I've got family obligations today, so I don't have time to spit out my usual thousand words of nonsense. Instead, I simply want to pose a question. I hope to have a review/commentary that relates to the question sometime in the near future:
Does it benefit MLS to attempt to maintain parity within in the league, or would soccer in the U.S. be better served by having one or two "superclubs"?
Just to frame the question a bit, I'll note that teams in the largest media markets would certainly be the leading candidates for this "superclub" status (LA Galaxy and Red Bull New York top of mind). If these teams were allowed to use their full resources to attract talent and market themselves, the profile of the league might be elevated. Parity, on the other hand, insures that fans all around the league can believe that their side can win MLS Cup every year, possibly aiding attendance throughout the league; but parity also insures a kind of across-the-board mediocrity which may hold back the entire endeavor.
I'm still fleshing out my thoughts on the matter, so I'll hold back on giving my opinion now; feel free to rant if you feel the urge.
I think this may be my best post to date, even if it is a little long. I apologize for the length in advance; just stick with it and please comment with your thoughts. It does get just a bit over-dramatic at the end, but I was reaching for a conclusion and couldn't come up with anything that more aptly summed it up.
As Americans, we've come to expect the best. Our prosperity and prominence has allowed us the luxury of always having the newest, the biggest, and the fastest. This attitude is a product of our environment, a trait so innate that we often take what we have for granted. When something fails to measure up to the standards to which we have become so accustomed, we, as a society, almost always summarily reject it. Without a history, without a legacy, without tradition passed from father to son, we simply choose to ignore that which we either don't understand, or deem unworthy of our passion.
Americans are, in a word, jaded.
Not only does our jaded nature cause us to be reviled in many parts of the world, it often keeps us from embracing new and "foreign" ideas. For many Americans, soccer fits this bill. Specifically, MLS fits this bill. Our top level soccer league is not, by anyone's estimation, one of the best leagues in the world. This is matter of fact, a fact which has retarded the growth of the professional game in the U.S. by turning away the average American sports fan.
In the modern connected age, information is no longer at a premium. Soccer fans around the world are able to watch their favorite teams, and therefore their favored leagues, from continents away, while choosing to completely ignore their domestic leagues if they so choose. Many soccer-loving residents of the U.S. (both citizens and ex-pats) do this every week, either adopting a club from another country, or carrying their allegiances with them from their homeland. These potential fans of the professional game here turn their noses up at MLS (the dreaded Eurosnob syndrome), seriously hampering the efforts of those who wish to see the league and the game succeed in this country.
For Joe Six Pack, sitting in his recliner in middle America, this combination of factors is fatal to his potential interest in soccer. There is no question that the sports he follows are played in leagues that are clearly the greatest in the world. His natural disdain as an American for anything second best is buoyed by his ability to see the best in American football, basketball, hockey, and baseball. The NFL is the only game in town for American football, so there's no question of it's supremacy. The NBA and NHL draw players and fans from all over the world, and dwarf leagues abroad in quality and exposure. Major League Baseball continues to draw away the biggest stars from Japan, the only other place where the sport is played on a level remotely comparable to its own. This isn't the case with soccer. Although Joe himself would be new enough to the game that he would likely be unable to pick up on the subtleties that separate the EPL, La Liga, and Serie A (not to mention South American leagues) from the American version, he doesn't give it a chance. He's heard from pundits, from talking heads, from blowhards, and maybe even from friends, that MLS is an inferior product. He knows, or is aware, that the league's salaries often pale in comparison with those in the other sports he follows. The games he might flip by on TV are often played in mostly empty stadiums (which are always full for other sports) on fields that were clearly not made for soccer (the ugly football line problem). Perception is reality for Joe, whether he chooses to embrace the game or not.
What to do? The league itself can do little to improve it's place in the pecking order when it has rightly chosen financial restraint over the free-wheeling spending it would take to rapidly improve quality; the lessons to be learned from the failure of the NASL are clear and important. Salaries will continue to lag behind those in other sports as long as attendances remain mediocre and teams are struggling just to get out of the red. Stadiums built for the game aren't yet the rule, and those already in use are only slowly impacting the aesthetics of play with atmosphere and field conditions. So Joe, along with millions of other sports fans for whom soccer remains a mystery, is unlikely to gravitate towards a league and a sport that is so obviously second rate in comparison to both other American sports leagues and other soccer leagues around the world. Americans just don't do second rate.
Clear answers to this problem elude me. If I wanted to be reactionary, I could just call Americans idiots and wash my hands of those who refuse to see the greatness of soccer and the potential of MLS; if I wanted to be reasonable, I could argue that Americans are simply slow to adapt and will enter the fold eventually. The first attitude is surrender, a way to convince myself that I don't care if the rest of the country learns what I know; that being that soccer is one of the greatest sports on earth, and at the least, worthy of any sports fan's attention. The second attitude is also a type of surrender; a way of throwing in the towel on converting the unconverted, convincing myself that I can be content waiting for professional game to take off in the U.S. Neither leaves me satisfied. There are those out there with a stake in the future of the sport and a love for the game that are attempting to spread the word the best they can; so I'll continue to do my part, small as it may be, to convince sports fans that even though it may not be the best, MLS is good enough.
As Americans, we've come to expect the best. Our prosperity and prominence has allowed us the luxury of always having the newest, the biggest, and the fastest. This attitude is a product of our environment, a trait so innate that we often take what we have for granted. When something fails to measure up to the standards to which we have become so accustomed, we, as a society, almost always summarily reject it. Without a history, without a legacy, without tradition passed from father to son, we simply choose to ignore that which we either don't understand, or deem unworthy of our passion.
