Tag Archives: jim rome

The Year’s Last Annoyance

The world is full of surprises. One of them, for me at least, was finding someone willing to mount a passionate defense of Field Turf (see the comments on my post of a couple of days ago). Well, live and learn I say. I didn’t find his arguments particularly convincing. He was certainly spot on when he called me a curmudgeon, but this also left me feeling like the kettle being addressed by the pot. Anyway, just another interesting outgrowth of putting one’s opinions up on the interweb.

Then there are those things in life that are not so surprising. As Exhibit A I give you this from FIFA president Sepp Blatter (or as he shall be known from here on, Der Truthahn):

FIFA president Sepp Blatter took a sharp jab at Major League Soccer during a television interview this weekend, saying it has yet to catch on as a legitimate professional league in the United States.

Blatter suggested league officials have had ample time to get the world’s most popular sport to take hold in the U.S., but the MLS has failed to generate much interest among mainstream American sports fans. “It is a question of time, I thought — we had the World Cup in 1994,” Blatter told Al Jazeera TV. “But it is now 18 years in so it should have been done now. But they are still struggling.”

The rest of the article is here, in case you’d like to feel your blood boil further.

As sunshine will gladly attest, I have an obsession with things German. But there are some things related to Germany of which I am not so fond. Schlagersänger, for instance, I could really do without. I do not love their passion for suspending things (meat products generally) in various forms of gelatin, or that the hours of operation of German government offices seems to be set using a random number generator. Least of all do I like the FIFA president (sure, he’s Swiss but he’s German-Swiss).

Practically everything that Der Truthahn says makes my head feel like it’s going to explode. For instance, his opposition to goal line technology. The reasons that he adduced during his long opposition to it were so risible that one can hardly imagine that an official of a major international sporting body could be responsible for them.

Even against the backdrop of other ridiculous things that he’s said, I found the comments about the MLS quite shocking. Fans of the game in this country already have to cope with frequent gestures of contempt from the domestic sporting media. Whenever some good thing happens for the game in the country, be it the staging of the World Cup, or the USMNT beating Spain in the Confederations Cup, or what have you, you can count on Jim Rome or some other soccer-loathing numpty to blight the public sphere with some self-satisfied garbage about how this isn’t the “turning point” for soccer in the US. After such a turning point, one assumes, soccer will sweep aside all the other domestic sports, force NASCAR drivers to pilot Yugos around a go kart track, and establish a millennial reign of European socialism and same sex marriage.
Of course, this completely misses the point. Building the game in North America is not about a single home run moment, so to speak, but about a long term project of incremental growth. It doesn’t seem to matter how many times this point is made in the public sphere. The soccer haters are convinced that we are coming to destroy their sports and to sell their women into slavery. There is a certainly (misguided) underlying logic to this. Sports in this country are not exactly a zero sum game, but it is nonetheless the case the increased interest in, and support for, soccer is going to result in at least a modicum of bleed from other sports. People believe, and not entirely without justice, that sports either expand or start dying. In this light, the animus against the game from the domestic sporting press (or from major sections of it at least) is understandable.

It is much less easy to understand when a figure like Der Truthahn, who should be one of our partisans, comes out with idiotic comments like these. He seems to engage in just the kind of thinking that the game’s domestic opponents do. Does he not understand that the building of the MLS must take place in the context of an already existing and massively powerful commercial sporting culture? The game grew in Europe without serious competitors. Even today the next biggest draws of interest are things like Formula 1, or cycling, or the anemically supported domestic basketball leagues. Der Truthahn seems to have no conception of the differences between that and a country with three major sports that have 80+ game seasons, and that’s before we even get to the NFL or NASCAR.

Here’s how it is: the fans of game in this country are going to continue the process of building it here. We don’t care about the opinions of Der Truthahn, or of the idiot sporting press; we’ll carry on regardless. With friends like Herr Blatter, who needs enemies?

Well, enough of that. So we’ve come to the last day of the year. 2013 was certainly not the greatest in this team’s history. I think that there are reasons to hope that next year will be better. Every time I get down, I just watch one of the replays of our matches. Irrespective of how the team is doing, I hear the home support singing their hearts out. We have our differences, we argue about the team and complain about the leadership, but to the outsiders we present a united front: one heart and one voice united in support of the side. We’ve come through some dark times. There will be more to come. But there will be sunny days as well and we can hold on to the prospect of that. In that regard, I know I speak for all of us here at The Axe.

