Oct 02 2008
Don’t Tread on Us, FIFA
So the Montreal Impact won and D.C. United lost in CONCACAF Champions League play last night, and the usual excuses are being trotted out — MLS teams lack depth, schedules are too congested, etc. — like so many show dogs at Westminster.
Somewhere in the conversation that followed this post, however, is the real answer. The default policy of MLS is isolationism.
Isolationism is a foreign policy which combines a non-interventionist military policy and a political policy of economic nationalism (protectionism). In other words, it asserts both of the following:
1. Non-interventionism – Political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial self-defense.
2. Protectionism – There should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.
Dan Loney suggests this idea in this post at BigSoccer.com, which details MLS commissioner Don Garber’s stubborn refusal to adhere to FIFA breaks and the international calendar. Here are some key quotes from Garber:
There are 13 weekends affected by international play and we have a 30 week season. To not play on those dates is impossible….
We can go to ESPN and have them double their rights fee and go to Chicago Fire fans and have them sell out every game so that our revenue changes and then you can expand your roster. But the reality is we’re still a business that’s developing. The need to beat teams in the Champions League isn’t enough to reconfigure our entire business model.
The business model of MLS is one that clearly wishes to avoid entangling alliances with other nations, save for when those alliances are necessary to preserve the model and allow it to flourish. Garber seems quite content to ignore fan demands to align MLS with the international schedule, because… well, it’s not keeping fans out of the stands is it? Writes Loney:
The Saturday game where Toronto had to suit up Rick Titus? 19,863 announced attendance. That Beckham-Blanco game ESPN advertised that had neither? Sell out.
And the premise, once again, is that Major League Soccer should leave money - a LOT of money - on the table, so that quality of play doesn’t suffer. But until the money the league makes is linked to quality of play, that premise is going to be met with…well, read what Garber said. Polite dismissal.
Loney further posits:
The business model fails on the field once in a while, but it hasn’t actually failed as a business model. It would be interesting to see how many New England season ticket holders fail to renew as a result of the Joe Public debacle. As a rough estimate, I’d say mid-to-high single digits.
Indeed. Isolationism works for MLS because the supporters buy into the policy. Just like it is with the NFL, where all that matters at the end of the season is who lifts the Lombardi Trophy, MLS clubs are focused on winning MLS Cup because the business model demands it.
Roger Goodell, however, doesn’t have to worry about keeping his league in line with the rest of the world. Perhaps the only reason MLS clubs even play in the CONCACAF Champions League and U.S. Open Cup is to allow MLS to maintain its status as the top-flight football league in America. The contempt with which Garber’s MLS clearly treats these tournaments is reflected in their play. How many starters did D.C. United bench last night to keep them healthy for a weekend matchup with Chivas USA? And yet the general reaction of D.C.U. fans seems to be, hey, why should we concern themselves with these international affairs? We have to get to the playoffs!
So instead real international challenges, we get made-for-profit events like SuperLiga and the Pan-Pacific Championship which allow MLS to feign interest in international play but force clubs in other countries to abide by its terms. When CONCACAF asks MLS to enter the war, however, the league shrugs its shoulders and sighs its collective, “Yeah, whatever.” This is an anathema to the way football works in the rest of the world. Imagine if the Premier League closed itself off from the rest of Europe and played reserve sides in UEFA competitions out of mere necessity. (Strangely enough, some folks involved with the Premier League seem quite comfortable with that concept.)
Ultimately, MLS can only keep itself isolated from the rest of the world for so long. This is the world’s game, after all, and you can’t keep the rest of the world at bay forever. Perhaps new owners will demand that Garber loosen the league’s trade restraints. Perhaps a metaphorical Pearl Harbor, like a USL club lifting a Champions League trophy — and really, does it seem all that far-fetched right now? — will force this league to join the fray in earnest. Until then, though, we can all expect MLS to be quite content with staying within its own borders. International embarrassment is meaningless here, so long as the business model keeps working at home.
RSS Feed
It amazes me how many soccer fans and bloggers think they have all of the answers. Don Garber doesn’t want to succeed on the world stage? That’s far from the truth.
The point that is commonly left out is Don Garber isn’t making 100% of the decisions - there is a board of directors in MLS, businessmen who understand what it takes to grow successful businesses - and there is no overnight answer to making MLS teams succeed in International Competition that will work in the US. MLS is building itself up to be successful in the long term as evidenced by the fact that they are still in business 13 years later. Be supportive of the league and help it grow - stop trying to tear it down.