Americans are, in a word, jaded.
Not only does our jaded nature cause us to be reviled in many parts of the world, it often keeps us from embracing new and "foreign" ideas. For many Americans, soccer fits this bill. Specifically, MLS fits this bill. Our top level soccer league is not, by anyone's estimation, one of the best leagues in the world. This is matter of fact, a fact which has retarded the growth of the professional game in the U.S. by turning away the average American sports fan.
In the modern connected age, information is no longer at a premium. Soccer fans around the world are able to watch their favorite teams, and therefore their favored leagues, from continents away, while choosing to completely ignore their domestic leagues if they so choose. Many soccer-loving residents of the U.S. (both citizens and ex-pats) do this every week, either adopting a club from another country, or carrying their allegiances with them from their homeland. These potential fans of the professional game here turn their noses up at MLS (the dreaded Eurosnob syndrome), seriously hampering the efforts of those who wish to see the league and the game succeed in this country.
For Joe Six Pack, sitting in his recliner in middle America, this combination of factors is fatal to his potential interest in soccer. There is no question that the sports he follows are played in leagues that are clearly the greatest in the world. His natural disdain as an American for anything second best is buoyed by his ability to see the best in American football, basketball, hockey, and baseball. The NFL is the only game in town for American football, so there's no question of it's supremacy. The NBA and NHL draw players and fans from all over the world, and dwarf leagues abroad in quality and exposure. Major League Baseball continues to draw away the biggest stars from Japan, the only other place where the sport is played on a level remotely comparable to its own. This isn't the case with soccer. Although Joe himself would be new enough to the game that he would likely be unable to pick up on the subtleties that separate the EPL, La Liga, and Serie A (not to mention South American leagues) from the American version, he doesn't give it a chance. He's heard from pundits, from talking heads, from blowhards, and maybe even from friends, that MLS is an inferior product. He knows, or is aware, that the league's salaries often pale in comparison with those in the other sports he follows. The games he might flip by on TV are often played in mostly empty stadiums (which are always full for other sports) on fields that were clearly not made for soccer (the ugly football line problem). Perception is reality for Joe, whether he chooses to embrace the game or not.
What to do? The league itself can do little to improve it's place in the pecking order when it has rightly chosen financial restraint over the free-wheeling spending it would take to rapidly improve quality; the lessons to be learned from the failure of the NASL are clear and important. Salaries will continue to lag behind those in other sports as long as attendances remain mediocre and teams are struggling just to get out of the red. Stadiums built for the game aren't yet the rule, and those already in use are only slowly impacting the aesthetics of play with atmosphere and field conditions. So Joe, along with millions of other sports fans for whom soccer remains a mystery, is unlikely to gravitate towards a league and a sport that is so obviously second rate in comparison to both other American sports leagues and other soccer leagues around the world. Americans just don't do second rate.
Clear answers to this problem elude me. If I wanted to be reactionary, I could just call Americans idiots and wash my hands of those who refuse to see the greatness of soccer and the potential of MLS; if I wanted to be reasonable, I could argue that Americans are simply slow to adapt and will enter the fold eventually. The first attitude is surrender, a way to convince myself that I don't care if the rest of the country learns what I know; that being that soccer is one of the greatest sports on earth, and at the least, worthy of any sports fan's attention. The second attitude is also a type of surrender; a way of throwing in the towel on converting the unconverted, convincing myself that I can be content waiting for professional game to take off in the U.S. Neither leaves me satisfied. There are those out there with a stake in the future of the sport and a love for the game that are attempting to spread the word the best they can; so I'll continue to do my part, small as it may be, to convince sports fans that even though it may not be the best, MLS is good enough.
ESPN's bid for the next round of EPL television rights leads to another obvious question I have not yet addressed: Will ESPN "Americanize" their broadcasts? In "Americanize" I mean all of the nonsense that currently infects broadcasts of American sports: in-game graphics, in-game interviews, babbling announcers, constant replays, etc. While I think ESPN is smart enough to know better when it comes to the EPL, and will find the right people to present the game properly, the question did open my eyes as to how differently EPL and MLS games are presented.
ESPN (and to a lesser extent, FSC) have done to MLS what many fear they might do to the EPL; they've Americanized the broadcasts to the point of taking away from the game on the field. I could spout off about this, skewer ESPN, and turn this post into a rant that might border on Eurosnobbery-but I won't. Instead, I'm going talk about another angle to the question: do the powers that be in American soccer trust the game?
Trusting the game is a simple matter. It boils down to letting the game speak for itself, no matter the form in which it's presented. Present soccer as it is; no over-the-top bells and whistles, no injected splashy graphics, no ridiculous rule changes, no specific efforts to . In the early years of MLS, the league certainly did not trust the game. The countdown clock and penalty shootouts to break ties, were both efforts to cater to what was believed to be a stubborn American consumer, one that would not easily take to the "foreignness" of the sport. Luckily, those embarrassing elements of MLS's early years have gone the way of the pegged jean and the Trapper Keeper; that doesn't mean that all parties involved have learned to trust the game.
Television outlets, however, have not followed the league's lead. ESPN continues to use elements it its broadcasts which are more suited to a monster truck rally than a soccer game. American commentators, brought up in a country where sports announcing is a more-is-best endeavor, have fallen into talking too much, rather than letting the game speak for itself. Graphics and statistics continue to fly at the viewer during the action, rather than at half-time where they belong. Replays are often ill-timed, inevitably leading to the viewer missing important action. All of these problems, and more, continue to plague viewers of the American game. Can there be any reasonable expectation that the situation will change for the better?
