Competing interests often keep Handball from growing in popularity

Christer Ahl wrote a commentary recently that addressed whether there are too many events like the European Championships on the quadrennial calendar for Handball.  In his view it all came down to the basic question:  For whom and for what purpose do we organize these Championships? And he does a pretty good job summing up the pros and cons along with the basic problems of an overly crowded schedule and the impacts to the players.  That being said he comes up short in a couple of areas that I’d like to further address.

The first area relates to Christer’s liberal use of the pronoun “we”.    In some follow up dialogue, Christer acknowledged that in the interests of time and space he used the word without defining contextually who the “we” was.  In broad terms Christer’s “we” refers to dedicated Handball enthusiasts who enjoy watching the sport and would like to see the sport become more popular.  This is probably a fairly large constituency even if there is no particular organization that directly speaks for these interests.  But, as you delve further into the article, Christer’s bias as an American and former IHF official with a very global view are pretty apparent.  Not to mention, he has a pretty sympathetic ear to the interests of the players.

When all is said and done, it’s pretty obvious that there is simply no “we” when it comes to Handball.  Instead it’s a complicated game of tug of war between competing organizations and interests with alliances that rotate back and forth based primarily (some would say, solely) on the best interests of those entities.  For the uninitiated here’s a primer on those entities.

IHF (International Handball Federation)
- Income sources:  World Championships, Olympics, TV rights and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:  Controls two prime money making events and the legitimacy of an international federation

EHF (European Handball Federation)
- Income sources: European Championships, Champions League, TV rights and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:  Controls two prime money making events and the represents the continent with the overwhelming greatest number of fans

Other Continental Federations (Africa, Asia, Pan America, Oceania)
- Income sources:  IHF grants, National Federations
- Power and influence factors:  These Federations to varying degrees have bundled national federations votes for IHF elections

National Federations (Europe)
- Income sources:  National Team competitions, National Club cup competitions, Government backing and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:   These Federations control the national teams which are the primary products of the top revenue events

National Federations (Rest of World)
- Income sources:  IHF grants (often filtered down through Continental Federations)
- Power and influence factors:  These nations each have a vote in the elections for IHF positions and collectively they can out poll Europe

National Leagues
- Income sources:  Clubs, TV rights for league matches and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:  These leagues represent the clubs in their leagues.

Top Handball Clubs
- Income sources:  Club matches and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:  These top Handball clubs pay the bulk of the salaries for the World’s best players

Other Handball Clubs
- Income sources:  Club matches and sponsorships
- Power and influence factors:  While fewer top players play for these clubs these clubs provide the competition for the top clubs and are necessary for the National Leagues to function

Players
- Income sources:  Clubs, also additional minor compensation for national team events and sponsorships/advertisements
- Power and influence factors:  The players are the product.  Without the players there is no Handball

Now, I’ll be the first to state that this is a simplified summary of the different entities that collectively are involved in the Handball world.  It just scratches the surface and even within these different entities there are competing interests.  For instance the German Bundesliga competes against other national leagues and it can hardly be said that every European National Federation is on the same page on a number of issues.

About the only thing that all these different entities agree upon is that it indeed would be a good thing in Handball was more popular.  And I suppose all involved also like watching a good handball match.  But, it’s hard to see common cause going much further than that.  And as with many things in life and politics, these divisions pretty much all boil down to money and the reality that there is only so much money to be divided up.

If you take the specific question Christer asked, “For whom and for what purpose do we organize these Championships?” and ask each of those entities you’ll get a substantially different answer from every single one of them.  That’s because staging a European Championship or World Championship has a tremendous impact with pros and cons for each of these entities.  Changing the status quo, could radically diminish (or even eliminate) some of these organizations.

So, if the current state of affairs is that there is a tangled web of competing interests does that mean this status quo will be maintained on into the future?   Or is there a real potential for some radical change to the status quo.  For change that would increase the popularity of the sport and result in a better product for fans world-wide?

Yes, it’s possible and that will be addressed in a follow up commentary.   If you’re looking for a hint, look at the common thread inherent in each of these entities and then follow the money.

After 24 straight years of no winning seasons the 2003-04 Air Force Basketball team came out of nowhere to post a 22-7 record, a conference championship and an NCAA tourney bid. Could something similar happen for USA Team Handball?