Be happy that you have a league and teams to support. Look at the growth from 2001 until now and see that it’s moving in the right direction - the fact that DC is not going to advance in the 08/09 CCL is not the end of the world.
You can say it’s far from the truth, but you haven’t given me one lick of evidence to suggest otherwise. All you’re telling me to do is support the business model and pay no mind to those pesky international competitions. That’s a textbook isolationist stance.
And I already have a local club to support — in USL-1. Glory, glory, Carolina…
“Isolationism works for MLS because the supporters buy into the policy.”
MLS is what it is. An artificial construct that allows more money to flow into American soccer than would with a more traditional club system.
This year’s embarrassments notwithstanding, and they ARE embarrassments, MLS has brought a higher level of soccer to America than our clubs could if separate. By any realistic measure (e.g. USOC performance over the past 13 years, revenue, payroll, number players sold to European leagues, number and level of players imported FROM European leagues), MLS is providing the highest level of soccer in the US, is doing so despite the history of failed top-flight leagues in this country, and is actually attracting even MORE talent and investment into the game in this country.
All that said, I would love to see loosened salary and roster restrictions, a tweaked schedule to respect more (i.e. ANY) FIFA dates and more emphasis put on the CONCACAF tournaments (though there is a solid argument that supporting the current CONCACAF setup would be doing no great service to the worldwide game). MLS still has a lot of room for improvement, and I do think many changes could be made more quickly than the powers-that-be seem to, but on the whole, the MLS “way” has given us more and better soccer than we as a nation would “deserve” using a more traditional model of organization.
Will: What is the argument against supporting the current CONCACAF setup? I’d love to read that. Is it just because Jack Warner is a conniving rat bastard, or is there more to it than that?
Go Montreal and Puerto Rico. After all, wasn’t this country built on the idea that the free market encourages competition, which leads to better quality products at lower prices? I’m all for the better quality product in the US, though I doubt we’ll see the lower prices! Glory, Glory Carolina!
How not to deal with the press
http://timesonline.typepad.com/thegame/2008/10/joe-kinnear-los.html
Well, DC’s crap perfomance has more to do with the fact that half of their starters were injured. DC has usually cared about international competitions, at least somewhat. There’s only so much you can do without Moreno, Gallardo, McTavish, Quaranta, etc. That, and DC’s just not that good this year - losing Christian Gomez really hurt us.
That having been said, remember that other national leagues have had decades to get where they are. How long has the English football pyramid been around, 100 years or more? MLS has been there 13 years, starting pretty much from scratch, and routinely losing top talent across the Atlantic. MLS may eventually take a more conventional business model, but they have to get money and support for that, and they’ll only get that by following a model Americans are comfortable with.
Also, there’s this. Clubs need money to get the depth of talent necessary to compete in multiple concurrent competitions. And if the salary cap restrictions were eased and revenue-sharing scrapped, only a few clubs - DC, New England, New York, LA, Chicago, maybe Houston - would be able to compete, and we’d become a league like the EPL where only a select few teams have a realistic chance of taking home the trophy at the end of the year. That may work in other countries, but that’s a sure-fire way to turn American fans off.
Dave,
Certainly the most sound part of the argument against caring about CONCACAF is the absurd level of corruption running through the circuitry of influence powered by Jack Warner.
There is a further, admittedly more tenuous argument that cultural, demographic, and infrastructural limitations of CONCACAF should be prompting the US and Mexico (and maybe Canada and Costa Rica as well) to look elsewhere for the keys to further development, but simple geography and the relative ease of WC qualifying means we’re probably stuck with good ol’ CONCA-Crap.
Dave,
If MLS were truly isolationist, MLS clubs would not be participating in the US Open Cup and CONCACAF Champions League, and the Superliga would not exist at all.
Don Garber is just a manager who serves the owners; he has to make sure that the league budget balances and that the employees are paid on time and that the usual legal obligations are being met. The real decisions will be made, eventually, by the owners, not by Don Garber. The new owners coming into MLS have deeper pockets and eventually they will dig into them to avoid the embarrassment of losing to Joe Public FC.
You have to be patient with MLS. They have proven they can learn - they are slow learners, but they do learn.
Isolationism doesn’t necessarily mean complete separation from international affairs. It means “legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.” SuperLiga could be an example of a legal barrier; MLS will play FMF clubs, but only on their own terms.
