. Arena will have pressure to win, and win quickly, especially if the Galaxy fail to draw fans at the rate to which they've become accustomed.
The Galaxy have to get good again, and do it quickly. It's often said that college football is better when Notre Dame is good; the same holds true for MLS and the Galaxy. Like it or not, they are a flagship franchise in MLS, and their success has a direct impact on the strength of the league. I'm sure MLS dreamed of a scenario in which their biggest ever signing carried his side to a MLS Cup title, featuring in an ABC broadcasted final for all of America to see; obviously this didn't happen, as the Galaxy found themselves teetering into unbalanced oblivion. Now the pieces have to be picked as quickly as possible, without that which unbalanced them throwing off the squad. To add to their ills, it appears that their most gifted player, one who can carry them almost single-handedley in a way Beckham never could, will also be staying in Europe.
One player gone that they are better off without, and one player with a foot out of the door and a hankering to make his bones in Germany; Galaxy finds themselves wrapped up in two of the biggest stories the league has ever seen. If they can somehow pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and play winning football, it will be a major coup. While the Galaxy may be "the former team of David Beckham" for a time, a winning season can always be framed with the acknowledgment that Beckham's failures were immediately followed by a major success; Galaxy and the league will look better for letting Beckham leave, lessening the negative effects of his departure.
American soccer is team soccer by necessity; we simply don't have players in our league that can take over a game by themselves. With Beckham's distracting influence gone, LA can get back to the business of playing team soccer once again. Until MLS has the clout and money to draw world class players more than one at a time, the team will continue to trump the superstar, and that's exactly the way it should be.
Far be it for me to tell Galaxy fans how to feel, but shouldn't there be a parade ambling through Carson right about now? While signing Beckham meant immediate name recognition for the team and the league, it quickly turned into a farce on the field. The Galaxy have never been as bad as they've been the last few years, and some of that certainly falls directly on Beckham's shoulders. Forget the monetary effect Beckham's salary had on the makeup of the team; his presence in LA and the circus that followed him were not conducive to a strong team atmosphere. Comments made by Galaxy players in the days since Beckham's loan deal started indicated a split locker room at the HDC; it's easy to conclude that Beck's presence only amplified the distinction between the "haves" and "havenots" in MLS. When special considerations are made for one player, no matter that players stature, egos become raw.
If Beckham is truly gone, the Galaxy can get back to the business of putting together a proper football team. Bruce Arena is a proven MLS manager, and if given the chance to do so, he can make LA a winner again. If a majority of Galaxy fans aren't jumping up and down over the departure of their proverbial albatross, then there's something rotten in LA. It would be easy to say good riddance to those who bought in simply because Beckham arrived; but in a country where every soccer fan is a precious flower, MLS can't afford to lose anyone. Arena will have pressure to win, and win quickly, especially if the Galaxy fail to draw fans at the rate to which they've become accustomed.
The Galaxy have to get good again, and do it quickly. It's often said that college football is better when Notre Dame is good; the same holds true for MLS and the Galaxy. Like it or not, they are a flagship franchise in MLS, and their success has a direct impact on the strength of the league. I'm sure MLS dreamed of a scenario in which their biggest ever signing carried his side to a MLS Cup title, featuring in an ABC broadcasted final for all of America to see; obviously this didn't happen, as the Galaxy found themselves teetering into unbalanced oblivion. Now the pieces have to be picked as quickly as possible, without that which unbalanced them throwing off the squad. To add to their ills, it appears that their most gifted player, one who can carry them almost single-handedley in a way Beckham never could, will also be staying in Europe.
One player gone that they are better off without, and one player with a foot out of the door and a hankering to make his bones in Germany; Galaxy finds themselves wrapped up in two of the biggest stories the league has ever seen. If they can somehow pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and play winning football, it will be a major coup. While the Galaxy may be "the former team of David Beckham" for a time, a winning season can always be framed with the acknowledgment that Beckham's failures were immediately followed by a major success; Galaxy and the league will look better for letting Beckham leave, lessening the negative effects of his departure.
American soccer is team soccer by necessity; we simply don't have players in our league that can take over a game by themselves. With Beckham's distracting influence gone, LA can get back to the business of playing team soccer once again. Until MLS has the clout and money to draw world class players more than one at a time, the team will continue to trump the superstar, and that's exactly the way it should be.
A few stadium related stories have hit the Internet, so I wanted to post a brief piece on the push for team-controlled, soccer specific stadiums across the league.
In the world of modern revenue driven sports, a dedicate single-use stadium is often essential to the success of a professional sports franchise. The era of multi-use stadiums, stadiums built to save costs by housing two teams in a space built specifically for neither, has come and gone. NFL and MLB teams have leveraged themselves into state-of-the-art facilities across America. These teams, which have strong historical connections to their communities, often build these stadiums with subsidies from the local government, which cities feel compelled to hand out when their local teams threaten relocation.
For Major League Soccer clubs, leverage is severely lacking. Playing a "second-rate" sport in a young league, MLS clubs have yet to establish the same kind of roots in their hometowns that older more established teams take for granted. Threats of relocation holds little sway over local governments that have, in many cases, recently completed the business of building stadiums for NFL or MLB teams (or both). Because MLS teams are usually the last to come calling, they bear the brunt of backlash from citizens sick of their cities spending money on stadiums for revenue-rich franchises owned by billionaires.
Forced to turn elsewhere, many MLS teams are leaving city centers and heading towards suburban areas. Chicago Fire, Colorado Rapids, FC Dallas, Real Salt Lake; all have soccer specific stadiums in suburban communities, where MLS teams have found governments willing to subsidize construction. DC United and the Houston Dynamo, two teams fighting to secure stadium deals in their respective cities, have had mixed results. A stadium in Houston looks to be a certainty, but the Dynamo have been forced to make concessions to facilitate the process. Early designs for the facility are spartan and devoid of aesthetics; with funding limited and subsidies lacking, the team is forced to choose function over form. The Dynamo will also share the stadium with the Texas Southern University football team, a nod to financial considerations, as it will bring in $2.5 million annually.
