Beckham, continued:
So, $200M over five years for non-performance based pay, MLS Deputy Commissioner Ivan Gazidis said. Can we call Becks what he is, then, Mr. Gazidis? A league co-owner? Perhaps the most invested individual in the entire MLS? (I have no data to back that up). I still think the move is whack.
I think Beckham is a good player — his performance on set pieces is world-class, and his ability to make dangerous offensive crosses from the 50-yard line is unquestioned. I disagree that he was England's best player in the WC, but whatever... (Aaron Lennon, who played as a Beckham replacement, was much more dangerous).
I think we agree on this fundamental point: The Beckham move is a gamble. The league is tired of slow progress, and wants to make a major splash. The MLS of on the tip of every tongue today. In the future, Beckham's presence allows other European stars to move to America. Beckham's presence will mean increased international attention for the MLS.
Why gamble now, though?
The league is progressing nicely, isn't it? It is developing decent players like Clint Dempsey, it has a certain internal star-power with Freddie Adu, and it has not embarrased itself in any of the friendlies it has played. American soccer hasn't been groundbreaking, and some commentators are saying Mexico is poised to overtake us once more, but we've looked solid, and gained some respect.
So, why gamble like this? What is to be gained? Why put so much on the line? We are in no position to compete with Europe now or even in the reasonably near future.
I'll say this in defense of the move: Even though I'm scared of such a large gamble, and I generally think it is unnecessary, if the MLS has to gamble, this is near perfect for the following reasons:
1. Beckham is perfect — speaks English, instantly recognizable, still reasonably talented.
2. The NHL is down — if ever the networks were looking for more sports, now seems to be the time.
3. The MLS has the infrastructure to capitalize: Many teams have built soccer specific stadiums.
So, anyway, I'm not a fan. I think it's risky behavior from a league that doesn't need to take risks.
I think Beckham is a good player — his performance on set pieces is world-class, and his ability to make dangerous offensive crosses from the 50-yard line is unquestioned. I disagree that he was England's best player in the WC, but whatever... (Aaron Lennon, who played as a Beckham replacement, was much more dangerous).
I think we agree on this fundamental point: The Beckham move is a gamble. The league is tired of slow progress, and wants to make a major splash. The MLS of on the tip of every tongue today. In the future, Beckham's presence allows other European stars to move to America. Beckham's presence will mean increased international attention for the MLS.
Why gamble now, though?
The league is progressing nicely, isn't it? It is developing decent players like Clint Dempsey, it has a certain internal star-power with Freddie Adu, and it has not embarrased itself in any of the friendlies it has played. American soccer hasn't been groundbreaking, and some commentators are saying Mexico is poised to overtake us once more, but we've looked solid, and gained some respect.
So, why gamble like this? What is to be gained? Why put so much on the line? We are in no position to compete with Europe now or even in the reasonably near future.
I'll say this in defense of the move: Even though I'm scared of such a large gamble, and I generally think it is unnecessary, if the MLS has to gamble, this is near perfect for the following reasons:
1. Beckham is perfect — speaks English, instantly recognizable, still reasonably talented.
2. The NHL is down — if ever the networks were looking for more sports, now seems to be the time.
3. The MLS has the infrastructure to capitalize: Many teams have built soccer specific stadiums.
So, anyway, I'm not a fan. I think it's risky behavior from a league that doesn't need to take risks.
posted by Chris at 5:46 PM
1 Comments:
I join Paul in thinking that this move is a good one for MLS. Of course, even the best player in the world isn't going to make the other Galaxians world-beaters (Donovan might do more there) and dominate the sport/change the game.
And the $200 million price tag for endorsements is huge, but in the short term, it makes MLS look like big time spenders, and if Beckham is even half as interested in getting celebrities to like MLS as he is in getting celebrities to like him, the synergistic potential of this second-degree publicity is mind-blowing. Because when Tom Cruise and Beckham come to the same place -- how many teenage girls will follow? How many mediocre ventures have such hordes of proper young ladies propped up far beyond the point of diminishing returns?
I think it'll last longer than than one season of hype.
Post a Comment
<< Home