About That Beckham Effect...

"Major League Soccer's big investment seems to have paid off."

So begins a piece from the Economist arguing, effectively, that the $250 million the league invested to bring David Beckham to MLS was worth the cost.

"Mr Beckham’s star power has helped legitimise the league, encouraging other stars to follow (such as Thierry Henry of France) and leading to an influx of investment in new clubs in Seattle, Portland and, in Canada, Toronto and Vancouver," says the Economist. The article also quotes DC United Owner Will Chang saying Becks helped soccer "make the paradigm shift to being cool."

Chang's comment is absurd on a number of levels that we'll deal with in a minute. Let's first explore the story's main argument, that Beckham helped legitimize (note proper spelling) the league.

Did Beckham really lead other stars to follow him to MLS?
Past-their-prime superstars are as old as the league itself. Look at the original rosters from its inauguration year and you'll see names like Hugo Sanchez, Marco Etcheverry, Carlos Valderrama and Roberto Donadoni, to name but a few. Beckham was certainly not the first big name to join an MLS outfit, he was merely the biggest to do so.

In fact, there is probably LESS star power on MLS rosters at present than in the league's early days. Quick: name one player on the Houston Dynamo (the team that will face Beckham's Galaxy for the MLS Cup on Sunday). Not that easy, is it? Many MLS teams, including the Dynamo, have not even made use of their "Beckham rule" exception to sign one player to a contract that doesn't count against the salary cap. And the ones that have, have not always seen it work out in their favor.

And did Henry really join MLS because of Becks? Highly unlikely that it factored into his decision at all. More important to Henry was the ability to relocate to New York City and still get paid multiple millions to play soccer. Would MLS (and the New York Red Bulls) have been able to afford Henry without Becks' precedent? Absolutely. The Austrian drink company's investment in MLS predated Becks's arrival by more than one year. It dropped $200 million on a new stadium and clearly viewed the team as a cost center. It was going to invest in star player regardless.

This assumes it's even a good thing to attract such "star power." The Economist somehow views this connection as an established fact; big names = a successful league. In reality, one could argue (convincingly) that exactly the opposite is true. If it were just big names that make a league, we'd care a lot more about teams in Qatar and the Emirates.

So what does make a successful league? It's quite simple: fannies in the seats and eyeballs on tv. The Economist story mentions attendance being up 7 percent over last year, which is indeed substantial. More importantly, it follows years of smaller gains. How much of that was due to Becks? In his first two years in the league, arguably all of it. Since then, as Beckham's popularity has waned due to his poorly-managed forays in Europe, his influence at the gate has lessened as well. It was during this time that the most substantial gains were made. Since 2009, the arrival of the Seattle Sounders and their 40,000-odd season ticket holders was the real story behind the rise in attendance. Many MLS teams in bigger cities (Chicago, Dallas, Boston) have seen attendance drop off, at times significantly, since Beckham's arrival.

"Television figures are rising only slowly from low levels." Right, and really not until this year, meaning Beckham, by now a novelty, probably didn't have much (or anything) to do with it. MLS has shrewdly managed to turn this into lucrative television contracts, but the league remains all but ignored by mainstream media outside the Pacific Northwest.

Now to Will Chang. The DC United owner claimed Beckham's arrival helped make soccer cool and (quite literally) afforded U.S. players a place to play professionally. The second claim is of course ludicrous. While it's true that U.S. soccer players in the past did not have a professional league of their own, this was between 1984, when the old North American Soccer League went under, and 1996, MLS's first season. By the time Beckham came onto the scene in 2007, MLS was firmly entrenched as a business. As for "making soccer cool," the sport was widely played stateside long before Beckham's arrival. If numbers increased further since then, it's probably just a continuation of that trend and/or a result of the success of U.S. men's and women's teams at World Cups and (for the women) Olympic games--not due to a certain British midfielder with a cockney accent.

Americans now watch the World Cup in as many numbers and with as much passion as most countries. It will be a long time before businesses shut down on World Cup game days the way they do in Brazil, but in New York many office workers did mysteriously disappear at certain key times last June. The fact that we can field a competitive (men's) team is surely in no small part due to MLS--which, let's not forget, predates Beckham's arrival in LA by more than a decade. The team's greatest success, a quarterfinal berth at the 2002 tournament, long before Beckham shipped out to Spain, much less the U.S.

There is still a vast disparity between MLS and national team viewership and interest levels. Senior national teams (men's and women's) routinely lead Sportscenter broadcasts and newspapers' sports sections during World Cups. MLS gets one Sportscenter mention a year, for MLS Cup highlights, and that segment is usually toward the back-end of the show. How widely will the Galaxy's and Dynamo's hometown papers tout a triumph by their team? If they do at all, it will surely pale in comparison to a World Series title by the Dodgers or Astros.

That's all fine and good of course. Baseball is viewed as an American institution and soccer is seen as "un-American. Both assumptions are patently false, as we made clear a long time ago in one of the first posts in this space. Attitudes will change, slowly. Even then, MLS has little chance of becoming a truly major league. We'll know that has happened when the league is not celebrated for signing a player like David Beckham, but ridiculed for paying so much money for somebody so far past his prime whose priorities are clearly elsewhere. When such a move is called out as the blatant marketing ploy it is and was. When young American players, not aging European ones, attract attendance and media attention. At that point America will have become a true soccer nation. Until then we're just supporters of our national teams.

Seriously, why CAN'T the U.S. Produce a Soccer Star?

Why can't the U.S. build a soccer star? This was the title of a recent Wall Street Journal article. It's a compelling question and one that deserves our attention.

In the past month or two we've had a Chinese woman win the French Open, a German win the NBA Championship and a Northern Irishman (are they called that?) win some big golf tournament. I personally do not consider golf a sport but apparently it was a pretty big deal to those who do. We have a men's tennis star from Serbia, a boxing champion from the Philippines and a Jamaican holding the 100 meter world record in track and field. We do not, as of yet, have an American superstar in soccer.

Sure we've had one or two who were close (Brad Friedel, John Harkes) a few who are probably in the tier right below superstardom (Tim Howard, Landon Donovan, Clint Dempsey) and some who might have a chance, however remote, at making it yet (Jozy Altidore, Michael Bradley, Juan Agudelo). But that's pretty weak coming from the U.S., which as the Journal article points out has produced superstars in virtually every other sport imaginable.

What to make of this? Why hasn't it happened? What, if anything, does it say about the U.S.'s chances of becoming an elite soccer nation?

First off, it is important to define terms here. "Superstar" does not necessarily mean "great player." A superstar is created as much in the media as on the pitch. Example: David Beckham. Everybody in the entire world knows who he is and he can most certainly be called a superstar. Is he anywhere near the best player of his generation? Absolutely not. That's an extreme example, but let's not underestimate the role of media here. One could argue that the reason there hasn't been an American superstar is simply because the U.S. media hasn't been able to create one. Why hasn't U.S. media been able to create one? Because it hasn't been worth their time to! The sport simply isn't important enough here. Sure, everybody watches the World Cup now but that's one month every four years (and the U.S. is usually out after a fortnight). American media outlets have only really begun to cover the sport with any kind of sincerity. Now that they are, they've started clamoring for homegrown superstars. Good.

We've also been unlucky. Jozy Altidore appeared to have all the intangibles for superstar-dom but was stuck with coaches who wouldn't play him when he was in Spain. He was a little more successful after moving to Hull City but there the "supporting cast" was really not very good. Since then he's back to languishing on the bench. Still, Altidore is young (21) and unpolished (which is exactly why he needs to gain match experience, but whatever). He may yet turn into the first soccer superstar from the U.S. There's still time.

We'll probably never know exactly how good Donovan might have been. As a 29-year old attacking midfielder he is now past his prime. Instead of being tested against the best and the brightest in Europe, he chose to spend his most productive years competing against aging journeymen and American college players. Later, when he wanted to make the switch (to Everton) it was Major League Soccer that kept him stateside.

