Is Hope Solo the Right Person to Run U.S. Soccer?
Every week in ‘The Junction,’ the GSC staff weighs-in on debates and controversies related to sports and other off-field issues. This week, we’re talking Hope Solo’s qualifications for the role of U.S. Soccer president, Russia’s ban from the 2018 Winter Olympics, Mark Cuban’s critical comments on the NFL, and NBA superstars getting ejected from games.
Hope Solo recently announced her candidacy for U.S. Soccer president, despite her past history with domestic violence and past comments referring to the Swedish women’s soccer team as “cowards.” What are your thoughts on her qualifications for the role and whether these past incidents affect her candidacy?
Dan Szczepanek: From a visibility standpoint it makes a ton of sense, considering she’s one of like four American soccer players (male or female) that I’d be able to pick out of a line. On the other hand, when your resume actually includes being picked out of a line, that should automatically disqualify you. On the other other hand, after everything we’ve learned about how corrupt FIFA is, maybe being accused of a crime is a prerequisite for becoming a leader of an international soccer federation. So to conclude, Solo’s atrocious history as a human being either makes her the most qualified or worst possible choice to run U.S. Soccer.
Parker Goss: Do I think she is right in that U.S. soccer needs to reprioritize? Yes. I think that much is obvious. But, I’m not convinced she will know how to actually pull it off. That’s politics.
Gord Randall: Hope Solo is human trash. I can’t think of a worse person to represent anyone, anywhere, for any reason. I can’t imagine most Americans are at all proud of her at this point, and if they are, they represent the worst stereotypes about Americans.
Nick H: Solo’s unsportsmanlike comments about Sweden don’t really seem to me to be relevant; they were dickish, but it’s hardly candidacy-invalidating. The fairly convincing allegations of domestic violence are much more concerning, and will likely taint what already seems to be an outsider candidacy.
What was your reaction Russia’s ban from the 2018 Pyeongchang Olympics for its doping scandal?
Szczepanek: Let’s just say that “International Olympic Committee Bans Russian for Cheating Scandal” is in the running for most ironic sentence of 2017. And this year is competitive.
Goss: What caught me off guard was how late the decision was. I don’t actively follow the comings and goings of the IOC, so I had assumed that whatever sanctions would be placed on Russia had already come down by now. I immediately felt bad for the athletes who resisted the systematic encouragement to dope. You don’t want to take away their shot to compete, but it seems like the prospect of them still competing as a neutral athlete pretty well addresses those concerns. I am in favor of the decision, just maybe not the timing.
Randall: This was the right move, done for the wrong reasons. In classic IOC fashion, they screwed up levying punishments in Brazil where they were deserved, and now are trying to have people forget they did it by coming down hard this time. They’re just lucky that Russia actually considers the Winter Olympics relevant. What happens if Turkey or Brazil goes rogue? They’ve got to do better the first time, next time.
H: It seems like a good, if belated, first step toward enforcing rules that everyone assumes have been flouted by athletes and nations for years. Allowing Russian athletes to compete as “neutral” may have a whiff of a half-measure, but assuming that stringent testing is applied to these athletes, it seems like a reasonable compromise to me. The Olympics only happen every four years, and it would be a shame to disqualify innocent athletes from what may be their only shot.
Mavericks owner Mark Cuban has been outspoken about the NFL in recent years. His latest remarks included: “We (the NBA) are the only league where talent comes first, and that’s a critical distinction… I hate to just keep banging on the NFL, but the saturation was a symptom of a bigger problem.” Do you agree with Cuban’s comments, and why or why not?
Szczepanek: I’m a huge Mark Cuban fanboy, so I don’t know how objectively I can assess his comments specifically. But, I can speak to what appears to be a growing gap between the ownership ranks of the NBA and the NFL. The NBA is seeing an influx of new-rich money, and while that means putting up with Steve Ballmer dance moves, it also means some of the most innovative and shrewd business minds sitting around a table, thinking about how they can grow the league and make even more money. Meanwhile at the NFL Headquarters, I can imagine meeting after meeting getting derailed as Roger Goodell has to explain to Bob McNair for the umpteenth time that no, he can not demand his players pick cotton in the offseason. If I were the NFL, I would be looking to do everything in my power to get new blood into the ownership ranks, and fast.
