MLS Has to Think Beyond Beckham
As anyone who saw the match between the LA Galaxy and the New York Red Bulls will appreciate, the challenges facing Major League Soccer run much deeper than whether David Beckham stays or goes, says Ben Cohen.
For the New York Red Bulls, playing soccer at Giants Stadium in New Jersey must be pretty soul-destroying. At most games, the stadium’s vastness is underlined by the seemingly endless stretches of empty seats, as if the New York franchise of Major League Soccer is a warm-up act for some super group who won’t be mounting the stage for several hours yet.
Rare are those occasions when the Red Bulls players can look up at a stadium filled to capacity. On two of them, David Beckham and the Los Angeles Galaxy have been present for games that actually lived up to the hype. Beckham made his New York debut in 2007, in an extraordinary game marked by superb goals and abysmal defending that ended in a 5-4 Red Bulls victory. In 2008, he played in a more sober, yet engaging, 2-2 draw.
On Thursday night, Beckham returned to Giants Stadium. Only 20,000 spectators trickled in, causing the New York Daily News – hardly known for its fondness for the sport variously known here as futbol or football or soccer – to declare that Beckham had worn out his welcome in MLS.
You could argue that Beckham has become a convenient hate figure for those frustrated at the failure to bring American tastes into line with the rest of the world by converting “soccer” into “football”. At last night’s game, there were clusters of fans who barracked Beckham viciously every time he received the ball. At the same time, there were plenty of teenage girls still sufficiently charmed by Beckham’s celebrity to wear his Number 23 jersey.
The real problem for American soccer runs much deeper than Beckham’s Will-He-Stay-Or-Will-He-Go routine. Over and above the frisson of interest generated by Beckham’s spat with team-mate Landon Donovan, after the latter told a leading US sports writer that he was none too impressed by Goldenballs’s decision to jet off to AC Milan, few people in this country really care about the game. And Beckham knows that.
It’s always been tough to decide – perhaps because he himself can’t – whether David Beckham is a footballer first and a marketing device second. His disillusionment with MLS, which landed him on a fanfare $250 million deal, stems, I think, for the primacy of his footballing identity. He still has ambition. He wants to play for England in the 2010 World Cup. Fabio Capello has told him that to do so, he has to be playing his football in a league where he’ll be challenged – not one which, at its best, offers the standard of a mid-level English Championship game. Can he really be faulted for acknowledging that reality?
Beckham is not the only major name in the MLS. Chicago Fire has Brian McBride and Cuauhtemoc Blanco, Seattle has Kasey Keller and Freddie Ljungberg. The difference is that for those players, MLS is the vehicle to bring one’s career to an elegant close, not to revive it. That understanding even seems to guide Bob Bradley, the coach of the impressive US national team, whose player selections in the recent FIFA Confederations Cup were dominated by US nationals in European leagues, like Clint Dempsey, Jozy Altidore, Charlie Davies and Tim Howard.
Beckham, then, made an expensive mistake with MLS, no doubt fuelled by his personal vanity and his desire to leave an indelible mark upon a city where celebrity is the most precious of commodities. But a humid, empty Giants Stadium, its artificial turf still streaked by the yard markings of the American football played there in the winter, is a world away from a party at Tom Cruise’s mansion.
Watching Beckham on the field last night, you couldn’t help but wonder whether his secret wish was to fulfil the chant of some of those present, by electing to “f-ck off!” His performance, in a game which resulted in comfortable 3-1 victory for the Galaxy, was technically decent, if unmemorable. He was on the field for seventy minutes, playing some characteristically accurate long passes into the penalty area and taking the corner which led to a spectacular Landon Donovan goal. Unlike Donovan, though, he didn’t play spiritedly. And maybe that is because, when you’ve played for the likes of Real Madrid and Manchester United, it’s hard to feel challenged by a supremely awful team like the New York Red Bulls.
Therein lies the lesson for MLS stategists. Worry less about Beckham, more about how to boost the professional standard of a game which, in America, is played by many and watched by few. When young American players decide they’d rather stay in the MLS instead of venturing to the second divisions of France or Greece – when, in other words, Landon Donovan is the rule, not the exception – something truly meaningful will have occurred.
Ben – welcome to World Football Columns, a very good article and a clear direction for the MLS.
I think they’re finding it hard to adjust to life without Beckham. The NY Times football blog is littered with articles about him and they generate the most comments – most of which are bitter about Beckham’s commitment to the MLS. My advice too would be to get over him and move on and concentrate on the many other factors which make a successful football league.
I have a new column up in a week or two about my account of the Galaxy vs Dynamo game I went to see a few weeks ago, with a few insights into what I thought of MLS.
Additionally there should be a column on the site later this week written by one of the authors here about the New York Cosmos – again showing a different side to the American Soccer and the MLS.
Look forward to further articles from across the pond!
Perhaps they should look to break the contract with Beckham? He has shown he has goals beyond MLS, and Capello has already said he would need to do the same again next season to make England’s World Cup Squad, no doubt his ultimate aim. I still think that Beckham is a useful marketing tool for the league but agree completely that they need to look to improve other aspects.
