Style Police
March 30 -2007Â 
MLS will go into its 12th season with most of the usual nagging questions answered. Soccer specific stadiums have become the norm, business models are stable, and the arrival of David Beckham has eased pressure to sign big names.  Â
But while the window for complaint has narrowed, it certainly hasn’t closed. And those peering through the opening all seem to be landing on the same issue: MLS matches, in terms of watchability, fall somewhere between the Craftsman Truck Series and an LPGA swimsuit competition.
Ian Plenderleith of US Soccer Players tackles the problem in his latest piece, and quotes MLS Deputy Commissioner Ivan Gazidis as saying
“Ultimately we will not achieve our full potential unless we are able to deliver the game on the field that people want to watch,” he says. “We’re very conscious of that, and it’s probably the most important issue for us over the next four or five years to improve the on-field game.”
Plenderleith goes on to examine the role organizations play in cooking the mediocre soup, and even finds the balls to ask working coaches the following question: “How much do you feel responsible for the overall attractiveness of MLS games?” I’m assuming no MLS coaches threw Plenderleith through a wall, but I’d like to see him ask that question of Big Sam Allardyce. Can you say, “Plender-dead?”
He pokes a bit at referees and their offsides/professional-foul calls before settling on the following conclusion: it’s the fault of MLS’s crappy players.Â
Don’t get me wrong; I’d love to pile on that bandwagon. I’d love to be able to sit here and bang out an ode to all the ways Fecundo Erpen is trash. Or about how Hercules Gomez, for every touch of the ball he takes, makes MLS more boring. But there’s a problem: the two issues are completely unrelated.
“Unrelated, you say?” Yes, unrelated. Because leagues with far less quality routinely generate far more entertaining moments. Take the League Championship, for instance. MLS squads, on average, are every bit as talented as Championship squads (for proof, see Sunderland’s 2005 tour of the US and Canada which featured repeated beatdowns by A-League teams), yet the Championship is an eminently more watchable enterprise. Why?
Well, let me cue up my broken record player: MLS games don’t mean anything.  Between the AYSO-worthy playoff system and the lack of relegation, MLS games are exercises in meaninglessness. The League Championship, on the other hand, oozes tension.  Even when the soccer on display is less “beautiful game” and more “I smell of chips and Boddington’s,” the Championship pulsates with energy. Winning the league is transcendent, while losing it is soul shattering. Between the two you have the makings of entertainment.
If you’re unsure whether Gazidis is capable of processing this point, let me clear that up for you:
“It’s not just about playing the game, it’s also about how the game is played. Having a vibrant professional league, and a league that’s going to grow over five to 10 years, carries with it a real responsibility. It’s not enough that we play for wins and losses and believe we can grow the game simply by doing that.”
Wow. And before we knew it, stores only sold one style of leather shoe, pre-shredded cheese was being rationed via government issued stamp-cards, and MLS teams cooperatively choreographed entertaining matches for the benefit of the proletariat. I see you, Gazidis, you Pinko.
Why MLS executives think they can create an exciting league by following a separate model from every other exciting league on the planet is beyond me. Sure, maybe they’re the smartest people ever to walk the face of the Earth and they’ll pull it off, but I’m betting that’s not the case. In fact, I’m guessing they don’t know the first thing about this game.Â
The risk reality here is the alienation of folks like Dave over at Dave’s Football Blog (which is starting to become a daily habit due to moments like this and this). Dave’s site is devoted to covering football in all its forms; a concept that would have been unthinkable just years ago. It hasn’t taken Dave long to get the lay of the land, and he’s come to the conclusion that something’s amiss with MLS. Or, as he puts it,
MLS owners are pussies. They don’t give an actual damn about winning. They just want to turn a profit with their soccer teams with as minimal an investment as possible — just like William Clay Ford with the Detroit Lions and Donald Sterling with the L.A. Clippers. They know there’s an audience in America for this form of football, so they just throw a league out there, get the TV networks to buy into it, and that’s that.
