History, politics, people of Oly WA

Category: meta sports (Page 2 of 5)

What should Evergreen do with its athletic program?

Thanks to @downwithpants for the conversation to kick this off.

Dave Weber’s seat was barely cold before his successor, Sarah Works is also heading out the door.

Weber left after eight years, because when push came to shove, the vision above him wasn’t the same as his vision for the program:

“It came to a point where my boss’ vision wasn’t mine,” Weber said.
There is a push toward recreation sports, intramural sports and outdoor recreation at Evergreen. Yet there are no regrets, just differences of opinion.

“We had good support in the sense that most faculty and staff want the teams to do well,” Weber said. “But when it came to stepping to the forefront and truly advocating for a more prominent role for our department, most of that does come from within the athletics and rec staff.”

Weber’s resignation and Works appointment and eventual resignation seems to indicate a flux in terms of what athletics at Evergreen are supposed to be. I remember growing up, when there were no varsity sports at Evergreen. My uncle played for the Geoducks soccer team, but at that point was a glorified club team playing locally.

Bounce that against the Quincy Wilder led Geoducks, packing the gym seemingly every night. If Evergreen wasn’t a good place for competitive intercollegiate athletics, why did it seem that that team (plus any other successful Geoduck team) was popular at the school?

The tin-pot band (anyone remember that?) made up of male 19 year old students came to the basketball games back then because the team was good and fun to watch.

Even though (we know the old tale of why the Geoduck was chosen) Evergreen was founded as a school that would never embrace big time college athletics, playing in the NAIA seems to be a way to a nice middle territory between Seattle University-esque small college striving and just not trying at all.

Weber did a great job for years towing this middle ground between “Undefeated since 1967” attitude and trading in being a college for being a sports franchise. I don’t think the Geoducks will ever sell out the way some schools have, but there is something to be said for putting some effort into it.

Another note: There is another model out there, just not one that many have used. The BYU Mens soccer team is essentially a club team and does not participate at the collegiate level. But, they’ve found a way to still participate at a higher level:

Paralleling their efforts to increase the level of competition , Brigham Young University Soccer left the Collegiate Club division of soccer, and purchased a Premier Development League franchise, where they began play in May of 2003. Part of the United Soccer Leagues, this league provides the year round competition necessary to develop individual and team skills that in hand will better prepare them for success in their international travels. We are the only University sponsored soccer program to ever purchase a franchise and that competes at a level considered higher than NCAA soccer in the pyramid of U.S. soccer development.

Is there some future in that model for Evergreen? Creating a side non-profit organization that receives grants from the school to offer athletic opportunities for students. But, can be separate from the school and be able to raise its own funds as well. And, by looking for opportunities to compete at a high level in non-college venues (PDL, WCCL or IBL), it could still play at a high level.

And, just another thing: Don’t you think an institution with its own blog farm could put up a simple RSS feed for its athletic department?

Comment to usopencup.com (citizen media and the USOC)

My thoughts to here:

I would like the new website to include opportunities for fans around the country to be able to submit their own stories, game coverage, pictures and movies.

This could include a “diary” system that is available through Drupal, Scoop, or a similar content management system. Also, services like Flickr and Youtube include features in which users can organically group pictures and videos together.

I think its vital that grassroots fans have a way to promote and cover the tournament.

By the way, you guys are already doing a great jobs, thanks!

5 reasons why MLS PDX is a much better idea than MLB PDX

I was an enemy of Portland getting a major league baseball team from way back (even before this). But, them getting a MLS team is a much better idea. I hope they get one, at least so we can kick their asses around another whole level of soccer.

1. Know your town. For awhile there, Portland was a Single A affiliate to the Rockies. The Portland Rockies. Single A. Didn’t draw well as memory serves.

Even though the Beavers have been back in recent years, Portland has a much better track record of soccer town than a baseball town.

2. Know your league. For as much as I’d like to play up the significance of MLS, it is still very much an emerging league. So, while the NFL and MLB are safely ensconced in the economics of regional monopolies, MLS teams are much better served by building up regional rivalries.

Very few Portland soccer fans would travel up to Seattle to deliberately root for the Sounders, so the only way for the league to capitalize on soccer fans in Oregon is to put a team there.

3. Know your t.v. contract. MLB=regional cable, such as Fox Sports Northwest. MLS=local broadcast affiliate, like King 5/Kong 16. No cross-over into the Portland t.v. market.

4. Know your town #2. Almost unspeakable truth that Portland is different than saaaaaaay Cincinnati, right? I’m just saying that culturally, Portland is more a soccer town than a baseball town. See chapter 10 in How Soccer Explains the World.

5. Know your ass kicking. Come on Portland, come and get it. You know you miss us. You know you want to lose to us again in league.