DC United have yet to make any real progress on a stadium in the District of Columbia, and things have taken a turn for the worse with the recent pullout of a major developer from the Poplar Point project (the proposed location of a United stadium). The suburbs look likely to be the team's ultimate destination, with Prince George's County (directly east of the city) actively wooing the MLS club. The Poplar Point stadium has long been the dream of United's passionate supporters, a smaller stadium which would heighten their already intense home atmosphere.
Those clubs yet to secure stadium deals will not be helped by the recent downturn in the economy, and plans already in place may have to be scaled back. Luckily for MLS, only DC United, San Jose, New England, and Seattle are without progressing projects or venues under construction. San Jose is attempting to move forward with a 15,000 seat stadium financed exclusively with private funds, while New England and Seattle have unique sharing deals that allow them to play in NFL stadiums either rent free or at a favorable rate. The league may force these teams to move to a soccer specific stadium in the future, although economic factors could serve to lessen the pressure.
Per the league, a concrete stadium plan is must for any city hoping to land an expansion team; Portland, Miami, Vancouver and St. Louis have all attempted to line up stadium financing or are looking renovate existing facilities to meet the demands of soccer. Portland's bid is almost certainly dependant on the ability of their investors to secure city financing for a renovation to PGE Park. The effort is a source of major debate in Portland, and the anti-stadium crowd is vocal and determined. Miami seems to have no definite plans, although the league may overlook that fact in light of FC Barcelona's association with the bid. Vancouver hopes to renovate BC Place if awarded a franchise, a plan with a fraction of the cost of constructing a new facility. St. Louis appears to have everything in place, with both a site selected and sufficient funding secured.
Dedicated, team-controlled stadiums are essential for the future growth of the league on a number of fronts. The financial benefits are obvious, as teams are able to keep revenue in house. Teams must also have scheduling control, not only for revenue reasons (games on optimal dates, weekends, etc.), but to aid in alleviating the fixture congestion that has become an issue in recent years. Stadiums built for soccer greatly aid in improving match atmosphere, something which not only begets more support, but increases the appeal of televised matches.
As Major League Soccer looks to weather the economic storm currently blowing through, it will be well-served by the soccer specific stadiums already in place. It would have been difficult to see the league surviving a similar economy ten years ago; with too many teams in cavernous football stadiums and hamstrung by poor rental agreements, the financial crisis may have done more damage than the league could withstand. The push for these stadiums must continue, despite the times, for MLS to reach the heights it and its fans believe it will.
Relevant Links:
A fantastic stadium info presentation
San Jose stadium update
Dynamo stadium update
An appeal for Portland's stadium deal
DC United stadium drama
More United stadium drama
In the world of modern revenue driven sports, a dedicate single-use stadium is often essential to the success of a professional sports franchise. The era of multi-use stadiums, stadiums built to save costs by housing two teams in a space built specifically for neither, has come and gone. NFL and MLB teams have leveraged themselves into state-of-the-art facilities across America. These teams, which have strong historical connections to their communities, often build these stadiums with subsidies from the local government, which cities feel compelled to hand out when their local teams threaten relocation.
For Major League Soccer clubs, leverage is severely lacking. Playing a "second-rate" sport in a young league, MLS clubs have yet to establish the same kind of roots in their hometowns that older more established teams take for granted. Threats of relocation holds little sway over local governments that have, in many cases, recently completed the business of building stadiums for NFL or MLB teams (or both). Because MLS teams are usually the last to come calling, they bear the brunt of backlash from citizens sick of their cities spending money on stadiums for revenue-rich franchises owned by billionaires.
Forced to turn elsewhere, many MLS teams are leaving city centers and heading towards suburban areas. Chicago Fire, Colorado Rapids, FC Dallas, Real Salt Lake; all have soccer specific stadiums in suburban communities, where MLS teams have found governments willing to subsidize construction. DC United and the Houston Dynamo, two teams fighting to secure stadium deals in their respective cities, have had mixed results. A stadium in Houston looks to be a certainty, but the Dynamo have been forced to make concessions to facilitate the process. Early designs for the facility are spartan and devoid of aesthetics; with funding limited and subsidies lacking, the team is forced to choose function over form. The Dynamo will also share the stadium with the Texas Southern University football team, a nod to financial considerations, as it will bring in $2.5 million annually.
DC United have yet to make any real progress on a stadium in the District of Columbia, and things have taken a turn for the worse with the recent pullout of a major developer from the Poplar Point project (the proposed location of a United stadium). The suburbs look likely to be the team's ultimate destination, with Prince George's County (directly east of the city) actively wooing the MLS club. The Poplar Point stadium has long been the dream of United's passionate supporters, a smaller stadium which would heighten their already intense home atmosphere.
Those clubs yet to secure stadium deals will not be helped by the recent downturn in the economy, and plans already in place may have to be scaled back. Luckily for MLS, only DC United, San Jose, New England, and Seattle are without progressing projects or venues under construction. San Jose is attempting to move forward with a 15,000 seat stadium financed exclusively with private funds, while New England and Seattle have unique sharing deals that allow them to play in NFL stadiums either rent free or at a favorable rate. The league may force these teams to move to a soccer specific stadium in the future, although economic factors could serve to lessen the pressure.
Per the league, a concrete stadium plan is must for any city hoping to land an expansion team; Portland, Miami, Vancouver and St. Louis have all attempted to line up stadium financing or are looking renovate existing facilities to meet the demands of soccer. Portland's bid is almost certainly dependant on the ability of their investors to secure city financing for a renovation to PGE Park. The effort is a source of major debate in Portland, and the anti-stadium crowd is vocal and determined. Miami seems to have no definite plans, although the league may overlook that fact in light of FC Barcelona's association with the bid. Vancouver hopes to renovate BC Place if awarded a franchise, a plan with a fraction of the cost of constructing a new facility. St. Louis appears to have everything in place, with both a site selected and sufficient funding secured.
