Hey everyone, I didn’t quit the site that easy.  Over the past month I’ve faced major writing block in addition to getting engaged to my pre-wifey, traveling to Miami for the first time, putting in time at the ol’ day job and watching a boat load of soccer (even physically playing it one time, which was fun).  I’m not going to bore you with the details so let’s just dive into another edition of ‘Why American soccer isn’t that good’.

Only one of the main reasons I stopped updating was that …. American soccer is starting to get better.  Not in a ‘the kid who got picked last in basketball didn’t get picked last this time’ but ‘the kid who got picked last is maybe the second or third pick’.  America is right in the middle of things. They beat Mexico finally in Mexico City and Dempsey just signed a deal giving him more salary than any other American in history.  Signs are looking up … which is a bit rough for me.  I named this suckyball, do I have to change it now to ‘Pretty good ball?”  The site name was my girlfriends idea, and even though I find it catchy, it doesn’t RELATE anymore to my ideas on the game out here.  I used to make fun of the fact that ESPN didn’t have ANY soccer coverage and out of nowhere they launched ESPNFC.com which no doubt is read by millions of readers.  Also one of my favorite sites, grantland.com, disdained MLS so bad they refused to cover it even after putting up weekly in-depth posts of the English Premiere League.  What is this and what does it mean??: 

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/35285/the-designated-player-an-introduction-to-our-new-mls-column

A specific column on MLS from GRANTLAND?? The league really is slow but steady wins the race …

So let’s look forward, if soccer continues to grow …. and soccer’s admirers continue to play the ‘slow but steady growth’ card … what happens in five years? 

Will the NFL ever lose enough power to appear ….. less omnipotent?

Last night I watched part of the game between the Giants and the Cowboys.  Two teams worth over 3.5 billion dollars were showcased on the first broadcast of the NFL season and I’d guess at least twenty million people watched (AT LEAST).  They had a Rockefeller Center preparty music where No Doubt played and the league and NBC showed off new field technology and analysis for the upcoming 2012 season. 

I’m cutting to the chase, it’s a bit boring now watching NFL games knowing that not only there’s a commercial every fifteen seconds but also a third of each team will end up with brain damage.  I concede that the broadcast quality is on-par with any Hollywood blockbuster, but are we watching players play a game or are we watching a celebration of high-quality advertising and collective patriotism?  Are young people that at home with commercials to get bathed in a glow of Madison Avenue one out of every two minutes for an NFL game?  It looks like it and it’s sad (by the way, I’m a hypocrite on this, some of the commercials aren’t that bad).

I wrote it before and I wrote it again, the NFL is inching towards some far off cousin of the Hunger Games where poor destitute physically gifted young men are trained to injure and maul eachother on field and broadcast into millions of homes from ‘the capital’ (New York City is the NFL’s homebase by the way). 

And yet I’m not disgusted enough to give it up completely!!!!

If anything I think the NFL’s weak point is there’s only so much control and power it can amass before it can’t hit the profit projections anymore.  The Giants are selling scarves now which shows that some tide out there is changing.  About a year ago I complained that soccer scarves are pretty ridiculous and euro-centric, the joke’s on me though because now if I buy one I will feel more like Eli Manning. 

Also the choice of getting No Doubt to perform seemed an odd choice.  Gwen Stefani is married now and is known for being a high-society fashion maven … why is she dressed in the same outfit from over ten years ago?  Why is the drummer wearing the same face paint?  Why is a band from my youth being presented not as a rebellious entity but a tool for NFL’s pre-season extravaganza.  There’s no way I could imagine Gwen Stefani singing ‘Don’t Speak’ to a crowd right before a Troy Aikman / Joe Montana game circa 1994 …. I doubt younger people identify with what the NFL’s going for in 2014 ….. but constant brain damage and expecting a life-changing injury every five minutes is a draw that’ll keep the fans watching.

Sidenote: I watched this NFL Game and then glanced at the NBC Sports presentation of the Rapids vs the Timbers (hoorayy!!!).  The gap between the two leagues appears at least ten years off, maybe Don Garber should call Green Day or the Offspring.

Could America ever draw players away from Spain and England?

They did with David Beckham but that whole scenario seems so insane in retrospect that I can’t believe it happened.  The new crop of superstars practices day in and day out with an eye towards Madrid or Manchester (United or City).  It’s great getting the celebrated ex-star every once in a while but how far away are we from not only negotiating with rising elite talent but SIGNING them before they go across the pond?

I think there’s a few factors young star players look at when deciding there future.  They want to play with the BEST (so far Beckham, Henry and to a certain extent Donovan will be teammates for the youngsters).  I also think Latino talent is growing up and admires the MLS because the teams are in the backyard but …. so is Mexico (which also has great players).  The Mexico point brings up the second issue.

Young players want the MOST MONEY for the shortest amount of years played.  It makes sense, and Mexico and Brazil all pay a ton more money to their players.  Neymar just went ahead and bought his own YACHT as his team placates him before his own transfer.

So …. this question is tricky.  How do you sign new elite players from EUROPE or WHEREVER when Mexico and Brazil are nearby and offer more money?  It seems like the only thing MLS can do is try signing local talent (which it has been doing) and then trying to sign foreign talent that has a hard time getting playing time in Brazil or Mexico (Vietnamese, Columbians, assorted African countries etc). 

Bottom line MLS can’t sign the next Ronaldo until it not only beats Mexican or Brazilian teams  (let alone EPL or La Liga teams) on the playing field but at the business table.

We’ll see how that goes down the line …..

If you’re a consistent reader of this site you might have noticed I’ve used the above picture more than a few times.  I can’t give you a good reason I use it, only that for some reason I feel it’s a good example of ‘American soccer’ … namely the two stars aren’t American and yet they’re two huge attractions for our American soccer league.  So in the spirit of this post, let’s look ahead maybe five or six years when these players move on from here and MLS goes back to life after Beckham.  So what will MLS and American soccer look like when these players move on and MLS’s television contracts are set to expire?

1.  Mexico might shove us around a lot more than they do now.  Not only did they come out of our Olympic qualifying group in first place, but they won the Gold over Brazil in the Olympic final.  Do you think they’re phased by Clint Dempsey kicking passes around when they’ve defeated the original Beautiful Game?  A lot of people are stating that it’s good for our national team because we’re geographical neighbors and close to Mexico …. but does that argument make any sense?  If my next door neighbor is a talented soccer player does that mean I’m good too just because I’m close by?  Maybe if I TRAINED with him … but none of our American players are going through the Mexican academies are they?

2.     The media cares more about our Women’s national team than either MLS or our Men’s team.  A gold medal and a Women’s World Cup final can do that … but let’s keep in mind that there’s not even a Women’s professional league to play in.  Hope Solo has even been rumored to have tried playing on an MLS team, now does it seem that crazy if some MLS team decides to take her up on that when she’s a bigger start out here than most of our better male players?

3.  ESPN.com will finally launch a better soccer section.  Even though it mentioned ‘more MLS coverage’, I think what we’ll get is ‘more Premiere League stats’ or ‘more European coverage’.  If you want to see for yourself go ahead and check out ESPNFC.com in about a month or two.

4.  A top soccer website had its annual breakdown of the top 50 players in the world.  Guess how many MLS players cracked the list?  The answer is the same as fifty minus fifty.  And everyone’s favorite soccer playing Texan Clint Dempsey barely cracked the list after putting together a monster Premiere League season (he was actually#50).

Source:
http://www.goal.com/en-us/slideshow/69

5.  MLS seems to not be pacing itself with expansion teams.  A news report came out this week that the league is willing to shell out millions of dollars out of pocket to build a new soccer stadium in Queens.  This is after Montreal was added as an expansion team and also after Orlando kept trying to hold the door open for them to invest into the league.  Are the expansions a good way for the league to grow or are the league’s owners so hungry for new revenue that they’ll let anyone with 40 million dollars and college soccer field into the league?  I hope it’s the first reason.

After over a year following the league I’ve been to a Red Bulls game, a Chelsea game and a Real Madrid/AC Milan game.  Believe it or not I didn’t mind the Red Bulls game and enjoyed myself just as much as I did with the other two.  I wouldn’t mind going back and watching Henry again if I could somehow find a Saturday game not played at 8pm at night far away in New Jersey.  But if you’re asking me to attend a game with no Henry to watch when I could just as easily get tickets to some better European team friendly closer to my house?  That’s a difficult ticket to sell …. and that’s coming from someone who writes a blog about soccer in America.

1.  TV ratings will keep going up!!!

They’re not, they’ve been flat.  The All-Star game is an important indicator of the overall health of the tv ratings.  This year’s game against Chelsea showed a ratings drop:

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/07/2012-mls-all-star-game-down-double-digits/

Also the high ratings games for this year involve either New York or Los Angeles and have the Olympics or huge European games drawing in viewers.  You can’t really predict what will happen in 2013 when the Olympics aren’t there ……….. but at least 2014 will have more soccer coverage right? 

In my opinion the ratings are stagnant and only move when two major teams are involved, otherwise not as many people watch the smaller teams.  Call me a hater but it seems that in the heart of every MLS fan optimism abounds when reality can come up short.

2.  American soccer will keep improving and dominate against Mexico!! 

Estas loco??? Have you noticed all the soccer ads in the Olympics feature our women?  America does not have an American men’s soccer team in the Olympics because we couldn’t qualify.  America can’t beat Mexico by a large margin right now and I hate typing this, but I will because I think it’s true:  Mexico is getting better.   

Their clubs have more money, their top clubs beat MLS top clubs every year and if they Mexicans played against strong squads they’d put up a fight.  It’s not going to be surprising when Mexico goes deeper in the Olympics (even after Spain crashed out). 

So there, television ratings are flat and our national team can’t match up well against Mexico.

………. so why did I name this ‘In Defense of Suckyball’?

I believe the league will improve but it’s going to take at least five or six years to start making waves.  That’s enough time for the league’s business end to start making an impact.  If you follow MLS you must’ve heard the stereotype of ‘slow but steady’ or ‘being financial secure’.  What this means is that teams aren’t throwing money into the wind to chase star players.  What they’re doing is selecting the best players for the cheapest amount of money and building the league from the bottom up.  Executives aren’t afraid to attract players from countries that actually care about soccer and even though our national players have to fight to get on MLS squads, the talent level as a whole is improving.  It was a good surprise to see the MLS side upset Chelsea for the All-Star game as well.  It was even better when the three goal scorers were all Americans who had spent a good portion of their career in MLS (Wondolowski, Pontius and Eddie Johnson).

Also I’ve noticed that, going against what I thought before, I even want to invite people out to MLS games.  Shocking I know! But if you’re at a soccer game it’s not only acceptable to shout out and degrade opposing fans but it opens up a whole new side of cheering for sport.  Because so much of the ball movement is controlled by specific individuals you as a fan you get to pretend you’re a second year college art student.  You can talk to eachother about ‘creativity in a sequence’ or the ‘first touch mastery’ of a popular player.  When’s the last time you said that major league baseball power hitter did something unique and tricky?  When that NFL player tackled that other guy did it surprise you when it happened and was it skillfull ?? (Full disclosure: NFL collisions can be like miniature car accidents, dangerous for the people involved  but onlookers will stop over and over again to see the damage, including myself).  But well-played soccer can be a blast when viewed live and I think MLS can reach higher apexes, without a doubt.  The only comparison I can make is a basketball game and it seems like being smooth with your feet just seems more difficult to me then controlling a ball with your hands.

