In his double life as both a professor of economics and as the head of the US Soccer Federation Sunil Gulati is used to different vantage points.  He’s also experienced in weighing costs and benefits in a systematic way.  So how might we in the US soccer community appeal to him?  Maybe we can present our points about where to go from here by identifying the pros and cons of different paths along with the underlying forces we feel will drive the continuing development.  It all sounds so logical, doesn’t it?   I wish I could deliver more than just one amateur enthusiast’s viewpoint myself.  That’s part of the beauty of a soccer blog carnival, though.  There are independent voices out there, presented en masse, that can round out opinions and suggest good alternatives.

My own goal is to mention a few things to consider in choosing a new USMT coach in Part I and then to shift gears in Part II to talk about how to build on any fan interest that survived our poor WC performance to promote the game further.

Part I:  Deciding on a new coach

Bruce Arena didn’t go out on a high note, but he certainly had his fair share of them over the years.  The program is ready for a change, though.  Players usually benefit by having a variety of coaching influences.  While it’s important to have stability, and to give capable coaches a chance to prove that their systems can work given time, Arena’s 8 years have been more than enough to satisfy those criteria.  So, the King is dead; long live the King.  But is it to be King Juergen?

We hear Klinsmann’s name most.  I like him, too, for all the reasons usually cited:  he lives here, he rallied what had looked like a pretty mediocre German squad to an impressive third place finish, he’s enthusiastic, he was a great player not far removed from his glory days, and he could presumably teach American charges an effective European style of play with an emphasis on attack.  There may be some negatives, though, too, that I have not heard making the rounds.  For one, he’d be a bit like buying a hot stock right after its big run-up.  Is there possibly too much enthusiasm for an admittedly successful guy, but one who had two important advantages going into the tournament – low expectations and a home crowd?  I’m also curious to know, in general, how former standout players perform as coaches, especially outside their own countries.  Granted, Franz Beckenbauer was a superstar player AND a World Cup-winning coach, but that was as manager of Germany.  Maybe my historical knowledge is poor and there are other compelling examples, but it seems to me that the talent to amaze on the pitch is different from the ability to impart it.  Klinsmann is not all that experienced as a coach, either, which may be a drawback in a country where technical skills are still lagging a little.  The reasons he gave for quitting the post in Germany may be disconcerting, too.  He wanted to spend more time with his family and to step away from the high pressure.  This doesn’t necessarily mean that the US job is a bad fit.  His family is already near and he presumably would feel less pressure here than in der Vaterland, but we may wonder if he’s motivated enough to make sacrifices on our behalf.

If Klinsmann is not our man, then who are some of the others that may be?  I like several candidates I’ve heard mentioned.  Peter Nowak has done a very creditable job at DC United and in my mind was as smart and as skillful a player as the MLS has ever seen. 

Bob Bradley is another one with a strong MLS record – winningest coach of all-time, in fact.  His former players speak very highly of his abilities not just as a teacher, but as a leader.  He has done a good job turning the Chivas USA program around, too.  Since he has worked under Bruce Arena on several occasions, some may feel he’s too similar in his approach, but as far as I can tell, he’s his own man with his own coaching persona. 

If an international resume is what we want, there are few more impressive than Guus Hiddink’s.  He has now taken three national teams to higher-than-expected heights.  Holland, his native country, was an impressive semi-finalist in 1998.  He then led South Korea to the semis in 2002.  His most recent success in Australia is further proof that he gets results where few were foreseen.  I’ve heard that he’s available, but I’ve also heard that he’s slated to go to Russia.  If he truly is free to sign, I’d say he’s worth serious consideration.

Part II:  Advancing fan support

By all accounts, enthusiasm for the game in the US is trending upward.  Gulati has already contributed significantly to this growth and will no doubt do more.  Grass roots initiatives, youth development, large-scale promotions, and viable business models are levers at his disposal and he will continue to use them well.  My own less tangible comments and suggestions are meant more for those who are unofficial promoters of o jogo bonito, not Mr. Gulati.  Throughout, I try to acknowledge the distinct sub-species of American soccer fans that exist today.  (See our earlier post for a description of the different fan types we’ve found in the US.) 