Still, there is one player who should have been a superstar and today, if he were in his prime, would qualify: Brad Friedel. At his peak, in the early- to mid-2000s, Friedel was probably one of the five best goalkeepers in the world. I challenge you to name a goalkeeper from the Western hemisphere, at least these past 30 years, who was better. Not Jorge Campos nor Jose Chilavert, both of whom actually were bonafide superstars, make the grade. Even the current generation of Brazilian keepers, while head and shoulders above the usual goalkeeping stock from that country, are inferior to Friedel when he was in his prime.

Why wasn't Friedel known as America's first soccer superstar? Simple: the media didn't anoint him as such. We can pontificate for hours on why that didn't happen (everything from Friedel's rather rogue look, to lack of PR firepower, to dearth of "charisma," to the nature of his position on the pitch, etc) and when we do we'll realize just how fleeting such a term is.

The 'grand opening' of 'Red Bull Arena'

I was there. It was awesome. Felt like a real, honest-to-goodness European football ground. The only thing that was missing was cigarette smoke (and that's not a bad thing. For whatever reason the scientific view that smoking kills people is not yet accepted in Europe). Coming on the day Major League Soccer decided against committing harakiri, inking a new five-year collective bargaining agreement that permits its 15th season to start on time, it was particularly awesome. More here and here (second link is to photo gallery). Enjoy.

Checking in on local (as in NYC) soccer stuff

I go to great lengths on this blog not to offend, frustrate, bore or otherwise upset the "Eurosnobs"* of the world. This is not necessarily because I agree with or support their views, but simply because they make up the bulk of the readership (with another sizable chunk made up of "LatAmsnobs"). If your readers don't want to hear about Major League Soccer, there isn't really all that much you can do about it beyond the occasional "educational" column. Consider this one of those occasions.

The New York metropolitan era is on the verge of a major soccer renaissance. The catalyst is a new, state of the art "soccer-specific stadium" built by and for the local MLS team, the New York Red Bulls. The ground is in nearby Harrison, N.J., which is across state lines but happens to be closer to downtown Manhattan than Shea Stadium. It opens March 20 with a friendly between the Red Bulls and Brazilian side Santos.

I'm not going to write an ad for Red Bull Arena. Others have covered that angle already. I did pay a visit and was impressed with what I saw. It's a real, honest-to-goodness football ground, as continentals would call it. It even has real grass. And it's going to be a big hit.

The truth is New York is a soccer town, though one that has been in deep hibernation since at least 1984, when the old North American Soccer League folded its tent. The prior decade, when a guy called Edison Arantes do Nascimento played here, the local club regularly drew 70,000 to its home games at Giants Stadium (also in New Jersey). For a time there was talk that soccer would become America's fifth "major sport," joining baseball, football, basketball and ice hockey. And the New York Cosmos' success did not end with Pele either, though it likely did originate with him; as recently as 1981, with Pele long gone, the team drew an average of nearly 35,000 fans to its home games. The following year it drew close to 29,000. Red Bull Arena can literally not fit that many people; its maximum capacity is around 25,000.

Which is not to suggest this capacity will become an issue, at least not right away. But it could eventually. Because soccer has the potential to become one of New York's three most popular sports. Key words here are
potential and New York. Probably nothing will displace baseball as New York's number one sport in the immediate future. But (American) football has always been more popular with suburbanites and in "red states" than in a (supposedly) sophisticated, liberal urban enclave like New York. Most people who attend New York Giants and Jets games are from New Jersey, Connecticut, or upstate New York as opposed to one of the four boroughs. The New York Rangers ice hockey team sell out nearly every home game, but really their following constitutes little more than a niche audience in a city of New York's size. Basketball long ago fell out of favor with the local team's pathetic performance this past decade, though it too continues to sell out games. Yes, if Lebron James is signed this summer that will change overnight, but there is a bigger chance that Thierry Henry will sign with the Red Bulls.

In fact, the word is Henry has already signed and the team is just waiting for the right moment to announce the deal. The Frenchman would then join the club after the World Cup. New York's Irish population will be outraged but they'll get over it and anyway make up just a sliver of the city's 2.87 million foreign-born residents these days. (Those who consider themselves "Irish American" are of course far more numerous, but probably know about as much about Henry as they do the IRA. Not that it stopped them from getting involved with that organization in the past. Okay bad comparison).

Anyway, Henry will get New York City residents out to Red Bull Arena in numbers, much the way David Beckham did when he came to town. With a few exceptions: 1. Unlike Becks, who played for the LA Galaxy on a different coast, Henry's appearance will be more than just a one-off; 2. Henry can score goals from something other than set pieces; and 3. Henry speaks fluent English.

If Henry doesn't come, you can rest assured the Austrian energy drink company will find somebody of (almost) equal stature to raise its profile. It has also begun an aggressive marketing campaign throughout the Metropolitan area. But the key will be to build something sustainable. And for that to happen the team needs to be watch-able.

The past 14 years it has been anything but. It played its home games on a plastic turf more often than not decorated with American football yardlines. It was mismanaged and miscoached. Its poor play (even by MLS standards) was only accentuated by the elastic pitch. But MLS play has gotten better and will improve even more this season. It will never be as entertaining as the Premier League but there will come a day when MLS play is not really discernible from Europe's larger (though not largest) leagues.

And its popularity will only grow. Professional soccer is already a hit in the Pacific Northwest, Toronto and Philadelphia. If MLS can get out of its own way (and avoid a work stoppage) New York will join that list.

For more news and notes on the New York Red Bulls, please check out their American Soccer News page where I am a regular contributor. This year I am also co-moderating a new podcast called Seeing Red! The New York soccer roundup. Get the most recent episode here.

*UrbanDictionary.com definition: Eurosnob
n. An American who is a soccer fan but refuses to support either the U.S. National Team or Major League Soccer, instead cheering for European teams they have no personal connections to, based on the perceived superiority of said teams.

Fan 1: "Hey, you like soccer, too! Wanna check out the Dynamo game?"

Fan 2: "I'd never watch American soccer. I'd rather watch Arsenal on TV than go to a live game down the street."

Fan 1: "Douchebag Eurosnob Traitor..."

Ten for '10: Top questions facing the beautiful game in 2010

Happy holidays from Soccer Source! In the spirit of things, we thought it would be a good idea to identify 10 questions facing world soccer in 2010 and rank them according to (our perceived order of) importance. Note that while we might claim these are "world" soccer issues, true imperialists that we are the list is almost entirely U.S.- and England-specific. But you've come to expect as much at this point, right? Anyway, here goes:

1. Who will win the 2010 World Cup?
Any speculation on this topic naturally begins with the point that no European country has won a World Cup outside its home continent. That would leave Argentina, Brazil and the United States as favorites. Just kidding, the U.S. is at least a generation or two away from even entering that conversation. So it's between Argentina and Brazil then? Not so fast. The 2010 tournament might be played outside of Europe, however the South African winter probably suits Europeans better than South Americans. Recent World Cups held outside Europe took place in ecosystems more akin to tropical rainforests, which are ill-suited to delicate European (particularly northern European) athletes. The one exception, Argentina, featured a heavily favored home side--and even then the Dutch almost won. So in terms of geography, we're entering uncharted waters in 2010 and not just because it's the first World Cup to take place in Africa. So where does that leave us? Maybe, just maybe, the best team will win. Right now, that team is Spain or Brazil, depending on whom you believe. So one of them will win the World Cup. Germany will probably make the final again just because that always happens. But really, Spain and Brazil are heavy favorites, followed by Argentina and Italy. Germany and Ivory Coast could be right there as well. England? Don't make me laugh. Ireland have a better chance of winning at this point and I say that fully aware they won't even be in the field.

2. Will Barcelona repeat its success from 2009?
It's going to be very, very difficult. For starters they have to repeat as Liga champs. That may be the easiest task at this point and only because second-placed Real Madrid have failed to impress. Then there is the Copa del Rey, a grueling two-stage elimination tournament that is now just in the round of 16. Upsets always happen in this thing (just ask Real Madrid) especially when teams have to devote manpower to their European campaigns. Speaking of which, Barca have an easy draw in the Champions League round of 16 (they face VfB Stuttgart, who aren't even good in Germany anymore). So at least that's in their favor. But with the myriad other tournaments, there are simply so many things that can go wrong that it's difficult to like Barcelona's chances of winning six trophies again.

