The Future?

Galera, I had posted this on my guestbook and felt that there were enough quality responses to open it up to a wider audience. If it doesn't elicit additional post is fine with me as well; at least more people will get to view it.

Please tolerate the cut-and-paste job.

 

About my Avatar: The picture is of a 13 year old named Neymar. He is a Santos prodigy who has attracted interest of big clubs including Real Madrid. Seems that he is destined to leave his country without ever having played a single pro game there ...... like the young argentine Messi.

Great for his family's immediate fortune, and good luck to him.

"The Future?" is meant to ask two questions: a) could he be the next, next, next big thing?, and b) does he mark the beginning of a trend that further depresses a once rich and storied tradition --- Brasilian club football..

It used to be that the Brasileiro had a galaxy of stars on every team, and heroes identifiable to a club's fans. Every big Brasilian team has its list of all-time idols that reads like a who's who of footballing greats (whether or not they ever saw Selecao glory). Songs, books and poems were written about them.

With the acceleration of the exodus towards Europe, not only has the quality of the championship suffered, but now idols are being measured in 1-3 year time frames! A poor substitute for yesteryear's player-club-fan relationship that lasted a decade or more.

IMO the Brasilian football fan has long come to grips with the fact that they will get to see their future world stars on home soil for only a short stint; then they will need to be content to continue their emotional attachment to these players by catching them playing EUFA CL football on the satellite.

But now, something far more serious looms. Is it hard to imagine a day when Brasilian football fans will sit down for a WC game and see a Selecao in which not a single starter ever played locally?

That's why I wonder if young Neymar is the future....

 

lanman

tp - do you not think that the situation you described also help the national team, as players realise they are seen much less by their home fans than they would like and so resolve to give their best wherever possible for those fans?

 

lanman, I don't think so. I do believe that playing in Europe makes Brasilian NT players almost impervious (not 100%) as to where they play. At the NT level that is a major plus.

However, in the broader context of Brasilian football I don't believe it is a net positive; especially if the next generation of superstar players won't ever be seen by the local populace until they reach European soil.

[Interestingly, Ronaldo is probably the first Brasilian superstar that has close to NO local history. He played less than 2 years for Cruzeiro. Though he is remembered fondly, but he doesn't evoke the emotions of players like Garrincha, Pele, Ademir, Zico, etc. In the same way Jose Altafini "Mazzola" is an all-time great, but I've never seen him embraced by the culture of Brasilian football; he left too early.]

I'm fearful of the economics of it all. Its great business to buy Brasilians out of the Brasileiro...you almost never lose money compared to buying an equivalent local Spanish, English, Italian player. Now they've gotten wiser and realized that you can get them for nothing (since they are not under contract at such age), by just hiring the father and moving the family. I remember reading about Messi in 1998, and that experiment worked well.

I first felt queezy when Anderson of the under-17 WC was sold to Porto. He played exactly one year with Gremio and helped them back into the first division (his goal in the dieing minutes of the final game is the stuff that gives you goose bumps). In the past (up to early 80s) Gremio fans could hope to see him become one of the great icons of their team over a 8-10 year period.

In the not so distant past, they could hope to see him play for 2-3 years (a la Ronaldinho). Instead, its was down to 9 months with him.

Neymar will not be seen by most until he (hopefully) pops up in Real's A team 5 years from now.

In the course of the Brasil draft I noticed that idol status is being bestowed to players who had 1-2 good years at Brasilian clubs! In the past you were looked at askew until you showed at least 5 years of great service. And, you had to fight your way on to teams that had established stars.

I understand it. It's natural -- with almost entire rosters turning-over almost every 18-24 months due to player exodus abroad -- the newer generation of fans and the human mind recalibrate how to judge who is worthy of the term "idol". That's part of the reason why Tevez is being hailed as one of the biggest ever Corinthian idols after just 1 year! He's a fantastic player, but in the almost 100 year history of that club, and with all the players that have graced it, it strikes me as odd.

When I lived in Brasil I spent hours in libraries and bookstores picking up and reading all sorts of biographies on Palmeras, SPFC, Corinthians, Flamengo, Botafogo, Fluminense, etc. greats. Volumes of stuff is available, often written by some of the best Brasilian literary figures who happened to be devout fans of those clubs. You could feel it in the text. I don't see that happening for players who left no emotional attachment.

I'm a realist and understand that money moves everything. I'm not asking for things to go back....I'm just saddened at the thought of where it may end up.

 

Argentine Soccer Fan

This is a very interesting topic. Thanks for the pm, tp.

