What was so outrageous about Garber’s press conference?
Jay Bell
It has been a few days since Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber’s now infamous teleconference in response to US men’s national team manager Jürgen Klinsmann’s criticisms of top American players choosing to play in MLS. The teleconference opened up a litany of issues and topics to scrutinize over in regards to the national team and the league. Garber’s comments were met with a largely negative backlash from sections of the American soccer community and I am still struggling to figure out why.
I don’t get it. The commissioner of a professional sports league came to the defense of his league, its owners and their players. He was emotional, honest and open. Then he was condemned.
Klinsmann chose to speak to the media last Monday about how he felt MLS was detrimental to the form and progress of US Soccer’s best players. He singled out stars Michael Bradley and Clint Dempsey who returned to MLS for big-money offers. Garber probably knew what he wanted to say by Tuesday afternoon, but waited until Wednesday after Klinsmann’s experimental lineup drew 1-1 with Honduras.
One word I saw tossed around was “petty.” Reporters and Twitter users said the commissioner came off as petty in his response. I have the same questions now as I did on Wednesday.
He came off as petty to who?
And what negative impact does it have?
Did ESPN or Fox Sports report the next morning that, “Petty MLS cries about Klinsmann’s comments?” Did those in the international soccer community that have thumbed their nose up at US Soccer for 20 years think any less of MLS the next day? What about the German players, media and fans that got tired of Klinsmann’s antics six years ago? Do you think any of the league’s major sponsors felt worse about their investment in MLS after the commissioner took a strong public stance against comments made against the league?
No. What you got was a bunch of snarky comments on Twitter and an imbecilic article from Deadspin with the cultured title, “MLS Commissioner Has Some Dumb Shit To Say About Jurgen Klinsmann.” (Please do not go look for it. Deadspin’s American soccer coverage has devolved into 100% click bait with intentionally inflammatory content, but I digress…)
The fact is Garber’s response had no downside. Be serious: did anyone Sunday night sit down and say: “Hey, I was going to watch Sounders-Galaxy for the Supporters Shield in Landon’s last home game but now that Don Garber lashed out, I’m just not.” No. And this proves the larger point: anyone that believed it was “petty” will still cover the league, watch the matches, and/or purchase the same amount of tickets and merchandise as they always have. It was a PR strike and Garber accomplished exactly what he wanted.
Still, some didn’t feel that way. Garber was accused of “missing the point” of Klinsmann’s comments, as if this was just a philosophical debate betwixt two of the power figures in American soccer. That criticism should be levied if Garber makes the same comments in a room behind closed doors with no cameras or media present. This was a planned public response. Garber didn’t have to make inarguable points. His response needed to be loud and austere. Again, Garber accomplished exactly what he wanted.
As far as the base response to the teleconference, my best theory is a communal opinion emerged that was derived from a mob mentality driven by social media. Fans and reporters were amazed and excited as the teleconference began. Garber spoke about being frustrated by Klinsmann’s comments. The more open and emotional Garber became, the more he was criticized. What?
People, especially in media, tend to decry rehearsed responses by public figures. We want famous people to “let us in.” Last week’s teleconference wasn’t led by just an employee of MLS. We heard from Don Garber. We heard his feelings and his opinions expressed in a very Landon-Donovan-honest way. Then we criticized him for it, similarly to how we blast Donovan. I don’t get it.
Klinsmann criticizes the MLS players, but then leaves players who “accept the challenge in Europe” home.
CONTRADICTION
Klinsmann’s assessments on player performances and club situations are unfailingly incongruent and contentious. No one is ever playing enough or well enough. In the case of MLS players, Klinsmann levies the laziest criticism hailed by Euro-snobs. He grossly oversimplifies “Europe” as one level of preparation that is better than MLS.
His tone is so matter of fact you want to believe that a prospect playing for the Chicago Fire or San Jose Earthquakes is worse than competing for a spot for some random team in Poland. Mike Magee would disagree. Klinsmann wouldn’t care what Magee says, but Chris Wondolowski would disagree too. At this point, Terence Boyd might disagree too.
Poor Boyd. He committed to the US too soon. If he had held out for a conditional commitment, maybe he would have been in Brazil and the US would have had a Plan B when Jozy Altidore got inured.
Why is MLS good enough for Jermaine Jones, age 32, but not Clint Dempsey, age 31? If MLS isn’t detrimental, why did a Wondolowski, an MLS-lifer, in average form go to Brazil over a very in-form Boyd? Why did Sacha Kljestan, a Champions league player in Belgium, watch Brad Davis, a MLS lifer, on his couch this summer?