3. What form will professional soccer take in the U.S.?
Make no mistake: this issue will have a direct impact on the wider world of soccer. North America has historically been the "final frontier" of the beautiful game, with countless professional leagues coming and going the last 80 years. Now, U.S. professional soccer is at the crossroads once more , with its top two divisions facing a labor stand-off and infighting, respectively. It could not come at a worse time. Major League Soccer, which was created as a prerequisite for the U.S. receiving the 1994 World Cup, has finally made some inroads with the American public. Its newest team, the Seattle Sounders, were an unprecedented success in 2009. The next expansion club, the Philadelphia Union, are already selling season tickets by the thousands. Television ratings have even gone up. A strike or lockout would be costly, perhaps fatal, but is now a very real possibility. A Jan. 31 deadline looms and the two sides remain far apart on major issues. Then there's the new North American Soccer League, or NASL 2.0, a group of dissident clubs from the United Soccer Leagues that acquired the rights to the NASL name. The two leagues, USL and NASL, are now caught in their own legal battle. How will all this end? Who knows if it even will end in 2010? If the history of U.S. professional soccer has proven anything, it's a penchant for self destruction.

4. How will the U.S. Men's National Team do at the World Cup?
This issue is also vital to the future of the beautiful game, which is why the powers-that-be in Zurich engineered an easy yet compelling draw for the Yanks. The U.S. should qualify from its group for sure. I can see them even defeating England, which will be hampered by the forced inclusion of David Beckham in its squad. After that, it's anybody's guess. A quarterfinal spot could be in the offing. Anything beyond that is highly unlikely. In the end everybody will say the U.S. did enough to demonstrate they're on their way to becoming a world soccer. Which is exactly what they say all the time, anyway.

5. How will England do at the World Cup?
No better than the U.S., that's for sure. England are caught in a kind of generational shift, with aging, overrated midfielders (Gerrard, Lampard) holding on to spots while younger guys like Aaron Lennon struggle for space. The whole thing is made more difficult through the forced inclusion of Beckham. You laugh, but do you really think Becks' corporate sponsors (which only includes, oh, everybody, plus all the companies that are bailing on Tiger Woods) will let Fabio Capello get away with leaving him off? Beckham is not only going to be named to the squad, but will also see at least 45 minutes of action against the U.S. That will screw up England's game and they could lose, or at least draw the match. Once that happens, FIFA will assure both sides get through to the elimination round. England might go through to the quarterfinals again, but that's about as far as we can see them advancing.

6. Who will be the star of the World Cup?
Another item that will have a major bearing on the future shape of the game (or at least its marketing arm). Who will be "the face" of the 2010 World Cup? The 2006 tournament didn't really have one, other than Zidane, and that for the wrong reason. In '02 you had Ronaldo and perhaps Oliver Kahn (shudder). In '98 Zidane again or one of his teammates or perhaps the entire France squad. It's been a little while (probably Maradona in '86) since somebody claimed the tournament for himself. This year the stars seem lined up for Lionel Messi but don't count out the likes of Didier Drogba or Fernando Torres or maybe somebody less obvious. (Not Cristiano Ronaldo. I have no faith in his ability to perform on this stage with that team).

7. Can Chelsea win the Premiership?
Yes. Will they? Yes. Perhaps by default, but Blues will take it. They simply have too much firepower, even with Drogba missing time this winter due to the African Nations Cup. More importantly, the only team with a realistic chance of catching them seems to lack the talent and wherewithal to mount a challenge. Then you have Arsenal, who are simply too inexperienced. Maybe next year.

8. Will professional soccer become a hot ticket in New York once more?
Obviously this depends on what happens with item No. 3 and to a lesser extent item No. 4. But the metropolitan New York area is poised for a soccer renaissance. The main reason for this is the new soccer-specific stadium, Red Bull Arena, that has arisen on the banks of the Passaic River. The Harrison, N.J., ground finally provides the New York metropolitan region the state-of-the-art soccer temple it has clamored for ever since Dutch settlers traded a few glass shards for the island of Manhattan. Unlike Giants Stadium, which was never intended for soccer, it is accessible via public transport. The ground's primary tenant, the New York Red Bulls, are admittedly not the most exciting draw (and not just because of their horrible name) but that could change very quickly. The likes of Thierry Henry and Raul have been linked to the team, who have both salary cap space (one "designated player" spot) and cash-on-hand to make such a deal happen. Better yet, they could trade in their goofy name for something much better: the New York Cosmos. Rights to the name were recently sold to new ownership and there has been some talk it will reappear in some form. Of course if there's a strike or a lockout this all becomes a moot point.

9. What U.S. soccer player will establish himself in a top European league?
This one's easy: Jozy Altidore. It's going to happen. All he needs is a chance to see first team football on a consistent basis. So far, Altidore's short European career has been almost completely wasted. His current coach at Hull City, Phil Brown, for whatever reason doesn't want to play him any more than his previous ones at Villareal and Xerez did. But Hull City are caught in a relegation dogfight and we expect Brown's leash to be a short one. He'll either be forced to play Jozy out of the sheer necessity to try something new, or will go down before he has the chance. The team's last two games, neither of which Altidore suited up for, demonstrated it cannot score without him in the lineup. It may not be able to score much with him either, but it's hard to fathom why he hasn't received more of a chance. But he'll get one next year and when he does he'll impress. Take it to the bank.
10. What's going to happen with Liverpool?
Nothing good we can think of. Rafa Benitez should have been fired already, but might be allowed to hang on for a little while longer. A top four spot clearly isn't happening, no matter how much the Spaniard doth protest. Once the team's owners catch on to this it will likely be the end for Benitez. How much that helps the club's fortunes is open for debate. There is no doubting the team has talent and no denying it is showing little resolve on the pitch at this point. On paper, those things would be helped by a new, better coach. But Liverpool's problems might just go deeper than that. Maybe the players just won't work together because they're inherently selfish and were never taught to be anything else? Maybe they simply can't complement each other on the pitch? If that's the case, new blood will be needed. But who? And where from? And how much might they be expected to change the team's play if Stevie G is still running the show? Maybe Stevie's part of the problem? The only thing clear is there are no easy answers when it comes to Liverpool. 2010 won't be an easy year at Anfield, either.

Photo taken from ballantine.com without permission.

Hooliganism in the USA, part III

To read Part I in this series, please click here.
To read Part II.

Yes, this again. Soccer hooliganism is coming to the USA. Check that: it's already here.

In fairness, the "analysis" is a bit different this time. Whereas in the past hooliganism was all about things that were (supposedly) going on in Major League Soccer, it is now all about stateside supporters groups of English teams. Not just any English team, mind you, but one Liverpool FC.

I'm getting ahead of myself. The above links to an open letter addressed to an "esteemed member of the football media" (who sent it to me). It concerns the 16-year old individual who tossed the now-infamous beach ball on the pitch at Sunderland's Stadium of Light on Oct. 17. As we all know this caused contributed to Liverpool's 1-0 defeat that day because the Sunderland goal was scored when the (soccer) ball bounced off the beach ball and into the Liverpool net. As you might imagine this angered the otherwise polite Liverpool supporters a great deal, and they vented their anger on various bulletin boards and other Internet forums. At some point--perhaps (hopefully?) in jest, perhaps not--they threatened the young lad's life, which understandably upset him a great deal.

Apparently, some of these fans were in the U.S. and other places outside the mother country. To wit:

“These people were from America and Australia and all over the world – so-called fans who never come to Liverpool," said the 16-year old, who added that after discovering this he "just ignored them."

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what led Mr. Wesley Chin to pen that letter to members of the media. As far as I can tell, it does not appear to be an act of satire, at least not intentionally.

Chin writes:
"I respectfully ask that this story does not fall through the cracks, and receive the attention that it deserves. We, as football fans to the beautiful game, simply cannot allow these reports of violence, hate, and intolerance be swept under the rug. The people responsible for the threats against this boy need to be held accountable for their disgusting actions, and not be given a pass for their actions. By letting this slip by us, it sends a message that they can say and do whatever they want with online protective anonymity. Silence is consent."