The English Premier League is notoriously, as they should be, particular about the way their product is presented. ESPN, if successful in its bid for television rights, will be subject to the same stringent requirements that Sky and Setanta are currently. Essentially, this means that ESPN will have to learn, and quickly, how to properly present world class football on a weekly basis. It's logical to believe that this can only be a boon to their MLS coverage; if ESPN fails to enact changes to MLS broadcasts to bring them in line with their EPL coverage, it's a slap in the face to American soccer fans, and we should all storm Bristol with pitch forks and torches.
To return to the general point, it's imperative that those in charge, no matter what role they play in the growth of the game in the United States, learn to trust the game in it's most basic sense. American sports fan, while stubborn, aren't stupid. If the game gains enough exposure, and those already in the fold remain vocal in their support, it should only be a matter of time before more Americans gravitate to the game. Let the game sell itself. Let the action on the pitch be the draw. Let go of all attempts, no matter how subtle, to "Americanize" the game.
Quality of play is certainly top of mind for MLS, an effort to trust the game and bring in fans as teams become stronger both domestically and in international cup competitions. The DP and GA salary cap exceptions are just the first steps on a long road the league is traveling; with a little more progress, there won't be any doubt that the league trusts the game. As for ESPN, let's cross our fingers that the EPL bid is successful; I'd love to see an MLS Primetime Thursday broadcast that looks as good as those produced by Sky and Setanta.
An afterthought, if you don't mind. I've held off on the shameless begging to this point, but I'm finding that my hopes for this blog trump any shame I might have worked up. So this is a plea to anyone that comes by my humble little spot and likes (or agrees with, or doesn't and wants to hate) what they see: please "hype" or "stumble" or "digg" or "technorati" or whatever so that I might get a few more readers. I like to think that I'm adding to the discussion with my writing here, and I believe fans of the game in this country might get something out of it. I've also added a "Blogged.com" tag at the top of the page which allows you to review (not sure if you have to sign up) the blog; that would also be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
ESPN (and to a lesser extent, FSC) have done to MLS what many fear they might do to the EPL; they've Americanized the broadcasts to the point of taking away from the game on the field. I could spout off about this, skewer ESPN, and turn this post into a rant that might border on Eurosnobbery-but I won't. Instead, I'm going talk about another angle to the question: do the powers that be in American soccer trust the game?
Trusting the game is a simple matter. It boils down to letting the game speak for itself, no matter the form in which it's presented. Present soccer as it is; no over-the-top bells and whistles, no injected splashy graphics, no ridiculous rule changes, no specific efforts to . In the early years of MLS, the league certainly did not trust the game. The countdown clock and penalty shootouts to break ties, were both efforts to cater to what was believed to be a stubborn American consumer, one that would not easily take to the "foreignness" of the sport. Luckily, those embarrassing elements of MLS's early years have gone the way of the pegged jean and the Trapper Keeper; that doesn't mean that all parties involved have learned to trust the game.
Television outlets, however, have not followed the league's lead. ESPN continues to use elements it its broadcasts which are more suited to a monster truck rally than a soccer game. American commentators, brought up in a country where sports announcing is a more-is-best endeavor, have fallen into talking too much, rather than letting the game speak for itself. Graphics and statistics continue to fly at the viewer during the action, rather than at half-time where they belong. Replays are often ill-timed, inevitably leading to the viewer missing important action. All of these problems, and more, continue to plague viewers of the American game. Can there be any reasonable expectation that the situation will change for the better?
The English Premier League is notoriously, as they should be, particular about the way their product is presented. ESPN, if successful in its bid for television rights, will be subject to the same stringent requirements that Sky and Setanta are currently. Essentially, this means that ESPN will have to learn, and quickly, how to properly present world class football on a weekly basis. It's logical to believe that this can only be a boon to their MLS coverage; if ESPN fails to enact changes to MLS broadcasts to bring them in line with their EPL coverage, it's a slap in the face to American soccer fans, and we should all storm Bristol with pitch forks and torches.
To return to the general point, it's imperative that those in charge, no matter what role they play in the growth of the game in the United States, learn to trust the game in it's most basic sense. American sports fan, while stubborn, aren't stupid. If the game gains enough exposure, and those already in the fold remain vocal in their support, it should only be a matter of time before more Americans gravitate to the game. Let the game sell itself. Let the action on the pitch be the draw. Let go of all attempts, no matter how subtle, to "Americanize" the game.
Quality of play is certainly top of mind for MLS, an effort to trust the game and bring in fans as teams become stronger both domestically and in international cup competitions. The DP and GA salary cap exceptions are just the first steps on a long road the league is traveling; with a little more progress, there won't be any doubt that the league trusts the game. As for ESPN, let's cross our fingers that the EPL bid is successful; I'd love to see an MLS Primetime Thursday broadcast that looks as good as those produced by Sky and Setanta.
An afterthought, if you don't mind. I've held off on the shameless begging to this point, but I'm finding that my hopes for this blog trump any shame I might have worked up. So this is a plea to anyone that comes by my humble little spot and likes (or agrees with, or doesn't and wants to hate) what they see: please "hype" or "stumble" or "digg" or "technorati" or whatever so that I might get a few more readers. I like to think that I'm adding to the discussion with my writing here, and I believe fans of the game in this country might get something out of it. I've also added a "Blogged.com" tag at the top of the page which allows you to review (not sure if you have to sign up) the blog; that would also be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
With the MLS SuperDraft taking place yesterday, the news that the Atlanta MLS bid is no more was a bit forgotten. While I never supported an MLS team in Atlanta, the bid's retraction is important because it is another indication that the economic realities facing the league are likely to be the most important issue of 2009.