So yes I think the league is going to improve, and in theory more people will follow it.  But there’s a huge difference between months, years and decades and another difference between a Chelsea friendly at Yankee Stadium and Red Bull game in Harrison NJ (although I actually liked the Red Bulls just as much!).

Tonight features the MLS All-stars facing off against Chelsea in a game ESPN2 describes as ‘the heritage of the old guard taking on new world power’.  Last year I wrote that the All-star game meant nothing and was just another day for the Manchester United squad on summer vacation.  Is that still the case?

Let’s find out.  Above is a link to the trailer ESPN put together to try and get stateside soccer fans blood boiling against those darn Europeans.

0-5 seconds:

There’s footage of some old colonial firearms going off and Landon Donavan going making a pass.  Then comes the voice over ‘the best of North America against the European champions’.  There’s also footage of MLS’s Thierry Henry (who is French and also has been a European champion, yet is referred to as the best of North America.)

……

But does MLS really feature North America’s best?  Were they even developed here? 

5-25 seconds:

David Beckham – English. 

Landon Donovan – American

Freddy Montero – Columbian

Dwayne De Rosario – Canadian

Chris Wondolowski – American

25-30 seconds:

A nice tifoish drape display, pretty classy no?  Oh wait, that must’ve been designed by
http://sidlee.com
!!!  They’re a Montreal based advertising firm that MLS executives have been raving about for half a year.  I can’t say they’re doing a bad job as the league’s attendance and television ratings have been rising a bit, and at least they’re not European.  Just French-Canadian??

Even though most American die-hards will say that I’m putting a negative light on the teams efforts I have to point out that the league itself has always pushed itself into European comparisons.  This All-star game has nothing to do with American soccer players but everything to do with a smaller league trying to exploit much bigger soccer followings (MLS’s European star players, the Chelsea tour and even Seattle’s rabid fan-base which was shown in three cuts).

I can’t say that I don’t want the MLS to win, I do.  It’s just that this All-star game isn’t anything like The Avengers playing soccer against Loki and his pale Chelsea brethren (as this ad would have you believe).

Bon chance.

A rising number of American fans hold onto the belief that if there were multiple national soccer leagues then it would only be a small matter of years until the U.S.A wins the World Cup and our clubs can beat Manchester City.  Does that theory even hold water?

I looked into the English system first and was surprised not only by how many levels they have (four professional) but the amount of time those teams have been playing.  It’s not out of the ordinary to have a fourth level team from the 1920s still showing up every weekend to play in front of a good number of fans.  You would think that the team would have been dismantled after fifty years of playing sub-standard soccer but that’s not the case.  Yet when I think about it a bit more it makes total sense.  If I have a local team playing in my BACKYARD and they have a chance of being promoted to a higher level, then I wouldn’t mind paying ten dollars to see if they can do it or not (because they’re they’re somehow connected, however tenuous, to higher levels of play).

La Liga and Italian soccer have similar systems and both hold at least two levels of professional teams.  But could you make the argument that more levels of play equal better play at the top level?   

This is where MLS might have an ace up its sleeve.

The American league is set up different than other pro/rel systems because MLS is controlled as a single entity that ensures that the teams budgets are accounted for, not twenty owners fighting for business survival.  Although any MLS team owner can join in and maybe cough up enough money for a stadium deal or t-shirt sponsor, he doesn’t have the freedom or control to hire whatever player he wants.  It’s almost as if the teams only compete with eachother on the field.  Outside of it the league ensures that the status quo is maintained season after season regardless of which team does better than the others.  With promotion and relegation owners have to spend a majority of time trying to avoid bankruptcy and plan player acquisitions, let alone focusing on the win-loss column. 

For every fan making a huge deal out of promotion and relegation that’s another person that doesn’t have to worry about his team folding because of mismanaged finances.  Even if an MLS team tries to lose money hand over fist by somehow signing Mario Balotelli for 80 million dollars the league will step in and block the trade (unless Mario wants to play for three million a year, which would be unreal).  The league is iron-handed the same way the NFL has full control over the NFL draft and college football:  There’s no way a team can play outside of the rules as the single entity structure ensures every last dollar is accounted for.

Which brings us to the question … is elite play the result of competitive promotion and relegation or something else?  I think the better answer is MONEY and TRAINING, and one of those is a bit harder to get a supply of.  If we look at the English soccer leagues again you see the teams that started separating themselves from the pack in the 1940s are the teams that found larger pools of money to pay the top players.  The same goes for the Italian and Spanish leagues. 

If MLS continues to have positive cash flow and can match the spending power of teams like Real Madrid (unlikely, but impossible) then it won’t be difficult to compete.  If an MLS team has a 500 million dollar payroll then it won’t matter what goes on down in the third level.

Although any knowledgable fan of world soccer will see where I’m going with this, I’m going to go ahead and state the dead obvious:  Americans will pay more to see two foreign super teams play against eachother (in a game that means nothing) than watch two American MLS teams play in a regular season game. 

To begin with, I’ve never been to a soccer game besides the ones I played in when I was seven or eight.  This is about to change.  This summer, four major European teams are coming to New York and suckyball.wordpress.com was gifted tickets for both games.  And when I say ‘gifted’ I mean my girlfriend bought them for us.  Not just AC Milan is scheduled to play this summer but also Paris St-Germaine, Real Madrid and Champions League Winners Chelsea FC at Yankee stadium.  This begins to answer the question … if MLS fans will buy tickets to watch the Sounders play against Manchester United, how much will they pay for Real Madrid against AC Milan?  And I went to stubhub.com to find out!

For comparison, first I went first to check on Red Bulls tickets for Red Bull Arena.  I wanted to use the most EXPENSIVE tickets as an example, but those were for two French league teams (tickets starting at $39).  So then I went with the second highest … and those again featured a European team, the Tottenham Hotspurs (tickets starting at $38).  I then went with a standard game which should be on MLS’s radar, the DC United game that will be focused on NBC Sports this upcoming Sunday.  The tickets for there range from 29 – 259 dollars on resale.  And again, these tickets are for a game about a week away.

Let’s look at the Chelsea FC tickets.  Right now the tickets run between 53 – 330 dollars.  This game is over four weeks away and the capacity for Yankee Stadium is pretty much double the size of Red Bull Arena.  In about a month you can expect the ticket price to go upward although it’s tough to tell right now.  Keep in mind this game doesn’t mean anything other than you can watch Drogba pass the ball to Fernando Torres a couple of times (before they’re both benched for rest in the second half).

And then there was Real Madrid.  What self respecting soccer fan wouldn’t mind shelling out between $140 to $1,000 dollars a ticket? 

http://www.stubhub.com/ac-milan-tickets/milan-vs-madrid-8-8-2012-4094263/

And keep in mind it’s even further away into August!!  So buy the time Mr. Ronaldo lands in New York City a ticket could be over well over $250 for a cheap seat in the nosebleeds where you can’t see anyone that well.

In conclusion, am I bragging about scoring these tickets?  Yes, without guilt.  Do I think American teams could one day gain the prestige that European teams benefit from?  If there were 20 other cloned David Beckhams going to 20 different countries similar to Singapore then yes, maybe we can make some change putting on the road shows.  But as of right now certain major stadiums are bypassing MLS teams altogether and inviting the major clubs, and national teams like Brazil’s, to put on a quick friendly on American soil.  If it’s good for Yankee Stadium and Cowboy Stadium how long until Manchester United is playing indoor soccer at the Miami Heat’s American Airlines arena?  Is there anyway Lebron could play a few minutes?

Now the  … other news: They’re paying Manchester United a ton of money to be associated with them as a way to help Chevrolet get further into China.  They’re also putting together a ‘Chevrolet China Cup’ as a way to let everyone know that Wayne Rooney and Alex Ferguson love driving Chevy cars. 

 Part of their reasoning for this is, per the link below, “more people in the world wear Manchester United jerseys than NFL jerseys combined” (ooooooh, Roger Goodell got burned.)

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/06/04/Marketing-and-Sponsorship/GM.aspx

Although I think this is a good deal for GM right now I doubt that it looks good on either MLS or our national team.  It would’ve been great if General Motors had handed Don Garber a decent sized amount to be ‘the official automaker of MLS’ .  But advertisers go where the people are and it’s just a fact that Manchester United’s branding power is worth more than all 19 MLS teams combined.

But don’t you think the Men’s national team should start signing a few more advertising deals around now?  Well …. no, not yet.  They still haven’t gotten to the point where they can dominate Canada and it still looks like any attention they receive is from either a) playing Brazil or b) playing Mexico.  It doesn’t look like they’ll beat either team soon but American advertisers enjoy when the U.S. team plays against Brazil or Mexico (or Spain, Italy etc).

But wait … with that line of reasoning wouldn’t you think American advertisers would just skip American games and focus on a game where Brazil and Mexico might play against eachother? 

Wait a minute … that just happened over the weekend at COWBOY STADIUM.

84,000 people showed up for the recent game and Jerry Jones is starting to realize the potential of international soccer.  So is Budweiser because they made a giant Bud Light tifo for the entire stadium to look at.  When’s the last time you saw a gargantuan Sam Adams tifo at Gillette Stadium?

To cut this brief I’ll outline my main point.  Most American soccer fans feel vindicated when the Super Bowl loses a major advertiser like GMC and the NFL loses a little face to the soccer world.  It points to a recent trend where their ad rates will continue to flat line instead of the once steady growth in the 80s and 90s.  But the new advertising money in soccer will only flow into areas where there is a high demand … and right now the only thing American soccer has going for it is that it’s American.  In 95% of the soccer kingdom that’s not cutting it. 

So in five years from now is it that absurd if MLS sponsorship has just modest, small gains while the Primera and the Mexican national team receive increased love from major American corporations?  Is it that crazy to think NBC and ESPN will show more important Primera games if the ratings start to accelerate?  No one could’ve believed that GMC pulled out of Superbowl advertising, is it that crazy to think major American companies will promote other leagues instead of MLS when they realize soccer fans watch the other leagues more?

Best of luck Garber.

Let’s skip past the Scotland friendly and just go right into this upcoming Wednesday for Team U.S.A.’s next friendly: a game against Brazil.  American soccer neophytes will make a bigger deal out of this then they should, however Brazil’s team isn’t the world dominator they used to be.  Spain and Italy won the last two recent World Cups and Brazil’s penchant for giving us the world’s strongest players is starting to wear thin.  After Ronaldo and Ronaldhino rode into their own South American sunsets there aren’t that many elite Brazilians playing for the top five super clubs (though there are a TON of Brazilians playing in high levels).  While Kaka is a favorite with Real Madrid he is overshadowed by another Ronaldo who was born in Portugal and is the world’s highest paid player.  And when Pele stated that Brazil’s young Neymar would be the greatest player in the world … 90% of soccer fans thought he lost it. 