Happy New Years to you all. #RCTID

Magadh

Night Thoughts on Yet Another Interlull

Well, it seems that, yet again, we have a little time on our hands here. Once again, the rhythm of the season is broken up, ostensibly to accommodate the beginning of the qualifying rounds for international tournaments, although since Chivas and the Sounders played yesterday. Basically, there’s nothing going on in the league until Wednesday, and we don’t play again until the weekend.

Usually, I am not a big fan of these mid-season breaks. I just don’t have that much interest in the international side of football and, in any case, they break the flow of the season at times that quite often make no sense at all. Those of you who follow the European leagues will recall that there was a round of international matches the week before the opening of the English Premier League season. I believe that the leagues in southern Europe had already started up at that point, although now that BeIN Sports has bought up the rights to pretty much everything aside from the EPL I have very little idea about what is going on down there.

Now, three weeks later, we are having another break for a round of international fixtures, some of which are actual qualifiers, so of which are friendlies. I’m sure that I’ve nattered on about this topic before, but since we have a little free time here, allow me to reiterate that in the question of club versus country I come down very strongly on the club side. I know for a fact that I’ve talked in previous columns about the fact that a large proportion of fans of the game in the United States came to it via the marketing of the international wing of the sport. The staging of the World Cup here in 1994 had a salutary effect on interest in the game here, although claims that it was going to make the game in this country were, as they always are, totally overblown.

Ok, allow me to his pause on my rant here…so that I can start ranting about another topic. It seems to me that every time something really good happens to the USMNT, the pundits on the major sports networks go a bit crazy. I know that most of them really dislike football (the real kind) and, as an aside, it’s always really funny for me to see them forced to appear to take some interest in it every time the World Cup rolls around. For a lot of them, addicted as they are to seeing guys trussed up in gladiatorial armor and extremely tight little pants bashing each other in the head in between long bouts of standing around doing nothing, what the world calls football is both boring and a little threatening. How else to explain their need to take to the airwaves after events like the U.S. beating Spain in the Confederations Cup in 2009 to assure us that this isn’t the event that will take soccer in this country to some new plateau? I watched Jim Rome (who I think is a first class dope in any case) do this particular dance. After a brief pat on the back to the U.S. team (who had after all just beat the top ranked international team in the world) he went on to expatiate for about five minutes about how this wasn’t some sort of turning point for the game in this country.

This sort of thing really makes me want to scream. Attention Jim Rome (and others obsessed with the “traditional” American sports culture): football in the country is not going to be made or broken by one event. It will not be a matter of a tournament, nor a big win, nor any one particular thing. No one among the supporters of the game in this country thinks that it will. What I think these people are afraid of is that the long term growth of the game (and who can argue that it’s not growing) will leech interest away from other sports. Well, there’s that and there is their underlying xenophobia which moves them to disrespect anything that they perceive as alien, but that’s another issue. I don’t know if they are right to be worried, but I suspect that it is really a non-issue.

I’ve had a lot of conversations both with friends and family members in the North America who are fans of the traditional sports culture here, and with people that I know from Europe, in which it is averred that soccer will never really make it in the U.S. I always have the same answer. Look, there are 300+ million of us in this country. We’re mad for sports. More importantly, we know how to do it. We have a lot of infrastructure here devoted to promoting the acquisition of skills, and to the acquisition of knowledge about how it’s done. We’re going to figure this out too. We’re figuring it out now. It’s not going to be a situation where one event happens and a massive lightbulb goes on over the collective head of the country. It never is with sports. None of the major traditional sports in this country developed that way, and soccer won’t either. There will be some setbacks (like blowing an early lead away to Jamaica or not qualifying for the Olympics), but to focus on that stuff is to miss the big picture. We now have a viable domestic league in this country, one with a business plan that is not completely loopy (thus differentiating itself from the NASL). There are kids now in this country who know that you can make a living in the game without having to pull up stakes and move to Europe (as John O’Brien did in the 1990s). We are getting it right, but it will take time.

I also have to laugh when European friends discount the quality of the game in this country. To them I say, as Satchel Paige warned, “Don’t look back. Something might be gaining on you.”