If a financially strong bid, backed by one the country's foremost businessmen in Arthur Blank, falls by the wayside because of economic factors, then things have truly gotten bad. Montreal's bid was summarily rejected by the league when the group there attempted to low-ball the expansion fee due to the economy, and St. Louis' bid has come under extra financial scrutiny despite an in-place stadium plan. From now until such time as the financial crisis is over, every aspect of the game in America will need to be viewed through that prism. Our national entities are working without a net to a certain extent; without a strong grasp of the situation, those organizations may find themselves moving backward.
Perhaps the most unfortunate part of this dilemma is the potential 2009 has for giving American soccer big headlines. I've already listed the big stories possible for '09, both on and off the field; while all of them can still happen, their effect will certainly be muted by the economic situation. How much of a hit will MLS take to their attendance numbers? How many stadium projects will be put on hold indefinitely? How many of USMNT supporters will be able to go South Africa for the Confed Cup?
We've got to take the good with the bad these days, and as optimistic as I am about the game in the US and impatient as I am for the major soccer explosion, the economy has got me down. I've personally only taken a small hit, but it's certainly affecting the amount of entertainment dollars I will have at my disposal in 2009; a plight I share with millions of others. With a crowded sports landscape dominated by the big-money boys (NFL, MLB, NBA), soccer will need to claw for any progress it can make this year. Don Garber has repeatedly made it clear that MLS is keenly in touch with the financial situation. I have to keep his words in mind when the impatient fan in me gets frustrated; none of the shackles imposed on the teams or the league itself can come off until the powers-that-be are confident we are out of the woods.
More than ever, I think creative marketing will be key in the new economy. MLS isn't going to get by with the old standards, and will need to be discerning with its marketing dollar in 2009. Inexpensive alternatives coupled with a big splash or two may be the way to go; viral marketing and subversive concepts can create buzz if used properly. I have absolutely no idea how to do those things (yet, I'm certainly going to try to come up with something), I just believe they're possible.
If anyone has any good ideas, I'd love to hear them. We might not be able to get MLS to implement them, but it's still fun to bat ideas around.
If a financially strong bid, backed by one the country's foremost businessmen in Arthur Blank, falls by the wayside because of economic factors, then things have truly gotten bad. Montreal's bid was summarily rejected by the league when the group there attempted to low-ball the expansion fee due to the economy, and St. Louis' bid has come under extra financial scrutiny despite an in-place stadium plan. From now until such time as the financial crisis is over, every aspect of the game in America will need to be viewed through that prism. Our national entities are working without a net to a certain extent; without a strong grasp of the situation, those organizations may find themselves moving backward.
Perhaps the most unfortunate part of this dilemma is the potential 2009 has for giving American soccer big headlines. I've already listed the big stories possible for '09, both on and off the field; while all of them can still happen, their effect will certainly be muted by the economic situation. How much of a hit will MLS take to their attendance numbers? How many stadium projects will be put on hold indefinitely? How many of USMNT supporters will be able to go South Africa for the Confed Cup?
We've got to take the good with the bad these days, and as optimistic as I am about the game in the US and impatient as I am for the major soccer explosion, the economy has got me down. I've personally only taken a small hit, but it's certainly affecting the amount of entertainment dollars I will have at my disposal in 2009; a plight I share with millions of others. With a crowded sports landscape dominated by the big-money boys (NFL, MLB, NBA), soccer will need to claw for any progress it can make this year. Don Garber has repeatedly made it clear that MLS is keenly in touch with the financial situation. I have to keep his words in mind when the impatient fan in me gets frustrated; none of the shackles imposed on the teams or the league itself can come off until the powers-that-be are confident we are out of the woods.
More than ever, I think creative marketing will be key in the new economy. MLS isn't going to get by with the old standards, and will need to be discerning with its marketing dollar in 2009. Inexpensive alternatives coupled with a big splash or two may be the way to go; viral marketing and subversive concepts can create buzz if used properly. I have absolutely no idea how to do those things (yet, I'm certainly going to try to come up with something), I just believe they're possible.
If anyone has any good ideas, I'd love to hear them. We might not be able to get MLS to implement them, but it's still fun to bat ideas around.
A couple of things of note happened (or were reported on) today:
The MLS SuperDraft happened.
As I've said before, I don't know enough about any of the players to comment on the "winners" and "losers" in the draft (and I definitely won't be grading). I will say that for some reason, the Generation Adidas kids excite me a lot more than any of the others. That probably has something to do with most of them being sophomores or juniors, which means they're hitting the professional ranks at 19 or 20 instead of 21 or 22. As a soccer nation we've got to get our heads around the idea that kids need to be in professional environments as soon possible (like when they get zits, or when that crazy Jennifer-Tilly-one-second-Barry-White-the-next voice thing starts to happen). We can't just apply this plan to the obvious prodigies (Adu, Altidore, etc.) anymore.
Atlanta pulling out of the expansion race happened.
This story appeared today in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and I came by it through The 24th Minute. All I can really say is, good riddance. Atlanta's no where near ready for a team, no matter how much cash Arthur Blank has stashed in the tanks of the toilets in the kitchen and bath section. A "presence" in any geographical area should never be a compelling reason to place an expansion team, and that's all Atlanta really had going for it.
Sacha Kljestan heading to Glasgow for a trial happened.
And no, it's not Rangers, the current club of American internationals Beasley and Edu: it's Rangers' bitter rival, Celtic. Ives is reporting the story, so you know it's true, and it's certainly a huge opportunity for Sacha. I've stated in this space before that I'm all for young Americans getting quality coaching in Europe; although I will say that it's a bit of a double-edged sword when it comes to marketing MLS. It's difficult not to be excited at the possibilities though, when one's first allegiance lies with the National Team (as mine does).