On second thought, maybe it was intended as satire? In that case the joke is on those of us stupid enough to take it seriously. Anyway, here goes:


Dear Mr. Chin,
Thank you for your letter (which was not sent to me personally, but whatever). I agree that violence, hate and intolerance should not be swept under the rug. I also agree that people who issue threats of physical violence need to be held accountable for their actions.

But with all due respect, I think you are taking this far too seriously.

While I do not in any way condone the actions of a select few soccer fans who threaten physical violence, I do not believe this is a reflection of the sport itself. Sports fans are a passionate group, as you point out. Sometimes this passion gets the better of them and they say and do stupid things. Sometimes, they actually mean them. In such instances, authorities need to get involved to protect the individuals affected.

This is not unique to soccer. Bill Buckner received death threats. So did that kid who interfered with the foul ball at Wrigley Field. In some non-soccer circles (college sports come to mind) death threats would be an improvement over some of the banter found on Internet boards.

I am sorry that you are left "feeling completely disgusted" by the news. However, referring to it as an "atrocity" is I think a bit much. So is your "silence is consent" talk.

I have been a fan of the beautiful game for about 30 years and have watched it grow in this country for the past 20. This blog, now two years old, is very much a reflection of what I have experienced. I feel fears of hooliganism and fan violence not only overblown, but alarmist and self-serving.

Allow me to refer you to an earlier statement I made on the subject of soccer violence. I realize this situation is a bit different, but think the message still applies. Please take it to heart:

Nobody wants to see anything resembling the extremely dangerous atmosphere at football grounds in Europe from the mid-60s to early 90s (least of all me, who has firsthand experience with at least a sliver of that time and place). But there is absolutely no chance of that happening in the U.S. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The null set. There are many reasons for this: socio-economic reasons, cultural reasons, geographic reasons and many more. Too much to get into at this point. (Sometime later, maybe. Though probably not).

What we will continue to see--and not only in this country--are episodes of violence or unruly behavior when you put large numbers of young men in a confined space at the same time and add alcohol. It happens at (American) football games, baseball games, basketball games, hockey games and yes, soccer games. Every time it happens at a soccer game we can be sure to hear and read about how hooliganism is coming to the U.S. Don't believe it. It's just somebody else taking themselves too seriously and thinking they know something about soccer culture. Or as the Guardian's Barney Ronay put it, "most likely, one of the culprits here is a lingering US fascination with the cliche and paraphernalia of English football hooliganism." Indeed. Time to get over that, folks. Whenever you're ready...

Are you ready, Mr. Chin?

Can Seattle do for soccer what it did for $5 lattes and grunge music?

If you've been anywhere near Major League Soccer this season you will have heard of the Seattle Sounders FC, the league's newest club. Not so much for what they've done on the field--this being MLS most clubs do pretty much the same thing--but for the attention they've attracted locally.


The team is a massive hit in the Pacific Northwest, where it has become a pop culture phenomenon. More on the cultural impact in a bit. First some numbers to put the Sounders success at the gate into perspective:

• The team averaged 30,943 spectators for its 17 regular season home games this season. That is an MLS record--not for an expansion team, for all teams, all time.
• That number is higher than it is for German champions Wolfsburg, French champions Bordeaux and Premiership side Fulham FC among others, according to this Wikipedia table, which is probably wrong (did Juventus really average 21,000 fans last season?) but whatever.
  
• Perhaps most impressive of all: The Sounders are the first U.S. soccer club to rank in the top 50 in the world for average regular season attendance (they're 50th but still).

The club has a FC Barcelona-type ownership structure, which came about at the behest of minority owner Drew Carey (yes, that Drew Carey). Carey also thought up the idea of having supporters march into the stadium en masse on game days accompanied by their very own marching band, the Sound Wave. This concept marries traditions from Latin America with those from U.S. sports and is precisely the type of thing America needs to do to make soccer its own.

Seattle may be the perfect place to launch such initiatives. It was here, after all, that Starbucks began charging (and receiving!) outrageous rates for coffee on the premise that it would provide patrons the "third place" that had been sorely lacking from U.S. culture. The flannel shirt, grunge music and self-loathing were all popularized here. Why not soccer?

Of course, Americans have had various love affairs with the sport in the past, but all were short-lived. There was Pele and the New York Cosmos and the North American Soccer League, which peaked around 1978. The 1994 World Cup caused a stir when it was held in the U.S., as did its 2002 incarnation when the U.S. national team made a run to the quarterfinals. The history books tell us of other "golden ages" in the more distant past.

Is this merely another "false dawn" in American soccer? Or is the sport finally, finally making sustainable inroads with the U.S. public? In other words, is this the $5 latte, which is alive and well nationwide despite the recession, or flannel shirts, which are not (though I heard somewhere they're making a comeback. Or maybe I just dreamed it).

Only time will tell. There is probably evidence on both sides, but consider this: The Philadelphia Union, a club that begins play next season (in its own soccer-specific stadium to boot) had sold 6,000 season tickets by May and has a fervent fan base ready to go. New York's MLS franchise will open its own soccer-specific stadium (in New Jersey, but still) that is attracting rave reviews from players and fans. Even the local business community is anteing up. If the "Sounders phenomenon" catches on in those cities, soccer will be a lot harder to displace from the American imagination.

Photo supplied by AmericanSoccerNews.net

One reason why football (soccer) will might not be a major success in the U.S.

Fellow soccer bloggers Caught Offside yesterday offered up seven reasons why football (soccer) will never be a major success in the U.S. It got lost in all of the hullabaloo over Charlie Davies' accident but I wanted to take the time to address it now.

First things first: Caught Offside are wrong on all but one count, namely that the sport is not stat-intensive enough to become a major deal in the U.S. And frankly, even that's debatable. The others (others sports have a headstart, the U.S. is not very good at soccer, there aren't enough interruptions for advertising, there's no full-time buzzer, not enough cheerleaders and the love of other sports is too great) are, to put it politely, completely off the mark. Many of them are not even true in their own right, much less as reasons for why the sport will fail (again) in this country.

Other sports have a headstart? Sure they do. Just like baseball and basketball did when pro (American) football entered the mainstream in the 1960s. Where was ultimate fighting 10 years ago? Prior to the 1980s the NCAA college basketball tournament was not even televised in its entirety. There are countless other examples of sports entering an already crowded marketplace and succeeding in a major way. A lot of this, it is true, was due to technological advancements (the ubiquity of televisions in American households in the 1960s for pro football) or major events that captured the attention of the nation at the time (think Bird vs. Magic at the 1979 NCAA basketball finals) as well as other factors. So yes, other sports might have a headstart. Big deal. It doesn't mean anything.

The "love of other sports is too great" argument is really no different than this one. Whether these sports have a headstart or people simply love them too much, it just drives home the same point: that there is no space for another "major" sport. But there is always room at the top in America. Just ask the ultimate fighting guys or Lance Armstrong or Tony Hawk or Bode Miller or anybody else who is a household name in this country in a sport outside of football, baseball, basketball or ice hockey.

The U.S. is not very good at soccer? Compared to whom, Brazil? We played them to the letter in the Confederations Cup final a few months back. Yes, they did beat us, but it was darned close. At the last World Cup, in an otherwise meek showing, the U.S. played a scoreless draw against eventual champions Italy. I'm not even bringing up the 2002 World Cup. You might argue the U.S. is not (yet) world class in soccer, but "not very good"? That's just not very accurate. Besides, you want not very good? Look at the U.S. ice hockey team's performance at the last Olympics. Or look at our baseball teams, which performed poorly not only at the last Olympic games, but at the World Baseball Classic. Yet baseball and hockey somehow remain popular, major, sports in this country.

The 'not enough stoppages for advertising' argument is as old as television itself. For the 1994 World Cup advertisers and media companies figured out a way to televise the game "commercial free" by putting a big corporate logo in one of the corners of the screen alongside the game clock and score. Problem solved. If this was still an issue, ESPN never would have acquired the rights to Premiership and Champions League games. Even without constant commercials, soccer sells on TV. This is not only a non issue for the sport's popularity (or lack thereof) in this country, but not a factor, period.

