Tuesday, September 16, 2014

In-Game Video Review....in Major League Soccer?

The suggestion by Major League Soccer Commissioner, Don Garber, that MLS would like to test out In-Game Video Review can be looked at from a few different angles. The first thing to consider in this decision is whether or not its good for the game from a domestic AND international perspective. Domestically, the generations prior to the Millenials don't really understand or appreciate the match flow of soccer. This makes it hard to crack into the Big 4 of major league sports. This is where these types of decisions come into play. Soccer lacks the natural breaks in the game that Americans desire. Which means fewer chances to take bathroom breaks, discuss the last call with your friends, more time spent having to focus on one thing, and, most importantly to execs, it decreases the amount of advertising inventory.

From an international standpoint, MLS is already receiving criticism because of player availability on international friendly dates and because of the timing of their season and how it doesn't fit in with the international calendar. While some of that has come from U.S. Soccer, much of it comes from FIFA as well. Scheduling issues aside, MLS is already a strange animal to international fan. It is viewed as an unprofessional league where stars go to retire by many. At a time when many of the biggest and most successful clubs are transitioning to an international model and establishing academies in the United States, MLS could potentially alienate it's core fan base if they were to implement/experiment with In-Game Review. It could also damage the league's image in the eyes of some of it's international counterparts.

The flip side of this argument is if MLS finds a way to implement IGR in a manner that minimally effects match flow, the league could possibly be perceived as an innovator. The problem is that not many leagues are taking cues from this side of the pond when it comes to soccer. Unless you count the vanishing spray that everyone seems to be using. So, no. I don't see this trend sticking.

From a business standpoint, this move could certainly create more opportunities for sponsorship inventory and activation. I can already see "In-Game Review brought to you by GoPro". And I'm sure this opportunity would be taken into consideration the MLS front office. Yes, they already use live reads during the match broadcasts to create some exposure for league and team partners, but this element creates that desired stoppage in play so that you have the viewer's undivided attention. Even if its only for 15-30 seconds.

The most important thing to remember in all of this is that fact that NEVER in the history of sports has a team won a championship because they were relying on the referee to make the right call. That's not how this works. The teams that perform at the highest level on the most consistent basis are going to win championships in any sport. There is no luck involved in winning championships at any level. High School soccer all the way up through the World Cup.

There are more than enough games in the MLS season to flatten out any variances or abnormal occurrences caused by errors in refereeing or otherwise. The current playoff system does a pretty good job of that as well. I understand that there is some desire to make the game "better" but there are other ways to do it. It is already perception that MLS refs are terrible. Why highlight that by letting coaches challenge questionable calls? The league is much better served by working to improve the quality of refereeing to minimize missed and/or questionable calls.

It has been stated by World Cup and MLS referee, Mark Geiger, that the league asks referees to 'overlook' some calls in the interest of game play and flow. It seems hypocritical to implement that practice then turn around and want to review questionable calls. It stands to reason that the league should just train their referees and referee's assistants better to ensure that they call games the "right" way. I believe it was in the D.C. United vs. New York Red Bulls match last week when the linesman called Bradley Wright Phillips offside when he was clearly on. That assistant was behind the play and in a horrible position to make the call.

But that's part of the reason its called the Beautiful Game. Because of its subjective nature and the Soccer Gods pushing a call in your favor later on in the match or the season. Calls are left up to the opinion of the referee. It's in the rules of the game. This means that if the referee issues a red card, he or she saw something that warranted it. It may not always be the right call but that's the way the ball bounces. It is manager's job to step up and make adjustments to put his team in a position to win or get a draw out of the match. Something about this whole In-Game Review has the aroma of "everyone gets a trophy" and I am not a fan.