FIFA soliciting for bids for World Cup 2018 & 2022 happened.
This is a bit of a non-story, but the U.S. is almost certain to bid for one (or both) of these cups. Of course I want to see the World Cup return to the states, mostly for selfish reasons, but also because of the massive exposure it will give the game in this counrty. The American soccer scene today bears almost no resemblance to that of '94, so the effect a World Cup could have would be massive. Even better that the U.S would be a much stronger side than in '94, and would play in front of a much more vocal, soccer-savvy fan base.
Comments, concerns, complaints?
The MLS SuperDraft happened.
As I've said before, I don't know enough about any of the players to comment on the "winners" and "losers" in the draft (and I definitely won't be grading). I will say that for some reason, the Generation Adidas kids excite me a lot more than any of the others. That probably has something to do with most of them being sophomores or juniors, which means they're hitting the professional ranks at 19 or 20 instead of 21 or 22. As a soccer nation we've got to get our heads around the idea that kids need to be in professional environments as soon possible (like when they get zits, or when that crazy Jennifer-Tilly-one-second-Barry-White-the-next voice thing starts to happen). We can't just apply this plan to the obvious prodigies (Adu, Altidore, etc.) anymore.
Atlanta pulling out of the expansion race happened.
This story appeared today in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and I came by it through The 24th Minute. All I can really say is, good riddance. Atlanta's no where near ready for a team, no matter how much cash Arthur Blank has stashed in the tanks of the toilets in the kitchen and bath section. A "presence" in any geographical area should never be a compelling reason to place an expansion team, and that's all Atlanta really had going for it.
Sacha Kljestan heading to Glasgow for a trial happened.
And no, it's not Rangers, the current club of American internationals Beasley and Edu: it's Rangers' bitter rival, Celtic. Ives is reporting the story, so you know it's true, and it's certainly a huge opportunity for Sacha. I've stated in this space before that I'm all for young Americans getting quality coaching in Europe; although I will say that it's a bit of a double-edged sword when it comes to marketing MLS. It's difficult not to be excited at the possibilities though, when one's first allegiance lies with the National Team (as mine does).
FIFA soliciting for bids for World Cup 2018 & 2022 happened.
This is a bit of a non-story, but the U.S. is almost certain to bid for one (or both) of these cups. Of course I want to see the World Cup return to the states, mostly for selfish reasons, but also because of the massive exposure it will give the game in this counrty. The American soccer scene today bears almost no resemblance to that of '94, so the effect a World Cup could have would be massive. Even better that the U.S would be a much stronger side than in '94, and would play in front of a much more vocal, soccer-savvy fan base.
Comments, concerns, complaints?
Here we are, roughly three hours from one of the big events on the MLS calendar, the SuperDraft (I've never understood the "super" part; what makes it super?).
Although I've indicated here that the draft needs to eventually become obsolete if MLS is going make the leap to relevancy, it's currently the best method for teams to acquire young talent. I'm mostly unfamiliar with the players, though I'll be trying to learn as much as possible about those most highly touted, if only because I'll be rooting for them to become stars. MLS is a league lacking for young star power, so the more of these players that fulfill their potential, the better.
I'm looking forward to the day that a young American (or U.S. based) starlet makes their debut in MLS after being groomed in his team's youth system. Until then, happy draft day, and I hope your team gets the guy you want.
I'm looking to put something together in the near future on the upcoming expansion announcement: there has already been plenty of discussion around the web on which cities deserve teams or have the strongest bids, so I'll be focusing on what each city's team would mean in a broader American sports context (if that makes any sense).
Although I've indicated here that the draft needs to eventually become obsolete if MLS is going make the leap to relevancy, it's currently the best method for teams to acquire young talent. I'm mostly unfamiliar with the players, though I'll be trying to learn as much as possible about those most highly touted, if only because I'll be rooting for them to become stars. MLS is a league lacking for young star power, so the more of these players that fulfill their potential, the better.
I'm looking forward to the day that a young American (or U.S. based) starlet makes their debut in MLS after being groomed in his team's youth system. Until then, happy draft day, and I hope your team gets the guy you want.
I'm looking to put something together in the near future on the upcoming expansion announcement: there has already been plenty of discussion around the web on which cities deserve teams or have the strongest bids, so I'll be focusing on what each city's team would mean in a broader American sports context (if that makes any sense).
Today, a subject much lighter than my usual fare, but one which seems to inflame more passion than most; MLS naming conventions. Philadelphia is following Seattle's lead and is conducting a naming contest. The four rumored choices certainly don't smack of creativity, and there is much discussion on the subject (don't click if you're offended by four letter words for the male anatomy).
In the early years of MLS, the league took a purely "American" approach to naming teams. The founding members of the league were given ridiculous nicknames that not only adhered to our traditional city-nickname format, but also made use of an ugly late 90's trend of singular nicknames (i.e. Galaxy, Revolution, United, Burn, Wiz, Crew, Clash, Mutiny). Only two teams were given names outside of this convention: New York/New Jersey MetroStars (hideous for other reasons) and Colorado Rapids. Kansas City was changed from "Wiz" to "Wizards" before the '97 season, a change brought on by a lawsuit rather than a sudden awakening on the part of the organization.