It even turns out that Uruguay (yes URUGUAY) is considered in some parts of the world as the better South American soccer country now, a statement that must make Brazilians pause in their samba dancing.  Uruguay doesn’t boast very much about their soccer success, but they play as well as Brazil and it’s no longer a shock when they knock big brother out of major tournaments. 

So Brazil’s no longer the end all be all of soccer ………….. but they’re still well ahead of American soccer when looked at further.  After close review the Americans are still at a disadvantage.

To look further here’s a good article from Grant Wahl at Sports Illustrated.  He even points toward which players Brazil will start:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/grant_wahl/05/28/usa.brazil/index.html?sct=sc_t11_a0

For all the bells and whistles of American soccer if you look at Brazil’s starting line-up you’ll see that no less than five of them play for the top 10 best clubs on the entire planet.  If you’re a featured player with Manchester United or Real Madrid then you’re the best of the best, period, end of story.  Also keep in mind that Brazil neglected to include one of their favorite players because he’s just not good enough for them anymore (I speak of Ronaldhino, who would be good enough for almost every other country in existence but in Brazil he’s just another great star player).

So with those top players Brazil ready to start (and there’s even a good chance they’ll bench their best players for rest and America will still have an uphill climb), who will America bring out?

Let’s start with Donovan who scored three times Saturday night and maybe cracked a highlight reel or two on Sportscenter.  Donovan’s club team is Everton (tough league, middle of the standings).  Dempsey is another fan favorite, but he’s injured (his club team is also in a tough league, middle of the standings).  Then there’s Hercules Gomez from Santos Laguna (tough league, top team, 30 years old), Jermaine Jones (decent league, he’s also very German) and more than a few players scratching the surface of the top levels of international play.  Michael Bradley is coming into his own but his Italian club Chievo is another example of a middling team in a tough environment.

As far as the United States has come we’re still a step or two away from being a top five soccer country.  To do that we need strikers and defenders who play for the superclubs to get high level experience for international play (which may take another five years for us).

My prediction: It doesn’t matter who wins, as long as Dempsey lands on a top five club like Real Madrid or Manchester United after his Fulham transfer.  Dempsey, we need you to go to a Champions League team, do it, that’s what’s up.

After a week I still couldn’t wrap my head around the GIGANTIC ratings that Manchester City and Manchester United brought in last week.  The big number, again, was 600 million.  This number was mentioned not only on air by the commentators but repeated over and over again by various news sites.  For example, CNN repeated the number:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/30/sport/football/football-manchester-city-united-premier-league/index.html

Although I couldn’t find the definitive evidence that 600 million tuned in to the game I did find a few websites that mentioned that no less than 190 countries watched the game.    And the number also makes sense when you take in certain factors such as:

• Manchester United is one of the most popular teams (regardless of playing soccer) on the planet.
• The Premiere League is one of the most popular leagues on the planet.
• This game pretty much determined which team would win the Premiere League for this year.

So I can see how even if the ‘analysts’ that broke this game down were the same ‘analysts’ who said that Beckham received a $250 million dollar contract, I think at least 350-400 million people watched this game.

Which brings me to …………… this:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=soccer&id=7879464

I’m mentioning the fact that U.S. ratings for a Premiere League game went through the roof … a very low roof.  One million Americans tuned into ESPN for the game, which otherwise would be fantastic.  But there’s a massive disparity between America and the rest of the entire world when it comes to following soccer.  There’s a massive difference between 1 million American viewers and the 599 million others paying attention.  In retrospect fans of MLS should rejoice because the MLS Championship game between the Galaxy and Houston was about 200,000 viewers shy of the 1 million mark.

I’ll be brief but state my point:  I think that ESPN took a step forward (a greedy step) by broadcasting the match-up and I for one think that in the next three or four years we’ll see American ratings go up for Premiere League games.  But these two numbers (1 million viewers compared to 599 million others) shows how the rest of the world could not care less about the rise of American soccer.  Americans pretty much have to step in line with 180-something other countries.

Over the weekend I read ‘Brave Dragons‘ from Jim Yardley.  The book details the experiences of following an ex-NBA coach leading a Chinese professional basketball team and trying to get them into the play-offs.  The American coach had minimal experience with the Mandarin language and was pretty much tossed into the water to find out how to swim.   It was an enjoyable read and now I feel that in fifteen or twenty years there’s no reason the next generation of Chinese basketball players wouldn’t be that out of place if they make an NBA squad.  The sheer NUMBERS of Chinese players combined with their love and devotion to the game of basketball can, should and will produce multiple international stars. 

Here are a few details from the book worth noting (I’ll go into detail with Major League Soccer later):

-  David Stern is a China nut.  During Michael Jordan’s popularity in the mid-90s commissioner Stern would mail actual VHS tapes of NBA highlights to the most important Chinese government television network (for free) in the hope they’d start airing the games (they did and Jordan became a Chinese hero).  Mr. Stern considered this basic advertising for his league and the NBA brand is so strong today that major Chinese advertisers PAY THE NBA (willingly, even happily) just to promote their product with the dual brand association.  This goes for beer cans, cell phone companies, car rental agencies and anything else that seems a good fit for Stern.  After reading the book you can see how important China is for the American league because of a vested interest to keep Chinese consumers and business segments satiated with the best possible games and players.  Now would be an amazing and profitable time to be an NBA executive working in China 

-  The CBA (Chinese Basketball Association) is just starting to scratch the surface of working like a true cash-generating league.  In the past it was so over-regulated and filled with red tape that it looked completely different than how the CBA is ran now: Teams are starting to lavish their players a bit more with bonus perks, Chinese players don’t have to be Shaq or Kobe to strike up deals with Chinese shoe companies and also owners are starting to realize you can make money on selling things like soda, popcorn and t-shirts inside the arena (I’m serious, before it was just too much of a hassle to set up basic concessions when few people cared about them).  Also, even now, a few Chinese arenas still don’t hold that many people (between 4-5 thousand) and there aren’t enough owners crazy enough to build their own showcase arena for the team.  I imagine in about five years some of them will.

- The Chinese players take basketball serious, very serious.  They are willing to sacrifice their bodies and health to get their team playing better and wouldn’t mind training fourteen hours a day for a slight playing edge …. yet they don’t have a reasonable NBA skill set (yet).  They’re still missing out on key areas of play that an average college-level American basketball player would excel at.

Does this sound familiar?  A young league … with solid, positive growth numbers …. that is always compared (almost unfairly) with another global standard of international play?

I’m describing Major League Soccer.  To me there’s not that much difference between a young Chinese team trying to fit into  an NBA world and your run of the mill average MLS team fighting to come up in the black instead of the red (for both money and goal counts).  Both face problems with money, both are stupified by the massive success of higher leagues and both are backed by excessive numbers of new fans putting more money into a developing program. 

Okay, so what’s my point so far?

Let’s start with 600 million, that’s the number every soccer fan and sports analyst mentioned this week when Manchester United and Manchester City played in a game that affects the league title.  The 600 million global viewers is pretty much over DOUBLE a typical Super Bowl and proves what every American soccer fan has been saying forever - AMERICA WILL LOVE SOCCER WHETHER IT WANTS TO OR NOT.  There’s also no reason that an important Premiere League match can’t bring in more than a billion viewers (8 billion people on Earth, they all love soccer, 1 out of 8 watches).  I know that the 600 million number didn’t come straight from American television sets but to me that fact just shows that 700 million is right around the corner when Americans decide to sit down for a game or two.

So there are 600 million viewers to the English Premiere League and …. okay, just a million watched the MLS title game.  Let me have one sole act of non-cynicism when I come to the defense of MLS and say there’s no reason that MLS viewership can’t rival the audience of Mexico or somewhere like France when it comes to their leagues playing.  I’m not asking for La Liga ratings or from Serie A either, I’m just stating we can match ratings for average size leagues.  In the meantime I can’t find tickets to the MLS All-star game in Philadelphia and it looks like they could be sold-out already (the game will be in late July). 

For American fans of soccer (as well as Chinese fans of basketball) the feeling is like practicing in the shadow of a much larger brother who has already taken all of the spotlight.  When I think of European leagues I always hear this statement: ‘it will take time to build a league’. It’s a gross statement of the obvious and doesn’t begin to address many challenges that a younger league has to deal with. I get it.  I know 600 million people watch the Premiere League (including me, and I LIKE IT TOO!).  I know ESPN is now shaking hands in Spain and asking locals about ‘derbies’ and ‘classicos’.  I know that one of my favorite sports site (Grantland.com) is a puppet for Disney to get more fringe soccer fans interested in the European games that draw in big ratings and advertising dollars (not so for MLS and it’s slow path to world mediocrity).  I know that there are one or two American players that were given an international seal of approval, but there’s still no American player at the position of striker on a top-four mega club. 

The more Americans learn about La Liga and the Premiere League the more they realize that four years to ‘American soccer dominance’ could turn out to be a thirty or forty year battle in a non-level playing field.  Mexico doesn’t like our teams doing well in serious club play that matters, do you think Brazil or even Spain will?

I don’t know why Chinese care so much about the NBA, I’m not Chinese (no matter what my girlfriend will tell you).  But maybe as an American I feel that with internet access and young people flying all over the world practicing three languages at a time it’s obvious the world is shrinking faster every day.  Soccer is a game that connects me to the entire world .  And as an American I feel pushed out.

Like most American soccer fans I hold onto the steadfast belief of gradual improvement when it comes to the stature of MLS.  I know I’m not alone in feeling that somehow, someway our players HAVE to get better against the likes of stronger European powers.  And about a year ago I watched RSL come within a goal of securing their entry in the Club World Cup and I figured we were maybe three or four years away of having a team that accomplished that goal.  Isn’t this the plan: MLS fields a team that beats every other team in North America THEN our team will go to the ‘Club World Cup’ and THEN they’ll compete against the brightest teams in the world and then SOMEHOW they will win out and become THE BEST CLUB IN THE WORLD?

If something doesn’t feel right while reading this don’t worry.  I know we’re years away from there and you can’t fathom what would happen if one of our teams even GETS to the final two of the Club World Cup.  But what I’m about to explain will make you look at the future in a different way and think twice about what it means to become the Concacaf Champion. 

Because what I’ve come to find out is this: The Club World Cup doesn’t mean anything compared to the UEFA Champions League Finals (in addition, the Club World Cup might be done in three years anyway).  Did you know that Japan won’t even host it anymore because they don’t want to?  So that means that even if an MLS team qualifies for the Club World Cup it could be labeled a gigantic waste of time and held by a sponsor that might even go out of business in a year or two.

But why?

Let’s start with what the Club World Cup aspires to be.  It’s a tournament composed of the top team from each continent.  In theory, Club World Cup soccer is beautiful and flawless, the teams are loaded with top talent, and billions of people would watch the televised games for hand over fist profits.  So last year when Barcelona manhandled Brazil’s Santos in Japan’s Yokohama stadium the entire world was supposed to conclude that these were the two best teams in the world.  Therefore, if MLS fielded a qualifed team out of Concacaf and somehow managed to beat Santos they would get the honor of playing against Messi in a serious game that mattered on the world stage.

That’s what we’re expecting right?