I see the short-term benefits in terms of sponsorship and possibly pulling in some new fans who don't like the fact that the game is is played continuously for 45 minutes at a time. But if I were a gambling man, I'd be willing to bet that this experiment will be short lived. Similar to penalty shootouts in regular season games during the dark ages of MLS.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

The Real Problem with the Hawks

Yes, this blog is primarily about the business of soccer but as a Georgian and hardcore Hawks fan, I felt compelled to speak on the recently released email from Hawks majority owner, Bruce Levenson.

My feelings are hurt. Not because of the email but because I feel as though my intelligence is being insulted. I can summarize the Hawks' problems and this blog post in one sentence: The Hawks passed on Chris Paul for Marvin Williams. I'm not saying this one decision defines the Hawks. But this one and several others like it certainly point to issues within the front office.

Whether or not Bruce Levenson's email was racist or not is going to depend on who you ask. That can debated all day. The real issue with the Atlanta Hawks and their attendance is the fact that they haven't put a solid product out on the floor for quite some time now. Yes, they've made the playoffs every season for the past 7 seasons. And sometimes they even give us a strong showing against the Celtics or Pacers in an exciting first round seven game series. But that's no longer enough. As a fan, I want to see a championship, ANY championship come back to ATL. I think the last time the city won anything sports related, I was in middle school.

The Atlanta Hawks seem to be developing into a team of high achieving role players which, in my opinion, is a step in the right direction to the "Spurs of the South" model they're trying to cultivate with the arrival of Danny Ferry (who may or may not be on his way out given recent developments to this story). Part of the reason for bringing him in was that he had success putting together competitive teams as opposed to a group of super stars.

I danced a jig in my living room when I saw that he was able to offload the contracts of an aging Joe Johnson AND Marvin Williams. WHAT?! He managed to swindle the Nets into taking Joe Johnson's $20 million/ season contract while also avoiding having to amnesty him and taking a hit to the team's bottom line. And the Marvin Williams deal was nothing short of Wizardry. I don't know how on Earth he got that done...seriously.

Now, all of a sudden, we have roughly $30 million in cap space just in time for a huge 2013 Free Agency summer. All signs pointed to shifting some things around and at least ATTEMPTING to make a play for CP3 or Dwight Howard (who is an Atlanta native). Instead, we did virtually nothing. More of the same Hawks. Underpromising and barely over delivering. In Ferry's defense, up to this point, D. Howard has proven that he's not the missing piece that is going to help you win a championship. But that acquisition would have allowed Al Horford to slide over to his natural position in the #4 spot, D. Howard at Center, and Jeff Teague running point. Maybe that's not a Big 3 but its a 2nd or 3rd round playoff team. Especially in the Eastern Conference. Medium sized 3.

So that's one example of where the Hawks front office has been historically weak in Free Agency. Let's take a look at some of their drafting decisions over the last few years.

2005 - As I mentioned above, the Atlanta Hawks picked Marvin Williams before Chris Paul with their #2 pick in 2005. They also looked over Deron Williams, Adrew Bynum, Danny Granger, and David Lee in that same draft year.

2006 - With the #5 pick, they selected Shelden Williams over J.J. Reddick, Brandon Roy, Rudy Gay, and Rajon Rondo. It should be noted that I remember going to a Rockets vs. Hawks game in Houston and during a timeout huddle, Shelden was paying 0 attention to the coaches and looking up at the promotion on the video board.

2007 - Acie Law with the 11th pick. Drafted before Thaddeus Young, Rodney Stuckey, and Glenn Davis.
Acie Law is now playing in Greece.


The list goes on. I understand that personnel decisions are EXTREMELY difficult. There are all sorts of things that need to be considered when putting together a team in the NBA, many of which I'm probably not even aware of. So I don't think any reasonable person expects the front office to get the draft and Free Agency right every time. That ism't realistic. But when it becomes consistent, it is now a part of your team culture and the fans notice that. If ownership and team executives aren't invested in putting a contending team on the floor every year, its a very tough sell to get fans to come out and support the team. A better team means more people at the stadium which translates into being able to increase the price tag of your sponsorships.