Recent years have seen a reversal; in the new MLS, teams are striving to emulate the aura of European sides with names like "Real" and "FC". Real Salt Lake is truly unfortunate, a name that went way too far towards a European model, using the "Real" designation when it's truly not warranted (for background, please see the history of Real Madrid). Toronto FC is derided on several levels in North American soccer circles, both for the bare bones nature of the name and for the use of "FC" in a country (and culture) where the game is called "soccer" rather than "football" (not to mention being officially "FC" and not "Football Club"). In a refreshing twist, Seattle's effort to pin a Euro-name on their new expansion club was met with a write-in campaign and a compromise in Seattle Sounders FC. It seems the best of both worlds, although again we see "FC" where perhaps "SC" is more appropriate.
The whole thing is one big mess, the type of issue that seems innocuous, but may indicate the flavor of the game in the U.S. If we let ourselves be led around by our tails when it comes to naming our teams, how can we expect to establish our own identity in any aspect of the beautiful game?
I've always leaned towards the Euro model, if only because the traditional American one has led to such abominations when the decisions are left to the minds of all-to-clever marketing departments. The Sounders result could represent a sea-change going forward, but only if Philly doesn't follow up that success story with a return to the recent norm.
I won't be a Philadelphia fan, so I'll recuse myself from the voting; if I was to choose, I guess I would lukewarmly select Philadelphia City. The name seems the most appropriate of the rumored four, and gives Philly fans a chance to organically nickname their side.
According to the MLS Philly website, voting will start on the January 19th; I guess it's a good sign that they appear in tune with the Internet rumor mill.
Feel free to state your opinion, especially if you're from Philly and plan to support the team.
In the early years of MLS, the league took a purely "American" approach to naming teams. The founding members of the league were given ridiculous nicknames that not only adhered to our traditional city-nickname format, but also made use of an ugly late 90's trend of singular nicknames (i.e. Galaxy, Revolution, United, Burn, Wiz, Crew, Clash, Mutiny). Only two teams were given names outside of this convention: New York/New Jersey MetroStars (hideous for other reasons) and Colorado Rapids. Kansas City was changed from "Wiz" to "Wizards" before the '97 season, a change brought on by a lawsuit rather than a sudden awakening on the part of the organization.
Recent years have seen a reversal; in the new MLS, teams are striving to emulate the aura of European sides with names like "Real" and "FC". Real Salt Lake is truly unfortunate, a name that went way too far towards a European model, using the "Real" designation when it's truly not warranted (for background, please see the history of Real Madrid). Toronto FC is derided on several levels in North American soccer circles, both for the bare bones nature of the name and for the use of "FC" in a country (and culture) where the game is called "soccer" rather than "football" (not to mention being officially "FC" and not "Football Club"). In a refreshing twist, Seattle's effort to pin a Euro-name on their new expansion club was met with a write-in campaign and a compromise in Seattle Sounders FC. It seems the best of both worlds, although again we see "FC" where perhaps "SC" is more appropriate.
The whole thing is one big mess, the type of issue that seems innocuous, but may indicate the flavor of the game in the U.S. If we let ourselves be led around by our tails when it comes to naming our teams, how can we expect to establish our own identity in any aspect of the beautiful game?
I've always leaned towards the Euro model, if only because the traditional American one has led to such abominations when the decisions are left to the minds of all-to-clever marketing departments. The Sounders result could represent a sea-change going forward, but only if Philly doesn't follow up that success story with a return to the recent norm.
I won't be a Philadelphia fan, so I'll recuse myself from the voting; if I was to choose, I guess I would lukewarmly select Philadelphia City. The name seems the most appropriate of the rumored four, and gives Philly fans a chance to organically nickname their side.
According to the MLS Philly website, voting will start on the January 19th; I guess it's a good sign that they appear in tune with the Internet rumor mill.
Feel free to state your opinion, especially if you're from Philly and plan to support the team.
A story just showed up in my news reader with this headline:
"ESPN Said to Plan Bid for English Premier League Soccer Rights"
Now, I've mentioned these rumors before, and the BBC reported essentially the same information a month ago, but there are a couple more details in the Bloomberg piece that are worth analyzing.
First, ESPN is said to be "considering bids for one or two of the six packages on offer". The 138 EPL games each season are divided into six packages; currently Sky holds four and Setanta two. No one network is allowed to control more than five of the packages.
It's theorized that ESPN will start a new channel in the UK to broadcast their games (I believe it's a theory: it's stated as fact in the Bloomberg piece, but it isn't attributed to any ESPN source).
As an American soccer fan, I'm excited about this prospect for a couple of different reasons, each which relate back to the general state of the game in the U.S. One, ESPN is the premier American televised sports provider; a channel dedicated to soccer in the ESPN family would be a major step up in terms of exposure. There doesn't appear to me to be any reason that this channel wouldn't be available in the States, as there would be no extra cost to ESPN in terms of language or staffing. Two, the future ESPN soccer channel seems a logical place for MLS broadcasts to end up. There should be little conflict, with seasons that overlap for only a few months each year and start times hours apart. If ESPN is going to invest so heavily in the game abroad, why not throw a few more dollars at the much cheaper domestic league? American soccer is desperately in need of a dedicated studio show, and the new channel would provide a good platform for it.
I may be a little blinded by the potential windfall that ESPN dipping its over-sized toes into the EPL could be for American soccer fans, so please don't hesitate to ground me if you see any negatives.
I will say that I hope the American cable giants don't dick around with adding the new channel if it does come to pass. I'd be forced to switch back to satellite.
Just for reference, here's
an additional story on ESPN and the EPL rights from the Telegraph.
"ESPN Said to Plan Bid for English Premier League Soccer Rights"
Now, I've mentioned these rumors before, and the BBC reported essentially the same information a month ago, but there are a couple more details in the Bloomberg piece that are worth analyzing.