• Applaud the soccer moms (and dads).  They’re more than just a voting demographic; they’re the ones schlepping their youngsters from one activity to another, with soccer often foremost among them.  Some percentage of these kids continue with the game beyond grade school and are the star players and knowledgeable fans of the future.
• While we’re at it, let’s show some gratitude for the coaches out there, too.  Thanks to clinics, licensing programs, and how-to books, even those who never played the game have been contributing.  Those who have stuck with it are the Darwinian success stories, but even those who were just in it to share an activity with their kids for a while served as place-holders until increasingly more qualified coaches and trainers hit the scene.
• Welcome the casual fan.  These people can’t tell you Zidane’s former club affiliation in Italy, but can offer commentary on head-butts.  They hear talk about the World Cup at the water cooler and want in on the topic du jour.  As more serious fans, we know they bring very little to the conversation, but let’s welcome them into the fold anyway.  There’s no point in alienating them, especially if they’ve shown enough interest to broach the subject.  As ambassadors of the game ourselves, we might even get them to watch a few matches on TV or buy tickets to up the numbers in the stands.
• Buy a pint for an Ultra.  We should make sure their vocal cords are well-lubricated to keep the chorus going strong.  In America’s own (better) tradition, imbibers have kept their cool.  There is very little talk of mauling rival tribes.
• Tolerate the cutting edge elitists.  They may be a little haughty in their disdain for lower class life forms with more pedestrian tastes, but these progressive folks tend to be more open-minded than most given their global perspective.  If they’re the type who like soccer for its inherent beauty and not just because it separates them from the masses, they can be loyal allies (and a market force in attracting more of it).
• Engage the polysports.  These are fans open to a variety of sports; quick to pick up on subtleties and willing to give anything a chance.  They probably follow soccer during the World Cup just like they follow swimming, gymnastics, and track during the Olympics.  To get them interested in soccer beyond the quadrennial cycle, we should make sure Champion’s League, the MLS finals, and Euro 2008 show up on their radar screens.
• Indulge the intellectuals.  Academics, cultural cognoscenti, and literary types have often used soccer as a prism for more elevated themes.  Several recent books (e.g., How Soccer Explains the World and The Thinking Fan’s Guide to the World Cup) have played up the cultural angles to good effect.  Several bloggers have picked up on this, too.  As long as the scholarship is not too thickly applied, these can be thought-provoking pieces.  The more we understand about the sport and its impact throughout the world, the better we’ll be at building an eclectic form of it here.
• Proselytize selectively.  Many of us are in or have gone through a stage where we want everyone to share in the joy of the newly converted.  When we run up against the sports conservatives, though, (or sports reactionaries, as Susan has dubbed them) we get the well-rehearsed litany of why soccer is an inferior sport.  It’s as though 0-0 draws were invented purely for their cliché-spouting purposes.  My current, more enlightened view is to simply forget about them.  They enjoy seeing if you’ll take the bait and will frustrate you to no end with their rope-a-dope close-mindedness if you ever try to talk sense to them.
• Promote the transition to “Total Fan” status.  This is the most exalted, fully evolved state achievable.  Anything we can do to bring fans from the aforementioned categories into this one is worth trying.  Of course, part of being a total fan is supporting the product that is already there (professional teams, amateur teams, broadcasts, publications, etc.), and another part is building a better future (getting involved in player development, recruiting other fans, and learning more about what has worked in other countries). 

A big part of the future is in Sunil Gulati’s capable hands, but an even bigger part, it seems, belongs to us as we collectively shape US soccer culture.  We’ll want to draw on best practices from elsewhere, but apply our own can-do attitude to put it all into practice. 

South Africa, here we come.

[Submitted by Steve]

Many, many factors come together to determine the outcome of a match.  For something that can seem so random and capricious – whether the curled shot clangs off the post or goes just inside it, whether the whistle blows as the attacker goes down in the box or play continues – there are surprisingly many knowable variables that can help predict the game’s winner.  In this analysis, we focus only on measurable determinants.  Gut feelings, national character, and past glories are (rightly or wrongly) immaterial to this study because they cannot be quantified.

So what are the drivers we’ve identified to separate winners from losers?  For one, home field advantage is a well-known factor.  Host countries almost always do better than they would if they were playing half a hemisphere away.  We find weaker evidence of a home continent advantage, as well.  Goals scored and goals allowed in Group play are also significant variables helping to explain wins in the knock-out phase.  How fresh a team is for the match can be important, too.  This can be measured by two additional variables.  One is the amount of rest the team has had since the previous game and the other is whether the previous game was decided during regulation play or, instead, went to overtime or penalties. 

These are the factors we’ve identified so far.  (Any help in positing others would be greatly appreciated.)  Now the goal is to estimate the strength of each effect.  What if the host nation is going against a team with better success so far at keeping the ball out of the back of their own net, but one that didn’t score quite as much and has also had two fewer days of rest?  To which team would the balance tip?