This might be a bit cynical, but one would be hard pressed to find much evidence to the contrary. To the prospective viewer the league looks like little more than an exhibition of not very good soccer.Â
So while Gazidis goes on about “responsibility,” it might be nice to see some players, fans, and organizations dying for wins. I’ll take a league of average players battling to the death over an exhibition of great soccer for nothing any day. I’m willing to bet prospective fans would too.
Agreed.
I remember posting on the Chicago Trib soccer blog (”oy, i’m that lame.”) about how MLS needed relegation, and then I was shouted down by a bunch of folks who thought that America wouldn’t want to see FC Fairbanks take on Waco United on ESPN’s MLS Primetime Thursday.
Hey man, I’d see them if they played with the passion to get out of the A-League or whatever PDL-typeleague.
If Garber says they they’re looking to expand to 15 teams by 2010 or so, couldn’t they put in a “window of promotion”. Meaning that over the next few years (2011-2013), they’ll add one team from the A-league to play their way into the MLS, and then in 2014, add in a 3 spot relegation. That would give the MLS charter members plenty of time to prep for it, and you could hype it up.
Comment by macarthur31 — March 30, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Well done, Garth. I agree with almost all of that in principle. But, I’m not sure the argument that “MLS games don’t mean anything” truly cuts to the core of the quality-of-play problem.
Surely, I agree, games don’t matter. The playoffs should be scrapped in favor of a flat table set-up where the ‘regular season’ reigns supreme.
My problem is, MLS games aren’t that much better in the playoffs (”PLAYOFFS? PLAYOFFS? I’M JUST HOPING WE CAN WIN A GAME, ANOTHER GAME!”) than they are in the regular season. Maybe the intensity is higher, but are the actual techniques and performances any higher in quality? I don’t think so.
So, what IS the problem?
I think, like any serious problem, it’s a disease with a combination of symptoms. I submit that the general level of talent, coupled with the American-style of play, sprinkled with the ‘meaningless’ games, produce the sort of matches that have failed to garner larger attention and ignite the collective imagination.
When I use the phrase “American-style of play”, I’m talking about the high-energy and high-pressure tactics employed, how men are always closing down on their man/the ball. It’s go, go, go, go at (close to) break-neck speed with a general lack of those soft, lovely and sublime touches we see in more technically developed leagues. Space and time are luxuries that are not afforded in MLS. What was it I read not to long ago in reference to Zidane? “Great players create the illusion of space and time”?
While there is certainly nothing wrong with the high-pressure approach (it’s the same way in England), our players are mostly incapable of creating the time and space better players use to produce a more effective (and aesthetically pleasing) touch that many of us are so used to seeing (especially on the Continent) and have come to (correctly) associate with great footy.
To expect MLS players to give their opponents more time on the ball for the sake of watchability is silly, nor is it the remedy. I get time and space on some sundays, but it doesn’t ensure that my final touch or the ball I chose to play is good enough. Unfortunately, the same holds true at the higher level.
But, MLS isn’t entirely American. It is a blend of players from different countries, with different approaches to the game, and this is often evident when you see a Latin player on the ball. Does that mean we need more Latin players? Certainly not. It is an American league after all, and the spine of it will have to be American.
I think, fundamentally, the ‘fix’ is quite difficult. I believe the root of it all goes back to the way the game is taught at the youngest and most basic stages (by fathers who prefer MLB or NFL). It then it perpetuated by the way talent is identified and groomed in this country. While one could make the arguement that there may be little American-born Ronaldinho’s playing great street ball somewhere in a poor Houston neighborhood, the chances of this type of underpriveldged child rising from obscurity are razor thin. While it might be tough overseas where eyes are actually open and looking for talent in all places (not just travel teams dominated by middle to upper class rich white American kids), it’s practically impossible here in the States.
Granted, much of it goes down to a culture where soccer is further down on the depth chart. One could make the parallel to foreign footy being more in line with American basketball in how young urban talent arises from the streets. It may be unreasonable, but I’ve believed for some time that US Soccer would be well-served to take the game to the streets and introduce a completely new demographic to the game through free leagues. Obviously, this is easier said than done, and grassroots efforts are already in place, but is the current travel-team and college set-up really serving us all that well? I don’t want to hear about Project 40, either. I’m talking about players on a LARGE scale.