Dedicated, team-controlled stadiums are essential for the future growth of the league on a number of fronts. The financial benefits are obvious, as teams are able to keep revenue in house. Teams must also have scheduling control, not only for revenue reasons (games on optimal dates, weekends, etc.), but to aid in alleviating the fixture congestion that has become an issue in recent years. Stadiums built for soccer greatly aid in improving match atmosphere, something which not only begets more support, but increases the appeal of televised matches.
As Major League Soccer looks to weather the economic storm currently blowing through, it will be well-served by the soccer specific stadiums already in place. It would have been difficult to see the league surviving a similar economy ten years ago; with too many teams in cavernous football stadiums and hamstrung by poor rental agreements, the financial crisis may have done more damage than the league could withstand. The push for these stadiums must continue, despite the times, for MLS to reach the heights it and its fans believe it will.
Relevant Links:
A fantastic stadium info presentation
San Jose stadium update
Dynamo stadium update
An appeal for Portland's stadium deal
DC United stadium drama
More United stadium drama
The LA Galaxy, and Major League Soccer as a whole, made quite the splash when they signed David Beckham to be the game's pied piper in the United States. More attention was given to American soccer than ever before, and the media coverage more than made up for Beckham and the Galaxy's failures on the pitch. News of Beckham's tacit admission today that he would like to stay in Milan and possibly end his career there comes as no shock to American soccer fans; the question now becomes, "What next?".
The league and the Galaxy will both continue on, of course, doing their best to draw fans and television viewers without the English superstar on which to lean. Many believe MLS will be better for the Beckham departure, able now to return to the business of creating a sustainable soccer product in the United States without the distractions that Beckham's presence brought. Others will lament the early termination of a contract originally meant to help American soccer grow at a pace faster than its current place in the culture would seem to allow. Those with the latter viewpoint may call for a new Beckham, a superstar will international appeal that could salvage some of the "damage" done by the free kick maestro's early departure.
Nothing the league can do in this regard, short of bringing in an in-his-prime superstar at a cost the league could not justify, would garner attention the way the Beckham experiment did. The mainstream sports media fell over itself to trumpet the arrival of the photogenic Beckham and his former pop star wife in a way that could never be duplicated again. While the way in which his time here was covered, at least initially, bordered on the ridiculous, it would be difficult to argue that the exposure gained by MLS was not worth the money spent. If there is no one else who can do what Beckham did, should MLS even consider another bite at the apple?
The world of soccer that exists outside of the United States is undiscovered territory for American sports fans. Beckham's trump card was his crossover appeal, an appeal lacking in almost any player that would seriously consider a move to the U.S. Several prominent names have been linked with the league in recent years, most often because they themselves stated an affinity for the country and a possible desire to end their careers here. That stated caveat that they would like to finish their playing career in the U.S. is a bitter pill for American soccers fans and the league itself to swallow. The beauty of the Beckham concept, despite it's poor execution and potentially disappointing ending, was that Beckham was believed to still have some life left in his 30+ legs (which we now know is certainly the case). Any world famous footballer that might consider a move to MLS will more than likely do so when it is clear that he can no longer play with the upper-echelon of European talent; to sign a player like this would only further the already entrenched notion the MLS is a "retirement league".
MLS must ride a fine line with their attempts to bring notice to the game in the U.S. while still building the league's talent base and their reputation abroad. Do nothing, choose not to sign another gigantic superstar, and the league risks slipping back into irrelevancy in this country. Sign a big name, spending millions of dollars on one player for what amounts to a P.R. campaign, and the league risks losing sight of the ultimate goal of establishing a top-notch soccer league, while propagating their own poor standing in the international soccer community. Americans, while they may not be intimately familiar with the biggest names in the sport, are still aware that the domestic soccer league is bereft of star power; Americans will turn out for a star, something the league (outside of Blanco, whose main appeal lies in a specific segment of the population) is now without.
I'll miss Beckham's presence in MLS, if only because the coverage of the league is sure to slip somewhat back towards pre-experiment levels. I do think, however, that the product on the field, the efforts to grow grassroots fan support, and a slow improvement in the overall quality of players the league employs is more important than another flash-in-the-pan media blitz. Without entertaining matches, compelling storylines, attractive atmospheres and success in international competitions by MLS teams, the league will simply be an afterthought in the U.S., regardless of one or two famous names. The lessons of the NASL once again reverberate; even though the approach has been much more fiscally responsible, the league has to be aware that going back to the well a second time could be supremely disappointing.
Even if I was of the opinion that the league should go for Beckham 2.0, it wouldn't matter; there simply isn't anyone in the world of football big enough to match Goldenballs.
The league and the Galaxy will both continue on, of course, doing their best to draw fans and television viewers without the English superstar on which to lean. Many believe MLS will be better for the Beckham departure, able now to return to the business of creating a sustainable soccer product in the United States without the distractions that Beckham's presence brought. Others will lament the early termination of a contract originally meant to help American soccer grow at a pace faster than its current place in the culture would seem to allow. Those with the latter viewpoint may call for a new Beckham, a superstar will international appeal that could salvage some of the "damage" done by the free kick maestro's early departure.
Nothing the league can do in this regard, short of bringing in an in-his-prime superstar at a cost the league could not justify, would garner attention the way the Beckham experiment did. The mainstream sports media fell over itself to trumpet the arrival of the photogenic Beckham and his former pop star wife in a way that could never be duplicated again. While the way in which his time here was covered, at least initially, bordered on the ridiculous, it would be difficult to argue that the exposure gained by MLS was not worth the money spent. If there is no one else who can do what Beckham did, should MLS even consider another bite at the apple?