Grass roots is the key in my opinion. They need to look to get kids playing small sided games on an almost daily basis. Focus on technical ability rather than physical stuff. I do think the future is bright though, having exposure to top tier European football will help in the long term as well. The kids can see the possibilities, and also watch the patterns of play and movement of some of the best players in the world.
I love the Dutch system, also employed by Barcelona, of playing everyone in every position, and the focus on ball retention it provides. Pass, offer, receive, pass, offer, receive so they say. I think the US and England have a great deal to learn so far as grass roots is concerned.
Are there any dramatic changes you would look to invoke? I know the sport is popular with kids until they reach a certain age, why do you think they get seduced by other sports or activities?
Steve J. and Steve A., thanks for your comments. Steve A., it’s a serious marketing problem. Kids here see this as a game to play, not a game to watch – Beckham was really the first footballer here since Pele to have a profile on a par with Alex Rodriguez (baseball) or Michael Jordan (basketball). The lack of visible footballers is compounded by the fact that it’s not a game widely talked about, or that you encounter in casual conversation, as you would in Europe or Latin America. Briefly, there’s no attendant culture around the game, so going professional in football is not as seductive or even as obvious a choice as the equivalent in NFL or baseball.
I asked a friend whether he thought President Obama would have phoned Bob Bradley before the Confederations Cup Final with Brazil to say good luck. “He probably doesn’t even know it’s happening – he’s a basketball guy,” came the answer.
All that said, the US is a country of extraordinary variations. Consequently, there are regions – like the Pacific Northwest – where football really is gaining a following. Perhaps the answer is to look beyond New York and LA, towards cities like Seattle and Portland, if you want to see the future.
Ben, would be interesting to hear about football in the Pacific Northwest and importantly why and how it has picked up there and not say, in the South in places such as Florida.
Is this a case of there’s more European influences up there or is the region slightly more pragmatic to the nature of a new sport? Could it even be because their Basketball, Baseball and American Football teams aren’t as good?
Ben, very well written article, it was very interesting to need. I also saw the Galaxy-Red Bulls game and I was not surprised by the reaction he received from many of the fans. Although Beckham has time after time reaffirmed his commitment to MLS, he has rarely backed his word up with his play or his actions. You’re very right in saying the league and its fans need to stop depending on him as some sort of football/soccer savior in the states. Beckham will always put his personal interests first, for better or for worse for MLS, and as long as that is the case, he can expect to always receive the reactions he did during the game at Giants Stadium.
And Steven just referring to your post where you mention why soccer hasn’t flourished or taken root in the southern United States. MLS failed twice with teams in Florida. Both the Tampa Bay Mutiny and Miami Fusion proved very unsuccessful fan-wise in their brief stints in the league. I would be very surprised if MLS makes a third attempt to build a team in Florida, at least in the near future.
Joe (and Ben) It’s something I listened to on the BBC World Football Podcast (a great show) that Miami especially didn’t succeed because of their inability to reach out the hispanic and black community largely appealing to the white-middle class.
I’ve not read anything more on this since so it would be good to hear your views on the subject? If anyone thinks this is too off topic and has a full answer then feel free to do new column but any answer will do on this!
Steven, it is an interesting point you bring up. I don’t know too much about the history of the Miami franchise, but for a team to succeed in Florida, it needs to connect with its Hispanic population. If that demographic of people becomes interested, it is very possible for a team to thrive in that area. It would be interesting to see if a team would succeed in Miami now as opposed to 10 years ago. I ultimately think down the road there will be a MLS team in Florida, but thus far the league’s track record in that state is not good.
The problem the league has is competing in a sports saturated market and revenue. American sports such as the NFL, MLB, and basketball are entrenched. The NHL has had a tough time in certain markets. The NHL sort of goes up and down, yet the LA Kings do get decent attendances despite their horrible multiple seasons.
“MLS” teams that have their own stadiums such as LA, Toronto, and Columbus can make money off of parking fees, concessions, and sponsorships. These revenue streams exist in addition to team merchandizing and tickets. Teams that do not have their own stadiums can have problems with scheduling, plus they have to share ticket revenue. Plus, those three other sources of revenue could be limited or not exist.
Even municipalities that see they have a good thing going (Houston Dynamo) delay to get a new stadium bill passed. The constant struggle the league has had with San Jose and San Jose State University is an excellent example of why the league has to be careful about spending money.
The league needs every team playing in a soccer specific stadium so that more revenue streams can get developed. By increasing revenue then more money can get spent to improve the product. Certain owners want to spend more money while others do not.
Business people know you have to spend money to make money. Yet, too many people who live in the U.S. will spend money to see a Barcelona, but not even go to see the Houston Dynamo.
Dave – Agreed, you have to spend money to make money in football and that doesn’t just apply to the businessmen, it needs a buy-in from everyone.
The problem is until it grows businessmen will be reluctant to invest, but until someone invests then it will struggle to grow. One has to happen first, the question is which one?