Wrong.  This idea of competing against European clubs is a dream with no basis and will get more and more hard to swallow as MLS fields better teams.  Japan decided they didn’t want to host the Club World Cup after 2012 and no other country stepped in (as they would have to shell out massive dollars to promote and service multiple super teams).  Japan even said they were cutting the Club World Cup to ‘focus more on their country’s women’s soccer program’.  Don’t believe me?

http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/184779/japan-passes-on-future-club-world-cups-to-focus-on-women-s-football

If you clicked on the link you would’ve been surprised to see the new hosts of the 2013 Club World Cup: the Moraccans!  I have no idea about their country or their economy having enough resources to provide for a successful international tournament and I am HOPING that everything turns out fine.  But what I’ve learned after about two or three hours of online research is that multiple countries want nothing to do with this thing (Brazil, Japan, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates).  This world tournament doesn’t sound so rock solid and that could mean that our American squads might not ever compete against global soccer powers in a true tournament that even means anything.  In 2015 we might still be forced to pay other teams to fly over to play MLS squads in friendlies and watch as they sit their star players on the bench because there’s no possible way to put together GAMES THAT MATTER outside of the Club World Cup (which I mentioned could be hemoragging sponsors).

Is there a true global tournament that means anything when it comes to top club playing against eachother?  Why yes, THERE IS …. but you have to have a team in Europe to enter it.  I’m typing about the UEFA Champions League (which is turning into crack for a huge chunk of Spanish, English and other European club coaches).  There are multiple reasons (MONEY) that successful teams will travel back and forth for many months (MONEY) all in the goal of sliding into the top four spots ($$$$$$$) of this European tournament.

Let’s go deeper ….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League#Tournament

This tournament brings in as many eyeballs per year as the Super Bowl and in my opinion will surpass it by 2016 based on two factors.  One, more Americans will care about soccer by then and two,  as the world becomes more connected and third world countries (who already care about soccer) can finally get a chance to buy a computer or television set, they will want to watch Real Madrid and the likes of Arsenal play their minds out for 90 minutes. 

And when there are eyeballs watching on television there is ….

Cash.  The European teams will be swimming in it just based on the tournament structure alone.  From the beginning the entire UEFA Champions league was brought together to entice top clubs with the following promise ‘If you play well and have millions of your fans watch this game … then we will pay you more money the further you go.’  A lot of the European powerhouses (actually all of them) won’t turn that situation down.  Here’s the cost structure (From the wikipedia page):

‘As of 2010–11, UEFA awards €2.1 million to each team in the play-offs round. For reaching the group stage, UEFA awards €3.9 million, plus €550,000 per group match played. A win in the group is awarded €800,000 and a draw is worth €400,000. In addition, UEFA pays teams reaching the first knockout round €3 million, each quarter finalist €3.3 million, €4.2 million for each semi-finalist, €5.6 million for the runners-up and €9 million for the winners’

Where is this prize money coming from?  It’s all television revenue money divided up between teams and everybody ends up happy: the fans, the teams and even UEFA who figured out how to feed the golden goose it’s favorite duck feed.  If you add up all the numbers you can see how competing in the UEFA Champions league could get your Euro team a solid 20 million Euros to buy new players with (and that’s not even with your team winning most of the time).

As for Americans and their Don Quixote inspired fight against Mexican teams in the Concacaf … if they’re lucky enough to win they’ll draw in MUCH lesser money.  I’m not sure about the exact amount but they’re looking at maybe 500,000 dollars for winning the entire thing.  Then if they go to the Club World Cup (which might be lessened in three years) they’ll be rewarded about a million for participation (no promises it’ll stay that high), and maybe 5 million if they end up number one against Real Madrid, Barca, Santos or some Manchester United team.  By the way, good luck telling Alex Ferguson and his Manchester United buddies that you’re going to take that five million dollars away from him. 

How demoralizing would it be if an MLS team qualifies for the Club World Cup and a super team decides to sit half of their starting line-up for their first tournament match?  It’s a possibility because a team like Barcelona doesn’t want to start Messi against a weaker club when an injury is a possibility and they’re only playing for chump change anyway.  This year they smacked around Brazil’s best club and would you be upset with them if they don’t take a team like the L.A. Galaxy seriously? 

If MLS’s dream is to compete against the top club they have to wake up.  For America to be considered a soccer superpower this whole ‘Concacaf to the future!’ idea has to be sidelined.  Here are some other options:

• America decides to surrender to Europe and maybe calls itself ‘West Europe’.  That way we can enter UEFA Champions League play and get part of the billions of revenue being doled out.  I understand that this whole white flag option would never happen though.
• MLS executives spend millions of dollars to ensure that Moracco holds Club World Cups that are ran the MLS way (take it one season at a time, no big surprises and above all don’t die).  If the Club World Cup thing continues for a decade or two it might be a prestigious enough to mean something to most of the world.  But why would MLS executives pay millions of dollars to some other entity when they don’t even like paying their own players?
• The Concacaf tournament grows ten-fold and splashes money around like a drunk banker in Vegas.  Wouldn’t it be crazy to see Premiere League players tell their advisors ‘Yo, I just scored a hat trick against Liverpool.  This means maybe next year I can sign with a team in NORTH AMERICA!’

 So, as it stands now American teams continue their uphill battle.  They need more money, but are excluded from the most world’s most profitable soccer tournament.  They want to develop top players, but those players will turn around and state they are thinking about ‘Champions League’ play that they can’t find out west.  MLS’s owners want to tell you about their bright future, positive growth and the immense possibilities … but the future is anything but certain.

In short, as it’s set up now MLS teams won’t be considered on par with European power house teams even if they play in the Club World Cup.  I like to say maybe in 2014 the league will be better, but with UEFA’s stranglehold on it’s own Champions League system it’s looking like 2034. 

……… in addition, congratulations to Fernando Torres for turning the soccer world upside down and inspiring American soccer fans everywhere to believe in the impossible. 

You would think playing in a shiny new stadium, in New York of all places, with one of the top acquisitions in league history would get your attendance maybe half full for a second home game.  Instead, only about 9,500 people showed up to see Thierry Henry demolish a strained expansion team.  Sacre bleu!!!  This must’ve been a surprise not only for the fans in attendance but the league management itself who keeps trying to prop up the New York team as a league favorite.  What’s going on when a major team like New York is missing their attendance goals for important home games?

I can’t answer that at the moment, but I’m starting to notice a few pecular tendencies with the league this year.  Let’s look deeper. 

1.  Canada’s not too shabby.

The Vancouver team this month hasn’t given up a goal, Montreal is a new addition to the league and Toronto is the only MLS team left standing for the Mexico/MLS Champions League play.  Oh, and did I mention that our neighbors to the north smacked our Olympic qualifying soccer team up a bit to keep Americans out of the summer Olympics?  Canada right now has every right to say it’s soccer is just as good as American soccer and is putting together a pretty good argument for my next point …

2.  The success of MLS has nothing to do with American soccer improving.

Plenty of MLS fans care about the success of the U.S. Men’s National Team but the two are not as related as you would think.  As stated before almost half of the players for MLS are foreign born and the coaches number one priority is always fielding a talented team, regardless of national origin.  And even for the homegrown players that American fans are proud of (Dempsey, Donovan, Howard and maybe a dozen others) it’s not mandatory for them to play just for MLS.  The trend for MLS (as stated by even the commissioner) is to be competitive with the top leagues in the world and compete at the top levels.  In those specific top leagues there is not an incentive for developing regional talent, only fielding the best possible team your money can buy.  For every Rooney there is a Chicharito flown in to bolster the squad.  Two of the best players in the world (Messi and Ronaldo) are not even Spanish yet dominate the headlines in Spain’s league play.  For MLS to emulate these leagues means that American owners also have to invite world class players onto their fields, which has nothing to do with domestic improvement.

3.  Even if your team has a ton of fans and a competitive team it doesn’t equal national exposure.

About two weeks ago I watched a Seattle Sounders game and took notice of a few things.  First I was struck by the amount of people cramming into the stadium and pretty much losing their tops for their local team (MLS always mentions Seattle in the same breath as L.A. or New York because of the atmosphere at their home games).  I also noticed that one of the fan death chants involves heavy stomping and abrupt hand motions in some twisted hateful form of the Macarena that’s intended to scare the cleats off the away players (it made for very good television).  Seattle and cities like it in direct contrast to a team like New York (see the above paragraph) which can’t get it’s marketing act together or up in New England which Boston doesn’t know exists.

What does MLS have to do to get Seattle to register on the national sports scene?  MLS writers have to make obligatory Seattle references (yours truly included) because they know that the city is planting seeds for MLS success and to ignore their soccer program would imply ignorance of something that MLS has gotten right so far.  And yet, even if they become league champions this year the major news networks won’t make a big deal out of it because it’s still a small news story outside of L.A. and New York. 

Seattle would have to sign Christiano Ronaldo, have him get in a fight with Wayne Rooney at some random friendly this summer and then win the MLS championship (with a broken leg) to have most casual soccer fans start paying attention to Seattle.  Remember that even the city of Chicago, despite being such a dense and populated city, wasn’t such a huge basketball story until Jordan started playing there. 

Sometimes, it even seems that maybe most people in Seattle would want to keep their team a snobbish secret from the rest of the country instead of trying to foster national news coverage.  I know this from personal experience when I found out over dinner that ‘You must follow soccer here (New York) because your city HAS a team, like us in SEATTLE’ … and not because soccer’s a fun game to watch?  Garber must be losing it trying to make new American soccer fans focus on that ‘whole Sounder thing’ only to be met with yawns and questions on how to get free Beckham jerseys.  If Seattle is only getting a sliver of national news coverage then that’s tough news for Salt Lake, Houston or Portland (which have a solid group of core supporters and yet little outside coverage).

Lastly, I’d like to make mention that although MLS isn’t rebranding itself this year what they ARE doing is splurging a little and hiring some people for a new way to create ‘brand experiences’ and ‘creative happenings’ … or as I like to call it: An expensive posh advertising firm:  www.sidlee.com.  

That advertising firm is based in Montreal and while I don’t have any doubt to the quality of their work I do think it’s a good example of the league’s perogative:  For MLS to get better they pretty much need foreign talent.

http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/mls/story/_/id/7662861/major-league-soccer-major-storylines-2012-season

Let’s start with the above link.  Despite ESPN.com having NO mention of the first day of the MLS 2012 season (today), they decided to try and drum up a little interest with ‘MAJOR’ storylines about the upcoming season.  And just for full disclosure: I’m not very interested with any upcoming MLS games, although I’ll try and watch a game or two if it seems important (which means I might not watch a game for five months, we’ll see).

Anyway, in the interest of American suckyball let’s see what those five MAJOR storylines should be ….

