If Grant or someone else asks those "hard questions" about teams that aren't meeting everyone's expectations, people will just complain about the answers. He's there to run a league and put the best public face he can on it, not dish dirt to fans. In the end, it doesn't mean jack shit what he says to the fans on Dallas' attendance. What he (and other I/Os) say to the Hunts is the important conversation.
I see your point. In response I would just say that Garber is in a bit of a different position than the commissioners of other pro-sports leagues because of the single-entity structure. I would think the single entity structure means the league commissioner in MLS wields more power over teams than the commissioners in other leagues, which probably explains why I see far more discussion about the league commissioner among MLS fans than the fans of other pro sports leagues. Between franchise fees, SUM, etc., a lot of money streams into MLS. Could a system be developed that directs additional money to the struggling franchises for use in marketing? I don't know. As for him saying "get better or else", I agree with you that he is not going to take this tack because those I/O's are his bosses.
In fact, I'd bet that those three franchises (due to their stadium situations) actually are doing better for the bottom line than DCU and other teams. The stadium situation in DC should now be priority #1 for Garber. That's even more pressing than expansion.
Sorry, just as laughable. The website debacle is an excuse to fling crap at Garber, not a good reason to do so. He has a measure of responsibility, yes, but it hardly provides the least bit of counterbalance to his accomplishments with the league, let alone cause to label him a "moron."
Do people actually think the commissioner of MLS should be spending his time worrying about which web designer to hire? Do we think Roger Goddell or David Stern do that stuff? Hell, no. Do CEO's at big companies worry about this stuff? No, they don't. People act like Garber is sitting in his office all alone, making all of these decisions. MLS has departments of people that worry about this stuff, and they undoubtedly made the calls here. Garber's involvement was probably the fact that he sat in some meeting where a guy presented what he was going to do. Garber said......"OK, sounds good to me." He's no web designer/computer programmer. Then these guys didn't deliver what they said they were going to do. I applaud Garber for taking responsibility. But for the love of god, let's not act like this is some horrific mistake by Garber. It wasn't his mistake....other people f'ed up........and he's taking the responsibility. Good for him.
No, absoultely not. But I do expect him to at least browse through the website before he allows it to be released to the public. Every website I build the CEO's of the companies take a look at the site before it is released. It is extremely unprofessional for the head person of a company to allow something as large as a website to go public without them taking a look at it.
Do we know he didn't? Seems to me the thing just blew up once it went public......not before. I just think we're blaming Don waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much for this web thing. I read that Wahl interview and thought.......damn this guy has his sh*t together. This league would be absolutely nowhere without him. Then I come to this thread, and read nothing but criticism. It's laughable.
I have to agree with this. I am as big a "Don" fan as they come, but to say it's one master glitch that caused all of the problems, yet it's taking them two weeks to fix, seems a bit far fetched. I applaud him for basically saying the site is embarassing and begging forgiveness, but it seems too simplistic an explanation. Then again, I'm not a code monkey. So what do I know. Heh, so it's the coders fault that they didn't tell management that the deadline was impossible? I'm sure not of the guys building the website thought to complain to management. Probably never corssed their mind. Read Dilbert much?
The guy just came off a massive labor negotiation, the league is launching yet another club, two more expansion teams are on deck, new stadiums are being built, one of the flagship franchises is about to go down the pooper and it's a World Cup year -- probably the biggest marketing opportunity for the league and the sport. So, Yes, the website is of critical importance because of all the above. And they dropped a deuce on it. But there is no way that Garber is on point for that. As huge as it is, from a strictly workflow and time management perspective it is imperative that he delegates 95% of that project. What I've yet to hear is what sort of senior manager was in charge of fubar.com and what the come uppance in that realm has been. But to lay this entirely at Garber's feet is just unrealistic. He at least admits it's a massive cock-up. I've seen a lot less candid crap coming from CEOs after epic fails. So I give him credit for that. And for the first paragraph, etc.
Yep, and Don didn't really know much either. He called it "a code" which is never something someone in the know would say. He doesn't really understand what went wrong with the site and he's giving a layman's explanation as good as he can. He's just not that technical. For me it just seems as if the site wasn't ready to be launched on time but they had to do something because the league schedule was starting and they had no website. If a programmer actually got fired for this it sucks because unless he was being insubordinate or lying about his work, it can't really be blamed on one guy. And if one guy really was responsible for the technical portion of bringing the whole site together that was just mismanaged all the way from the top. Don's a great commissioner so I'm not blaming him for the site's failings. I think he just doesn't really know why the site didn't launch in it's full state on time and he's either saying what he thinks happened or what he thinks others want to hear. The many things wrong with the site can't all be attributed to one data component. There are design issues, stylesheet issues, inconsistent redirects, performance issues, and simple usability problems that can only be blamed on poor design, not a bad data connector. I've worked in the web industry for a decade and I am currently a web server admin and content management admin for a large CAD company with a community presence so I know what it takes to build a community driven site like mlssoccer is supposed to be. There's no way one guy can be blamed for a failure, be he a developer or a PM.
they did have a website (web.mlsnet.com) that they could have opted to continue (for a parallel period). They opted to throw the switch (on the new site -- that turned out to have many bugs, or one huge bug that popped up) and to cut-off use of the previous site. this was a business decision to make a full switch on a hard date, and it was a business decision designed to save money (that could have been invested in maintaining the "old site" for some parallel period or until such a time that the "new site" was truly ready). there were a lot of decisions (from the failure to continue with the old site as an official fallback during a parallel/new-url-launch period, to the apparent improper and insufficient testing of the mlssoccer.com site) that contributed to the launch and ongoing new website issues. and no, not all (or any) of those complaints should or can be laid at Garber's feet, but it is a good sign that he recognizes the problems and accepts some of the culpability.