The world of soccer that exists outside of the United States is undiscovered territory for American sports fans. Beckham's trump card was his crossover appeal, an appeal lacking in almost any player that would seriously consider a move to the U.S. Several prominent names have been linked with the league in recent years, most often because they themselves stated an affinity for the country and a possible desire to end their careers here. That stated caveat that they would like to finish their playing career in the U.S. is a bitter pill for American soccers fans and the league itself to swallow. The beauty of the Beckham concept, despite it's poor execution and potentially disappointing ending, was that Beckham was believed to still have some life left in his 30+ legs (which we now know is certainly the case). Any world famous footballer that might consider a move to MLS will more than likely do so when it is clear that he can no longer play with the upper-echelon of European talent; to sign a player like this would only further the already entrenched notion the MLS is a "retirement league".
MLS must ride a fine line with their attempts to bring notice to the game in the U.S. while still building the league's talent base and their reputation abroad. Do nothing, choose not to sign another gigantic superstar, and the league risks slipping back into irrelevancy in this country. Sign a big name, spending millions of dollars on one player for what amounts to a P.R. campaign, and the league risks losing sight of the ultimate goal of establishing a top-notch soccer league, while propagating their own poor standing in the international soccer community. Americans, while they may not be intimately familiar with the biggest names in the sport, are still aware that the domestic soccer league is bereft of star power; Americans will turn out for a star, something the league (outside of Blanco, whose main appeal lies in a specific segment of the population) is now without.
I'll miss Beckham's presence in MLS, if only because the coverage of the league is sure to slip somewhat back towards pre-experiment levels. I do think, however, that the product on the field, the efforts to grow grassroots fan support, and a slow improvement in the overall quality of players the league employs is more important than another flash-in-the-pan media blitz. Without entertaining matches, compelling storylines, attractive atmospheres and success in international competitions by MLS teams, the league will simply be an afterthought in the U.S., regardless of one or two famous names. The lessons of the NASL once again reverberate; even though the approach has been much more fiscally responsible, the league has to be aware that going back to the well a second time could be supremely disappointing.
Even if I was of the opinion that the league should go for Beckham 2.0, it wouldn't matter; there simply isn't anyone in the world of football big enough to match Goldenballs.
Bobby Convey, he of the gimpy knee and big time promise, is returning home to play for the San Jose Earthquakes. While certainly a coup for San Jose and MLS, Convey's return to the States indicates how far American soccer has to go before becoming a force on the international stage.
Convey's path back to the United States is one too often trod by American players. Young and talented, Convey spent four and a half years in MLS with DC United before making a transfer to English side Reading in 2004. After a brief stint of strong play, Convey suffered a knee injury that sidelined him for an extended period. He has yet to fully regain his pre-injury form, and with his career stalled, it makes sense for him to return to MLS to resuscitate it.
Rumors are circulating that DaMarcus Beasley could also be headed back to MLS, returning to the league after spending time with three different European clubs. Beasley is another victim of injury, a player who seemed to be on the rise at Rangers before a knee ligament tear sidelined him in November of 2007. In the time since, Beasley has struggled to get first team football with Rangers. After the Glasgow club denied FC Schalke the oppotunity to sign him on a free transfer, LA Galaxy has stepped into the breach. With San Jose signing Convey, the Galaxy moves to the top of the allocation order, giving them the opportunity obtain Beasley.
Although the value of American players is infinitely higher in MLS than in any other league in the world, it's a bit disheartening to see two players with the promise that Convey and Beasley possess come back to the States in less than ideal conditions. MLS often seems the last resort for American players of any caliber, much less those with international caps, and it appears this may be the case for Convey and Beasley. With their value abroad dipping precipitously and their respective places in the national team setup at stake, it appears that regular football in America will trump riding the bench in Europe for the time being. You certainly can't blame either for choosing to come home, and there are those that will say that an MLS starting eleven is the perfect place for a slightly tarnished American player to refurbish themselves. While that may be true, and American "stars" are necessary to make the league go, the relative failure of those stars in Europe at such a young age is a frustrating situation.As the United States continues to export young soccer talent, the number of players returning home after short or disappointing stints in Europe it bound to increase. For the time being, however, the return to our admittedly second rate league by our higher profile players is a black eye for American soccer. Although mitigated by the injuries that both Convey and Beasley suffered, the implication will continue to be that our players can't hack it when they leave American shores. If Beasley and Convey play well and become the class of the league immediately, while good for them, their teams, and their careers, it will again shine a light on the on Major League Soccer's lesser quality. The fact that both players are still prominent (Beasley more than Convey) in our national team setup only serves to reinforce the notion that the quality of our footballers is still not . While MLS players will always have a role to play in the national team, it seemed possible that the reliance on those players was lessening as more Americans moved abroad.
In the future, when MLS is no longer a feeder league and is instead a choice desination for world class footballers, two American players returning home after a few years in Europe will be a reason to celebrate. Unfortunately for Convey and Beasley (and fans of the USMNT), that time has yet to come. Here's to hoping that the next round of up and coming American talent sticks, fulfills their potential in Europe, and raises the profile of American soccer and MLS in the process.
Obviously this post was based on speculation in the case of Beasley; he scored for Rangers against AC Milan in a friendly today, so maybe there's still hope for him in Glasgow. I also referenced a couple of things I wanted to link to, so here you go:Soccer by Ives: Quakes close in on Convey (also contains a Beasley mention)
San Jose Mercury News: Quakes close to signing Convey
And an added bonus, video of DMB scoring today:
More USA-Mexico Rivalry
I'm going through my usual evening routine of reading every single news story related to American soccer that exists on the internet, and a story catches my eye. Noah Davis of Goal.com (no relation) has written a little opinion piece on USA-Mexico. His contention is that the rivalry is the best in international soccer. Those of you that have been coming around here for awhile know that I posted my own USA-Mexico rivalry piece (MFUSA link, tribalfootball.com link), in which I claimed it was the best rivalry in North American sports. While Noah and I have taken different approaches, I think it's interesting to see his take. Even more interesting is the lambasting he's getting in the comments section there; I was tempted to post my own thoughts, but I'm afraid I'd be rendered dumb by associating myself with those people. While the pure volume doesn't match, and the idiocy seems to exist on a much lower level, I myself was given the old what-for by a few who commented at tribalfootball.com. I'm interested in the responses from a sociological standpoint, as each one is a little bit of what makes up the American soccer scene. There's a good smattering of American fans who want to make themselves seem "soccer-savvy" by downplaying the rivalry, plenty of Mexico fans badmouthing the Americans, and the usual Euro Snob or hater group dismissing North American football all together.