Magadh

seasonal split d’accord

in anticipation for the upcoming season certain changes must be discussed. because major league soccer shares the first two words with major league baseball, the league determined a change was necessary to benefit the rivalries that exist within each division. well, that is not actually the entire truth but is certainly one of the effects of the new scheduling debacle. the league has determined that each team will play the teams in their respective divisions three times, and then play an additional 10 games against their counterpart division teams. here is where i really begin to take issue with the mls.

regardless of the growing popularity of the sport, soccer in america is still a game played by marginalized youth. this is insured by annoying but widely listened to sports commentators such as jim rome and colin cowherd who suggest that soccer is boring and should be left to moms and their mini-vans and the scots with their piss bombs. this opinion is echoed by many of the brainless fatties who spend their sunday mornings, afternoons, and monday evenings listening to the awe shucksisms that come out of terry bradshaw’s gob, and then tune into the am drive time with those previously mentioned angry men. soccer is not america’s sport, it is the world’s sport. and, to be honest, many americans hate things they cannot attribute to american ingenuity.

so, when considering the new changes as justified by mls commissioner, don garber, who stated that the mls needed to have its own identity during the supporters summit this last november, i am concerned mls thinks its rivals are those other major sporting leagues. i get the need to create an identity, but the identity garber has suggested is itself borrowed. every major sporting league in american has a similar scheduling approach. borrowing a scheduling approach from those leagues only accepts the position of being an inferior product. perhaps a better approach is to state that the product and entertainment is distinctly different from american sports and we will not change just to pander to terry bradshaw’s fraternity brothers.

coincidentally, the announcement was during the supporters summit and not one supporter seemed excited about the changes. the justifications focused on the need for a competitiveness, frequent flyer miles, and the fact the addition of montreal has now increased the teams to 19, but also wanted to give fans the opportunity to see every team…just not every year. that makes complete sense; however, if you remove the normal approach to the season with each team playing the other, you immediately handicap the league. in a proper league with a normal approach to the season, each team plays each other twice, home and away. every group of fans is given the opportunity to watch every team in the league every year. what could possibly be wrong with that? let’s face it, certain teams will have greater draw than others and that increase the numbers of fans attracted to matches. the more fans attracted in more cities increases the numbers who actually care about the league.

consequently, the league has eliminated the major attraction of the game: seeing other players every year. and not just other players, other notable players. if there is one thing that yanks on americans it is celebrity. we love the famous. we go to extreme ends to meet, follow, act like, look like, and be like, the famous. the best example of fame when speaking of mls is none other than beckham. i have met and spoken with many people who know nothing about football, but they are always willing to talk about beckham and posh. when the galaxy came portland last season, it was not the fact that portland had another important match ahead of them that opened discussions, it was beckham. my seat neighbor sold his tickets for a whopping 750$ and i stood next to little girls. little girls. jeld-wen was full of little girls, and secretly their mothers, all wanting a photo of beckham. football? no, we want beckham. i think the mls understood this concept, but cut their nose of despite their face. this last off-season, paris-st germaine courted david beckham to join their increasingly well stocked ranks. they have the money and they have the desire to pay players to come to their club. why not pay for the biggest name in football join in the twilight of his career? you just know the mls breathed a collective sigh of relief when he resigned with the galaxy. now, with the new changes installed by the league certain cities will not see beckham, or henry, or keane, or any other notable player or side of interest except in an off year. careers end, players leave, and fans miss out. in a league with a developing national draw, keeping it possible for every city to have that experience every year is crucial to growing the attraction.

additionally, the changes in scheduling may prove to unfairly benefit some clubs. in all sports, there are teams everyone loves to play. parity is a dead dream that died with communism and gorbachov, and some teams just plain suck monkey balls. when increasing the number of times teams play interdivision games, you also increase the disparity between the teams within each division.

another issue with the increase of interdivision games that may have gone unnoticed is that it could likely diminish the importance of rivalries. what was once a season event becomes an every other week event. soon timbers will be dating sounders, they will procreate and have confused children and those children will end up following the life path of lindsey lohan. the build up of antipathy through the anticipation of an annual event can only prevent a portland filled with lindsey lohans. portland is weird enough without an infestation of skanky, bleached-out cokeheads…not that there is anything wrong with a few of them, i am sure the second largest industry in the state of oregon appreciates skanky, bleached-out cokeheads, but they have an attention span of a gnat. my concern is that mls fans may become fickle and their attention spans reflect that of lindsay lohan, affecting the numbers who actually attend games–the very thing commissioner garber is concerned about growing.

i am sure during the course of the season i will return to this issue, especially when we look at the table standings in the months of august and september.

sunshine