1. The rise of the powerhouses

ESPN tried using this tactic last year and the results were mixed.  To prove my point, the above image of Beckham and Henry was used in a suckyball post a year ago deriding the same notion.  Yes the Galaxy won the title and made headlines for non-soccer news pages, but the Red Bulls weren’t a heavy hitting team by any notion.  You can call them maybe ‘successful’ but they were also famous for tying game after game and their new stadium is in legal dispute for not paying enough taxes.  The ESPN article also mentioned Michael Ballack as a new Red Bull addition for this season.  He is a famous German football player FROM TEN YEARS AGO.  As much as they try to convince you Michael Ballack is Das Pele remember that Michael’s greatest success is from TEN YEARS AGO.  To spin this in a positive light at least he is in good company with other older European stars playing in the lukewarm waters of the MLS talent pool. 

In no way am I disparraging his play, he is/was an elite talent … it’s just that he was better A DECADE AGO.

2. Can an MLS team win the CONCACAF Champions League?

Pass.  I think MLS has gotten better enough where they might win against Mexican teams in the North American final.  The real question is can they win against European and Brazilian clubs in the finals after the finals?  It doesn’t seem likely.

3. The Olympic effect

This isn’t a question ESPN wants to answer anyway as NBC is the one making money from the Olympics this year.  Didn’t it make total sense for NBC to start broadcasting MLS games when the summer Olympics were four or five months away?  MLS can afford to field lackluster squads as the best compete in London, MLS has fielded a lot worse in the past and still managed to scrape buy.  I think the commissioner’s goal every year is to get more Americans invested in soccer and a strong international Olympic push isn’t detrimental to that.  Saying that MLS will suffer because of the Olympics is just grasping at straws.  Remember, ESPN only cares about four or five big teams to market as the ‘Champion of MLS’, the rest of the league is an afterthought to them anyway.  Which brings us to ….

4. Brace yourselves for the Montreal Impact

Their coach is a first timer, their stadium isn’t ready yet and they ‘appear’ to have a strong fan base.  Are Montreal’s citizens French enough to hold this expansion team up? I doubt it and think that the league found/duped someone willing to throw a fistful of cash into an MLS team without thinking through the numbers.  If anyone needs to be ‘Braced’ it’s the new Impact players being used as a dice roll in MLS’s expansion plans.  Bon Chance!!!!

5. The unbalanced schedule — and the imbalance in general

From the article: By now, clubs know that travel is the bane of the MLS experience.  To alleviate this effect, and to increase the number of games between local rivals, MLS is going back to the unbalanced schedule, making teams play more games within their conference than outside it. Yet this will have a knock-on effect for the entire league. The Western Conference has been stronger than the Eastern for several years now, and this offseason this imbalance has become more pronounced as most Western teams appear to only have gotten stronger while the East largely stagnated. Will this create two distinct tiers within the league?

Wait, are you saying that the league is shifting into one strong league against a lesser league that can’t compete?  Something like two separate leagues that only play against eachother on few occasions?  Why, you’re describing a common practice in European and Spanish play: Relegated leagues!  So with this in mind: NO, the league will NEVER allow such an arrangement to happen. 

The MLS owners will find a way to keep things balanced, especially when they control player contracts and their team destinations.  The league won’t be lopsided, just steered in different directions until the Galaxy, Sounders, Red Bulls or THE BRACEFUL MONTREAL IMPACT (this is sarcasm here) go into the post season.

Let’s get this over with.  On this upcoming Sunday afternoon millions of Americans (well over half the country) will gather in front of their televisions for a four hour advertising assault to their senses.  The advertising industry loves to throw out the line that ‘this is the one event that people look forward to watching our commercials!’  and they are right.  It might be a waste of time to compare the Super Bowl’s advertising power to MLS, but let’s go there.  Let’s see what we’re dealing with.  As a quasi-fan of the MLS I see cracks in the NFL’s armor and need to see the full scope of that league’s biggest day. 

To begin with, let’s look at basic advertising rates for the SB: 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/11/sportsline/main6082591.shtml

$3 Million dollars per commercial.

I couldn’t find any numbers for the MLS Final, but I did check the NBA Finals advertising rates just to see what the going rate is for another successful sports league:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2010/05/20100531/This-Weeks-News/Advertising-Sales-Strong-Going-Into-NBA-Finals.aspx

The NBA wasn’t too shabby but is still literally and figuratively out of the NFL’s league.  To advertise on the NBA Finals (in 2010 for the above link) it will cost you on average $400,000 for a 30-second spot. 

UPDATE AFTER ORIGINAL POST!!: Someone pointed out to me that the NBA might have 7 games total played in a series, therefore bringing up an advertisers rate to a possible 2.8 million over the course of the games.  I doubt the NBA Finals commercials are as relevant as the Super Bowl’s, but the point was made that the NBA is getting as wealthy as the NFL over time.  Soccer in America could still never charge that much though ….

Let’s look at a different angle, the fact that major advertisers will spend additional money just to produce those commercials for Super Bowl Sunday.  It’s one thing to break the bank to get your commercial in the line-up, but how much are you willing to spend on the actual advertising clip?  Celebrities like Matthew Broderick can demand serious money to act like Ferris Beuller again after a twenty year hiatus, maybe that costs even more than a 30-second NBA spot.  Oh? And what other celebrities can we expect this year?  Oh yeah, David Beckham is confirmed to make an appearance that might draw in more total viewers than the entire years worth of games with his MLS team. 

Now I digress on that issue and point to a few differences in how athletes approach the game.  For one thing, Tom Brady and Eli Manning aren’t going to spend three months a year playing in a different league.  Landon Donovan feels no shame in playing a few months in England every year and American soccer fans even now consider him a better soccer player because of it.  Donovan’s not alone either, one of the MLS’s best players, Thierry Henry, decided to show up with his old English team just for the fun of it.  This is telling because it shows non-exclusiveness with MLS’s players. 

If you watch the NBA Finals you are telling yourself you are watching the world’s best basketball teams field the best players (Lebron James, D. Wayde, Jason Kidd and Dirk showed up in 2011).  If you watch the Super Bowl you are telling yourself you are watching the toughest, scariest most athletic football players that America breeds and trains; any attempt to duplicate such a game outside of America would not give you such a game.  However, with MLS and even the U.S. Men’s team you can not admit to yourself these are the best players.  As such, in an MLS Final you would be watching some players that would be desperate to play in foreign lands and treat this game as an afterthought. 

Let’s keep going.  To buy a ticket to BE at the Super Bowl this year in the stadium on gameday you’ll be asked to pay at least $2,252.00 for horrific seats where you couldn’t identify anyone not named Tom or Eli.  If you wanted to spend $250 for tickets to the MLS Final you will have had field view very close to the game per the L.A. Galaxy’s website.  If you wanted to spend $2,252.00 for any 2011 MLS Final tickets you might have been sat front and center on a team’s bench and given free beer and an authentic soccer jersey, or deemed insane.  Also if you wanted to get into the NFL’s media day to gawk at players who aren’t even playing yet, you would have shelled out between $100-350$.

I’m going to stop beating the dead horse and focus on a few positives for soccer fans who hope for change.  First is that for all of the over-hype of the current Super Bowl this years ad prices are stagnant this year.  They’re not rising in price like they once did and a lot of the better commercials are already on the internet for viewers to watch now (days before game day).  It doesn’t make much sense to me to spend so much on ads that aren’t kept secret anymore.  Remember that before the internet you could only watch Superbowl Ads on that one sunday and people would talk about it for days afterwards.  Now even Pepsi decided to screw the whole thing and will spend 30 million on something else. 

I also think a younger generation with a fast cell phone and zero short term memory is more adapted to soccer in the long run than the NFL only because soccer is played pretty much all the time, in most of the world, with their own over-hyped ridiculous important games.  If the NFL can’t convince people to keep watching on television the Super Bowl could be a waste of time (the television as we know it might be obsolete in twenty years anyway).  Already most people have over 350 channels, the internet, friends and actual lives in 2012.  They can’t be convinced to sit down and care about a game that doesn’t interest them anymore (ask MLB executives about this issue).

To end this Super introspection I’ll end this post with a Super Bowl commercial that some say changed the advertising industry in 1994:

Almost twenty years later Budweiser was bought out by a group named InBev, a European beer company operated by a group of forward thinking and audacious Brazilians.  In 1994 most Americans would’ve thought that Budweiser getting bought out by a once small European company was like seeing bullfrogs fly to outerspace, but it still happened, by a company that some call ‘the Wal-Mart of Beer Companies’. This same European group is now in charge of all major Budweiser advertising for the 2012 Super Bowl even as they try their best to make it as American as possible. But it makes you wonder … could the whole soccer thing EVER catch on stateside for huge soccer games? 

And when will the MLS Final EVER, EVER, EVER, have some major music act for a half-time show?  EVER?

Let’s start here:
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2012/01/wild-card-steep-drop-in-overnights-for-bengalstexans/

I don’t know if the NFL play-off game wasn’t interesting because I’m watching more soccer or because both NFL teams will soon become cannon fodder for the three or four elite teams that have a legitimate chance of winning the Super Bowl.  Either way, most NFL fans would agree that the Bengals and Texans match-up wasn’t going to be a ratings blockbuster and they’re not surprised with the ‘low’ 15.3 rating.  Notice that this rating is a substantial drop that Roger Goodell can’t be proud of (but at least he cashed in those ESPN contract checks from before the season started).

What does that 15.3 rating mean?  It means that 15% of all households with a TV watched that game. 

But what about the MLS Final?  They had all of their pieces together for ESPN:  Beckham made a Finals appearance with the L.A. Galaxy (an overhyped team to begin with) and the ratings had to be higher than from seasons past right?  Please tell us that the ratings were at least higher than the year before.

The ratings were .8, as in 4/5th of 1 percentage.  For all of the bells and whistles during the season the MLS Final drew in about 800,000 people.  That means that 15 times as many Americans care about two middling, ‘happy to be here’ NFL teams than the two top soccer clubs in America.  I’m not comparing the two ratings to disparage MLS any, I just need to illustrate that soccer is maybe at least a decade away from becoming as prevalent as the NFL.  And the ratings weren’t higher than the year before (but that was just for first time viewing in America, there’s a good chance that the Galaxy drew in more viewers on international telecasts).

But there is a silver lining though: the NFL DID put together a weak broadcast while the MLS didn’t fall back any.  Maybe next year soccer could go forward a bit while the NFL is stuck with something like the Browns vs Chiefs?  In my opinion higher ratings can’t be that difficult if the MLS would just SIGN A TOP WORLD PLAYER that would help give the league an extra push in the right direction.  But anyone who has read this site more than five times knows how likely that is to happen (.8% chance?). 

Best of luck though MLS, in five years may you bring in more viewers than NFL preseason games.  That’d be a great start.

In other side stories from 2011 Dempsey is becoming one of Fulham’s best players.  It’s a shame more Americans can’t appreciate what the Texas native is doing for American soccer as he continues to score enough goals to keep his team away from the axe of relegation.  One could argue that Dempsey’s goals in English professional play are more important than the fluke miracle that happened in the World Cup where the goalkeeper couldn’t keep two hands wrapped around the ball.  Not one to be counted out Landon Donovan is parlaying his MLS championship for a chance to be successful with Everton (a well known English team that’s not even close to the top of league play).