Come on…

Want college football playoffs? Don’t watch bowl games

I skipped the National “Championship” Bowl last night in favor of a recorded FA Cup 3rd Round game and UW beating Stanford. Mostly because I didn’t watch any bowl games this year, not wanting to encourage the entire system.

The only bowl game I even remotely tried to watch was the Rose Bowl, it has too many emotional ties for me to completely ignore it. But, if they got rid of it for a playoff system, I’d be ok with that.

Its weird to me that a ten year old article from World Net Daily would express my feelings so well on this topic:

If the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) was supposed to make college football fans drop their demands for a national championship playoff, it is a complete and utter failure. If the BCS was supposed to bring meaning to the post season bowl games, it is a complete and utter failure. In fact, the only thing that the BCS has done is drive the last nail in the coffin of the old bowl system.

College football is the most exciting team sport in America. No other sport fills stadiums with more than 100,000 fans at a time, week in and week out. No other sport can match the excitement of last week’s UCLA-Miami or Kansas State-Texas A&M games.

However, college football is seriously ill and those who are responsible for its health have taken leave of their senses. They have sacrificed everything that makes college football wonderful at the altar of egocentric coaches and advertisers who want to waste their money for meaningless bowls.

Re: Mariners vs. Sounders

I’m a bit late reflecting on this as requested, but better late than never.

I’m not 100 percent sure of the impacts the Sounders FC is going to have on the Mariners in terms of fan support or health of either franchise. But, if there ever was an opportunity to start a new franchise in Seattle (or reintroduce an old one) now is the time.

I’ve written a lot in the past how
a nearby MLB team would hurt the Mariners, mostly because the Mariners t.v. contract (plus really good local ratings) make them a money-making team. If you carve off a good chunk of that t.v. market, then the Mariners make less. Two mediocre baseball teams instead of one good one. Three years later, not even one good one.

I’m not sure if the same argument applies to a soccer team vs. a baseball team though.

I’m not even sure if an MLS team in Portland would even threaten the Sounders market, but rather since soccer is relatively new to many markets, a close rival would probably do more to increase interest.

Another reason isn’t necessarily a reason, but a sort of sign post. If baseball executives aren’t worried about a nearby MLS franchise, why should fans be? The owners of the Oakland Athetics are so not worried about a soccer team with a congruent schedule that they bought one. The New York Mets’ owners were also said to be interested in a summer soccer team, despite the crowded New York sports market.

In a historic note that doesn’t really address the question, baseball’s connection with soccer goes way back. In the early days of professional North American soccer (I mean the early days, not the 1960s, but the 1920s) baseball owners saw soccer as a way to extend the profitability of their stadiums. By playing soccer during the baseball off-season (when North American soccer still adhered to the world soccer calendar), they could make money year round. (see page 55)

Ever hear of Fall River FC or Bethlaham Steel? That effort did not work out.

Just a last few thoughts on schedules. Soccer in North America doesn’t exactly have the same schedule as baseball right now and might not in the future in a much larger sense. While the MLS and MLB schedules overlap, MLS teams play in several other competitions. These include the US Open Cup (still summer), Superliga (summer again, my argument is losing steam) and the CONCACAF Champions League (summer to spring, certainly not baseball type schedule).

There is also talk of MLS going to a two competition league system sometime in the future. This system is popular in our hemisphere and would allow the continuation of a playoff system and allow a summer break.

Re: Sonics fans can turn south

NEVER!

Its bad enough that the Olympian carries the Jailblazers in their daily game calendar now.


If all I cared about was the geographic proximity of a major league sports team when there wasn’t one in that league nearer, I’d be a Canucks fan too. And, why support a league that would take away the Sonics in the first place?

5 Thoughts on “Project Franchise”

The so far succesful MyFC experiment in England is spawning other experiments, most recently Project Franchise (project runway?).

Other than a column in the NY Times, I can’t really find anything else about this group:

Enter Joe Scura, the mind behind Project Franchise, a group with a mission to buy a sports team and let the fans vote on every decision.

Yes, every decision. Next time Fox wants to advertise its hilarious new cop-and-dog buddy flick behind home plate, it may have to poll the fans.

“Something like this has been a long time coming, but the Internet has finally made it feasible,” Scura said. “Fans are more than just piggy banks/hot dog receptacles.”

For $5, fans can buy a vote and act as the collective general manager, deciding on everything from personnel to team colors.

1. Good idea not to ask for money up front. That wouldn’t have gone anywhere.

2. Pick a sport, but you’ll probably end up with baseball. Or basketball, but I hope baseball. See #4

3. No top level pro league will allow this to happen to one of their teams. Not because they’re too smart, but because they’re not smart at all. Mark Cuban won’t be able to buy the Cubs, the San Diego Padres couldn’t be given to the people of San Diego and the pro-sports cartel (really, I’m not throwing that term around) won’t let a group of thousands of anyones buy a team.