BSkyB retains Premiership rights
This isn't directly American soccer news, except in the context of ESPN's potential pursuit of EPL rights. If ESPN is serious about soccer, we'll find out just how serious they are within the next few months. Since I've written on the subject, I've learned that ESPN owning any English television rights for the Premier League doesn't necessarily mean anything for the American market; they are separate rights packages. The international (which I'm assuming includes the U.S.) rights don't come up for bidding until 2010. ESPN may be biding their time, throwing their name into the hat for the English rights simply as way to connect themselves with the sport in a serious manner. I'm already starting to notice a few little things that point towards an ESPN investment of some type in the game; acknowledgment of big matches, a few scores here and there, and even a great goal or two making Top 10 plays. Perhaps even more telling than any European football they may highlight is the nods to soccer on this side of the pond; I'm fairly certain I saw a Mexican league goal in the Top 10 plays on Sportscenter a week or two ago (my son distracted me, so I was unable to really pay attention). Definitely stay tuned for more developments on this front.
Interview with Steven Wells
EPLtalk.com has a interview with Steven Wells, an English soccer writer and observer of the sport in American. While I'm no fan of their MLS version (which may have some of the worst writing ever, and as such is partly responsible for the existence of this blog), EPLtalk does an excellent job with this interview. Though I've never thought about it in absolutes mentioned, the assigning of political viewpoints to attitudes towards soccer in America in the first question are probably fairly accurate (feel free to yell at me if you disagree). Wells is, for the most part, a man after my own heart; he seems to see through most of the crap that American sports fans throw up in the face of the soccer revolution. It's a good read, and I may have to appropriate some of his thoughts to expound upon in this space at a later date.
Sounders name Super Search winner
Seattle named Vini Oliveira the winner of their Super Search contest (a fan's take here). This is a little old, but I wanted to include it because I'm mulling over an opinion on the "reality show player search" concept, and what it means for MLS that such shows are seen as a good idea. Although Chivas USA hit the jackpot with Sueno MLS winner Jorge Flores, I'm not sure finding players through a televised competition is the way to go for MLS teams. Open tryouts are a must in the soccer environment as it exists today, but shows like Sueno MLS and Super Search seem to minimize the importance of the league. While admittedly not a fair comparison, I doubt we'll be seeing any other major American professional sports team find a player this way. If the Super Search winner turns out to be a contributor, then more power to him and the Sounders. But it will surely shine a light on the dire development situation as it currently exists in the U.S.
Rambled a bit in that last one, sorry about that. I probably won't have anything else tonight, but I'm guessing I'll have something for you guys tomorrow.
I'm going through my usual evening routine of reading every single news story related to American soccer that exists on the internet, and a story catches my eye. Noah Davis of Goal.com (no relation) has written a little opinion piece on USA-Mexico. His contention is that the rivalry is the best in international soccer. Those of you that have been coming around here for awhile know that I posted my own USA-Mexico rivalry piece (MFUSA link, tribalfootball.com link), in which I claimed it was the best rivalry in North American sports. While Noah and I have taken different approaches, I think it's interesting to see his take. Even more interesting is the lambasting he's getting in the comments section there; I was tempted to post my own thoughts, but I'm afraid I'd be rendered dumb by associating myself with those people. While the pure volume doesn't match, and the idiocy seems to exist on a much lower level, I myself was given the old what-for by a few who commented at tribalfootball.com. I'm interested in the responses from a sociological standpoint, as each one is a little bit of what makes up the American soccer scene. There's a good smattering of American fans who want to make themselves seem "soccer-savvy" by downplaying the rivalry, plenty of Mexico fans badmouthing the Americans, and the usual Euro Snob or hater group dismissing North American football all together.
BSkyB retains Premiership rights
This isn't directly American soccer news, except in the context of ESPN's potential pursuit of EPL rights. If ESPN is serious about soccer, we'll find out just how serious they are within the next few months. Since I've written on the subject, I've learned that ESPN owning any English television rights for the Premier League doesn't necessarily mean anything for the American market; they are separate rights packages. The international (which I'm assuming includes the U.S.) rights don't come up for bidding until 2010. ESPN may be biding their time, throwing their name into the hat for the English rights simply as way to connect themselves with the sport in a serious manner. I'm already starting to notice a few little things that point towards an ESPN investment of some type in the game; acknowledgment of big matches, a few scores here and there, and even a great goal or two making Top 10 plays. Perhaps even more telling than any European football they may highlight is the nods to soccer on this side of the pond; I'm fairly certain I saw a Mexican league goal in the Top 10 plays on Sportscenter a week or two ago (my son distracted me, so I was unable to really pay attention). Definitely stay tuned for more developments on this front.
Interview with Steven Wells
EPLtalk.com has a interview with Steven Wells, an English soccer writer and observer of the sport in American. While I'm no fan of their MLS version (which may have some of the worst writing ever, and as such is partly responsible for the existence of this blog), EPLtalk does an excellent job with this interview. Though I've never thought about it in absolutes mentioned, the assigning of political viewpoints to attitudes towards soccer in America in the first question are probably fairly accurate (feel free to yell at me if you disagree). Wells is, for the most part, a man after my own heart; he seems to see through most of the crap that American sports fans throw up in the face of the soccer revolution. It's a good read, and I may have to appropriate some of his thoughts to expound upon in this space at a later date.