First, ESPN is said to be "considering bids for one or two of the six packages on offer". The 138 EPL games each season are divided into six packages; currently Sky holds four and Setanta two. No one network is allowed to control more than five of the packages.
It's theorized that ESPN will start a new channel in the UK to broadcast their games (I believe it's a theory: it's stated as fact in the Bloomberg piece, but it isn't attributed to any ESPN source).
As an American soccer fan, I'm excited about this prospect for a couple of different reasons, each which relate back to the general state of the game in the U.S. One, ESPN is the premier American televised sports provider; a channel dedicated to soccer in the ESPN family would be a major step up in terms of exposure. There doesn't appear to me to be any reason that this channel wouldn't be available in the States, as there would be no extra cost to ESPN in terms of language or staffing. Two, the future ESPN soccer channel seems a logical place for MLS broadcasts to end up. There should be little conflict, with seasons that overlap for only a few months each year and start times hours apart. If ESPN is going to invest so heavily in the game abroad, why not throw a few more dollars at the much cheaper domestic league? American soccer is desperately in need of a dedicated studio show, and the new channel would provide a good platform for it.
I may be a little blinded by the potential windfall that ESPN dipping its over-sized toes into the EPL could be for American soccer fans, so please don't hesitate to ground me if you see any negatives.
I will say that I hope the American cable giants don't dick around with adding the new channel if it does come to pass. I'd be forced to switch back to satellite.
Just for reference, here's
an additional story on ESPN and the EPL rights from the Telegraph.
ESPN has moved the USA-Mexico qualifier from one of the lesser lights of their lineup (ESPN Classic) to one of the big boys (ESPN2) and I couldn't be happier. HD baby!
It's good to see ESPN stepping up and highlighting (somewhat) the only big-time soccer match on this continent; moving college basketball (even if it is Xavier-Dayton) out of the way to give USA-Mexico a proper presentation might actually indicate that things are picking up. Hopefully, this is an indication that ESPN wants to give soccer a bump, and other improvements in coverage will follow.
I dream of a day when highlights of USA-Mexico lead Sportscenter. I dream of a day when Tommy Smyth (or whoever) is in studio to analyze the match on that night's Sportscenter. I dream of a day when ESPN's full weight is brought to bear on American soccer, instead of the lip-service they have given it to this point. Maybe bumping regionally relevant college basketball is first indication that those dreams can come true.
I am starting to get a little worked up for USA-Sweden, in spite of myself. As much as I love watching the Euro leagues on the weekend, I never really have a dog in the fight. I miss having a rooting interest, and the Sweden match will certainly provide me the fix I've been missing. I'll be a nutjob on January 24th no matter if the game means something or not; and it will certainly ramp up the anticipation for February 11th and the game that actually means something.
Side Note: If anyone has info on the television coverage of the Confed Cup this summer, let me know. I just realized that I don't know where it might be on TV and I want to be sure I'm not going to miss out.
It's good to see ESPN stepping up and highlighting (somewhat) the only big-time soccer match on this continent; moving college basketball (even if it is Xavier-Dayton) out of the way to give USA-Mexico a proper presentation might actually indicate that things are picking up. Hopefully, this is an indication that ESPN wants to give soccer a bump, and other improvements in coverage will follow.
I dream of a day when highlights of USA-Mexico lead Sportscenter. I dream of a day when Tommy Smyth (or whoever) is in studio to analyze the match on that night's Sportscenter. I dream of a day when ESPN's full weight is brought to bear on American soccer, instead of the lip-service they have given it to this point. Maybe bumping regionally relevant college basketball is first indication that those dreams can come true.
I am starting to get a little worked up for USA-Sweden, in spite of myself. As much as I love watching the Euro leagues on the weekend, I never really have a dog in the fight. I miss having a rooting interest, and the Sweden match will certainly provide me the fix I've been missing. I'll be a nutjob on January 24th no matter if the game means something or not; and it will certainly ramp up the anticipation for February 11th and the game that actually means something.
Side Note: If anyone has info on the television coverage of the Confed Cup this summer, let me know. I just realized that I don't know where it might be on TV and I want to be sure I'm not going to miss out.
I'm not usually one for letting others dictate my focus here, but today I'm going to make an exception.
Kartik Krishnaiyer has sounded off regarding the apparent poor ranking of MLS in comparison to leagues around the world.
Let me first say that I am not familiar with the IFFHS; I am not aware how well these rankings are regarded, or if they hold any weight in the international soccer community at all. I am aware, however, that these rankings are a bunch of crap.
I'll clarify, just in case you're confused. When I say that the rankings are crap, I mean purely from the perspective of MLS, an MLS fan, or anyone who wishes to see the league succeed. Some will point out that these rankings are an indication that the league is no where near as strong as its proponents claim it to be; I will point out that whether the league is more or less highly ranked then we wish it to be, it's still our league. Worrying about the ranking of MLS when compared to any other league is pointless in that it causes us to focus on subjective matters that have nothing to do with the competition on the field. As American soccer fans, we should ignore these rankings if only as a matter of principle; the league is severely handicapped by a restrictive salary structure that makes comparing it to any league, much less those in Mexico and Costa Rica, a laughable exercise. If anything, we should be heartened by the fact that MLS have managed to win anything at all against teams from a popular, well-funded, and respected league like that of Mexico.
As long as the MLS is forced to remain a financially conservative endeavor, these rankings will continue to mean nothing.
Kartik Krishnaiyer has sounded off regarding the apparent poor ranking of MLS in comparison to leagues around the world.
Let me first say that I am not familiar with the IFFHS; I am not aware how well these rankings are regarded, or if they hold any weight in the international soccer community at all. I am aware, however, that these rankings are a bunch of crap.