So, I do think the over-riding suspect in the quality of MLS is play is in fact, the players themselves. Mediorce talent playing a high-turnover game isn’t appealing to the eyes. I can watch my Sunday beer league for that. I’m incredibly athletic, and at 30 years-old am still usually one of the two fastest people on the pitch. Games are often tightly contested, and the style and rate of play are close cousins (cousins without the ball skills or quick thinking, basically) of American leagues many levels above us.
But, that isn’t enough. I expect something more from my professionals. I want to see the type of footy that my teammates and I are incapable of producing. I want TALENT. I want CREATIVITY.
So, let me tie this back in with the original argument against MLS’s attractiveness. I’m more than willing to say the talent level in this country has risen dramatically enough in the past two decades. Man for man, It can be aruged that there exist players here who are just as skilled as those in foriegn countries. But, why then, is the Dutch league that much more entertaining to watch than MLS? It’s style of play coupled with a footballing IQ and mental quickness (as in knowing what you’re doing with the ball as opposed to knowing it’s not alright to shoplift on camera).
So, I think fans would like to see more attractive football. Constant grudge matches aren’t great draws. Blackburn-Bolton isn’t the kind of fixture that makes fans of the English game. The problem is, MLS is full of Boltons and Middlesbroughs.
Ascetics are important. Just ask the WNBA.
Comment by Scott — March 30, 2007 @ 10:37 am
Scott,
I think that’s a good jumping off point for a discussion about the quality of American soccer. But, again, I think quality is only a slice in the larger pie of entertainment. Darlington vs. Scunthorpe is going to be a display of truly suspect footballing…but it’s going to be fun to see these minnows live and die by every (not very good) touch.
I agree completely with you across the board, but quality before competition seems a little like cart before horse.
Comment by garth — March 30, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
That’s true and a very thoughtful point. But, the atmosphere in northeast England (especially outside the top flight, since the Premiership continues to price its true fanbase out) is completely different than that found in Kansas City.
The electricity that comes from the stands, I will argue, is not necessarily a by-product of the way the squad plays (in terms of ascetics AND the great passion you speak of) but a result of the FANS’ passion for their club and the game as a whole (and of course, some pints).
I would argue that the passion of the fans and the atmosphere created by them plays just as crucial of a role in influencing the passion on the pitch as anything else.
Obviously, this doesn’t hold true across the board; some ‘professionals’ are there for a paycheck can’t be cocked to put their bodies on the line for the badge, but fans do care and really are capable of lighting a fire under their teams’ collective ass.
Now, back at the Home Depot Center… A crowd of 17,000, with half of those under the age of 17 is uncapable of inspiring such a response.
Truly, it is a vexing dilemma. Captain Obvious states that even after more than a decade, MLS still has a grueling uphill battle ahead of it.
Sadly, I don’t have all (or any of) the answers. But, for the right price (i.e. a decent salary), I’d be more than willing to give it a try, Mr. Garber.
Comment by Scott — March 30, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Nice work G and Scott, that was like 2 articles for the price of one (although i’m sure you meant aesthetics at the end there). The thing to remember is that MLS could introduce the excitement factor this year by introducing a promotion/relegation system, while the quality of play issue is a long-term dilemma with no easy solution. So be sure to coach your kid’s AYSO team and hope we can change the next generation…
hmm that was a bit hippy-style but hey.
Comment by jobicoppola — March 30, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
The bottom line is, as has been said numerous times here, relegation works and should be implemented. But it will never happen. Finding willing owners would be impossible, would you invest in an MLS franchise if next year there was even the sightest possibility of losing all of your insvestment?
Comment by slhvmwa — March 30, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
“would you invest in an MLS franchise if next year there was even the sightest possibility of losing all of your insvestment”
Risk-reward, anyone? If I had 200 million dollars, I’d be willing to risk 150 trying to create my own football feifdom(sp?). Where have all the reckless playboys gone?
Comment by garth — March 30, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
$150 mil to spend on a club? Reckless playboy chairman? Where do I sign up?