Before going into my predictions I’ll give you this link of some players I think would be perfect for MLS play in 2012:

http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/columnist/hirshey_david/id/7389908/premier-league-all-disappointment-team-far

I think Tevez would be a great addition to any American team even if he would talk about transfering to another team after two weeks here.  I haven’t watched much of his play but he strikes me as someone who doesn’t focus on things like passing and finesse as much as barreling over players and edging out goalies with close shots.  Out here he’d be a welcome addition to any MLS team and should injure at least three weak MLS players after five months.  To further confuse Tevez maybe we can send him to Vancouver for a spell?

So without further ado ….. My Predicitions for 2012 and the chances of them happening!!!

1.  Donovan gets at least four goals for Everton in his remaining play … the chances of this happening I put at 15%.  It would’ve been great if he stuck around for April’s Everton vs Fulham game to go against Clint Dempsey in English league play, but Landon has to fulfill his obligations to the Galaxy and play against teams like D.C. United and the New England Revolution.  

2.  The Americans don’t even sniff Bronze in Olympic soccer play.  I’m expecting a huge advertising build up and American soccer being pushed as a new sport to watch.  No longer will it be a cast off like Olympic Ping Pong or Olympic Badminton.  You’re going to hear about the Women’s and Men’s Team having a fighting chance in this tournament because NBC also has a new deal with MLS to broadcast further games.  The only downside of this newfound Olympic soccer hype will be that the Men’s team is still mediocre and can’t do well against Mexico right now.  I expect them to beat a team or two in the Olympics but finish weak overall (but scoring big with marketing agencies).  I think the chances of our Men’s team not winning any medal is 90%.

3.  Beckham’s gone.  93%.

4.  An MLS Team wins the CONCACAF club Final and plays well against a European team in the Champions League tournament.  If this goes down then the Mayans were right and the end of the world is imminent.  ZERO PERCENT

5.  This blog draws in more than five readers a day and a post of mine surges in twitter’s veins bringing me hundreds and hundreds of more devoted readers.  I think this delusion waits a year or two and has about a 18% chance of happening.

6.  The MLS Final will get more viewers than last year and the NBC deal prods the league forward.  Last year’s Final was a bit of a letdown (even with Beckham) but I’m willing to go out on a limb and support the league’s future for next year.  The chances of the MLS Final drawing in even more viewers is a solid 60-70%.  There’s just too much money being thrown at American soccer now that I don’t think it’ll regress any.

And now, for the coup de grace, a prediction from my girlfriend (someone who has had her family invested in soccer her entire life):

American soccer will still be sucky and nobody will care!!! 100 percent !!!

*America edged out Canada, Guadaloupe and Panama for the right to face Mexico.  The qualifying games were close.

*The trophy presentation was spoken in Spanish, not English, although the tournament and its final was held in America (causing our national team goalie to blow a gasket).  The Mexican fans in Los Angeles wouldn’t have minded if the presentation was in English though, their team had beaten the Americans with a solid performance and they were happy, but they flipped when the Spanish speaking commenced.

http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=ro-rogers_mls_drogba_financial_health_galaxy_113011

It seems that there’s a giant void left in American soccer after David Beckham expressed doubts about returning to the Galaxy.  Since the league has no idea if Beckham will return or not they are now scouring Europe and Spain for a talented player that is willing and able to give up high standards of play and national fame in exchange for American paychecks in a less grueling league.  Enter Didier Drogba, a player I barely know about and a player 90% of America will see for the first time. 

For a primer watch this video:

WARNING: THE ABOVE VIDEO’S MUSIC WILL MAKE YOU WANT TO PLAY DANCE DANCE REVOLUTION.

In the previous Yahoo article the author kept trying to state that the MLS will be a better league with the Chelsea forward, but it’s tough trying to generate excitement after MLS’s flagship player voyages to France.  Let’s look at the article from Martin Rogers (who I think is a fine journalist) a bit closer:

“Snagging Drogba would be a real coup for MLS, as the league continues to ride a recent wave of positive vibes. The Galaxy’s title win in the final year of Beckham’s contract created plenty of headlines and came just weeks after the release of figures that revealed MLS is now the third-best attended sports league in North America.”

Lies, lies, lies.  Whenever you read about ‘MLS beating other leagues in attendance’ keep in mind that the numbers are for AVERAGE attendance.  The MLS will have less games (with more people in the stands) and then compare numbers against the baseball and the NBA seasons which have LONGER SEASONS.  I give credit for MLS for bringing more crowds but go ahead and compare their championship to the coverage of the NBA Finals when Lebron and Wade battled Dirk. 

Drogba, if you’re reading this blog about bad American soccer from a hotel room in England you need to listen to me!  The MLS isn’t close to the NBA or the NFL!

“Ten years from now we need to have at least 50 Landon Donovan-caliber American players in the league,” MLS executive vice president Dan Courtemanche said. “We also need to have multiple players better than Donovan competing in MLS. With a country of 300 million-plus people, you would hope that could happen. -  MLS executive vice president Dan Courtemanche”

Another twist in logic, because about 40% of MLS players aren’t even Americans!!!  Why bring up 300 million people when you’re shipping in Brazilians and Swedes to fill up roster spots?  And in my opinion you already have players better than Donovan in the league now, they’re just not being over-hyped to death by AEG and Gatorade in marketing campaigns.  I think he means ‘We need more players that generate revenue and American media coverage than this guy does’. 

I give Dan credit for saying we need better players though, a lot of MLS executives swear that our MLS teams are good enough to beat Barcelona AND the entire 2006 Italian World Cup team.

“ More arrivals like that of Drogba would only help shift the needle further, and even with Beckham’s departure likely, MLS can be said to be enjoying a surge of health.”

zzzzz fdaf zzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzlfdk;ajf   

Oh, I apologize.  I fell asleep and hit my head on the keyboard after hearing another line about MLS’s surging health and optimism. 

So let’s talk about Drogba himself.  In the interest of fairness I’ve decided to state some positives and negatives about the impending trade (that might not even happen).

Positives:

- He plays for Chelsea, which is a blue-chip (pun intended) club in England.  Chelsea’s known for trying to stock their squads with elite players and Drogba is liked better than Fernando Torres (whom would be PERFECT for MLS, more on that later).  He also scored more goals than Rooney one year.

- If Drogba plays for the Galaxy then hardcore soccer fans will embrace the change because of his international experience.  Maybe he can teach the younger Galaxy players the same way Henry is teaching the young Red Bulls.

- He scored ten interesting goals in a Youtube video watched by 19,000 people? I’m drawing a blank.

Negatives:

- He’s another top level player in his mid-30s who won’t get very much compensation on his next contract, therefore he’s going to MLS.  American’s won’t have a high level 25 year old signing anytime soon and have to keep scouring youth programs and other soccer countries for diamonds in the rough.  The greatest players in the world won’t go to MLS.  Even Pele went to America AFTER he won the Brazilian world cups and decided that the money New York offered was just too much to turn away from at his age.

- The last MLS Final generated luke warm ratings with the added benefit of Beckham playing for maybe the last time in America.  If Drogba wins two championships in a row will the ratings really improve?  If THIERRY HENRY wins an MLS Championship will more people notice? 

…….. if you’re still reading you must really enjoy soccer.  Although I do hope that Dieder becomes a relevant part of MLS his arrival isn’t earth shattering and a game changer for MLS.  It seems more of the slow and steady growth that fans are accustomed to.  Just one day it’d be great to hear a major news story about a European super star, in his prime, getting bought out by MLS for hundreds of millions of dollars.  But right now those super teams doing major trades are across a very large pond dividing great soccer players from developing ones.

For example, take my experiences with sports as a child growing up in San Diego.  I played soccer and baseball in organized youth leagues.  However, basketball and football were games I practiced outside of organization and with kids around my block almost on a weekly basis.  Later in life I played just basketball for fun and still regret not becoming competitive at a high school level.  I still play basketball with friends once a week despite the attrition of middle age. 

To make this easier let me this together with percentages:

Sports I’ve physically played age 6-12: Soccer 15%, Baseball 60%, Basketball 20%, Football 5% Hockey, Tennis, other 0%. 

Sports I’ve physically played age 12-current: Baseball 30%, Basketball 65%, Football 5%.

Okay, that’s a pretty dramatic jump and it looks like soccer fell off a cliff as far as my participation went (and I didn’t hate soccer as a kid).  Even though I went on to play baseball in highschool I drifted away from that game too right before I went to college.  As far as the one single game that stuck with me as far as exercise and enjoyment, it’s obvious basketball was the game of choice.

Why am I even putting these numbers up?  I’m trying to show how organized sports have almost nothing to do with developing a passion and feel for the game.  The two sports where I was involved in an organization (soccer and baseball) also were two sports I didn’t continue playing into my teens.  I now watch soccer because my girlfriend’s family got me to enjoy the game a bit more, otherwise it’d be basketball and the NFL (and no hockey). 

So if parents drag their kids to tennis practice every week, will that be a guarantee their child will grow up into a raving tennis enthusiast twenty years down the line?  Which sport will strike a chord with a young player?  The one he has to play for mom and dad, or the one that all of his friends are already playing outside?  In my generation that pick-up game of choice was basketball and in my father’s generation it was baseball.  Signs are pointing to soccer becoming the next pick-up game but there are a lot more basketball courts in parks than soccer fields right now. 

To conclude, how do we get these young people to stick it out with soccer?  For one, having the game on television more won’t hurt.  Looking back maybe I would’ve practiced more if I had players to emulate in an actual pro league.  San Diego had a championship arena league soccer team and I didn’t care enough to get to know one player.  These days soccer is shown a bit more on T.V., but no way as much as the NBA, baseball or the NFL.  Also, kids have to enjoy the game in ways that have nothing to do with their parents.  Do they have a favorite soccer team?  Do they stop playing basketball in the parks and choose to practice soccer instead?  This isn’t about dropping your child off for a two hour practice of running around cones and standing in line for goal shots.  This is about eight or nine hours of practice time each week that them and their friends are putting in by themselves.  Since I don’t have kids yet I don’t know very much about the  youth soccer landscape, but I can’t help but wonder if some eminent soccer renaissance will develop here in America in the next fifteen years.  But come Sunday I’ll be working on my jumpshot. 

UPDATE: I tried finding a good Youtube clip of Brazilian street soccer to emphasize what young Americans are up against and I became disillusioned with the whole thing and didn’t want to embarrass our soccer coaches.  Let’s just say some countries are light years ahead of us.

http://goal.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/open-cup-final-seattle-vs-chicago/

Even though more American people are watching soccer it turns out that new viewers aren’t even aware of a major tournament that pits MLS teams against each other for advancement into an international champions league.  Tonight ESPN will hype up NYC vs L.A. again (when L.A. won’t have Donovan, Keane and possibly Beckham) but won’t make a peep about an American soccer tournament that has been going on for almost a century.  Personally, I didn’t even know about it until a random commenter on an ESPN news article (probably a Sounders fan) complained that ESPN coverage on the U.S. Open Cup final was non-existent.  They were right because ESPN.com and Yahoo Sports don’t have anything anywhere on their sites about the game.

So, to recap, a major and legitimate American soccer tournament is ignored and disregarded by national networks while they cover and overhype a meaningless mid-season MLS game (with star players sitting out).  People can watch the Open Cup on Fox Soccer but it’s pretty small compared to ESPN’s three of four channels of coverage.  That sucks.