I'll clarify, just in case you're confused. When I say that the rankings are crap, I mean purely from the perspective of MLS, an MLS fan, or anyone who wishes to see the league succeed. Some will point out that these rankings are an indication that the league is no where near as strong as its proponents claim it to be; I will point out that whether the league is more or less highly ranked then we wish it to be, it's still our league. Worrying about the ranking of MLS when compared to any other league is pointless in that it causes us to focus on subjective matters that have nothing to do with the competition on the field. As American soccer fans, we should ignore these rankings if only as a matter of principle; the league is severely handicapped by a restrictive salary structure that makes comparing it to any league, much less those in Mexico and Costa Rica, a laughable exercise. If anything, we should be heartened by the fact that MLS have managed to win anything at all against teams from a popular, well-funded, and respected league like that of Mexico.
As long as the MLS is forced to remain a financially conservative endeavor, these rankings will continue to mean nothing.
As I'm sure anyone who might read this blog knows, the MLS combine is currently taking place in Florida. The combine will be followed by the MLS Superdraft, which takes place in St. Louis on January 15th. It seems the timing is right to take a look at the way domestic players end up with MLS teams and what changes might be coming or might be necessary.
For each of the "Big Four" professional sports in the United States (and in three cases, Canada), there remains little competition when it comes to signing players. The NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball are each the undisputed top league in their respective sports. American sports leagues have the deepest pockets and the biggest stages, and players dream of playing here. MLS does not have this luxury. Competition for players is fierce, the pockets of MLS teams are limited, and very rarely do players aspire to play in a second-rate league in a country that largely ignores both the league and the game itself.
For the Big Four, drafts have become the law of the land. The draft spreads out the best talent in a way that helps poor teams improve (theoretically) and parity reign. Parity is seen as a key to the success of the NFL, and other major sports leagues either strive for parity give it lip service. MLS has followed this model, using the draft to disseminate college talent through the league without salaries skyrocketing due to teams bidding against each other for these young domestic players.
The draft is part of the larger MLS structure, which includes player allocation, the salary cap, and centrally controlled contracts. If the MLS is to compete on a global (or even continental) level as a serious league, the draft will need to fade away. The existence of the college soccer system has been a boon to the early years of the MLS, as teams have not had to invest heavily in youth systems to find capable domestic players. However, this is a situation that cannot be allowed to continue if MLS is to take the next step. Teams must now invest in youth systems and the league must throw away the crutch of the draft if the league is to grow and the quality of play is to improve.
College soccer is a fine place for the marginal talent, and will more than likely never go away completely. The system may always contribute players in some numbers to MLS. But soccer differs from other American sports, and players are often over-the-hill at thirty. American players are being handicapped by a system the refuses to develop them in a professional atmosphere at an age on par with their peers abroad.
I, just like anyone else who follows MLS, will be excited to see the young talent entering the league through the Super Draft. But I'm holding onto the hope that, sooner rather than later, the draft is no longer a circled date on the MLS calendar.
For each of the "Big Four" professional sports in the United States (and in three cases, Canada), there remains little competition when it comes to signing players. The NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball are each the undisputed top league in their respective sports. American sports leagues have the deepest pockets and the biggest stages, and players dream of playing here. MLS does not have this luxury. Competition for players is fierce, the pockets of MLS teams are limited, and very rarely do players aspire to play in a second-rate league in a country that largely ignores both the league and the game itself.
For the Big Four, drafts have become the law of the land. The draft spreads out the best talent in a way that helps poor teams improve (theoretically) and parity reign. Parity is seen as a key to the success of the NFL, and other major sports leagues either strive for parity give it lip service. MLS has followed this model, using the draft to disseminate college talent through the league without salaries skyrocketing due to teams bidding against each other for these young domestic players.
The draft is part of the larger MLS structure, which includes player allocation, the salary cap, and centrally controlled contracts. If the MLS is to compete on a global (or even continental) level as a serious league, the draft will need to fade away. The existence of the college soccer system has been a boon to the early years of the MLS, as teams have not had to invest heavily in youth systems to find capable domestic players. However, this is a situation that cannot be allowed to continue if MLS is to take the next step. Teams must now invest in youth systems and the league must throw away the crutch of the draft if the league is to grow and the quality of play is to improve.
College soccer is a fine place for the marginal talent, and will more than likely never go away completely. The system may always contribute players in some numbers to MLS. But soccer differs from other American sports, and players are often over-the-hill at thirty. American players are being handicapped by a system the refuses to develop them in a professional atmosphere at an age on par with their peers abroad.
I, just like anyone else who follows MLS, will be excited to see the young talent entering the league through the Super Draft. But I'm holding onto the hope that, sooner rather than later, the draft is no longer a circled date on the MLS calendar.
I just saw this at The Offside Rules and had to post about it myself:
.
It's freaking FANTASTIC. I'll just echo what was already said there by saying here that this is exactly what MLS needs; think NFL Films for American soccer. Regular pieces like this, and more video like the one of the first goal at Rio Tinto (it gave me chills) would give the MLS a new element that's missing from the current scene.
Anyone who isn't a fan of Gabby Okito after watching the piece on him, soccer fan or not, should check themselves for a soul.
.
It's freaking FANTASTIC. I'll just echo what was already said there by saying here that this is exactly what MLS needs; think NFL Films for American soccer. Regular pieces like this, and more video like the one of the first goal at Rio Tinto (it gave me chills) would give the MLS a new element that's missing from the current scene.
Anyone who isn't a fan of Gabby Okito after watching the piece on him, soccer fan or not, should check themselves for a soul.
|
