Happy Thanksgiving!

To everyone back home in Canada, Happy Thanksgiving! Please save some stuffing for me...

As seems to be becoming a regular occurrence, all has been quiet on the blog front of late. There have been a few things I've been tempted to post, a few stories/opinions/details about the radio silence that I considered voicing, but I elected against it. Work on my ambushing research, as well as a number of concerns outside of work and research and the like, have kept me away from BSM a bit longer than I would have liked, and certainly longer than I had planned. But, it's time to move forward.

For anyone who knows me or follows the blog, it will likely come as little surprise that I have two great loves in my life: hockey, and football (or soccer for my turkey-eating friends and family). This past week may well prove to have been a fantastic week on both accounts, though to what extent remains to be argued in a British courtroom this week. As well as stepping back out onto the ice and beginning the new season finally on Monday and Tuesday, it was announced this week that New England Sports Ventures, the owners of the Boston Red Sox and a number of other top sports properties state-side, has agreed a sale for my beloved Liverpool FC, pending a legal battle between the club's current beleaguered owners and the LFC board.

Should the sale go through, and court find in favour of the board, NESV's arrival at Anfield has been suggested as ushering in a new way of thinking into Liverpool's football operations, and extending the current growth of statistics and performance measures currently being used at clubs like Arsenal. NESV, who turned the Red Sox's fortunes by employing one of the founding fathers of sabremetrics in baseball, and a GM who studied under Moneyball's biggest proponent, Billy Beane, may well attempt to employ the same measures and metrics into Liverpool's football operations, it has been suggested, following the template which brought the Red Sox their first World Series' since the Curse of the Bambino.

Whilst in baseball, the use of metrics and moneyball-style performance tracking and measurement has become increasingly common, in other sports it remains a growing trend, but an interesting one. How it will impact and translate to a sport such as football, which is much more free-flowing and dynamic than more statistics-friendly sports like baseball remains to be investigated in earnest, but if the use of metrics in hockey are any indication, there would appear to be some value in its application. Over at Kukla's Korner (mandatory reading for any self-respecting hockey fan), the use of sabremetrics in hockey has been employed and studied increasingly over the past year, providing some suggestion of the value it may offer football clubs.

That said, dynamic sports such as football and hockey remain particularly difficult to measure in statistics alone. Greater exploration of the applicability and nature of metrics in sports such as hockey I think would be extremely useful, and I look forward it. Whilst we can measure a goalie's save percentage, and even adjust the percentage for a number of factors which may prove more telling in evaluating performance, can we or will we also adjust for the competition? For the players in front of the goalie? For the difficulty of shots? For the situation/context of shots and saves? All of this is possible, and how much it is in use already I don't know, but I think the deeper we look into performance measures in this way, and the better we explore and understand WHY metrics are used, and HOW, the more we may understand just how valuable NESV's secret weapon may be in restoring Liverpool to past glories.

Any Ideas?

Is it possible to replicate football fan atmosphere from league or European matches to England national team games? Will Wembley ever enjoy the same consistent, vibrant, exciting environment around and at matches as Liverpool do at Anfield? Or United at Old Trafford? Or Newcastle at St. James' Park?

The thought occurred following BSM's most recent leg of the world tour, which saw the (brief) return to England, and matches at both Wembley and Anfield in the span of one week. Having seen England comfortably beat Belarus in front of a loud, eagerly participative crowd, followed by a disappointing Liverpool getting booed off the pitch following an added-time loss to Lyon, the question of fan atmosphere seems an important one to restoring Wembley's mystique and importance in the England football fan's heart.

Despite Liverpool's loss, and generally lackluster performance, the difference between the two venues is undeniable: while Wembley is a massive, open, imposing stadium which awes fans and players alike for its imposing size and dominance on the North London skyline, the atmosphere inside the stadium pales in comparison to the country's smaller, more intimate, more established league stadia. So what can be done to translate what many see as a defining characteristic of English football, the singing, cheering, deeply passionate fans, to the national stage?

Would converting the home end into the equivalent of a season ticket holders end for the most involved England fans, ala Liverpool's Kop stand, or United's Stretford End, make for a greater aura at England games? Is there some way to balance the lottery system used for England match tickets with building a more consistent, regular fanbase?

Could more be done to stimulate fan interest and excitement through the sign boarding and multi-media features within the stadium? Would a greater drive on behalf of the in-stadium entertainment crews make any difference in coaxing greater response?

Could sponsors do more to activate their partnerships with the FA and focus on making Wembley a more exciting, imposing venue? Could Nationwide take a page out of the old Winnipeg Jet's playbook and give away white England-branded t-shirts to every fan in the stadium to create a white-wash effect in the stadium?

What impact do the cheerleaders have on fan atmosphere at NFL matches? The NFL's annual appearance at Wembley rarely seems lacking for excitement and atmosphere, would England fans respond to such tactics?

The answers to most of these are almost certainly "no", or at the very least, "not without some serious negotiations/compromises/changes"... but the question remains the same, and we're certainly not the only ones asking it: what can The FA do to create a better fan experience at Wembley?

10 Seconds or Less...

An interesting entry from Steven D. Levitt of Freakonomics fame, over at the bestselling book's blog (here). Levitt examines the progression and evolution of the 100 metre men's sprint, noting the relatively slow rate of improvement over the past 40+ years.

As Levitt notes:

Last week, the sprinter Usain Bolt ran 100 meters in 9.58 seconds, shattering the existing world record. For his feat, Bolt may just be named athlete of the year.

In some ways, what is more remarkable than Bolt’s feat is how slow the improvement has been in the 100-meter dash.