Sounders name Super Search winner
Seattle named Vini Oliveira the winner of their Super Search contest (a fan's take here). This is a little old, but I wanted to include it because I'm mulling over an opinion on the "reality show player search" concept, and what it means for MLS that such shows are seen as a good idea. Although Chivas USA hit the jackpot with Sueno MLS winner Jorge Flores, I'm not sure finding players through a televised competition is the way to go for MLS teams. Open tryouts are a must in the soccer environment as it exists today, but shows like Sueno MLS and Super Search seem to minimize the importance of the league. While admittedly not a fair comparison, I doubt we'll be seeing any other major American professional sports team find a player this way. If the Super Search winner turns out to be a contributor, then more power to him and the Sounders. But it will surely shine a light on the dire development situation as it currently exists in the U.S.
Rambled a bit in that last one, sorry about that. I probably won't have anything else tonight, but I'm guessing I'll have something for you guys tomorrow.
Brief thoughts on three stories:
More Beckham Nonsense
Reports have AC Milan's bid to make Beckham's loan permanent at 14 million pounds; seems about right to me, no matter what some will say. If MLS is willing to sell him, they have to be realistic about his value as a footballer and leave out all of the extraneous stuff. If they don't want to let him go (which might lead to a much messier ending), then I guess they could play hardball and let Milan make a tough decision. Just for perspective, 14m pounds is $19.86 million as of this morning.
Links:
David Beckham could stay at AC Milan if LA Galaxy accept £14m bid
We want Becks for good and will pay £14m to keep him, reveals Milan chief Galliani
USA World Cup Bids
The USA World Cup bids for 2018 and 2022 have spawned a host of stories and opinion on the subject; I may address it more in depth soon, but it won't be about the USA's chances to secure a Cup (mainly because it's going to be covered to death). I'm more likely to talk about what American soccer may look like when (or if) the world's biggest sporting event returns to the States. Contrasting what a potential Cup might mean for the game here, and the environment that Cup would take place in versus how things were in '94 may also be worth a few words. Opinion seems to be that that we're more likely to get the 2022 World Cup than the 2018 version, although it's all purely speculation at this point. As an admittedly biased observer, I'd like to think one bid or the other are bound to be successful. USSF seems to have all of their ducks in a row.
Links:
Univision executive Downs to direct U.S. bid
USA more likely to get 2002 World Cup
The case for the USA
Beasley Transfer Nixed
Bundesliga side Schalke apparently made a move for DaMarcus Beasley, but wanted him on a free transfer (which Rangers weren't going for). The move would have made me happy if it meant first team football for DMB. The man needs to be on the pitch as we head towards 2010, and it's just not happening at Rangers.
Link:
Schalke bid for Beasley rejected
More Beckham Nonsense
Reports have AC Milan's bid to make Beckham's loan permanent at 14 million pounds; seems about right to me, no matter what some will say. If MLS is willing to sell him, they have to be realistic about his value as a footballer and leave out all of the extraneous stuff. If they don't want to let him go (which might lead to a much messier ending), then I guess they could play hardball and let Milan make a tough decision. Just for perspective, 14m pounds is $19.86 million as of this morning.
Links:
David Beckham could stay at AC Milan if LA Galaxy accept £14m bid
We want Becks for good and will pay £14m to keep him, reveals Milan chief Galliani
USA World Cup Bids
The USA World Cup bids for 2018 and 2022 have spawned a host of stories and opinion on the subject; I may address it more in depth soon, but it won't be about the USA's chances to secure a Cup (mainly because it's going to be covered to death). I'm more likely to talk about what American soccer may look like when (or if) the world's biggest sporting event returns to the States. Contrasting what a potential Cup might mean for the game here, and the environment that Cup would take place in versus how things were in '94 may also be worth a few words. Opinion seems to be that that we're more likely to get the 2022 World Cup than the 2018 version, although it's all purely speculation at this point. As an admittedly biased observer, I'd like to think one bid or the other are bound to be successful. USSF seems to have all of their ducks in a row.
Links:
Univision executive Downs to direct U.S. bid
USA more likely to get 2002 World Cup
The case for the USA
Beasley Transfer Nixed
Bundesliga side Schalke apparently made a move for DaMarcus Beasley, but wanted him on a free transfer (which Rangers weren't going for). The move would have made me happy if it meant first team football for DMB. The man needs to be on the pitch as we head towards 2010, and it's just not happening at Rangers.
Link:
Schalke bid for Beasley rejected
From Sports Business Journal (through WVHooligan, where I stumbled across it) comes the news that MLS clubs are doing well with season ticket sales despite the poor economy.
While Seattle's season ticket success prior to their first MLS match has been well documented and has those in soccer circles buzzing, and Toronto's sellouts gave the league and potential expansion cities reason for optimism, it was unknown how the economic downturn might effect MLS clubs for the 2009 season. While it is still early, and not all clubs have commented on their sales figures, it may be safe to say that soccer will actually benefit from an environment where consumers are more frugal.
With limited entertainment dollars at their disposal, fans may find themselves priced out of the mainstream American sports. Several MLS teams play in cities where there is little or no competition during the league's summer schedule. Those that do share markets with Major League Baseball clubs (the only other major sports league active during the summer) may have a leg up on those teams due to smaller, less expensive ticket packages. Even when competition is not a factor, MLS teams are simply doing more to creatively market their product. While I have heard of two MLS teams that do little or no marketing in their local areas, several clubs have taken positive steps to connect with their communities and engender loyalty that will serve them well in the future. MLS teams, just as with all sports franchises, must build long lasting fan relationships that will carry them through hard economic times, or through losing spells that would otherwise see attendance lag and revenue drop drastically.
I'm certainly buoyed by the figures, and I hope that MLS shocks all observers and sees an overall attendance increase in 2009. The reports of creative ticket programs and marketing campaigns are encouraging, as they indicate an understanding on the part of the clubs of both the current economic climate as well as their place in communities on which they rely. Filling stadiums should be job one, as the MLS has sorely lacked for consistent stadium atmosphere in its brief history. Atmosphere may be more important for soccer than for any other sport, as full stadiums and passionate crowds make for engaging televised matches. Television is key to the long term survival and potential financial strength of the league, and ratings must improve if MLS is to continue to grow unimpeded. The connection between television ratings and attendance is often overlooked, so any progress on the latter should help to raise the former from their current poor standing.