That prices me out of Liverpool… I wonder how much it would take to buy Forest.
For $150 mil, you could have bought West Ham. Though, I guess Magnusson spent closer to $175 mil.
Comment by Scott — March 30, 2007 @ 2:31 pm
I understand why there is no relegation right now. AIG would not have invested what they did this offseason had LA been relegated(which they would have) this season. In this fledgling status, I can see why relegation is not an option right now. Hopefully in the near future…
That said, there’s no reason AT ALL that the league can not go to a single table and declare the points leader the champion. That’s something they can do to add meaning to the regular season right now. It would take no effort at all. The playoff system is joke, it takes what little meaning the regular season could have and sucks it right out. All you have to do to have a shot to win the title is not be the 2nd or 3rd worst team in all of the league.
Comment by BGN — March 30, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
Isn’t there an Ian who posts in comments here from time to time? Would that be Mr. Plenderleith? Plenderleith’s articles are quite good, and sound like they easily could have come from a Soccernista reader.
Comment by Nordy — March 30, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Perhaps in the first 10 years MLS needed to emulate other American sports to “ease” the fan into it. However, they ended the reg-season shootout, and now have stoppage time. They’re also creating a standard for field consistency, and allowing franchises to create academies/reserves.
I think what would help MLS grow in the next chapter is that it starts establishing a unique brand unlike the other American sports — and relegation/promotion would be a great element for that brand. Be the professional league that actually has accountability. If folks like me were able to find EPL and get into it, there have to be more sports fans out there that are able to “make the jump.”
The fanbases of current MLS teams (a la “Section 8″ for the Chicago Fire) are soccer/football savvy enough to appreciate a MLS without playoffs. You have Open Cup to do the season-long knockout thing. And if you build up SuperLiga and get entry in Copa Libertadores, you have reasons to get excited about a top 4 finish.
While relegation/promotion doesn’t necessarily guarantee a better quality/product, it’ll further establish MLS as a unique professional sports entity, which sports fans would be really eager to embrace.
Comment by macarthur31 — March 31, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
I got sick of reading bigsoccer.com because of topics like this coming up over and over again…
If all the buttons were pushed and a way to get conventional promotion and relegation to happen in the USA came into place, the same people would still complain that the top level isn’t any good.
The sizes of USL 1 and 2 should tell everyone here what the necessity of travel costs teams. The problem isn’t something to play for or a clear predicament to avoid; the problem is that we are trying to create something where nothing existed.
Foreign investment in MLS and USL show that the USA has a pretty good development system, and while players and spectators may make it bigger in time, but for now, let’s quit lying to ourselves.
Hockey fans in the South don’t express this sort of fear of social acceptance; I have never met a hockey fan that was ashamed of liking hockey. Perhaps this is because the NHL hasn’t waned as the pinnacle of its sport, but I’ve seen similar confidence from minor league hockey fans too, and I’ve been seeing this topic for way too long.
It’s okay to like the soccer that we have. It’s even okay to want it to be better, as long as you don’t expect somebody to squat and make the English system appear. (If someone tries, it will turn out like the Mexican system.)
Best wishes
Comment by chunter — April 1, 2007 @ 1:01 am
Chunter…there are only three conclusions that one can ascertain from the above post. Either you…
1) Work for an MLS team…sorry man.
2) Are a hunt…ridiculously rich yet inherently nerdy.
3) Trying to date Garber’s daughter.
Comment by Carlos — April 1, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
The single league table idea with no playoffs is so much for feasible than relegation (note I said feasible as in whether it will be implemented, not whether I dislike relegation). Travel costs aren’t really relevant since teams only play on weekends and already play teams in the other division twice a year. My guess is that playoffs were a way of selling the MLS to network television and maybe the casual observer, but it really really does dillute the relevance of the season.
Comment by Spectator — April 1, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
[...] MLS bloggers - the numbers seem to be growing exponentially - churns out a real nugget of insight. Soccernista questions the logic of MLS bigwigs, the DCenters seem intent on singlehandely building the DC [...]
Pingback by If This Is Football » Blog Archive » The Sweeper #4 — April 4, 2007 @ 11:13 pm