Klinsmann continues to call on (some of) his best players to test themselves in “Europe.” He does so after repeatedly calling in Bradley, Dempsey, Kyle Beckerman, Matt Besler, Brad Evans and Omar Gonzalez over the likes of Tim Ream, Eric Lichaj, Jonathan Spector, Sacha Kljestan and Oguchi Onyewu. Either call in other guys or accept their current status. Want to criticize MLS? Fine. Call in the players from the English Championship.
Gooch has followed Klinsmann’s advice in search of playing time in Europe for the past five years. Where are his caps? At least it has worked out for Chandler’s national team prospects. He’s been fairly good at right back and left back for the US.
It’s like calling up Brek Shea when he’s riding the bench for whatever current team in England and then criticizing him for not being game-sharp. Wait, we do that too don’t we?
How about a pretty direct comparison? Who is closer to earning a callup to the national team, Luis Robles or David Yelldell? We’ll wait here while some of you go Google David Yelldell. Go ahead, this page will still be here when you come back.
How have European transfers worked out for Shea and Juan Agudelo?
But sure, let’s go back 5 or 13 years and criticize Donovan for choosing MLS.
Bob Bradley had a pretty clear system. He called in guys who played in all levels in Europe, from the EPL to the Championship to Norway to Serie B. MLS players would get their chances in the January camp and other domestic games, but Bradley was willing to give anyone a chance who tried to play in Europe.
The longer that Klinsmann complains about his best guys being in MLS without anything resembling some sort of plan or pattern for the players to follow, the more his complaints just sound like nonsense.
Win club player of the year twice in England- hasn’t done shit.
KLINSMANN’S MOTIVATIONAL METHODS
Klinsmann has become pretty well known for his motivational “methods.” I think I could have just as easily placed “madness” there and it would have made just as much sense.
Klinsmann seems to think that “poking the bear” is enough to invoke change. He thinks that insulting someone in the media or pointing out their deficiencies is enough to spark positive adjustments. The problem is Klinsmann never stops there. Not only does he poke the bear, he then calls it stupid and makes funny faces at it. Klinsmann’s motivational tactics could easily be one of the sketches used for Jack Link’s Beef Jerky’s “Messin’ with Sasquatch” ads.
The comments about Bradley and Dempsey were not the first shots Klinsmann has taken at MLS. The recent back-and-forth had been a one-sided affair as Klinsmann ignored the form of players in MLS, cut Donovan from the World Cup roster, disagreeing with the basic structure of MLS before questioning Donovan’s decisions throughout his entire career.
He couldn’t even resist taking digs at Donovan before the guy’s farewell match. Garber was criticized for bringing up Donovan’s exclusion from the World Cup roster. Klinsmann was bringing up mess from 6-10 years ago. He caps those kinds of statements off with, “just being honest.” How many polite, honest statements precede that phrase? I find that is usually used to try to downplay the dickish nature of whatever was just said, a less obvious “with all due respect.”
As a reporter, it is personally annoying for me to watch, because we see it far too often in journalism these days. We see public figures asked questions specifically for their response, not for the content of their response. Klinsmann likes to poke people just to see how they react. That’s not motivational, that’s annoying and you could feel the irritation oozing out of Michael Bradley’s comments to MLSSoccer.com last week.
“My record when I’ve played for the national team and my commitment and contribution is there for anybody to look at and take from it what they want,” Bradley said. “I’ve certainly had moments in my career where people have challenged me, said that I’ve not been good enough, said that I’ll never be good enough. But not only has that never stopped me, it continues to motivate me and fuel me even more.”
That is a response by a future captain of the national team to his own coach, not an opponent or bitter ex-manager. I don’t see how that can be considered productive.
Jurgen offers criticisms too often without solutions.
DISHONESTY
I was pretty shocked and disappointed to read some stories by reporters last week that said Klinsmann’s antagonistic approach in the US Soccer establishment was a positive thing. I could understand that opinion coming from the new legion of Klinsmann fanboys who don’t know anything about US Soccer before 2011, but we have seen such rapid progression in a short amount of time.
Fans praised Klinsmann’s support for promotion and relegation, as well as his zealous encouragement for American players to play in Europe. They applaud him for making crazy statements that could theoretically spark some kind of progress. That’s like praising me for asking out all of the Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders. Of course they should marry me because I’m a great guy, but that ignores the real world circumstances that prevent it from happening, such as me being a short, overweight newspaper reporter from Arkansas. Real world circumstances prevent promotion/relegation. And my tactics aren’t likely to get me a cheerleader girlfriend in the end either.