From the South American perspective, I understand perfectly what tp is saying. We are having the same problem in Argentina. Now they are talking about a cousin of Messi who is 9 or 10 years old I think. He is supposed to be better than Messi was at his age, and everybody is watching him. It is getting ridiculous.

There have always been player transfers, but things have changed a lot in the last few years. I remember in 1978, Argentina had only one foreign based player, Mario Kempes, and his inclusion was questioned by the fans before the cup, because he wasn't home based. As late as 1986, many people questioned the inclusion of Jorge Valdano, who had left Argentina at a young age and was known to few fans.

Today, of course, the world is much smaller. The media constantly hypes the young talent, so everybody in Argentina knows who Lionel Messi is. Also, fans in Argentina now can watch Barcelona every week when Messi plays, so they are much more familiar with him than they were with Valdano. But it does seem to destroy the special relationship that fans used to have with their clubs and their players. Labruna was River, Rattin was Boca, Bochini was Independiente. Can we say the same today about players like Tevez, Mascherano or the young kid Aguero? I don't think so. One has to wonder how this trend will, in the long term, affect the popularity of the sport as a national identity. I don't think kids will grow up with the same connection towards the game that we used to have.

Aside from that, there is the fact that these kids are human beings, not products. With Messi things worked out so well, it was a best case scenario. The kid seems to be everything Barcelona hoped for, and the club also aparently gave him everything that he needed. Even his teammates could not have been better, as the club's star Ronaldinho sort of adopted him under his wings, like a younger brother.

But not every situation is going to play out so perfectly. Judging talent is an imperfect science. What will happen when the young phenom doesn't pan out? Is the club going to just give him a one-way ticket back home, after two or three years of interfeering in his normal development as a human being? How will this affect a youngster's life? Those are important questions which have to be dealt with as this type situation begins to take place more often.

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts.

 

Redshift

I was considering starting a thread on this myself so it's great to see that other people are giving it some serious thought.

I think the key to understanding this issue is realizing the economic factors that drive it. Let me start with the obvious: as the world’s most popular sport, football is a multi-billion dollar industry. Like any industry, the primary motive behind it is to profit. I’ll step back for a second before something really important gets lost: I am not saying by any means that players only play for remuneration, or that fandom is not based on a love of the game, the team and the players – quite on the contrary: these things are intertwined with core human emotions and needs. The reality, however, is that the impetus to make vast sums of money underlies nearly everything else.

Fundamentally, every industry is constituted by both capital or infrastructure and the labour required to fashion an end product, with these varying in proportions depending on what and where it is being produced. In the advanced economies such as Western Europe, the United States, and Japan, industries tend to be capital-intensive, because labour is comparatively expensive. The opposite is true of developing economies (such as Brasil and Argentina) as well as what is normally called “the Third World.” In this sense football is no different from any other business. One could object on the grounds that the “infrastructure” required to play football is trivial – after all, nothing more than a ball (or failing that, something round) and a continuous piece of flat earth is required. This is true, and has much to do with the sport’s popularity. However, one must recall what we are talking about: football as an industry – not football as a game or sport. The capital required to profit off of football to the degree that is done in Europe is incredibly extensive: there are stadiums, training facilities, medical services, transmission/broadcasting equipment and infrastructure, the whole marketing apparatus, distribution and retail infrastructure for merchandise, the sporting press/media, etc, etc, etc. These are the things that may be possessed in some form by developing economies, but in immensely less sophisticated state than what exists in Europe.

Getting back to the labour side of the equation, we see the primary factor in the huge gaps of labor cost between developed and developing economies as being directly related to the disparate levels of education and skill of the workforces concerned. It is precisely here where football is unique: the value of one’s labor as a football player bears little (if any) relation to one’s education. Habilidade and intimacy with the ball cannot be taught. Neither can raw talent. Physical attributes such as speed, strength or stamina can be improved, but only to a limited extent. Technique can be perfected, but not created where ability doesn’t exist. No amount of training can produce artistry. In this regard, footballers are a sort of synthesis between labor and something akin to a natural resource. For whatever reason (there are many theories) Brasil and Argentina are the richest countries in the world when it comes to this particular resource. Because of lower prevailing wages, lower labor-costs in the economies at large, and lesser purchasing power in these countries, however, the "price" of a SA player is miniscule when compared with a similarly skilled player in a European market. Don’t take my word for it: look at what Man Utd. paid for Wayne Rooney versus what was paid by PSV for Ronaldo or Romario, or if you prefer, what PSG had to dish out for Ronaldinho. On a very basic level, you have a situation where there are fewer skilled players available in Europe at a higher price. If you buy South American (or to a lesser extent African) you usually get a comparative bargain while simultaneously having the potential to land a superstar that will make you many multiples of what you paid to acquire him. If you make a couple of signings that don’t quite play out the way you expect or hope, you can always cut your losses by re-selling to the country of origin or to another interested European club. There's a HUGE discrepancy between what European clubs are willing to pay each other for players versus what they pay to the clubs of origin. Should you buy earlier (while you endure a bit more risk) you have to pay even less. Therefore, buying early and often is economically rational behavior. If it is not tempered, regulated or mediated somehow, the tendency is for more players to go the way Messi did or Neymar looks to, particularly when one is speaking of Argentines or Brasilians.