The full-time buzzer argument is even more nonsensical. "There is something very exact in nature about the way the big sports in the U.S. come to a halt," writes COS. Maybe, but what's inexact about a final whistle? Seems pretty finite to me. Baseball doesn't have a final buzzer either, by the way. Baseball games don't even have a clock, in fact. But that's okay because baseball isn't very popular in the U.S., is it?

Nor does baseball have cheerleaders. But soccer does at all levels in this country. High school and college for sure, and with various MLS teams as well. Ever heard of the ChivaGirls? Meanwhile several pro football and basketball teams don't have cheerleaders either. Nor does hockey. Nor does NASCAR. This argument sounds like it was made by somebody who is not very clued in to U.S. soccer. Or U.S. sports. Or, well, pretty much of anything.

Sure, Americans love their stats and there might (might!) be something to soccer's more ethereal nature that keeps it from becoming a major success in this country. (Though one could point to figure skating and gymnastics to nullify that point). More likely, other factors are at work. One of these is the very nature of MLS itself. The top U.S. professional league was created largely so American players would be able to earn money playing in their home country. In this, it has been an unbridled success: nearly every member of the national team got his start in MLS and the nats are more successful than ever before. But MLS, despite its moniker, is not a major soccer league. It is not the EPL. It will probably never even come close. That's fine of course, but there is something to the argument that American consumers clamor for the best and will accept no substitute. But the popularity of events like the World Cup will only grow. If we make a deep run in South Africa next summer we'll see exactly how much.

No top club action = no Top 25 this week

Of course no "top" club action does not mean there weren't some professional clubs in action. Here in the U.S., for example we had a full slate of Major League Soccer games (MLS does not honor FIFA's international match schedule. A result of the old tradition of isolationism perhaps?) Whatever. Rather than bore you with a recap of the national team games, we figure this as good time as any to get you caught up on what's been going on stateside.

But wait! There was top club action that took place, it just wasn't men's soccer. In Los Angeles, the Women's Professional Soccer league played its inaugural game. Having watched both yesterday's MLS match and the WPS one, we can say the latter was far more interesting. And not just because some of the girls are hot.

The WPS is not just for American girls women but a veritable all-star league of the best female players everywhere. Yesterday's game featured the Brazilian Marta (widely viewed as the best player in the woman's game these days) and U.S. national team captain Abby Wambach, among many others (most, though not all significantly better looking than the aforementioned. No, there cannot be a women's soccer article that doesn't mention their looks. We've come a long way but not that far yet. Get used to it). Marta's Los Angeles Sol defeated the Washington Freedom 2-0. Go ahead and laugh at the team names. The pure soccer skills on display were lightyears ahead of what is offered in MLS. These girls women can flat out play. They may lack the size and strength of their male counterparts but their technical skills are for the most part, picture perfect. Let me put it to you this way: If MLS players had the soccer skills of WPS players, it would be the EPL.

Now that we've offended all the purists with our talk of women's soccer, let's move on to MLS. After two match days, two teams remain with perfect records: Chivas USA and the Seattle Sounders. The latter are an expansion team that features a name (Freddie Ljungberg) Arsenal fans may be familiar with. The club hasn't needed Ljungberg's help thus far. He sat out the first game with some injury but got his debut in the second, coming on right after the hour mark when his team was leading 1-0. They ended up winning 2-0 over Real Salt Lake (so named because Utah's royal family are investors). Seattle has yet to give up a goal this season. They won their first game against the New York Red Bulls (last year's MLS Cup finalists) by 3-0. Speaking of the Red Bulls (who play their games in New Jersey), they hosted the New England Revolution in their home opener (in New Jersey) on Saturday night. New England, as some of you may know, are coached by a guy (Steve Nicol) Liverpool fans will have heard of. The game ended in a 1-1 draw but Nicol told me his team played better than they did in the season opener, when they defeated the San Jose Earthquakes 1-0.

Did I mention the Red Bulls play their games in New Jersey? They still have the New York name (as do the New York Giants and Jets, two (American) football teams that also play in Jersey). Apparently the league originally intended for two teams in the New York metropolitan area (and named the existing team the New York/New Jersey Metrostars to reflect this. The team later dropped the "New York/New Jersey" moniker, but when the Austrian energy drink company bought the team a few years ago they slapped the New York label on it, presumably because nobody in Austria has heard of New Jersey). The reason I mention this is that there will soon be a second team in the New York area, called FC New York. It will not compete directly with the Red Bulls, at least not yet, but will be placed in the United States Soccer League's top division. The USL is kind of like the second division to MLS, though this being America there is of course no promotion/relegation. But MLS has taken USL franchises and turned them into MLS squads before, most recently with Seattle (and will do so again with Vancouver and Portland in 2011). This information comes to me from the Borough Boys, a supporters group that launched a few years ago to help bring a team to one of the five boroughs (hence the name). The 'Boys may be a bit disappointed with FCNY however, as it will be neither a major league club nor (in the beginning at least) play its games in one of the five boroughs. Instead it has apparently targeted Hofstra University's stadium in Long Island as its home grounds. Long Island, of course, is quite possibly the only place that is more like New Jersey than New Jersey. But an official announcement is expected for Wednesday and more may be learned at that point.

The MLS playoffs are upon us

Other than to poke fun of Major League Soccer or ponder (not always in jest) if Tottenham Hotspur could beat any of its teams, we really haven't written about MLS much this season. This is not to suggest we are in any way Eurosnobs; our light-hearted jabs at North America's leading professional league are exactly that--and we all know Spurs wouldn't stand a chance against most MLS sides anyway. In all seriousness, we see it as our duty to support MLS, but the truth is the level of play has improved dramatically in recent years. That was on full display again this past weekend, where dramatic games in Colorado and Columbus (both on natural grass! With no football yardlines!) decided the playoff fates of no fewer than four teams. It was great stuff and anybody still harboring doubts about the quality of play in MLS should check out video highlights of the Columbus match, particularly the winning goal by Brad Evans that ended the season for DC United.

Unfortunately, the league still has a lot wrong with it, starting with the very concept of the playoff system itself. This bogus tournament, which gives eight of the league's 14 teams an equal shot at glory, is of course driven more by economic necessity than anything else. The eight teams play home-and-away series against each other until it culminates with the only-in-America one game "MLS Cup" final. The seven month regular season is effectively rendered worthless. The league has, in its defense, done more in recent years to make the regular season worthwhile but it needs to do more still. We understand the (economic) need for a playoff but suggest perhaps introducing a wild card "liguilla" instead, with certain teams getting first round bys. More on that some other time. For now, this is what we got. So let's take a look at the field.

The regular season's best team, the Columbus Crew, face the Kansas City Wizards with Claudio Lopez in the first round (even though the Crew easily clinched the Supporters' Shield trophy for the best team in the regular season, they do not actually face the worst of the eight playoff teams, the New York Red Bulls. This due to another quirk in the system). The Wizards have been in this space before; just last season they upset the top seeded team in the Western Conference, Chivas USA, in the first round. Are there any chances of a repeat performance? Well, of course, but only because it's a two game series where neither team is at any advantage (okay, the Crew get to play the second game at home. That's it). The Wizards are likely to be at a disadvantage however, as late season acquisition Josh Wolff (one of their best players and arguably the reason they are even in the playoffs) is due to miss the postseason with injury. But again, it's two games. Anything can happen.

The other Eastern Conference semifinal is a rematch of last year's Eastern Conference final between New England and Chicago. Chicago has the home field advantage this time (or what passes for home field advantage; as just noted it doesn't make much of a difference) and are favored to advance. New England has been in a bit of a freefall lately with just one win in their last eight games and three losses in a row. Chicago is unbeaten in its last four games. Advantage Chicago? Yes. Even with all their postseason heroics in years past, we do not see how the Revs can win this series.