Reason 1:

England tried to overtax, punish and control our government in two major wars.

I’ve been reading up on soccer in my sparetime and I haven’t heard this argument, but I do feel it’s valid.  During the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 England sent multiple war ships to fight against thousands of Americans.  And if England loves soccer and considers it their national game, and England also wanted to overtax our tea and control branches of our government by a separate monarchy …. then it makes sense that the United States would have a difficult time enjoying soccer right? 

I hear from people on both sides of the Atlantic that American’s are just bad at this sport but I feel that America has two hundred years of difficult history with Great Britain to deal with.  I have nothing personal against Englishmen because I wasn’t alive when this happened but when soccer was becoming a major sport in the mid 1800s America was fighting a civil war and laying the foundation for international importance.  And what Englishmen would want to move here with a soccer ball during 1850? We had Irish, Italians, Chinese and Polacks pretty much send boat after boat here but English people were content to stay home during this time period and I don’t blame them. 

In addition, other countries have had problems with England and enjoy soccer (Ireland and Argentina come to mind) but I think in cases like those either proximity is a case (Ireland, France, Sweden) or Spanish/European pride boosts popularity (Spain, Italy and as a result Portugal, Mexico, Brazil etc).  I know next to nothing about African soccer, but Hong Kong soccer is still huge due to the English influence. 

America could be also be excluded from following soccer because of our national size and also the fact that after three generations of people living here most Americans just stopped labeling themselves as descendants from somewhere else, instead they just started acting American.  The guy rooting for his NFL team Sunday Morning doesn’t call himself a quarter German and three quarters Swedish … he’s just a Texan who drives a Ford F-150.

Reason 2:  American Advertising doesn’t want us to watch soccer … yet. 

I implore you to watch this video: 

.  I can’t embed it into this site but you’re going to have to click through to watch it.  Don’t worry it’s worth it.  It’s essentially a small six minute video showing how some capable and bright advertising executives have the wool pulled over their eyes by a subliminal advertising campaign.  Giant corporations with countless millions of dollars are the ones pulling the strings behind ESPN (Disney), NBC (Comcast and General Electric) and ABC (Disney again).  They’re only going to promote soccer when a) there’s money to be made in it or b) there’s money to be made in it.  I’m watching it happen year by year to oblivious Americans (like myself) who are being surrounded more and more with soccer until it becomes a bigger pull to advertisers. 

Big businesses will only sell what the people want and their sales figures are showing that more soccer balls and goal nettings are being bought.  Do you think they care about the difference between the NBA and soccer?  All they know is that a few more people are catching soccer on TV every once in a while and 60,000 people will show up to watch Real Madrid smack around David Beckham’s team.  Big deal.  Like I keep mentioning over and over again, Americans won’t jump (or be pushed) into the soccer hype until the World Cup (or maybe the Olympics) because that’s when top caliber advertisers will unleash their marketing nirvana for soccer fans. 

Trust me, during the next World Cup it’ll be like us Americans are Indiana Jones running away from a giant rock of soccer commercials.

Reason 3:  There’s no bridge yet between America and soccer.

I live in New York City and am always amazed when people visit the city for the first time and they immediately go to a McDonalds or Starbucks when there are hundreds of diverse options literally surrounding them.  They can have Korean fried chicken from actual Koreans, or they can get some classic New York pizza that puts Dominoes to shame.  They can go to Chinatown for Peking Duck (I love eating duck, sometimes I order it now just to eat duck, it’s crazy).  But for some reason their flight comes in and within two hours they’re sitting at a Subway sandwich shop that’s just three blocks from some of the best Japanese street food you can imagine.

But do you want to know what I did when I first visited New York many years ago?  Where did I go when I was starving in a new place that was loud and foreign to me?  That’s right, I went straight to McDonalds and bought a cheeseburger and fries, oblivious to so many other good foods I could try out.  Because it’s safe, it’s What I Knew, and the positives of eating at place I’d ate at hundreds of times before outweighed the negatives of venturing into a place where some person  might yell at me in a foreign language or a New Yorker might smirk at my menu choice behind my back.  That same logic (the benefits of ‘safe’ outweigh the negatives of trying something new) is applicable to thousands and thousands of Americans.  Why should they waste their time watching a soccer game when they don’t even know players? What is ‘Champions League’ when the Lakers are going to play Miami?

The bridge I speak about is the same bridge that made me try out Brazilian food when I first moved out here, after like five months.  A friend dragged me to a Brazlian place and although I couldn’t speak Portugese I pointed at barbecued beef and tried out Guarana soda.  And years later I still think Guarana soda tastes a thousand times better than 7-up.  There has to be a bridge that connects Americans to soccer and it’s not there yet. 

America is the McDonalds, soccer is The Foreign Place.  If it’s any consolation to soccer fans McDonalds has a habit of taking things from different companies and then repackaging them in its menu such as breakfast burritos, beef wraps, ‘gourmet’ coffee and healthy apple parfaits.  So, yeah, eventually America should catch on ten or fifteen years down the line.  But for now …

4.  American soccer just sucks. 

The European soccer teams are investing so much money and support into their squads that MLS squads can’t keep up just yet.  And that means that Americans will keep getting knocked around by teams like Man U, Barca and Real Madrid.  We’ll see what happens later on down the line when one of the MLS superteams act more like men of steel than newspaper editors at a second job.

I think the above video is funny enough if you follow soccer stateside, but it’s also pretty funny if you look at the soccer section it’s located in:

http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/channels/womens-sports-and-soccer/

Of course the Onion specializes in satire and gross exaggeration but how much does ESPN.com cover soccer?  Let’s take a look …

1.  Major MLS updates occur about once every three or four days, other minor links are continuously updated but aren’t presented the same way that the European teams are covered.  In fact, if you click on ESPN.com’s soccer home page the majority of  news is European and Spanish clubs.  If there’s a major story about the US Men’s national team I suspect it’s only because ESPN is broadcasting it.

2.  The NFL, MLB and NBA sections are continuously updated 24/7.  Today ESPN.com is updating it’s NBA section about the Boston Celtics title chances when the league is in the middle of (a locked out) off-season.

3.  One of ESPN’s favorite sportwriters Bill Simmons, with millions of readers, will write about MLS about the same time he writes about professional frisbee qualifiers.  It just won’t happen.  He’ll write about Barcelona and the World Cup but I wouldn’t bet he’ll make a big deal out of the MLS Championship.  For a good example of what I’m talking about look over this link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060719

I think Bill Simmons is a great guy, very intelligent and has to be hard working to put together some of his extensive mail bag updates.  But in the above article he picks a favorite English team to root for and maybe five years later never mentions them again (despite constantly updating his other website with soccer news written by a different person: 
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6910323/week-3-north-do-want
).

ESPN.com isn’t the greatest, and neither is Yahoo Sports.  About a week ago Yahoo Sports pulled out the entire soccer section from their front page to run a breaking story about college football recruitment mishaps.   It lasted about a week and most soccer fans had to click around in different directions to get news, but who’s to say it won’t happen again?  Maybe the best website for MLS is majorleaguesoccer.com but it’s a bit biased right?  Do you think they’d break a story on any financial problems or trade disasters?

Going into the near term expect more news for soccer games that ESPN makes money off of (or at the least great coverage of Wayne Rooney).  Long term I’ll have to trust that the slow, tentative growth of MLS doesn’t run into a litany of brick walls.  Let me put it this way, the most overhyped team (the Galaxy) will win MLS’s most overhyped game (the MLS Cup) and ESPN will not really make a big deal out of it (not enough hype for their advertisers).

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/football-sport/soccers-for-girls-the-trials-of-a-manchester-united-fan-in-usa/

That’s a great article from a Manchester United fan stuck in America two decades ago.  After traveling here he didn’t have any Fox soccer or any exhibition matches to follow, there were probably no articles in the paper he could catch up on and he had to sit down with a portable radio during match season just to follow the development of his team.  And he did this at a time when 90% of Americans couldn’t tell the difference between Manchester United and an Australian Rugby team.

Now imagine his disbelief when his team went on a super tour of the U.S. and 60,000 people showed up at each stop.

It’s like an American football team scheduling a few games in England and outselling every major sporting fixture for months as a result, including the FA Cup final and the Ashes. I’ll assume it couldn’t possibly have trumped the Super Bowl, because that would be proper up the wall.

For more articles like the one above you can check out Sabotage Times and then bother them to get more insight from the author.  In the meantime though, the author Ian was kind and generous enough to answer a few questions of mine about the obstacles he had to get over after crossing the pond. Enjoy:

SB: Why did you decide to leave the U.K. and travel stateside?

Ian: Back in the 80s there was a formative learning process that working-class lads
from Britain went through to one degree or another; as a youngster you would support a
local football team, which fortunately for me was Manchester United. By the time you
were in your mid-teens, you’d go and stand on the terraces of your local stadium and
enjoy a crazy day of casual violence and a good deal of posturing and preening in your
designer gear, which back in the 70s and 80s was a new thing. The next step was booze;
drunk at the match and the rest of the night. And then came drugs. Books. And music.
After that came travel. I travelled for a few years, to Israel, Europe, Canada, the US,
North Africa, etc, but I met my wife in the US. We got married in England in late-’94.
I’ve lived in the States on and off since ‘88, so I’ve made a short answer very long,
and I apologize for that. Must be something in the Connecticut water. Nothing made
me “decide” to come to the States other than the fact America was a very untouchable
proposition and I couldn’t resist going there. I’ve thought about moving back to Britain
quite frequently since about 2000, but never managed to convince myself it could be
better than this.

SB: What was a huge culture shock when you arrived as far as soccer coverage is concerned?

Ian: Back in the old days I had a couple of things against me. One, I lived on an
island, and two, the live football was strictly pay-per-view, as it was everywhere then.
To get to a pub that was showing the match meant a ferry, then a bus to Boston, which
I only ever did once or twice. It was too much messing about. I listened to the match on
a shortwave radio instead, and was grateful for it. Sometimes they showed PPV on our
local channels. Scheduled games would be vetoed at the last minute for recordings of
Monster Jam Truck rallies or Professional Bull Riders. It would drive me up the fucking
wall!

The ’94 World Cup stimulated interest, as did America’s progress in the ’02 WC
in Japan and Korea among other campaigns. Now the MLS are signing real players from
Europe and South America, it could trigger a tipping point. You never know.

SB: What’s one thing about MLS that keeps getting on your nerves? Do you even watch
MLS anyway?

Ian: To be honest, I don’t watch it really, but I know that I should. Years ago it used to
annoy me in the sense that, when taken on its own, the MLS actually resembled any other
top level league, but as soon as MLS players were pitched against players from Europe
and South America, they were outpowered and outplayed. It annoyed me that so many
American soccer players were being peer-pressured into playing the major American
sports when they could have been raising the level of the game in the States.

SB: Have you ever been a fan of any NBA, NHL or NFL teams? If so why?