Let’s consider this from yet another angle, namely, that of the players. For every craque there are many skilled players, and for every skilled player there are countless competent, or median players that we often don’t think about. We regard being a football player as a dream… and while I’m sure it can be, it’s not all fun and games particularly for the latter. If they never learned a trade or some sort of marketable skill other than football, they can be in dire straits when they no longer can play and have a source of income. It is extremely difficult to save enough money to sustain you in your retirement, and even more so when the period where you are earning money is comparatively short. This problem is not unique to football either, but inherent to almost any professional sport that relies on the physical vigor of youth. It’s further compounded by the depressed wage situation in the South American market, and the fact that financial problems plague many clubs (wages are often paid late, or sometimes not at all, etc). An ever increasing number of players are going to play in the Turkish, Russian, Greek, Japanese and other similar leagues for precisely this reason. I don’t mean to malign anyone or step on toes, but the technical level of these leagues is not comparable to those in the countries of origin. Most players that chose to leave for teams in such leagues go for purely financial reasons – to secure their financial stability – and they have admitted as much. In my view, they cannot be blamed for this.

Are there any solutions to this problem? Certainly. But no simple ones. Read my signature. You can enact laws preventing more than a certain number of foreigners of playing on a team, or impeding players below a given age from being contracted. Some variation of these is probably desirable, but never underestimate the effectiveness of well-paid, high-powered lawyers unleashed on what seems like an intractable problem. Likewise, do not underrate the ability of the aforementioned vast sums of money to shape regulation in ways that are beneficial to its continued existence. I think the only real solution is an end to the economic gulf that exists between SA and Europe; only such a development will truly reduce this vast flow of players. The days where the Argentine and Brasilian leagues were replete with best craques of these respective countries, the stadiums were full, and players could become unforgettable icons marking entire eras of various teams are now in the past... but they can return.

 

Tremendous posts Redshift and ASF.

If I could rearrange the order Redshift's would go before my initial one as the prologue to this discussion. You've affectively framed the discussion and gave the "why's" as to how we have reached this point (w/ Neymar). Agree with everything you said.....I just don't see it ending any time soon, and thus my lament (that's really all it was, as I provided no solutions at all).

....or a cultural phenomenon? As ASF put it....

That is what is at risk - the rich cultural. The days when Sundays were about church in the morning, family meal early afternoon, then everyone getting together to see the craques late afternoon. Or discussions with oldtimers about the idols of your beloved team. I consider myself more of a football fan than most, I can barely keep up with the players on Botafogo...the turnover is sooo quick. I seriously doubt that 20 years from now any books will be written about this period, whereas I must own a good 7 great books about Botafogo and its players in the 1960s alone.

Exactly. There is a private equity concept to it all - go in early for the eventual capital appreciation; target 15% of the investment portfolio to make it big, thus subsidizing the other marginal or poor investment decisions. Its clear and it makes sense from a $$ perspective.

The players leaving for "lesser" leagues are also acting in their economic best interest. Can't begrudge them either.

High profile players such as Neymar and Messi will probalby not have to struggle to make it back home (even if they don't pan out); however, I have read articles and seen tv shorts on unknown youth taken extremely early from Brasil and Africa to "lesser" teams or "lesser" leagues around the world who don't pan out and have to eak out meager livings in foreign countries. One could argue that they would have had to struggle in their home countries as well....except that they would be in their home coutries.

This worthy subject deserves its own analysis, much deeper than the one we are engaged in.

World economic realities suggest that it won't happen anytime soon.

 

Sempre

I agree with you: it's a shame that the
'local link' you speak of is dying. That, of course, is why
every Roma fan reveres Totti as a legend and will defend
him from all criticism. He's Romanista through and through,
was born in the city, came up through the youth system,
and has captained the club in its most successful period.
You have to look at Raul or Maldini to find a modern player
who's given as much to his hometown. But Totti's case is
more remarkable because he stuck with Roma even when
the team had lost its financial clout and bigger clubs came
calling with fat contracts ("to win one scudetto with Roma
is like winning 10 with Juventus," as he commented ...).