Whether or not they see the big picture and understand the importance of strong attendance numbers for the league as a whole, or if they are simply doing their jobs and are taking steps to sell tickets in a tough economic time, it seems MLS sales departments are doing work that will benefit all. Discounting tickets and moving towards a "bargain event" mentality may seem a step back and a tough pill to swallow for a league striving to play with the big boys on the American sports landscape; but it is the right thing to do for now, and will hopefully see MLS take the next step towards increased popularity. If going to a MLS game is cheaper than the alternative, casual fans and those who may not have otherwise considered the option may find themselves enjoying American professional soccer at its highest level. Let's hope some of them catch the bug and end up with the passion for soccer that will help our game grow in our country.
Soccer specific stadiums will help atmosphere as well, but pure numbers are the most important factor. It's disheartening to wach an MLS game with large gaps through field level seats; the first instinct of any sports fan flipping by the game is to change the channel. If not enough people care to fill the good seats, why should they care?
While Seattle's season ticket success prior to their first MLS match has been well documented and has those in soccer circles buzzing, and Toronto's sellouts gave the league and potential expansion cities reason for optimism, it was unknown how the economic downturn might effect MLS clubs for the 2009 season. While it is still early, and not all clubs have commented on their sales figures, it may be safe to say that soccer will actually benefit from an environment where consumers are more frugal.
With limited entertainment dollars at their disposal, fans may find themselves priced out of the mainstream American sports. Several MLS teams play in cities where there is little or no competition during the league's summer schedule. Those that do share markets with Major League Baseball clubs (the only other major sports league active during the summer) may have a leg up on those teams due to smaller, less expensive ticket packages. Even when competition is not a factor, MLS teams are simply doing more to creatively market their product. While I have heard of two MLS teams that do little or no marketing in their local areas, several clubs have taken positive steps to connect with their communities and engender loyalty that will serve them well in the future. MLS teams, just as with all sports franchises, must build long lasting fan relationships that will carry them through hard economic times, or through losing spells that would otherwise see attendance lag and revenue drop drastically.
I'm certainly buoyed by the figures, and I hope that MLS shocks all observers and sees an overall attendance increase in 2009. The reports of creative ticket programs and marketing campaigns are encouraging, as they indicate an understanding on the part of the clubs of both the current economic climate as well as their place in communities on which they rely. Filling stadiums should be job one, as the MLS has sorely lacked for consistent stadium atmosphere in its brief history. Atmosphere may be more important for soccer than for any other sport, as full stadiums and passionate crowds make for engaging televised matches. Television is key to the long term survival and potential financial strength of the league, and ratings must improve if MLS is to continue to grow unimpeded. The connection between television ratings and attendance is often overlooked, so any progress on the latter should help to raise the former from their current poor standing.
Whether or not they see the big picture and understand the importance of strong attendance numbers for the league as a whole, or if they are simply doing their jobs and are taking steps to sell tickets in a tough economic time, it seems MLS sales departments are doing work that will benefit all. Discounting tickets and moving towards a "bargain event" mentality may seem a step back and a tough pill to swallow for a league striving to play with the big boys on the American sports landscape; but it is the right thing to do for now, and will hopefully see MLS take the next step towards increased popularity. If going to a MLS game is cheaper than the alternative, casual fans and those who may not have otherwise considered the option may find themselves enjoying American professional soccer at its highest level. Let's hope some of them catch the bug and end up with the passion for soccer that will help our game grow in our country.
Soccer specific stadiums will help atmosphere as well, but pure numbers are the most important factor. It's disheartening to wach an MLS game with large gaps through field level seats; the first instinct of any sports fan flipping by the game is to change the channel. If not enough people care to fill the good seats, why should they care?
The annual hype-fest known as the Super Bowl has come and gone for another year, leaving behind a trail of office absences, Monday morning hangovers, and for this writer, contemplation of the American fascination with the "Big Game". After weeks of interviews and features, countless hours of speculation and analysis, and day after day of endless buildup, a single American football game was played. Millions of Americans with no rooting interest gathered together around televisions in their homes or in bars to watch two teams compete for a championship. It's this iconic, far-reaching appeal that casts a shadow over the rest of American sports. The Super Bowl is so ingrained in the American culture that it has understandably colored how we view the tastes of the American consumer.
The behemoth of glitz, glamour, and marketing potential that is the Super Bowl has become a phenomenon that transcends sports. The NFL has 40 years of culturally relevant history behind its signature event, years that have served to make Super Bowl Sunday America's sports "holiday". The game on the field is often dwarfed by the extraneous happenings that come with it; the advertising boon the broadcast represents has itself become a major American cultural event. Mass media outlets descend on the Super Bowl's host city in numbers seen almost nowhere else. The exposure gained by the NFL, the NFL's corporate sponsors, and other entities that capitalize on the game's mass appeal is so large as to be almost immeasurable.
The hype that surrounds the Super Bowl can easily lead to frustrated feelings for soccer supporters in the U.S. The attention the final game of the NFL season receives often seems overblown, gratuitous, and (in some cases) undeserved, and we find ourselves asking why MLS Cup (or any American soccer event for that matter) cannot seem to attract even a fraction of the coverage the Super Bowl receives.
Major League Soccer, with a single game championship that echoes the nature of the Super Bowl, has looked to tap into the "Big Game" phenomenon. MLS has pushed the MLS Cup Final as their showpiece event, subscribing to the theory that the American sports mentality requires that a playoff tournament be played to determine a champion. While most of the world's foremost competitions use a single table format that crowns a champion based on overall points, MLS uses a playoff format that culminates in a championship match. In addition to fitting in with the American sports mindset, the MLS Cup final has served as Major League Soccer's biggest single annual event. The final is a benefit of the playoff format, a match that serves to draw attention to the league for one culminating day that would not exist in a single table league. The MLS Cup final garners almost no mainstream media attention, has little hype attached to it outside of the usual soccer suspects, and carries with it no culturally significant extras; yet it remains an important part of the American soccer effort, both presently and for the immediate future.