I think he's repeating what he was told, and he doesn't know enough about how the website works (nor should he in his position) to know that what he's saying doesn't make sense.
From what's leaked out I'm starting to think this wasn't an option. It sounds like whomever was running MLSnet.com (MLB?) said that as soon as you turn your other site on we're killing MLSnet.
but web.mlsnet.com was still "live" for several days, if not a week, after mlssoccer.com went live. (not that a lot of new content or stories were being put up there. but the old site did have the full schedule -- in a better format, imo -- and it had a lot of the useful info that consumers/readers were accustomed to seeing.) whomever was running mlsnet.com (MLB or BAM), I'm guessing would have been happy to keep the site live (as a fall back during some parallel period) had MLS been willing to pay them to maintain the site for another month or whatever. again, it was just a (cheap) business decision by MLS, and it came back to bite them when the "huge bug popped up 5 minutes after the launch of the new site."
Honestly that was the one of the parts about the entire thing I thought was bizarre. I assume that Don Garber doesn't know or need to know anything about web servers or dns. Normally, when a client leaves they don't grab your server and wipe it out the instant your account is closed. I've never seen it done. Unless you are being an asshole, most people simply remove the hostnames from their DNS servers, and sometimes that doesn't even happen. That's assuming it the former site was on a dedicated server, since it sounds like they didn't own anything. mlsnet.com could have been on a shared server for all we know. If that were the case, they never wipe the drives they just turn off web access for that directory in the webserver. Nowadays, its basically just clicking an icon and the site is turned off. Now, if MLS colo'd a box with MLB or whoever, and wiped the drives then their IT department are complete morons and deserve this to happen to them. Colo means when you send your server equipment to a hosting center and they basically just provide you with IP's, power and an ethernet handoff ( internet access) In short, if the content is still sitting on a computer somewhere, all they had to do is go into their DNS server and point the IP's back to the old server, and have the old place make sure the webserver was running with any IP they agreed to use. They could just set their time to lives to 5 or 10 minutes and that would be their downtime basically. That's it. It's not complicated. MLS didn't experience anything that is new, they just went live with a bad website. So, there must be some kind of political reason they can't do what I stated. Because a five minute switch would have fixed their issues.
you always say this, and it's absolutely true, as everyone realizes. but i don't think it's the point here. garber is a spokesman for the league. he has to field questions like, 'what do you consider the top issues for mls at the moment.' imo, he should find a way to send the message to the league's constituencies (which includes the fans, i.e. us, and specifically also the fans of fcd, col, etc) that the league considers it a priority to improve those situations. as i said, it's a ticklish spot. does fcd need lots of empathy and understanding, or a good dose of 'tough love?' tough call. but notice that garber did speak specifically about dcu and nyrb, so why not the tougher cases?
the web site launch was a big enough project that the chief executive has to take ultimate responsibility. he can't simply have assumed that the person(s) in charge were competent and reliable. it was run from hq. those folks needed to feel his presence and that failure was not an option. he had to make sure testing was thorough and sucessful. so yes, imo this mess does take down garber's stature by a peg or two. obviously it's not enough to call him a lousy commisioner, but it sure isn't a feather in his cap. if he ever comes under pressure in his job, my guess is that this item won't be forgotten. actually it's one of those cases where it's a bit fortunate that mls still flies a bit under the radar. had this happened, say, in the nba, imo all sport fans would be talking about it. so what this shows is that, in some ways, the 'ml' in 'mls' still is only letters of the alphabet.
It's MLBAM - not sure if it was Garber or the reporter who didn't get it right. This is one of the two biggest questions: why didn't MLS keep a failsafe option for this mission-critical site? Someone at the top was so confident it would all work that they simply didn't bother to retain MLBAM for another month or two. The other question, as others have said, is why all the blame was placed on one guy who wrote one piece of code. Who hired him? Who tested the code? If it wasn't stress-tested under near-actual-use conditions, who made that call? If the site was properly tested, with the feed feeding the site from all the same places it would at First Kick (think about it - this wasn't a full slate of games on the feed, it was ONE) and load placed on the site, there's no way it would have "just broken" five minutes after launch. This might have been what Garber was told, but I call shenanigans.