Likewise, MLS only competes in the Open Cup and the CONCACAF Champions League to keep its status as a top-flight league in the region and in FIFA. Otherwise, I think they would pull out. Either way, the business model dictates that the league comes first, and until the fans stop putting money into the business, they’ll have to live with the occasional Joe Public debacle. Considering how little publicity that got outside of soccer circles, how much does that really matter? Did anyone on ESPN even utter the words “Joe Public?” There you go.
Plus, there might be some credence to Will’s argument that the mere presence of Jack Warner discourages MLS from taking this new Champions League seriously. Why show support for corrupt leadership?
You say be patient, but I think we’ll be waiting a VERY long time for MLS to become the kind of league that fans of European soccer would like it to be. Like Will said, it is what it is.
Also please remember that a lot of American soccer fans don’t follow MLS precisely because of crap like this. MLS has learned (with the Toronto FC example) that it is possible to attract the “Euro-snob” American/Canadian soccer fan; but not taking international play seriously is a sure why to alienate not only these potential new fans, but already existing fans, as well.
In spite of what Garber says, the owners do care about international competition, as it’s the one thing that makes MLS different, and better than/more interesting than, the already existing top level US sports leagues. The owners will have the final word on this, not Garber. Be patient.
Also, MLS gets lots of money from Superliga (thanks to SUM’s share of the TV contracts) whereas they don’t make that kind of money from the CONCACAF Champions League (no share for SUM of those TV contracts, apparently), if I understand correctly. So the “lack of interest” may just be a not-so-subtle bit of political/corporate politicking on Garber’s part, or maybe it’s just sour grapes.
You might think that maybe Superliga will bypass CONCACAF Champions League and become the “real” competition in the region, but that will never happen. It’s during the Mexican pre-season when Mexican clubs are still in training, and the Mexican clubs that are invited don’t care about it enough to want to upset the CONCACAF or FIFA hierarchy. Moreover, CONCACAF Champions League winners go to the FIFA World Club Cup, whereas Superliga champions don’t go anywhere and no one cares about the competition and probably never will. It’s a nice bit of extra silverware in the trophy cabinet and a nice bit of extra income, but that’s it.
This is the world’s game, not yet-another-sport-that-only-North-Americans-care-about. MLS will adjust, eventually, to international realities. MLS will find a way to continue to participate in international competition and still make money. MLS front office may be stubborn but they aren’t stupid.
Dave, don’t be absurd. ESPN almost never covers soccer at all, much less MLS, unless it is David Beckham related. It doesn’t matter what ESPN says or thinks; if MLS fans are pissed off, it matters. And MLS fans are pissed off. The Revs have been in a slump ever since the Joe Public fiasco; don’t kid yourself that Rev fans haven’t noticed. They have.
Will season ticket holders not renew because of this? Probably not; on the other hand, new season ticket holders probably won’t sign up, either. Fans won’t kill off MLS by refusing to support it, but they will make their displeasure known.
And don’t kid yourself about MLS “having to” compete in US Open Cup and CONCACAF CL. NASL didn’t, and nothing happened. FIFA and USSF can’t MAKE MLS clubs compete if they don’t want to.
“Considering how little publicity that got outside of soccer circles, how much does that really matter? Did anyone on ESPN even utter the words “Joe Public?” There you go.”
Outside of soccer circles, what goes on in MLS almost NEVER gets any publicity, ever. Except for Beckham, of course. So what’s your point? MLS does have to listen to what is discussed inside soccer circles; these are the fans who are MLS’s only potential source of income.
“Plus, there might be some credence to Will’s argument that the mere presence of Jack Warner discourages MLS from taking this new Champions League seriously. Why show support for corrupt leadership?”
This is an absurd line of argument. There’s plenty of similar corruption in Africa, in Asia, and probably in Europe and Latin America as well. None of this stops clubs from competing. This is just an excuse thrown out there to divert the conversation, and/or it is a hobby horse being ridden by the anti-Jack Warner obsessives. Not everything that happens in CONCACAF is related to Jack Warner, believe it or not.
If Jack Warner really does have anything to do with this, it’s related to who gets what share of the CONCACAF CL TV contracts.
Will season ticket holders not renew because of this? Probably not; on the other hand, new season ticket holders probably won’t sign up, either. Fans won’t kill off MLS by refusing to support it, but they will make their displeasure known.