Over in the Western Conference the defending MLS Cup champion Houston Dynamo face the New York Red Bulls, who snuck into the playoffs when DC United lost their game at Columbus. This is a team (New York) that won only once of its last six games and this season had more losses (11) than wins (10) and a -6 goal difference to boot--but somehow still made the playoffs. Only in MLS, folks. The New York franchise has been in a nearly perpetual state of chaos its entire existence. This year, two of its best players became the first in MLS history to be suspended for performance enhancing drugs. At one point the team showed some promise but the last month of the season has been a disaster. They gave up 20 goals their last six games. So figure Houston in a walk, right? Not so fast. The Red Bulls played the defending champs tough this season and thoroughly beat them by a 3-0 score in their last meeting (in arguably their best game of the season). But that was then, this is now. Houston should advance easily.

The final playoff match-up pits Chivas USA against Real Salt Lake. The Los Angeles side (Chivas) are coached by the outspoken Preki, whose real name is Предраг Радосављевић (honest! It means Predrag Radosavljević and is like Russian or something. But the guy emigrated to the U.S. in the mid-90s and even played for the U.S. national team at one point). English fans will know Chivas as the previous club of Brad Guzan, who is now the backup goalkeeper at Aston Villa. The team's best player is undoubtedly Sacha Kljestan, a 23-year old Orange County native who is in all likelihood just biding his time before he gets snapped up by a European club. The RSL player most likely to be transferred to a European side, however, is unlikely to leave the bench the entire series. We're talking about Chris Seitz, the backup goalkeeper (and U.S. Under-23 international). He's quite possibly the best American goalkeeper since Brad Friedel. RSL also have a guy called Yura Movsisyan, another former Eastern bloc native with U.S. passport, who has been scoring goals at a blistering pace. He got RSL's 90th minute equalizer against Colorado, which clinched the playoff birth and Rocky Mountain Cup. It should all make for great theater and you'll be sorry if you miss it!

Johan Micoud has eyes on MLS deal

French midfielder Johan Micoud, whose contract with Girondins Bordeaux has expired, wants to join a Major League Soccer outfit, according to somebody with direct ties to the player and his agent. The 34-year old last year completed his second stint for Bordeaux. His 16-year professional career also included stops at Parma and (probably most famously) Werder Bremen after starting at AS Cannes back in 1992.

At nearly any other time in history, Micoud probably would have been a regular starter for the French national team. It just so happened that he was the same generation (and a similar position) as Zinedine Zidane et als. As it was, Micoud still won a spot on the "Bleus" team that won the 2000 Euro championships (though he didn't figure prominently). He was more of a key player (if it can be called that) on France's 2002 World Cup squad that exited after group play without scoring a single goal.

One MLS squad is said to have already passed on Micoud a few weeks ago: the New York Red Bulls, who have since gone on to sign Jorge Rojas, who plays the same position.

Major League Soccer Hooliganism, Part II

To read Part I, please click here.


The soccer blogosphere was alive this week with the sound of hooligans. Not literally, of course. It's not like I was sitting in front of my computer listening to "up to our knees in [fill in the blank] blood" or anything like that. Just that there was lots and lots (and lots) of talk about hooliganism, fan violence, security violence, etc. etc. in the U.S. and Major League Soccer.

Kicking it all off, of course, were some fisticuffs that took place at a Columbus Crew-West Ham United "friendly" on July 20. By now we all know the story: about a dozen (or maybe 30, according to many press reports) West Ham fans marched into the Columbus Crew end of the stadium to start a fight with their supporters. Security stepped in, perhaps even backed by pepperspray. There was at least one arrest and perhaps some minor injuries (though I couldn't find documentation of the latter).

The blogosphere reaction was swift and generally split into three camps: 1) Those who not only took the event seriously but called for some form of "swift action" to nip this hooligan problem in the bud, 2) Those who said it was overblown and 3) those (mainly from the U.K.) who took the whole thing with a grain of salt or made outright fun of it.

USA Soccer Spot was probably the most vocal members of group #1. "Columbus, you have a problem," they wrote, arguing that the hooliganism issue is specific to that franchise and not the league as a whole. "You have a problem and it needs to be stamped out not just for the good of your organization, but for the good of the league and the good of the game." Uh huh. Soccer America, who have obviously never been to Giants stadium, called the event "one of the worst incidents of fan trouble involving an MLS club." Bleacherreport.com said it was "a major confrontation" and that "hooliganism is everywhere when it comes to soccer, even within the borders of the U.S." CSRN's American Soccer Spot blog said these "incidents of hooliganism and fan violence" mean it is time for MLS to do a bit of soul-searching. Shakes, Shivers, and Dithers was probably most outspoken of all, writing of "the British disease" finally coming to America. "It is clear that one form or another of disorderly behavior has occurred in every country in which soccer is played," SS&D writes. "So far it has been avoided in America. What we don’t need is for our youth to have British idiots teaching us how not to behave."

Right. Except, the "idiots" in question may not have been British at all. At least, the one who was arrested definitely wasn't, according to the July 23 Daily West Ham United Digest. That and "disorderly behavior" has occurred in every country on every level and in every epoch where human beings have ever gathered. Except for maybe North Korea and until Sunday, Columbus, Ohio.

Next, the "overblown" camp, led first and foremost by the two clubs themselves. The Columbus Crew issued a statement calling such reports of the event a "gross mischaracterization." That might have been what set off USSS. West Ham was not far behind, though. "We understand this was an isolated incident," West Ham chief executive Scott Duxbury told the BBC. "I must agree with the Crew's official position that the incident was blown out of proportion," wrote Columbus Alive's Chris DeVille. "Columbus is burning...err, not really," was the title of West End Football's post on the subject.

Finally, those who made light of the whole thing. "Having successfully exported cholera, colonialism and the Cross to the New World, Blighty is now making an attempt at sending hooliganism Stateside, too," wrote the Londonist. Actually check that. They're in camp #1. I thought this was absolutely hilarious before I realized they appeared to be dead serious. "Why must a small, unbiddable part of me find it impossible to stifle a laugh?" asked the Guardian's Marina Hyde. Of the "Hudson Street Hooligans," the supposed "hard core" of Columbus supporters, Two Hundred Percent wrote "they are, ultimately, little boys living out a fantasy. You see them on YouTube, frantically masturbating over shaky hand-held camera footage of football hooliganism from across the world."

Asked about the incident, West Ham boss Alan Curbishley said "We needed that sort of workout...we wanted to show people what we're about."
(Not quite. He did say that but it wasn't in response to the incident, which I doubt he was even aware of at the time. See how easy it is to take quotes out of context?)

Dave's football blog had an alternate theory: the whole thing was just a publicity stunt!

Time to revisit an earlier Soccer Source post about hooliganism in MLS. The title ("...we should be so lucky") was of course somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Nobody wants to see anything resembling the extremely dangerous atmosphere at football grounds in Europe from the mid-60s to early 90s (least of all me, who has firsthand experience with at least a sliver of that time and place). But there is absolutely no chance of that happening in the U.S. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. The null set. There are many reasons for this, some of which were addressed in that piece. (Socio-economic reasons, cultural reasons, geographic reasons and many more. Too much to get into at this point. Sometime later, maybe).

What we will continue to see--and not only in this country--are episodes of violence or unruly behavior when you put large numbers of young men in a confined space at the same time and add alcohol. It happens at (American) football games, baseball games, basketball games, hockey games and yes, soccer games. Every time it happens at a soccer game we can be sure to hear and read about how hooliganism is coming to the U.S. Don't believe it. It's just somebody else taking themselves too seriously and thinking they know something about soccer culture. Or as the Guardian's Barney Ronay put it, "most likely, one of the culprits here is a lingering US fascination with the cliche and paraphernalia of English football hooliganism." Indeed. Time to get over that, folks. Whenever you're ready...

NYC Supporters Group Meets With Mets Boss Wilpon

Representatives of The Borough Boys, a supporters group dedicated to bringing a Major League Soccer franchise to New York City, yesterday met with New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon to discuss a possible team in Queens, N.Y. A communique sent by Borough Boys President Nick Laveglia to the group's members states in part:

"This was a very positive and exciting meeting. It took place in the corporate offices at Shea Stadium, during which Mr. Wilpon discussed plans for a potential team and stadium in the area.