So the MLS website pulled a Titanic, but on balance Garber and MLS have much to be happy about so far in 2010. The strike was averted, which is crucial in my book in a World Cup year, the DP rule was amended making the potential at least for more big names to come along post-World Cup, NY finally has its gem of a stadium to attract big time names AND fans, and TFC switched to grass to further entice a DP or three to join the fun in Toronto. Overall attendance is up, with Seattle showing no signs of a sophmore slump, Philly's home opener was a smash success, KC is starting to build its own spectacular new park, and Houston just got its long-awaited approval for a downtown building. After much bickering, expansion Portland seems to have finagled its way to getting the stadium renovations paid for, and the same went for Vancouver last year with its retractable roof conundrum. There are some concerns. FCD and Colorado need to step it up, and will a bit in the summer once school gets out, but at least they make money from the multi-field complexes. Despite the barren NFL digs, NE operates at no loss because of the Kraft ownership. Chivas may always be a question mark until they get their own place or move, but who knows just yet. The SJ stadium situation is leaving many Quakes fans worried why Uncle Lew hasn't yet pulled the trigger (or designed something with more than 15k capacity). I agree that the DC situation is the biggest hurdle. It will be tragic if perhaps the most storied team in league history has to move out of town. So if Garber can somehow help them pull off a deal to stay in the District, he will have really earned his money.
I wasn't pointing a finger at any specific team, but positing a situation in which one i/o is a chronic drain. IF that were the case, I suspect there is some mechanism to protect the others. It's also why I mentioned non-monetary contributions. If for example, the other owners actually value the advice they get from Kraft (as Garber says) that is a form of contribution. I have no idea whether Dallas, Colorado or NE are in a net plus or minus position vis a vis the league. You may be right that they are contributors. Or maybe not. However, the value of Colorado and Dallas having invested in soccer specific stadiums is, to my thinking, a real plus to the league regardless of cash flow in any given year. Red Bull was the classic case of the league carrying a money loser because it thought the image of having a NY team was a value. Hopefully that turns around now. DCU is another possible drain, but I think the other owners understand that DCU's i/o is making genuine (in fact Herculean) efforts to resolve the problems inherent in RFK. But do you think that DCU gets carried indefinitely if their owners with the best will and intention are unable to turn the situation around? I have no idea where the limit is, but at some point the BOG will say "no mas." Hopefully it never comes to that, but it would be foolish to think there are no limits.
Garbers answer about the website bugs me a bit, it's similar to the answer I got from the contact MLSsoccer.com e-mail I sent them, all I asked for was a legit box score, that showed who got the primary and secondary assits, GK saves, minutes of the substitutions, etc...and I got a response back about video and other crap, digital media, etc... I have had DK (old ESPN/MLS Shootout) every year it's been avaliable, I watch all the matches, I don't need stupid video shows or new media crap, or twitter or facebook, I'm an American sports fan, I want to see stats. and they still aren't getting it done, easiest thing in the world to do is add a box score at the bottom of the recap of the games, yet they halfass some stats which a majority of the time are wrong. for example; Zakuani (Riley) they list the guy who got the secondary assist but never put in Montero who actually got the main assist on the goal. It's ridiculous, like the people doing this shit don't even watch the games. I want cold, hard, stats. Little graphics that show substituions, but not when they happened, do nothing for any real sports fan.
Maybe because nothing good could come of it. It looks like DCU is his top priority at the moment, and with good reason: It's now the biggest revenue drain on the league, and whatever team is second isn't close. Getting them a stadium is the biggest issue by far, and calling out teams who already have them is so counterproductive to that end that it would be a major mistake to do it. Giving any stadium opponents (and, there are ALWAYS stadium opponents) some words that they could throw back in your face when you argue that a new stadium is essential for success would be positively idiotic. It would also create needless friction with the I/O's. Whatever Garber or the league as a whole can do to help them (which really isn't much) is best done in private. Calling them out in public would do nothing constructive, and likely cause the teams to expend effort that they could be using to address the problem to defend themselves. Now, what exactly do you mean by "empathy and understanding" and "tough love"? Are you talking about just PR, how the teams in question are treated in the public eye, or actual attempts at solving problems? If it's the latter, specifically what can Garber or anyone else actually do to rectify the issues at, say, Dallas, fitting either characterization? Seriously, what?
ok. but people have eyes. they can see that some franchises have little fan resonance even when the right sss piece has been put in place. an empty pizza hut pk already is fodder for the opponents. it's not like if we don't mention it, they won't know about it. but as i said, garber is the official mls communicator to the public. and the fans are also an important mls constituency. the fans also know about the underperforming franchises. so when he's asked 'what are the main issues facing mls,' imo he needs to find the proper language to let us know the league considers improving the underperformers a priority (as needs to be, i believe). well, garber didn't personally launch the seattle franchise, for example. and yet he gets credit for successful expansion. otoh, the web site was a high-profile project. it's where the league officially interacts with the public. it was done in-house at mls hq. and yet garber, you say, shouldn't take a hit for it... well, if you give him credit for everything that goes well, and let him off the hook on any problems, all it leads to, so to speak, is grade inflation. i'm not saying 'garber needs to fix fcd.' i'm saying, 'the underperformers are an important issue and should be included in a fair assessment of where mls stands, delivered by the commish to the fan constituency.' it may be tricky, but it's his job.