The World Cup And Money

As a big soccer fan and former college player and coach I haven't been as productive the last few weeks since the World Cup is on. I'll start by saying that I don't care why you hate soccer and what is wrong with the sport. And I don't care if you ever watch a soccer game in your life. I have no desire to convert you into a fan. I will only say that for those of you trying to be soccer evangelist you should give it up. You won't argue anyone into being a fan. And for those of you who want to argue that soccer isn't a sport or that it is boring, get over it. It's a foolish argument. I understand that you don't get it and I can't help it that you don't understand why others do. Your argument is just as old and stale as you believe ours to be so just walk away and we'll agree to leave each other alone.

Now that we've gotten that out of the way let's get on to talking about money. After the USA was knocked out of the tournament there was a sparkling moment of analysis by Jurgen Klinsmann. It was jaw droppingly astute and I hope it gets picked up by the suits in US Soccer.

Klinsmann was an accomplished forward in the 1990's and won the World Cup with Germany in 1990 and the European Championship in '96. He took over as coach of the German national team and took a very young team to a third place finish in 2006. They were considered overachievers and they played a bright, positive style that was a change from the deliberate and methodical style of the traditional German teams. He has divided his time between the US and Germany for many years. Before current US coach Bob Bradley was hired Klinsmann was considered. The rumors were that he and the US Soccer Federation could not agree on how the National Team was structured so they went separate ways.

In a sort of aside at the end of the broadcast, Klinsmann was asked where he thought the US needed to go from here. He basically said that the US needed to change how soccer develops and hope to produce quality players by 2022 when the US has a good chance of hosting the tournament again. I can't quote him directly but here is what I understood him to mean.

At present in the USA we pay to play soccer. Almost every participant pays a fee to play. It is rare to see kids playing on there own in a vacant lot. And if you want your child to become a good soccer player you have to pay a lot of money to have them play for a club team. It's expensive and most of the club players come from well-to-do-families. These are the kids who are recruited to play college soccer and who eventually make their way into professional sports.

That's not the way it works in the rest of the world. You've heard of kids playing soccer on the beaches in Brazil and if you've ever been to the third world you've undoubtedly seen kids playing in the streets. In most of Europe they don't have near the emphasis we do on high school and university sports so guys like Klinsmann grew up playing with friends. They were middle class kids who weren't paying to play.

Why does it matter? It is certainly possible for a upper class kid to have the hunger and drive to get good enough to succeed but it seems that poorer kids have a better chance to excel. Klinsmann points to basketball and notes how the streets of the inner city seems to be the main breeding ground for elite NBA talent. Sure, a few rich kids make it but it isn't the norm.

To back it up one only has to look at the fact that in the 20 years since 1990 when we started to take our place once again on the world soccer stage we have yet to produce even one world class soccer player. For those of you who point to Landon Donovan, who many argue is our best player ever, sorry, but no. If he was truly world class the likes of Manchester United, Chelsea, and Arsenal would come calling. And if he was really good he would be playing for Real Madrid or Barcelona.

Those clubs get who they want. This is how it works. They want the best players in the world so they can win because they are global enterprises and they make millions from being famous. Once they identify a target they begin to talk about how they would like that player playing at their club. No matter how much a player might like their current club they are easily convinced that moving would be a good idea. At that point you have a player who wants to move and it just comes down to money. Money talks and every club has there price. I have yet to see a wanted player not end up on a top club. And those clubs aren't targeting Donovan. In fact they have never targeted a US player like that.

Klinsann also pointed to 2022. Countries bid to host the World Cup and the next one up for bid is 2018. The USA is bidding for that one but the consensus is that it will go to Europe. (2014 will be in Brazil) That makes the USA's best chance 2022. Klinsmann believes we need to change our structure now so that we get these middle and lower class kids playing soccer so we have some talent by 2022. By that time we might start seeing some better talent coming along. They'd be young but then we would really have something to move forward with.

I thought Klinsmann had some excellent thoughts. He was looking into the future and he identified a key problem in the development in talent. I also appreciate that he wasn't afraid to address something that could be a politically incorrect topic. Race follows right behind economics and class and Klinsmann knows it. He knows that the the Hispanic and African/American community will end up being a much bigger part of US soccer than they are even now.

Money also sheds light on another interesting issue in the World Cup. Soccer is suffering right now because it doesn't know what to do about technology. There have been several high profile referring errors and the calls for the use of replay or other technology has gotten louder. But it isn't easy for Fifa. Sure they could use technology at the world cup but they don't want to create more of a class problem in soccer.

Just like with players, soccer has always had it roots in poorer nations. Sure Europe has several soccer powers but several poorer nations have excelled. Though Brazil is now considered a developed country it has been winning World Cup trophies for a long time now. Most of the European leagues are flooded with players from poorer countries. It is the accessibility of soccer by the poor that has enabled it to become THE global sport.

Technology is expensive and if Fifa started using replay where would it draw the line? Would the African Nations Cup tournament feel compelled to use it too? I know Sierra Leone couldn't afford that many cameras and the associated equipment so what would they do for home games? Would they be forced to play home games at a neutral site?

Personally, I'm all for instant replays in the World Cup but I understand the argument against it. I also understand the tension between the rich and poor in regards to it.

Fifa is one of those organizations that drive me crazy. On the one hand I think it is one of the most corrupt organizations around and wouldn't put anything past them. They have rules like no government interference in national soccer federations. Can someone explain to me how they know the North Korean federation is independent? But they do have a unique challenge in balancing the complexities of the modern world with a poor constituency. Looks like the US National Team has a lot to figure out too.