Having said that, I realize if only I think as a neutral these
feelings will appear to me as sentimentality. Given the
realities of the game today, players will do what's smart, and
the fact is, Totti hasn't been smart. Had he gone with Milan
or Madrid we can easily imagine that he would have won more
silverware, made more money, and developed more as a player
(it's no coincidence that Totti has often seemed a naive player
at international level--a consequence, perhaps, of never having
had to be the big fish in a big pond). I feel that it's probably a
similar thing for the young Brazilian player. He's given the choice
of being a local hero or going to a big club where there's money
to be made and invaluable experience to be gained, and I think
9 out of 10 times he'll be ambitious and go to the big club. And
I don't see that changing unless the economic realities change -
a harsh fact, but there you have it.

This discussion raises another interesting question for me and
it's over the value of 'national' connection. I sometimes read
comments like these on the Italy boards and they really make
me wonder: "Milan can buy either Chivu or Barzagli, but Barzagli
is Italian so I'd prefer Barzagli." On the one hand, that might seem
like a fine sentiment, in that Milan is a Serie A team and should
perhaps have a good share of players who speak Italian and are
of the same background as the fans. But Andrea Barzagli wasn't
born or raised in Milan, and Italy is a very regional country, so
the question becomes, "Would he really be more of a Milanista
than Chivu? If so, how?" And I do think there's a large dose of
hypocrisy and maybe even zenophobia in all the talk of homegrown
players. If clubs want players who'll be kin to the fans, they ought
to use boys from the neighborhood. But the game is so international
nowadays, and a city so limited by population, that you'll never have
11 Maldinis or Tottis ....

 

Redshift

It certainly is a cultural phenomenon, but when I said football as an industry, I was focused primarily on the economic / business end of things.

Something fundamental has been lost. Teams in South America are now lucky to hold on to exceptional players for more than 1 or 2 seasons. This is a shame, because in Europe, that is the amount of time people often are willing to wait for a player to settle in and become part of the group. It would be inconceivable to a European fan to have 100% (or nearly that) turnover in a few years. Likewise, it is just as absurd to think that they would accept the selling of their team’s biggest stars (the sort that come around once a generation) as their primary source of income – particularly if they were home grown. Yet, these are precisely the realities of the South American game. The likes of River Plate, Boca Juniors, São Paulo, Corinthians, and Cruzeiro (to name but a recent few), have histories too rich to be transformed into glorified vitrines (showcases) and feeder clubs for the European giants.

We are talking about players – that is, people – yet they are bought and sold like commodities. The worst part is that in many ways, that is what they have been reduced to.

That is a sad untold story. I was reading somewhere that on any given day, about 3 football players leave Brasil, and 2 come back.

Additionally, I ran across an article about Elber, and how despite being an idol in various European teams, this is the first time he was playing in his native country (the article was about culture shock, lol).

Definitely.

That does not diminish the necessity or urgency of such a development.

Van Basten suggested that one way to prevent something comparable that is happening with Dutch football would be to combine their national league with that of Belgium. I wonder if a combined Brasil-Argentina league wouldn’t be more marketable abroad and generate enough revenue to maintain the players. I am not so sure that it would, given that most leagues tend to make the vast majority of their revenue domestically. A better framework to adequately compensate clubs for broadcast rights would probably go a long way, as would a more organization at pretty much every level... but there simply is not as much money. Perhaps the players could be maintained for a bit longer than they are now? It’s something we can discuss.

 

Dark Savante

The biggest problem is going to be that once the trend is set by the biggest clubs it will become the status quo and could really get out of hand. Robbing from Peter to pay Paul so to speak. It would be horrible to see the rich history of South American teams being ravished, but as the rat race hots up I fear the biggest clubs will do this (importing hot talent and their family for a nominal fee) more and more often.

I know my team Man Utd are in the first stages of setting up similar systems in Brazil (Sao Paulo IIRC) and without a doubt the mighty hand will extend across the continent if we reap one or two rewards (saving the club millions of dollars on finished product) Rossi(Parma) and Pique(Barca) are two of the players from European clubs with snapped up and paid nothing but a testimonial fee for and they are immense talents. It will no doubt open up a floodgate if we get a few more successes from taking academy players from other European clubs let alone S.A.

It's could become a major problem in the upcoming years.

 

That's the end of cut-and-paste.

Thoughts?