Anyone who has followed the sport of Team Handball in the United States knows that the national teams have had their ups and downs.  Without a doubt it’s been more “downs” then “ups” and it’s safe to say we’re currently in a down phase.  We struggled to even win one match at the PANAM Games and have fallen behind nations like Mexico and Uruguay.  Maybe the bitter reality is that it’s just too hard for the USA to field respectable teams, let alone winning
teams that can compete for medals at an Olympics.  Maybe, but maybe not…

Perhaps just as moribund or disappointing for many years had been the Air Force Academy Men’s Basketball Program.  There are a lot of challenges to fielding a top college basketball team at a military service academy.  These challenges include height restrictions, academic requirements, and a military regimen which severely limits the players that can be recruited.  With the exception of the David Robinson years at Annapolis, no service academy team had ever had great success and Air Force’s high water mark for a long time was the mid 1970′s when several teams posted modest winning records.  Two major reasons for those successful seasons were Tom Schneeberger and Bob Djokovich, who later went on to be Olympians in Team Handball at the 1984 Olympics.

Following Schneeberger and Djokovich’s graduation in 1978, Air Force had 24 straight losing seasons and about the only positive thing that that could be said about the program was that the players tried hard and never gave up, no matter how far they were behind.  Many games played at the Academy resembled church halls in which you could literally count the fans in the stands.  Experts and longtime followers of college basketball all agreed: It was just too hard to win at Air Force.

Then in the year 2000, Air Force hired Joe Scott, a former Princeton player and coach who outrageously thought differently about the whole, you just can’t win at Air Force mentality.  Things at first didn’t seem to be much different.  The team’s record the first 3 years were 8-21, 9-19, and 12-16.  They showed steady progress and I noticed that they weren’t getting blown out quite as often against better teams.   Still, I had my doubts that they could ever get over the hump for a winning season.  Sure they might have been able to win some games against weak non-conference foes, but they still couldn’t beat the top schools (BYU, New Mexico, UNLV) in the Mountain West Conference (MWC).

Then in 2003-2004 a funny thing happened.  Somehow Air Force started winning those games against the teams that had always beaten them.  Somehow, someway, the laughingstock of the MWC won the Conference with a 12-2 record.  My goodness, they even made the NCAA Tournament for the first time in over 40 years!  The tomb that had been Clune Fieldhouse had overnight become one of the toughest and loudest places to play in the country.  There was some nice commentary at the time about what a great turnaround this was, but to those few who actually followed Air Force basketball closely through the years those kind words never even came close to conveying the miracle that had just occurred, seemingly out of nowhere.

How on earth had this happened?  My analysis (from my own observation and others) is that there were four major factors in this incredible reversal of fortune:

1) Better recruiting. Whether it was luck or persistent effort by the coaching staff, Air Force was able to find 5-7 talented players who could play at a high level.  These players were by no means NBA quality players, but they were good players that could compete athletically against their competition.  Through the years, Air Force had always had 1 or 2 players with that talent level.  Heck, I’d argue that a couple of those players were individually even better than the talent that Joe Scott assembled.  But, those players had no supporting cast and opponents keyed on them.  Being able to put 5 good players on the court all at one time made all the difference.

2) A system that stymied opponents.  And that system was the so called Princeton offense which slowed down the game and relied on passing and 3 point shooting.  Air Force executed this offense to perfection and teams weren’t used to playing it.  That season Air Force was able to sneak up on opponents who weren’t sure how to defend it.

3) Opponents that were in “down” years.  The MWC would never be mistaken for the ACC, but on the whole it’s usually a pretty good basketball conference.  It was fortunate timing that the golden era of AF basketball coincided with just about every other side in the conference going through a down phase.

4) Players that simply believed in themselves and the system.  Sometimes teams lose just because of the names on their jerseys.  Losing begets losing and sometimes everybody (coaches, fans, officials, opposing teams) starts expecting a particular team will lose.  Changing such a culture or vibe is often easier said than done.  When such a change occurs, though, it’s usually because a committed group truly starts to believe in themselves and what they can do.

So, what are the lessons here that can be applied to USA Team Handball.  Let’s go with the 4 reasons behind Air Force’s turnaround and see if they can be applied to Team Handball.