If Klinsmann wants to build up American soccer, why not publicly address issues that can actually help matters and can be improved now? I’m waiting for Klinsmann to question the lack of transparency in MLS. We shouldn’t need a 30 minute podcast to figure out allocation rules.
Instead of playing Bradley out of place and then criticizing him for playing in Toronto – where he is also improperly deployed – then question the methods that landed him in Toronto in the first place.
Maybe he could criticize the mechanisms that paid Jermaine Jones millions of dollars after holding out for a different team and then landing with New England? Maybe, Klinsmann could offer solutions to adjust the salary and roster structures of MLS that keep guys like Jordan Morris in college or Miguel Ibarra in the NASL, you know, where they’re strategically placed to send a message to MLS when Klinsmann feels international friendlies (where he plays half the team in a different position) should take precedence over the playoff race.
Klinsmann doesn’t offer solutions. He offers criticisms. At least publicly, which is where much of the problem lies. Klinsmann always chooses to put matters out in the open instead of working on them behind closed doors. There are productive ways to question the status quo. Instead, he just talks shit. “I’m very accomplished. You’re stupid. Everything you do is stupid. Now go fix it yourself. I’m going to go over here and talk about you some more to the media.” He literally says things like Dempsey, “hasn’t made shit.”
We can’t even get the truth about whether Klinsmann and/or his son apologized to Donovan after the kid’s ignorant text message in May. I know that Donovan has always opened up to the media about the most intimate details of his life, but Klinsmann fanboys will still pledge that good ole Jurgen is telling the truth.
Believe me, “fanboys” is not a term I use lightly.
I have never referred to fans of Gregg Popovich or Nick Saban as fanboys. Those guys have won championships. Klinsmann lone accomplishments with the US are winning an off-year Gold Cup and placing first in the Hexagonal round of CONCACAF World Cup qualifying. Both of which he accomplished with the players he’s criticized for playing in the league he has criticized.
All of a sudden, Klinsmann is beyond reproach for many fans. Try to discuss Klinsmann’s roster decisions or lineup formations on Twitter. Someone will always come to his defense, often quite feverishly. Usually they’ll tell you that you don’t know anything about soccer. Maybe. But give a listen to Paul Finebaum’s show if you think Nick Saban gets anything remotely close to that kind of leash from the Alabama fan base.
Too often we get transparency confused with honesty. We always know what’s on Klinsmann’s mind. How often do we ever actually really know what the truth is?
The Klinsmann reverence would be more palatable if he had Bob’s record.
STATURE
I don’t think anyone really had an issue with the context of Klinsmann’s comments. He’s crazy. He’s not dumb. Klinsmann criticized Bradley and Dempsey for accepting big-money moves to MLS, as if money shouldn’t be a factor. Soccer is their job. They use that money to support their families. Klinsmann was wrong for criticizing them for accepting those deals and Garber was wrong to ignore the monetary factor in their decisions.
But why is Klinsmann In a position to question anything and everything without ever actually doing something about it? He’s the technical director. I get it. Direct something.
Some Twitter users felt that Klinsmann’s motivations are more pure. They claimed that he has the interest of all of US Soccer. Mathematically, Klinsmann only cares about the interests of half of US Soccer: males. He does not coach any of the youth teams.
Garber announced on Wednesday that MLS and its clubs are spending $30 million in player development programs just in 2014. So who is doing more for US Soccer?
It has actually been a somewhat painful existence as a US Soccer supporter for the past 20 years. A perpetual feeling of “almost” still lives today. The US has been eliminated by just one goal in five of the past six World Cups, including all four knockout round losses:
1994, Brazil, 1-0
2002, Germany, 1-0.
2006, Ghana, 2-1.
2010, Ghana, 2-1.
2014, Belgium, 2-1.
Klinsmann has accomplished no more than his predecessors and actually accomplished so by far worse statistical measures. And the guy he replaced beat one of history’s best teams in a tournament setting and won a World Cup group. So why is he afforded not just the opportunity, but the right to publicly criticize anything and everything without a stern response from Mr. Garber?
Jay Bell has contributed to the Yanks Are Coming in the past as well as frequently to The Shin Guardian. He writes for a newspaper in Arkansas, and tweets a great deal about soccer at @JayBellHS.