The Winning Formula

The matches we analyzed in this study were from the knock-out stages of each World Cup from 1982 to 2002.  This gave us 78 data points in total, with no potential distortions from draws or let-downs in Group play if a team had already won the Group.  A regression analysis was then performed to estimate the numerical values to apply to each variable.  The resulting formula is:

WinFactor = 0.149 HomeCountry + 0.002 HomeContinent + 0.229 AvgGoalsScored – 0.236 AvgGoalsAllowed – 0.116 ExtraTimeIndicator + 0.131 log(DaysOfRest)

WinFactor can be calculated for each of the two teams in the match and the one with the higher total is the one more likely to win.  The variables on the right-hand side of the equation are defined as follows:

HomeCountry:  1 if the team is the host country, 0 otherwise

 

HomeContinent:  1 if the team is from the same continent as the host, 0 otherwise

 

AvgGoalsScored:  This is the average number of goals the team has scored in prior games of that year’s World Cup.  As a way to mitigate any distortions caused by blow-outs against weak opponents, any game where the team scores more that 4 goals counts each goal beyond 4 as only half when the average is calculated.  For example, in Germany’s 8-0 shellacking of Saudi Arabia in 2002, they are credited with only 6.

 

AvgGoalsAllowed:  Same as above, but with goals conceded

 

ExtraTimeIndicator:  1 if the team’s previous game was settled in overtime or by penalty shootout, 0 otherwise

 

DaysOfRest:  For example, if the team’s previous match was played on the 21^st of June and the current game is being played on the 25^th, this would be 5 days of rest.  Note that a natural log is taken.  This transformation recognizes that the longer the rest is, the less important each additional day is for improving performance.  For those without fancy calculators, the natural logs over the relevant range are:  log(3) = 1.099, log(4) = 1.386, log(5) = 1.609, log(6) = 1.792, log(7) = 1.946, log(8) = 2.079.

Applying the Formula

When all the variables are determined and the multiplications performed, this formula has correctly called the winner in 68% of the games in the sample.  It’s certainly not perfect, but no statistical model can be.  It cannot hope to know about Spain’s unfortunate tendency to collapse in later rounds, or how returning stars can reverse trends, or how the soccer Gods feel about a particular side on a particular day.  What it can do, though, is offer an objective and calculable forecast of match results.

For those interested in seeing how this year’s final shapes up, here is what plugging and chugging yields.

Italy’s WinFactor = 0.149 * 0 + 0.002 * 1 + 0.229 * 1.83 – 0.236 * 0.17 – 0.116 * 1 + 0.131 * 1.609 = 0.474

 

France’s WinFactor = 0.149 * 0 + 0.002 * 1 + 0.229 * 1.0 – 0.236 * 0.33 – 0.116 * 0 + 0.131 * 1.386 = 0.333

A slight edge to Italy, it seems.  The calculator says one thing, but Zidane and company may disagree.  I’d be disappointed if they didn’t.

[Submitted by Dr. Statto]

Oh, the joys of casual empiricism.

It’s quite tempting to look at the football interest that’s percolating around my own circle and extrapolate it to the country at large.  And the soccersphere!  Who knew?  I should have guessed that the cyberworld would be a utopia for soccer fans suffering from a US media-imposed inferiority complex.  I really had no idea that there was so much fine & insightful soccer writing going on right here in the USA. 

A clear-eyed look at some cold hard data is in order.  Is there any concrete evidence regarding the fortunes of our beloved sport in America?  According to a Wall Street Journal article of June 30, the “average number of US viewers” is up 93%.  That number, my friends, does not include Univision.  And better yet, this comparison is being made vis-à-vis the 1998 World Cup in France so there’s no distortion in the numbers because the Korean & Japanese viewing times were so unfriendly. 

Equally gratifying was a June 13 piece, also in the WSJ, about the growing number of American employees trying to watch the World Cup during work hours.  There were lots of other articles—28 in all—in the Journal for June 2006.

Something is there all right, but what?  I suppose that we’ll have to wait for the final ratings before we can draw any conclusions about how representative we are (or not, more likely) of the population overall. 

What inspired this entry was the pure pleasure to be had from observing The Girl and her cronies throughout this tournament.  Her longtime soulmate, who I will refer to as The Persian Princess, has been a devoted follower of the events in Germany.  Both she and The Girl were tearful after Germany went down to Italy.  They managed to avoid any ill will with their other friends as they watched yesterday’s match, but just barely.  I’ve written about one of those friends before—she supports the Italian side and is an ardent admirer of Luca Toni.  Yet another friend hardly heard a word we were saying when he watched Brazil’s first game with us, as his eyes never wandered from the screen.  How long ago that seems now! 

Here’s a question:  How do we get World Cup junkies to buy a ticket to a Major League Soccer game?  Any thoughts?

P.S., How cool was it to hear Thierry Henry singing La Marseillaise—“marchons, marchons”—loud and clear before the Portugal game just now? 

Even cooler:  to witness Real Madrid teammates Zidane & Figo swap shirts after the match.