1) Better Recruiting:  Nothing against the hard working men and women who are currently playing on our National Teams, but most of our current athletes are a step down in raw athletic talent when compared to their current competition.  This is particularly true for the women and partially true for the men.  And to be fair, it’s probably always been true with our National Teams to a certain extent.  The U.S. has often been a player or two short of being good enough to beat the good teams.  The need for better recruiting is a no brainer, but how do you go about it?  This will be a topic for part 2 of this series.

2) A system that stymies opponents:  Is there a Team Handball equivalent of the Princeton Offense?  For the most part national teams from the developing Handball nations have tried to emulate the successful teams in Europe.  They hire European coaches and the European coaches naturally seek to build a European style team.  There is, of course, some variance among the teams in Europe as some nations play a little more of a fluid game with fast breaks while others are more focused on defense and a half-court game.  So getting back to the question, I can think of only one example where a nation has developed a style of play or system that stymies opponents:  South Korea.  The South Koreans, particularly the women, play a helter skelter style of play which takes maximum advantage of their quickness and limits their size disadvantage.  This pretty much always gives the Koreans a slight edge when they play European teams because while they are accustomed to the European teams have to totally adjust their game.  Is it just a coincidence that the Koreans have also been the most successful non-European nation, even though the sport is
still a minor one in their country?  Maybe the U.S. should look across the Pacific instead of the Atlantic as it tries to develop its own style?

3) Opponents that were in “down” years.  Well, you can’t very well control what your competition is doing.  You can, however, take advantage of it.  Looking at the Pan American region it’s fairly apparent that the men’s teams are surging in quality while the women’s teams, with the exception of Brazil, are clearly in a down phase.  Starting from scratch, it’s entirely possible that the U.S. could put together a brand new Women’s team that could get 2nd place (qualifying for the 2016 Olympic Games) at the 2015 PANAM Games.  The Men could still qualify, as well, but their competition as it stands now is clearly tougher.

4) Players that simply believe in themselves and the system.  I can’t get into the psyche of our National Team players, but I suspect that both the Men’s and Women’s team have not fully formed the type of bond that only comes about through time and shared sacrifice.  They will need more matches and some stability in the program in order for this to happen.  And then they will need some matches where they play some teams close and see for themselves that they aren’t that far behind and where they need to get better.

So, if Air Force basketball can suddenly be successful after years of failure, I would argue that even USA Team Handball can turn it around.  It won’t be easy, though, and most importantly it’s not clear whether USA Team Handball will have the minimum resources needed to execute such a turnaround.  As the current budget stands now there is nowhere near enough funding to recruit, train and provide players a national team structure to allow them the
opportunity to succeed.  With adequate resources, though it could definitely happen.

In part 2 of this series, I’ll assess the feasibility of recruiting athletes with successful collegiate careers in other sports and transitioning them to Team Handball.  As the title implies, there’s an Air Force Basketball connection.

Tim Tebow: Current Right Back for Team Fatsis and future Right Back for Team USA

Drink a few beers in the evening after a Team Handball event and the subject inevitably comes up.  If you could field a Team Handball squad with athletes from other sports, who would you choose?  For a Handball fan this is the equivalent of “Superman vs. Batman” or “Ginger vs. Mary Ann.”  A debate that’s been held many times for which there’s no way to establish the right answer.  On Slate Magazine’s “Hang Up and Listen” Podcast, Dan Blake from Ithaca, NY posed that very question to co-hosts Stefan Fatsis, Mike Pesca, and Josh Levin.  (Take a listen from 6:38 to 11:15.)

Here are the teams that were compiled, some analysis of the players selected and an assessment as to who would win between Team Fatsis and Team Pesca.