Goss: Cuban is right about the growing interest surrounding the NBA, and the fact that it is coinciding with such a tumultuous era for the NFL. I hope he is not trying to imply that the NBA is already past the NFL in terms of American interest. I was speaking with former Big Ten referee Gary Crull last week, and he echoed a sentiment that many around the game of football can buy into. He simply said, “The game needs to change, or it’s going to fade away.” Taking that a step further, I think the surge in interest in the NBA is pushing the game to change even faster than it otherwise might want to.
Randall: I’m not a basketball fan, and in fact, a staunch football/baseball guy. But, Cuban’s comments, especially from a business perspective, are undeniably true and make complete sense. In fact, they mirror a lot of my complaints about my own favorite sports. Basketball is rightfully kicking their asses with millennials, and it’s because it’s fun, it allows/encourages players to be personalities, and it’s ultimately about the players and not tradition, team or coach. Cuban is also right that the NBA has never lost its edge when it comes to promoting itself, and has expanded its business carefully and strategically, as opposed to baseball’s “stuck in the past” approach, the NFL’s “spend all the money on everything possible” approach, and the NHL’s “just randomly expand into new places and see if it happens to work” strategy. I applaud the NBA for leading its game in the right direction, even though it doesn’t interest me in the slightest personally.
H: I don’t know if the NBA is truly talent-first, as nearly everyone agrees that the 82-game season is far too taxing on players. However, the NBA has made genuine steps to listen to players’ concerns by reducing back-to-backs and extending the All-Star break. I certainly agree with Cuban that NBA players have the largest footprint on the national consciousness — whether it’s MVPs like LeBron James and Stephen Curry speaking out on the political climate, JR Smith wandering shirtless for months post-championship, or Joel Embiid’s attempts to date Rihanna.
Let’s talk about all these NBA superstars getting ejected (Kevin Durant, DeMarcus Cousins, LeBron James, Stephen Curry, Anthony Davis). Do any of these surprise you, and which of these ejections was most questionable?
Szczepanek: Boogie is a ticking time-bomb, and I’m actually surprised that he isn’t ejected more frequently (and I’m guessing AD’s case is a matter of that Boogie-ness rubbing off on him). So those two make sense As for those other troublemakers, I’d chalk it up to boredom and the painstakingly difficult task of amping yourself up for a Tuesday matinee against Charlotte. This is all so meaningless. I wish we could just have the Cavs and Warriors play an 81-game tournament against one another, and forego the regular season altogether.
Goss: A vast majority of these ejections are coming in games that are not particularly close. I honestly don’t think much of it; these guys can put off a frustrating sense of entitlement. While I don’t really think this domino of ejections will really deter them from acting on their feelings of entitlement, I’m not super heartbroken to see them pissed off.
Randall: I haven’t watched any of the games in question, but LeBron’s HAS to be the most surprising, given that it was the first of his entire career. Let’s talk about the bigger issue here, though. Short of attempting to injure an opponent (or an official/fan/coach), there is ZERO justification for ejecting a player from a pro sport. This culture of officials running players from games because they’re tired of dealing with them has got to stop, in both baseball and basketball. What a brutal business move it is, and both leagues allow it to continue happening. Players often need to treat the officials with more respect, but as a teacher, I see this as the equivalent of kicking a misbehaving student out of your room. It’s frowned on for us because we are paid professionals, whose job it is to solve that problem, not hide it. Why should this situation be any different? A paying fan who got screwed out of seeing a world-class player play the whole game is far less likely to go again.
H: Considering he’d never before been ejected over his long career, I was pretty shocked to see LeBron James get thrown out rather than just get a technical. I find nearly all ejections questionable — an opportunity for refs to power trip, and the NBA to collect thousands of dollars from their players for getting emotional (god forbid) during competition — but the Anthony Davis one (also the first of his career) seemed particularly egregious, considering he wasn’t even anywhere near the ref.