Ian: When I came here in late-93 (unknowingly never to return to England) I remember
watching the NFL playoffs. Kansas City Chiefs caught my imagination, partly because
an Aussie mate kept insisting they were awesome cuz of ol’ Joe Montana. I imagined
Montana an American version of Roy Keane or Bryan Robson, and rooted for them right
through the playoffs. They lost 13-30 to Buffalo Bills in the AFC championship game.
Buffalo had lost three consecutive Super Bowls and were to go on and lose yet another. I
continued to like the Chiefs for a couple of years, but these days I couldn’t say I properly
supported a team, especially since the Red Sox bought Liverpool FC! I like the Yankees
cos they remind me of United. I like the Steelers cos of the colour of their uniforms and
their logo. Obviously I like it when the Celtics, Bruins or Patriots do well, and it was
great to see that first Red Sox World Series in ’04. If the Dallas Cowboys won every
Super Bowl between now and doomsday, I’d be happy. Don’t ask me why. Maybe I just
like the stars and silver of their helmets.

SB: Do you see any headache with the Premiere League as far as money problems or strikes
are concerned?

Ian: You must be joking. Premier League footballers are paid ridiculous amounts
of money by any standard. If they went on strike they’d never recover, because the
supporters would disown them.

Money problems for the smaller clubs seem worse than ever. It’s not uncommon
to read about clubs on the brink of going under. Let’s face it; even some steady Premier
League outfits are very unpredictable financially. The “big” clubs who are being
outdone by mega-rich foreigners buying their rivals and installing coaches who assemble
mercenaries are also under threat. United’s relationship with Man City has taken an acute
turn; we admire Alex Ferguson’s genius and hate City’s soulless spending to the point
where it’s uncomfortable. It’s all about money versus coaching talent. No prizes for
guessing who’s the good guys and the bad guys, but envy sees many outsiders enjoying
City’s tarnished day in the sun. We call them the “Anyone But United Brigade” (ABU).

SB: Finally, if I’m going to a bar to watch Man U play tell me which specific drink I should
order (with the reason why) and how many glasses/pitchers I should drink?.

Ian: Hmm, this is a difficult one. I assume you mean a bar in the US, cos you wouldn’t
go all the way to Manchester and not go into Old Trafford. So that rules out Joseph Holt’s
Bitter, which is a firm favourite of blokes living in the city, especially the Salford and
north Manchester areas. I might say 3 Monts Golden Ale, a bright, brain-scalding laser beam of a
farmhouse brew from French Flanders that makes your average lager look and taste like
ditchwater.

It’s tempting to say Boddington’s as Boddies also was originally a Manchester
bitter, or even John W. Lees, another Manchester brewery selling upscale (strong) ales
here in the US.

UPDATE FROM SUCKYBALL: If you want to learn more about Ian Hough’s travels he has a website and a book you can read into. His website is The Nameless Thing and you can Follow Ian on Twitter.

From the article:

‘But it’s even worse for the Red Bulls. This is a team not only in danger of missing the playoffs, but one that could become the biggest flop in American professional soccer history.’

Leave it to ESPN to over-publicize the Red Bulls playing poorly.  In my own opinion they’re really not even playing poorly, just tying a lot of games.  As far as ‘biggest flop in American professional soccer history’ I think there’s a recent team with Beckham and Donovan that failed in more extravagant fashion a few years ago. And they pretty much followed a similar team pattern – two or three hugely paid stars, annoying injuries, constant travel and side exhibitions and underpaid teammates trying to create miracles in hard spots.

Why not pay Lionel Messi 80 million a year to play for the Houston Dynamo and then field the rest of the team with 13 year old kids from a local middle school that get paid nothing but orange slices and Gatorade?  The crazy thing is some MLS executives would jump at it.

Oh by the way, have fun with this ESPN article from the beginning of the year:

http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/6179490/mls-poised-bigger-things

From the old article: “This asymmetric injection of quality into a few clubs has led to the emergence of two budding juggernauts in the key New York and Los Angeles markets, where the Red Bulls and Galaxy have been stockpiling talent to the point they are now the two best and deepest squads ever assembled in the league’s history.”

It’s easy to paint L.A. and N.Y. as powerhouse teams but I think ESPN could’ve done a better job of predicting team strength.  Don’t they actually go to the games?  Don’t they even watch them?

I previously mentioned that Fox brushed off the high price tag and probably gave the league between 12-17 million for this year.  So when that deal was announced earlier this year people were confused as to why it wasn’t a longer term contract.  I’d think that a long term deal would be better for both, but like I said, Fox and MLS agreed to just a single year:

http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1110/major-league-soccer/2011/02/18/2358604/mls-and-fox-soccer-channel-agree-on-one-year-contract

Now NBC is going to broadcast MLS games for three years and has the added bonus of a few U.S. national games (with Mexico, it’s probably in the contract, Mexico is very important).  Let’s look at these numbers before you fall asleep:

From here: 
http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1110/major-league-soccer/2011/08/10/2613971/mls-and-nbc-announce-three-year-broadcast-deal

‘The partnership will feature 45 MLS games in total, plus four U.S. men’s national team matches to be televised live across both NBC and NBC Sports Network (currently Versus) each season.

Each season, NBC will broadcast two regular-season MLS games, two playoff games and two U.S. national team matches. The rest will be shown on NBC Sports Network, which will be the new name of Versus starting in January 2012.’

49 games total.  6 semi-important games a year.  That’s 18 semi-important games on national television over the course of the contract and maybe 50 jokes on SNL hyping up soccer in marketing tie-ins.  But otherwise that’s 31 games on a channel people might not watch, out of 49 total.

After following American soccer for this long something seems off to me about this new NBC contract.  I agree that soccer isn’t dying or trapped to suck forever, but my gut is that they’re still bending facts.  Here are my three scenarios that can explain this deal:

Scenario Uno: Fox wasn’t getting ratings it wanted and bailed.  The executives at Fox were constantly pushing European leagues and I’m pretty sure they still have the contracts for those specific games in England and Spain.  But all the good games for MLS were bought by ESPN and taken off the table.  So Fox had to promote games that America didn’t go crazy over.  And if Americans weren’t tuning in, do you think European and Latin American immigrants were?  Please.  Fox Soccer never pushed for a three of four year deal and probably told MLS that they couldn’t go much higher.

Scenario Dos: NBC doesn’t give a peacock’s feather about MLS because they just want to learn and promote soccer for the Olympics and maybe the World Cup.  Last year ESPN ran victory laps around the other networks when they broadcast from Africa.  NBC pretty much has a good handle on the Olympics so it wouldn’t be difficult for them to get into the soccer world.  Would it be a stretch seeing the World Cup final on NBC?

When the U.S. women’s team make a run at Olympic gold (and the men try for Bronze) can’t you imagine MLS players munching on a McDonald’s Olympic-size happy meal and advertising Visa?  Goal!!!!! NBC is putting it’s weight in the global soccer world and all the weak insomnia curing games will be shoved on the NBC sports channel.  The games that are easier to promote will be on standard NBC. And then the U.S. National team matches will be hyped to death with the overdone logic of you’re not a real American if you think American soccer is getting worse!!  But people who follow soccer will understand that Americans aren’t great, sometimes we suck, and we’re all going to have to get used to McDonald’s bags with soccer balls all over it.

Scenario three: NBC has no idea what it’s walking into and got duped.

I couldn’t find any numbers on the contract but it’s at least twenty million for three years, easy.  If MLS can’t draw enough good advertising for the 31 games they’re going to have to be really be successful with the 18 others.  MLS playoffs in the middle of an NFL season? Ouch.  Hyping up teams that can only hype up their own city?  Tough work.  Even though I’m sure NBC executives will make some money on this deal it might not be as much as they thought.  The reason I say this is because if Fox Soccer was making a fortune then why did the regular Fox channel not broadcast any games?  Fox Soccer told them that MLS was tough, and it was growing, and that European teams were easier to succeed with.  NBC is now filling those shoes without the added benefit of Barcelona vs Real Madrid.

So I guess what it comes down to is that the only party that had a real upgrade was fans of the MLS.  Everything else is up in the air but league fans can look forward to three more years that the league won’t fold or drop any teams (hopefully).

And I still probably won’t catch more than five of the games …

But I AM sure that Manchester United pretty much leveled the MLS teams so far and I was hoping for a good solid tie.  A tie would’ve been a huge victory compared to cities getting ran over like this.  England decided to reclaim Seattle as a British Colony this week and Seattle started dumping coffee aside for afternoon tea.

One tie out of four games isn’t too much to ask.  Don’t MLS teams tie against eachother way too much anyway?  I think one week all 16 or 14 teams had ties against one another.  Ridiculous.

Losing 7-0 is just futbol castration to a team like Seattle that’s pretty much a poster city for MLS.  Well, let me retype that: Seattle is a poster city for MLS, but then it gets taken down to put up bigger posters of European teams on the same wall.  I keep writing that the only reason big European or Mexican teams come here isn’t to test American’s new found soccer strength, it’s to cash in on hype and drum up support for their team.  Let’s look at a couple of paragraphs from a goal.com article:

A full 67,052 piled into CenturyLink Field to see the reigning English Premier League champion, which scrapes at the record for the Pacific Northwest. Earlier, 51,523 showed up at Gillette Stadium, which hasn’t posted an MLS regular season average attendance over 20,000 since 1997, to watch the friendly against the New England Revolution. 

Sir Alex Ferguson sees the emerging market in North America as the perfect setting for a bit of proselytizing. 

“We think that the United States is an emerging country in terms of soccer and there’s also potential for us to increase our support base, which we’re always conscious of,” the manager said after defeating the Sounders. “We had good support tonight. It’s pleasing to us when we try to spread the gospel about the way we play, the romance of the club, the history of the club. The United States is a growing market in terms of support.”

So MLS wants you to believe American soccer is legit and movin on uuuup for a piece of the pie, but a thing like reality is standing in the way. Gillette Stadium, where people would spend 800 dollars to watch an NFL game, after 14 YEARS WITH SOCCER isn’t bringing the same amount of people it did before.  You got that right?  In 1997 more people went to see the MLS team play and now the fans either vanished or moved to Montreal?  Are all the advertising executives for New England related to the owner and hiding severe drug addiction?  How do you not do anything for over a decade when the rest of the league is taking on debt and killing themselves to give EMP shocks to their fan bases?

Oh wait, what you COULD do is bring Manchester United over and pay for their airfare and hotels.  So that English team  could beat down your team basically with one hand (er, one foot?) and play its best players for a short amount of time so they’ll stay healthy. As long as 60,000 people show up that’s quality marketing right?

But the catch is this: that’s marketing for MANCHESTER UNITED.  A team that DOESN’T NEED MARKETING.  The coach had just stated that he’s there to increase a support base (revenue) and that the United States is a growing market (the same way Vietnam and Hungary are growing markets for Microsoft Windows or a new Apple Store). Instead of paying for these European power teams to beat up your best players why not buy a thousand soccer balls for poor children.  Actually, I don’t know what to do with that extra money.  Just stop giving it to Rooney and Sir Alex Ferguson.

Full disclosure: I root for Manchester United every once in a while and mildly, very midly, agree that them coming to the U.S. is good for soccer in the long run.  But I don’t agree with neglecting your home team and inviting European club teams just to sell tickets you couldn’t sell yourself.