Back in 1968, Jim Hines became the first person to break the 10-second barrier, finishing the race in 9.95 seconds. In 1991, Carl Lewis got the world record down to 9.86 seconds. In 1999, Maurice Green ran 9.79 seconds. Asafa Powell ran 9.72 in 2008.

Thus, between 1968 and today, the world record time had improved by 3.7 percent, or less than 0.1 percent per year.

This is in spite of the fact that there have surely been technological advances in tracks and shoes, as well as expanding knowledge of weight training and fitness. The world’s population has increased substantially, as have nutrition levels, especially in developing countries.

The biggest puzzle to me is not how remarkable Usain Bolt is, but rather why it’s been so hard to get people to sprint faster.

Given the controversy in swimming and the technological advances "undermining" the integrity of the sport, it's surprising how slowly sprinting has developed by comparison. Advances in footwear, running surfaces, sportswear, training practices and diets haven't created the same progression as in other sports, making Bolt's accomplishments that much more incredible.

Is Bolt testing human potential? Or merely providing a catalyst for further improvement and an indication of things to come?

The commercialization of the counter-culture?

I heard an interesting interview this weekend with skateboarder Ryan Sheckler from the X-Games, talking about the attention and criticism some action sports athletes have been getting from the media, fans, and extreme sports purists over sponsorship money and media attention, calling into question the motives and interests of the athletes.

Now this morning, I come across two videos worth checking out...

Here

and

Here

We're currently witnessing the rapid expansion and commercialization of one of the fastest growing areas of sport today, going against many of its early ideals and virtues dating back to the original rise of skateboarding in California.

By and large, I think this progression has been handled exceptionally well; the move from extreme, niche sports, towards more popular, mainstream, action sports has been an important one, and given the professionalism with which events like the X-Games are currently run, and the globalized attention and interest, such advancements were inevitable.

What interests me, however, will be the next step for sports such as motocross and skateboarding and BMX. Action sports have filled a gap in the market, and met consumer demand by growing, as well as through innovation and creativity. But are these sports and events prepared to take on the more established professional sports? Do they need to? For teenagers coming up today, the X-Games are as much a part of their sporting history as the 'big four' pro sports leagues in North America. This is the first generation with such consciousness of these events, and the ramifications should be worth following...

How Far is Too Far?

To what extent are we willing to accept technological advancements and innovation in sport? With how quickly materials, technologies, training regimes and our understanding of dietary requirements have evolved in recent years, are we beginning to reach the limit of our comfort level? How far is too far?

This question is raised largely due to the recent decision by swimming's governing body, FINA, to restrict the use of advanced swimsuits by competitors and regulate the allowable suits, following the astonishing accomplishments of swimmers at last summer's Olympic Games, and in competitions since. Speedo, the leader in research and development for racing suits for swimmers, has understandably come out in opposition to the new regulations, while many of the world's top swimmers now face the tall task of readjusting to new suits, and new training requirements to match the expectations set in Beijing.

The important debate, however, is not whether FINA is right and justified in its actions, but rather at what point do governing bodies and organizers need to step in to protect the integrity of our games, the history and traditions of our sports, or in some cases, the safety of our athletes.

Major League Baseball has historically resisted calls for implementing replay technology and football-style challenges in order to help (and likely supplement) umpires; despite research into its effectiveness, and a growing list of incidents pointing to its potential uses, football leagues such as the English Premier League have refused to use goal-line technology similar to tennis' Hawk-Eye cameras. Technology has even been developed and tested to aid referees in judging off-side calls in football - given how often FIFA shifts interpretations of the law, would such technology really harm the integrity of the game?

Ultimately, I don't think there's a concrete answer to this debate, nor do I think the FINA decision will be the last of its kind in the coming years. However, I do think those responsible for sport need to begin to take stock of the advancements and benefits of such innovation, as well as account for the potential limitations and dangers. Following the record breaking feats of swimmers in Beijing, and the massive publicity push behind Michael Phelps' incredible gold medal haul, swimming may never have been more popular and followed as it was last summer. Is slowing the competitors down and placing greater limitations on what they wear really the best thing for the sport? Is protecting the standing world records and balancing competition for those unable to afford top of the line Speedos the right path? Evidently FINA believe so, but I'm not so sure...

Back To Form...

I don't want this to become a Red Bull-centric blog in any way, but the brand is easily one of the boldest, loudest, and most interesting sport marketers going today... And this week they gave us a reminder why.

In the early hours of July 13th, Red Bull-sponsored Freestyle Motocross star Robbie Maddison jumped London's famed Tower Bridge, the latest in a growing list of stunts and amazing jumps Maddison has attempted over the past couple of years. With Red Bull logos covering the bridge, as well as the ramp and landing, and photographers and cameramen on hand documenting the attempt from all angles, Maddison flew an estimated 22 metres, landing a backflip across the Thames, without any trial runs.

The true genius behind Red Bull's marketing, though, is in its subtlety. By staging the attempt at 2:55am, Red Bull both ensured logistically the jump was easier to plan, but also made it a more low-key, less grandiose event than it could otherwise have been. Stories appearing on ESPN, blogs, the UK's Channel Five television network, and highlights of the jump being uploaded on Youtube, have ensured a viral spread of the accomplishment, and as such, the brand. Whereas the weekend's announced extension of Red Bull's sponsorship of UK Athletics may have raised concerns over the future of the brand, and its identity, staging virally-driven, one-off guerrilla marketing stunts such as this only serve to re-affirm the strengths and roots of Red Bull's brand identity, something other brands could learn from.

More on the story here, from ESPN

And check out the jump and Maddison's thoughts here, care of Red Bull themselves