In a perfect world, I would prefer a single table. I believe that soccer, more than any other sport, is a game that does not need a playoff to crown a worthy champion. Other avenues to fill the American need for playoff competition (i.e. U.S. Open Cup) are available and should be expanded. But my view that MLS Cup is a necessary component of the professional game here (at least for the time being) is a pragmatic one; a point of view to which more American soccer fans should be attuned. Concepts like the single-table format, promotion/relegation, and the European calendar are intriguing and appealing to the traditionalists/Euro-centric among us, but are either too foreign, too difficult to implement, or simply impractical for professional soccer in the U.S. as it currently exists. Until a viable replacement for the marketing and exposure benefits MLS Cup provides can be found, the league cannot seriously consider a single table format.
While the MLS Cup final will more than likely never reach the level of the Super Bowl, the concept of a one off championship match aimed at pushing the hype meter as high as is possible remains a sound one. A single table format would certainly make MLS unique, but the loss of the MLS Cup final as the annual showpiece event of the American soccer calendar would more than mitigate any gains. MLS needs to garner all the attention it can; if the MLS Cup ceased to be, the league would lose a significant marketing tool. MLS Cup provides the league with an opportunity to exhibit itself for VIPs, current and possible corporate sponsors, the casual sports fan through a network television outlet it does not normally possess, as well as to reward loyal MLS fans with a "big game" event.
Despite the screaming of the vocal minority, MLS Cup will be around for the foreseeable future. The league may tweak the playoff format, and could conceivably consider staging the final in the home stadium of the team with the better regular-season record (which I believe is unlikely to happen), but the final itself will continue to be a part of the MLS schedule as long as it brings with it a showcase for not only the teams on the field, but the league and its future. Super Bowl-level hype or not, the MLS championship match serves a purpose for the league and fits nicely into the American concept that championships are won in championship games. With a little luck, a little more exposure, and a competition that continues to improve, perhaps MLS Cup can get its own share of hype.
The behemoth of glitz, glamour, and marketing potential that is the Super Bowl has become a phenomenon that transcends sports. The NFL has 40 years of culturally relevant history behind its signature event, years that have served to make Super Bowl Sunday America's sports "holiday". The game on the field is often dwarfed by the extraneous happenings that come with it; the advertising boon the broadcast represents has itself become a major American cultural event. Mass media outlets descend on the Super Bowl's host city in numbers seen almost nowhere else. The exposure gained by the NFL, the NFL's corporate sponsors, and other entities that capitalize on the game's mass appeal is so large as to be almost immeasurable.
The hype that surrounds the Super Bowl can easily lead to frustrated feelings for soccer supporters in the U.S. The attention the final game of the NFL season receives often seems overblown, gratuitous, and (in some cases) undeserved, and we find ourselves asking why MLS Cup (or any American soccer event for that matter) cannot seem to attract even a fraction of the coverage the Super Bowl receives.
Major League Soccer, with a single game championship that echoes the nature of the Super Bowl, has looked to tap into the "Big Game" phenomenon. MLS has pushed the MLS Cup Final as their showpiece event, subscribing to the theory that the American sports mentality requires that a playoff tournament be played to determine a champion. While most of the world's foremost competitions use a single table format that crowns a champion based on overall points, MLS uses a playoff format that culminates in a championship match. In addition to fitting in with the American sports mindset, the MLS Cup final has served as Major League Soccer's biggest single annual event. The final is a benefit of the playoff format, a match that serves to draw attention to the league for one culminating day that would not exist in a single table league. The MLS Cup final garners almost no mainstream media attention, has little hype attached to it outside of the usual soccer suspects, and carries with it no culturally significant extras; yet it remains an important part of the American soccer effort, both presently and for the immediate future.
In a perfect world, I would prefer a single table. I believe that soccer, more than any other sport, is a game that does not need a playoff to crown a worthy champion. Other avenues to fill the American need for playoff competition (i.e. U.S. Open Cup) are available and should be expanded. But my view that MLS Cup is a necessary component of the professional game here (at least for the time being) is a pragmatic one; a point of view to which more American soccer fans should be attuned. Concepts like the single-table format, promotion/relegation, and the European calendar are intriguing and appealing to the traditionalists/Euro-centric among us, but are either too foreign, too difficult to implement, or simply impractical for professional soccer in the U.S. as it currently exists. Until a viable replacement for the marketing and exposure benefits MLS Cup provides can be found, the league cannot seriously consider a single table format.
While the MLS Cup final will more than likely never reach the level of the Super Bowl, the concept of a one off championship match aimed at pushing the hype meter as high as is possible remains a sound one. A single table format would certainly make MLS unique, but the loss of the MLS Cup final as the annual showpiece event of the American soccer calendar would more than mitigate any gains. MLS needs to garner all the attention it can; if the MLS Cup ceased to be, the league would lose a significant marketing tool. MLS Cup provides the league with an opportunity to exhibit itself for VIPs, current and possible corporate sponsors, the casual sports fan through a network television outlet it does not normally possess, as well as to reward loyal MLS fans with a "big game" event.
Despite the screaming of the vocal minority, MLS Cup will be around for the foreseeable future. The league may tweak the playoff format, and could conceivably consider staging the final in the home stadium of the team with the better regular-season record (which I believe is unlikely to happen), but the final itself will continue to be a part of the MLS schedule as long as it brings with it a showcase for not only the teams on the field, but the league and its future. Super Bowl-level hype or not, the MLS championship match serves a purpose for the league and fits nicely into the American concept that championships are won in championship games. With a little luck, a little more exposure, and a competition that continues to improve, perhaps MLS Cup can get its own share of hype.