It can be said that Mr. Wilpon has a very strong interest in making this happen. Local councilman Hiram Monseratte, who was also in attendance, was in complete support of the plans."

The note adds that there is more news to report about this meeting,to be delivered at a later date.

Talk of a second franchise for the NYC area is of course as old as the league itself. But in last year's state of the league address, MLS Commissioner Don Garber confirmed that the Wilpon family was seeking a second team for the New York metropolitan area. It was believed to be the first time Garber spoke publicly on the matter.

Soccer Source was the first to interview Laveglia back in November.

For the uninitiated, the New York region's existing MLS franchise is the New York Red Bulls, who play their home games in New Jersey. There has been a long simmering debate about whether the team should be allowed to use the New York label. Many soccer fans in the area say they have never felt represented by the Red Bulls or its predecessor, the MetroStars. Others, specifically Metro/Red Bull fans, say this is bull--- and that these so-called "fans" should shut the f--- up and support the existing team.

Those are of course just the opening salvos in the debate. It quickly degenerates from there.

Hakan Sukur still wants MLS deal

His purported deal with Toronto FC has been scrapped (or never existed in the first place, according to some reports) but Turkey legend Hakan Sukur still wants to sign with a Major League Soccer team. The 36-year old "is free, available and wants to come to the U.S.," according to an individual with knowledge of the situation (don't you just love those?)

This would refute what appear to beTurkish press reports of Sukur's retirement (no Turkish reader on staff, sorry).

Sukur holds the record for most goals scored in Turkey's top division (249, according to his Wiki page) and for the Turkish national team (51 in 109 appearances). His professional career spans three decades and includes stints at Galatasaray (thrice), Inter Milan, Parma and Blackburn Rovers.

(Mainstream) U.S. soccer writers are fools, Exhibit A

Idiocy can certainly be tolerated on message boards, blogs or college campuses. Indeed, on some level we expect nonsense to emanate from all three areas. That's kind of what they're there for, right? So when somebody on the BigSoccer sewing circle argues with conviction about the New York Red Bulls' needing to go after Cristiano Ronaldo, Fabio Capello, Ronaldinho, Buffon or Drogba, we can kind of laugh it off the same way we would an 18-year old arguing the virtues of Marxism.

Unfortunately, when it comes to soccer coverage in the U.S., the writers employed to cover the sport really, truly are that clueless.

Take Jonah Freedman, an SI.com producer and writer. On the eve of Claudio Reyna's announced retirement, Freedman posited that Red Bull now needs to put on the full court press for a guy like Thierry Henry, whom he describes as "a real possibility," Andriy Shevchenko, Ronaldo or Jared Borgetti. Well, okay, this is admittedly not that bad, seeing as each of the aforementioned is over the age of 30 and at least some have contracts that will be expiring soon. (Though Henry a real possibility? That's a bit far-fetched, to say the least). But what Freedman's article said after that is what has made him the object of our ridicule:

"The Bulls missed the boat. Or more specifically, they missed the Titanic. Until Tuesday, an even bigger option was out there: Ronaldinho. There is perhaps no bigger name in the world that was legitimately available to MLS. The two-time FIFA World Player of the Year finally ended his drawn-out transfer saga, agreeing to a $30 million transfer from Barcelona to AC Milan. [...]
Where were the Red Bulls during the Ronaldinho saga? Milan and Manchester City spent the past month driving up the Brazilian's price tag. If, as it has been reported, the Bulls knew Reyna's retirement was an eventual outcome, why didn't they throw everything they had at convincing Ronaldinho to make an earth-shattering move to the U.S., perhaps bigger than even Beckham's?"

Why not? Gee, you think the $30 million price tag might have had something to do with it? What makes Freedman think Red Bull or MLS can compete with an offer of that size? Thirty mill? Are MLS franchises even worth that much? When has MLS ever paid even a tenth of that sum to acquire a player? (Not for Beckham, that's for sure. He came on a free transfer). And can we really put Ronaldinho's star power on Beckham's level? The latter, for all his flaws, has charisma to spare. He always says the right thing and is the perfect family-friendly pitch man for a U.S. audience. The former looks like Jar Jar Binks for chrissakes and has not really demonstrated much outside the pitch besides a propensity to party. Does he even speak English?

All that aside, why would Ronaldinho, who at 28 is still very much in the prime of his career (a few spare tires notwithstanding) and a fixture on the Brazilian national team, choose to go to MLS? Does Freedman realize this would preclude Ronaldinho from playing for the selecao, probably ever again? Is he aware that the individuals MLS brings on as designated players are without exception past their prime and (with only one exception, Beckham, whose national team is obviously desperate) retired from international competition? Does he have any clue how inferior MLS still is to top European competition? That even under the very best of circumstances MLS teams will not be able to compete with their European counterparts, either on the field or financially for a very, very long time, if ever? In short, what basis does Freedman have for believing Ronaldinho is "legitimately available to MLS"?

None, of course. Because he's obviously clueless about soccer in general and MLS in particular. While this does not really distinguish him from most of the U.S. populace, it does no favors to those who are working so hard to advance the sport in this country. The real issue, then, is not so much that Freedman is hopelessly in the dark about soccer, but that Sports Illustrated doesn't seem to care that he is. Then again, why should they? Soccer fans only make up a tiny fraction of their readership. Running the occasional un-researched, un-fact-checked, unedited soccer piece is more than enough to pay the sport lip service. Which begs the question why they would have a "producer" write the story in the first place. Just have the intern do it next time!

An eventful day for soccer media

First, the TV transmission of the Germany-Turkey Euro semifinal goes dark for unexplained reasons. Many, myself included, initially (and, it should be pointed out, falsely) blamed ESPN2 for the blackout. It wouldn't have been the first time the folks in Bristol messed up big time with soccer coverage. But ESPN had nothing to do with it. There were no TV pictures anywhere!

To make matters even more bizarre, this was an event taking place in Switzerland, a country renowned for its efficiency (along with a few other things, but we don't need to get into that right now). With the other semifinal and final taking place in Austria, this was the country's signature moment of the tournament. UEFA blamed electrical storms in Vienna, which is a perfectly reasonable argument until you realize Basel is hundreds of miles away from the Austrian capital. No wonder the BBC is lodging formal complaints with UEFA tomorrow (good luck with that one, folks).

The Euro tournament, for all its charms (and don't get me wrong, some of the games have been great) is kind of like the midterm elections in American politics. It gets media attention and people discuss it around the water cooler, but ultimately you know it's just a warm-up for the main event that takes place two years later. So it really is a testament to the growth of the sport in this country that the Euro is being taken seriously by U.S. media. The final will be broadcast on ABC as part of a doubleheader with the LA Galaxy and DC United squaring off first. The Globe and Mail, for one, is calling ESPN's decision to broadcast all of the Euro games revolutionary (yeah I know the Globe and Mail is Canadian, which is not American).

American soccer pundits (yes we have some) have even begun debating media strategies. The L.A. Times' Grahame Jones thinks the doubleheader is a bad idea because it will expose the inferior quality of play in MLS. Du Nord begs to differ because "it will show that MLS is not that far off from the top squads of the world."

Personally, I think they're both wrong. Du Nord because he doesn't think MLS is "that far off" and Jones because he thinks a U.S. audience will actually notice the difference. Make no mistake about it: MLS is definitely inferior, sometimes even vastly inferior, to the top leagues in the world. This is especially true if you watch the defensive play, which is at times nothing short of appalling. Demonstrating his naivete, Du Nord holds up last summer's New York versus L.A. match as a shining example of MLS' prowess, calling it "as good as anything I saw." Well, I saw the game too, and while I enjoyed the goals as much as the next guy, I did not exactly feel like somebody had put me in a timewarp and transported me back to the 1970 World Cup semifinals (okay fine, I wasn't actually around for that. I'm not that old. But I did watch the France v. Brazil quarterfinal match at the 1986 World Cup (on TV), and that was as good as anything I have ever seen and likely ever will see. I have a feeling those who witnessed it will back me up on this). Because seriously, going back to the LA v NY game here, if either team had a clue about basic defending, we would only have seen a fraction of the nine goals we witnessed.