And Garber will continue to respond to their displeasure with polite dismissal, because those fans are still supporting the business. It doesn’t matter how pissed off they are with the league if they’re still giving it their money. They’re buying in, so MLS has no real reason to change.
I make this same argument all the time with the music business. Do you dislike the RIAA’s ham-handed tactics of suing music fans for downloading tunes? Then STOP BUYING THEIR PRODUCT. Cut off the stream of cash that goes straight to those lawyers. Better yet, don’t download their product, either. Starve them of attention. Find new music OUTSIDE the mainstream. Make them realize that business as usual just isn’t going to work anymore.
But you can’t do that with some people, because they just enjoy that new Coldplay album too much, or they think it’s too much work to look for something new. Likewise, MLS supporters love their clubs too much to stop buying season tickets. Pissed off customers are still customers. MLS doesn’t have to worry about them until they stop being customers.
Re: SuperLiga — I’ve heard rumors that Superliga might replace the Mexican Interliga as a gateway to Copa Libertadores. I actually like the idea, but I tend to think MLS clubs would get their clock cleaned in South America.
If Jack Warner really does have anything to do with this, it’s related to who gets what share of the CONCACAF CL TV contracts.
Who gets what share there, anyway? There are definitive numbers out there for the UEFA CL and the Copa Libertadores, but I’ve yet to see how much cash clubs get for playing in the CONCACAF CL.
“Isolationism doesn’t necessarily mean complete separation from international affairs. It means “legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.” SuperLiga could be an example of a legal barrier; MLS will play FMF clubs, but only on their own terms.”
No, actually, it is not an example of isolationism. That would be like saying that my choosing to go on vacation in Mexico was an example of “isolationism” directed against Central America and the Caribbean.
Your example of a legal barrier isn’t a good analogy anyway, since I wasn’t using the word “isolationism” in a legal sense.
“Who gets what share there, anyway? There are definitive numbers out there for the UEFA CL and the Copa Libertadores, but I’ve yet to see how much cash clubs get for playing in the CONCACAF CL.”
Good question; I have no idea. A topic worth investigating for someone who has the time.
“And Garber will continue to respond to their displeasure with polite dismissal, because those fans are still supporting the business. It doesn’t matter how pissed off they are with the league if they’re still giving it their money. They’re buying in, so MLS has no real reason to change.”
As I keep pointing out, Don Garber is just a highly paid business manager. He runs the day to day operations; it is his business to be short-term oriented. Short term, his business logic makes sense; long term, it’s terminally stupid, because MLS can’t survive on the existing fan base; it has to grow.
The long term decisions are made by the owners, not by Garber, and they are smart enough to figure out that there’s a lot more potential NEW fans of MLS that they are alienating. Existing fans of MLS aren’t going to kill off MLS just to prove a point; we remember what happened after NASL folded. By the same token, existing fans of MLS cannot support the continued growth of MLS, which is the only thing that will allow MLS to survive and continue to attract new ownership and new sponsorship. MLS has to attract the “Euro snobs” and “soccer purists” to survive, long term. MLS’s desire to grow favors international competition, long term. MLS owners have to think about this sort of thing; Don Garber does not.
“Re: SuperLiga — I’ve heard rumors that Superliga might replace the Mexican Interliga as a gateway to Copa Libertadores. I actually like the idea, but I tend to think MLS clubs would get their clock cleaned in South America.”
Rumors? You mean wishful thinking on BigSoccer forums, perhaps?
CONMEBOL won’t allow this. SuperLiga grossly favors the MLS teams, as it is during MLS midseason, and Mexican offseason, and it is played on MLS home stadia, not home-and-away. CONMEBOL isn’t going to bypass the existing international structure to allow in some MLS teams who have shown that they don’t take international play seriously, anyway. Not gonna happen. Not unless SuperLiga format changes drastically from what it is now, at least.
Just to clarify, I was suggesting that the corruption in CONCACAF might be a good reason for FANS not to care. MLS will care to the extent its interests are benefited by doing so, which someday may be tied to what fans care about. Okay, okay: MORE CLOSELY tied.
I think that the Conmebol and Concacaf should come together into a single football entity, in order to have a Pan American Champions League. I’m from Brazil, I follow the MLS, and I think that a league with clubs from USA, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and other champions of the continent would bring in a context of great prestige in the world of football.
Excuse me, my english is poor.