4. Think indy league baseball or the CBA. Both have a bit of a reputation and track-record. Both are kind of feeder leagues for the top levels (so you know there is talent there somewhere), but both are also independent of the controls of the top level leagues. So, they just might go for something like this. A CBA franchise in Seattle might be nice. I hear we have an arena available soon.

EDIT: Looks like they’re on this track:

We aren’t completely insane. While we’d love to raise enough money to purchase a team from the NFL, NBA, MLB, MLS, or NHL, we realize that this is a bit of a stretch. Realistically we are trying to acquire (at least a majority stake) in a minor league or semi-pro sports team (Independent Baseball, NBADL, ABA, AHL or Arena Football). These leagues offer flexibility that the big leagues don’t, and give the fans the ability to get involved for a fraction of what we already spend on fantasy football or video games. We have already had productive discussions with some of these leagues and they have been very receptive of our approach.

5. “Project Franchise” might be a nice name, but it is also ironic. See #3 again, but it refers to the cartel-like economic system that North American sports leagues operate under. Rather than being “clubs” in a league, they are “franchises” in an almost single entity. This is the system that gives the league (other owners) so much say in terms of who can actually own a franchise, making it impossible for Project Franchise to own an NBA/NHL/MLB/NFL property.

Lou Guzzo goes a bit too commie with Sonics

Lou Guzzo:

They are joined by two other Democrats, Senators Maria Cantwell and Senator Patty Murray, who are also very critical of the Sonics “robbery” but are doing nothing about the N.B.A. owners’ action. If they were really concerned, they would immediately introduce legislation in Congress to take away the owners’ sports dictatorships and order that all pro-sports franchises should belong to the cities and their sports fans, whose dollars at the turnstiles make pro sports possible.

And…

With that kind of a law, only the voters and sports fans of cities could determine whether a basketball, football, baseball, hockey, or any other franchise could leave town. Every major city in the U.S. should have the right to own franchises in all pro sports and to force them to leave if they wished.

Under such a law, the cities would not own nor operate the teams. That would be done by eligible owners or organizations, and the city governments should have no say in the day-to-day operations of the teams. Doesn’t that make a lot more sense than the present stupid tugs of war the pro leagues now condone?

What would be much easier and much less radical proposal would be to simply allow non-profit or fan-owned teams. There is only one top level professional team in the United States that could be considered “fan owned.”

Here’s a quick rundown of what’s wrong with our current organization of pro-sports:

First, overturn the major leagues’ prohibition on fan ownership. This will likely require Congressional action. Representative Earl Blumenauer’s (D-Oregon) Give Fans a Chance Act (HR 590) would accomplish this goal. The bill would forbid any of the professional leagues from prohibiting community ownership, and would withdraw the leagues’ antitrust privileges if they did so. It also requires teams to give their communities 180 days notice of proposed relocation, during which time the community can put together an offer to retain the franchise. Lastly, it requires that leagues consider factors such as fan loyalty and whether the community is opposed to the move before approving relocation.

So, an effort like Share Liverpool or A.F.C. Wimbledon could ever happen.

What is a Sounder? I am a Sounder. We are Sounders

I was going to make this point in this post, but I decided to start a new one because I think this point stands on its own.

There are plenty of actual definitions of “sounder,” but none that actually make sense for the name of a professional sports franchise. Over at the Goal Seattle Museum, a story from 1974 asks the question “what is a Sounder?” without actually answering it.

So, lacking a better definition, and using as the image of the franchise a symbol that is more geographic than anything else, a Sounder is someone from Puget Sound.

What is a Sounder? I’m a Sounder. We are Sounders.

Space Needle as image (the post 90s sports franchise in Seattle)

Maybe its fitting that at a time when we’re bidding a long goodbye to the Sonics, a team that by name is tied to our industrial Boeing past, we’re also saying hello to the new Seattle Sounders FC, which use the Space Needle as their central totem.

The Sonics were like the Detroit Pistons (car industry) or the Green Bay Packer (meat packing), they referred back to a past that was relevant when the team was named. Not so much relevant now. Since the Sonics, we’ve had the Mariners (sailors, we still have sailors, don’t we?) and Seahawks (an imaginary sea bird).

While the Sounder are the second oldest surviving name in Seattle pro-sports history (Mariners and Seahawks came after the 1974 original Sounders), its a name vague enough to stand rebranding. And, it was rebranded in a very interesting, post-Microsoft, 1990s Seattle way.

Read this section of Selling Seattle for my back up. If you are marketing Seattle, and you need a quick imagery reference to tell people that you’re in Seattle, you use the Needle. You don’t use Mt. Rainier (not enough people know that mountain from any other mountain) and you don’t use ferries or just a shot of the Sound. Might was well be UP Michigan.

So, as the Needle is an image of Seattle, the nature of the team, its identity is sort of open for definition. What is a Sounder, anyway?

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2025 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

×