But I think this proves my point, that U.S. soccer fans, even knowledgeable ones like Du Nord, are still naive when it comes to the intricacies of the sport. I don't think very many of them will pick up on the shoddy (or worse) defending, the inconsistent passing, poor first touches and lack of creativity from the run of play that are the hallmark of your typical MLS game. For that matter they probably won't notice how the Euro final is superior in all these areas, or recognize that these qualities are standard fare for the world's top leagues. So I don't think ABC is taking a huge gamble, as Jones posits.

Unfortunately it's not all progress to report. The Boston Globe's Frank Dell'Apa has been taken off the New England Revolution beat and tasked with following the Boston Celtics instead (didn't the Celtics' season just end? What is there to follow, exactly? Okay, the NBA draft. Anything else?) For those not in the know, Dell'Apa has been one of the best MLS beat writers since its inception and probably the only one who has done any consistent, quality reporting on the Revs this past decade. It is a sad day in MLS because the Revs are one of the most media-unfriendly teams not only in the league (and organized sports in general) but probably just about anywhere (as somebody who has spent a lot of time dealing with flacks at investment banks you can trust me on this one). The team would truly have benefited from Dell'Apa's coverage. But all is not lost yet. The Globe's sports editor, Joe Sullivan, may be in a position to put Dell'Apa back where he belongs.

Friday Footie Link List, Feb. 22, 2008

How bad of an idea was the Pan-Pacific Championship? Not even the locals care about it, according to the New York Times' soccer blog. I seriously don't get the point, not even (especially?) from a business perspective. It's a tiny market in the middle of nowhere. Not so fast, though. One blogger in favor is An American's View on Futbol/Football/Soccer and he refuses to pan the Pan-Pacific Championship. Good for him. Diversity of opinion is what makes the blogosphere great. Hey, he has some good points too. Give credit where it's due.

A lot of attention has been given this whole Future of Football report (far more than it deserves if you ask me). PitchInvasion.net and The Offside have some of the more thorough analysis of the whole thing.

American Soccer Daily has an interview with Reading's Bobby Convey. I didn't know Convey was a Philadelphia native--but I like him anyway. In fact, he's one of my favorite U.S. national team players right now--and not only because his game is so un-American. Convey has technique, vision and field presence that I have frankly never seen in a U.S. outfielder (maybe Clint Mathis when he was at his absolute peak, circa 2002. But that was sadly very short-lived). Anyway, read the interview.

Speaking of Philly, Ives asks his readers to suggest names for its new MLS team. Some real good ones there. Some goofy ones too. And all points in between. My favorite is probably the Philadelphia Athletic, though Philadelphia Armpits is probably more appropriate. Watch Philly get a really cool name and built a really good team in no time, kind of like D.C. which also has a cool name and success on the field. Meanwhile, New Yorkers are stuck with a team in Jersey that is named after an Austrian soft drink popular with club kids and which has never won anything. Oh well, at least our mayor doesn't smoke crack.

Friday Footie Link List (Better Late Than Never)

The absolute coolest thing I saw in the soccer blogosphere this week was at Pitchinvasion.net. The geniuses who run that site got one of (if not the) best bloggers on Argentine soccer, Hasta el Gol Siempre (whom I have also interviewed on this site) to collaborate with Bill's Sports Maps on a primer on Argentinian football. The result speaks for itself and I'm being dead serious when I say no words--least of all mine--can do it justice. Check it out.

Another week another massive scoop by Ives, this time getting us the exclusive on the New York Red Bulls signing Oscar Echeverry. It looks like the Colombian striker will essentially provide depth up front and act as a potential insurance policy if and when Jozy Altidore leaves the club (which will hopefully not be for a crappy team like Reading). Red Bulls Head Coach Juan Carlos Osorio told Ives as much. This is all well and good, and it's high time the Red Bulls made some acquisitions this off season, but I thought Osorio's primary concern was with the team's defense?

Center Holds It is holding an informal poll on the worst player in Major League Soccer. They don't just mean worst skills-wise, but a combination of "salary and production versus expectations." We had this very discussion here focused on the Red Bulls Least Valuable Player of 2007. The winner I think should also be a front-runner to win CHI's poll, no? He gets my vote at least.

Friday Footie Link List, Feb. 1, 2008

The 2008 MLS season is fast approaching. Preseason rankings and expectations will arrive soon enough but Who Ate All The Cupcakes (the Yank version of Who Ate All The Pies, I presume) brings us their 2008 MLS Superlatives, styled after those really annoying yearbook contests they had in high school. Readers get to vote on a dozen categories (everything from "most popular" to "best dancer" and "best hair") and even suggest their own. I think I am going to suggest "least valuable," which was a popular category with the Red Bulls last year.

Speaking of WAATP, they have an interesting poll that asks readers to vote on which Premiership team had the most successful January transfer window. I think it's hard to argue against Spurs, personally. But please have your own say.

USA Soccer Spot has their take on the Brad Guzan work permit saga, arguing that work permit rules hurt Americans. I agree that in the short term players like Brad Guzan will suffer in their development because they cannot compete with the best in the world on a regular basis. However, I think that over the long term having a strong domestic league will be a bigger advantage to us--and if the only way we can do this is through other countries' bogus import restrictions (for lack of a better word) then so be it. Besides, we don't need to develop any more goalkeepers. It's the one position Yank players have actually mastered.

Scousers are having a particularly difficult time of it these days. Just how bad is it? This lunatic at Caught Offside (though not one himself) reckons there's no telling how low Reds will go. Eleven devils pins his hope on the club's fans buying out the team. Well if Barca fans can...

Finally, just how good are Inter Milan? Well, no longer the best club in the world, according to my Top 25. But still good enough to come from behind and beat Juventus in a thrilling Coppa Italia match Wednesday. SoccerLens has a feature inspired by a memorable performance in that game: Mario Balotelli is the lad's name and he was officially made an Inter hero by notching a brace, including the game-winner in the 54th minute. Can we consider him Inter's answer to Pato? Negative, states Goal.com. The Ghana-born teenager will be better.

Photo taken from Massere.Altervista.org without permission.

D.C. United Poised To Take On The Continent

There is still a good month left before the MLS season kicks off, but D.C. United are fast emerging as the big winner in the winter transfer market. MLS' best regular season team the past two years has upgraded several key positions, while adding international experience and Latin flair--the key ingredients, perhaps, to challenging for the newly-hatched CONCACAF Champions League.

It's true that D.C. has also lost some players (and is due to lose one more, Christian Gomez, before the season kicks off) but these departures are nowhere near as significant as losses suffered by the defending champion Houston Dynamo or runners-up New England Revolution, to name two of D.C.'s chief competitors for the Supporters Shield this year. And let's look at who the black-and-red have brought on in their place:

• Argentine midfielder Marcelo Gallardo, who joins from Paris Saint Germain, has one of the most impressive resumes of any player ever signed by the team: 44 caps (and two world cups) for the albiceleste, Argentine league titles and a Copa Libertadores trophy with River Plate and a French league title with Monaco.
• Colombian defender Gonzalo Martinez will more than fill the shoes of the Houston-bound Bobby Boswell. Martinez has been capped 36 times and was part of Colombia's 2001 Copa America-winning squad.
  
• Gonzalo Peralta, another Argentine and another Gonzalo, will further shore up the defense.
• Franco Niell, yet another Argentine, joins on loan from Argentinos Juniors. Goal.com describes Niell as a "highly-rated striker", whom I can see wreaking havoc with MLS defenders, who--let's face it--are not very good.
• Peruvian goalkeeper Jose Carvallo has played both Copa Sudamericana and Libertadores and been capped for various junior national teams (and once by Peru's senior nats). Carvallo is only 21 and has a Green Card so he won't even count as an international player. I think he'll fill Troy Perkins' shoes just fine, but if not...
• Zach Wells, who was acquired in the Boswell trade, has proven he can be a good, even very good goalkeeper in MLS.
  

While many D.C. fans are understandably upset about losing Gomez, we should remember that they won't get nothing in return; Gomez will demand value, maybe even substantial value, in a trade.