Team Fatsis

- Matt Kemp (Baseball):  I’ll have to take a pass on this assessment, as I haven’t followed baseball much for at least a decade.  On paper, his basketball background would make a good combination.
- Chris Young (Baseball):  The baseball pitcher with a basketball background is a good combination for Team Handball.  The ability to throw a ball hard is not a readily discernible skill.  (i.e., you can’t assume that a great basketball athlete naturally has a great arm).  Young is 32, though, and I can’t tell if the relatively sedentary baseball life of a pitcher has settled in.  Side note, I saw a Russia-USA baseball game several years ago and the commentator was a broken record, “Vladimir Yobonski is another former Team Handball player…”
- Kevin Durant (Basketball):  An OK choice.  Basketball, more than any other sport, is very similar to Handball in the flow of the game and the skill sets needed.  That being said, not every great basketball player makes a great handball player or vice versa.  Basketball players with more finesse tend to struggle a little when they cross over to Team Handball.  Durant is no wimp, but I think he might have some issues with the greater physicality.
- Dwight Howard (Basketball):  A great choice. Physicality would, of course, not be a problem for Dwight Howard.  He’s a natural circle runner and would be a brick wall on defense.
- Tim Tebow (Football):  An inspired choice.  Tebow has the raw skill set to be an exceptional Team Handball player.  His ability as a crafty runner who can break tackles would translate well to Team Handball where the defense can be more physical (compared to basketball).  Oh, and he’s left handed.
- Michael Vick (Football):  Vick is an OK choice.  Clearly, has the Tebow like skills, but would this 31 year old have the motivation.  And Fatsis stumbled upon another left hander.  I guess he could be on the wing next Tebow on the right hand side.
- Tim Howard (Soccer): Soccer goalies don’t necessarily transition well to Team Handball.  They have the basic concept of being a goalie, and, in particular understand the importance of positioning the body at the right angle.  But, there are some dramatic differences. Most notably, soccer goalies rarely stop a shot with their feet, an absolutely critical skill that they have to be taught.  Not to mention the size of the goal is much smaller and they will face more shots in 5 minutes then they’ll see in an entire soccer match.

Subs
Baseball (Carl Crawford, Jacoby Elsberry, Joe Mauer, Austin Jackson, Grady Sizemore)
Basketball (Lebron James, Chris Paul, Jimmer Fredette)
American Football (Cam Newton, Jake Plummer
Analysis:  I won’t go into detail on these subs, but suffice to say Lebron James and Cam Newton would be phenomenal players.  Chris Paul and Jimmer Fredette might be good players at Center Back or on the wing.

Team Pesca

- Julius Peppers (Football):  Peppers’ size and basketball skills demonstrated at North Carolina would, make him a great selection 5 years ago, but at age 31 he would be less likely to excel.
- Jason Pierre-Paul (Football):  Pesca’s best choice.  Pierre-Paul is a phenomenal athlete that only started playing football seriously 5 years ago.  He would pick up the sport very quickly.  Heck, you could probably start him as a defensive specialist at a top club in Europe with a year of dedicated training
- Tony Gonzalez (Football): Another football player with college basketball experience.  But at 35 years of age he would not adapt well to the new sport.
- Rob Gronkowski (Football): Yet another tight end for the Pesca squad.  At age 22 he should be able to handle the up and down nature of the sport fairly well.
- Derrick Rose (Basketball):  An exceptional athlete, Rose would definitely be a top notch Handball player.  He doesn’t appear to have played many other sports, though, and may not adapt quickly to a new sport.
- Kevin Garnett (Basketball): While Garnett is a great basketball player he is the type of athlete that would not excel in Team Handball at the same high level.  There are a few 7 foot handball players, but the nature of the game limits the benefit of such lofty height.  Generally, these players are very effective over the top shooters, but are less effective one on one and struggle on defense.  Garnett’s also 35 years old.

Josh Levin’s Picks (Levin didn’t pick a full squad)

Rajon Rondo (Basketball):  A good choice.  I could see him as an effective Center Back.
Robert Griffin III (Football):  An outstanding selection.  This 21 year 0ld with smarts, world class speed and great arm strength would be a tremendous 1 on 1 player.  Think Daniel Narcisse (only an even better athlete).
Tayshaun Prince (Basketball): An OK choice.  I’m not sold that he would be a great player and at 31 years old he’s showing a little age.

Team Fatsis vs. Team Pesca

Just looking at the starting lineups, the advantage is clearly Fatsis.  First off, Pesca didn’t even choose a goalie, but setting that aside Team Pesca is too old and is sorely lacking in quickness.  In particular, you can’t have converted tight ends playing the wing.  Matt Kemp and Michael Vick would have a field day on the fast break.   Midway  through the first half, the bulky football players would really be huffing and puffing and Derrick Rose would probably be angrily urging them to show a little hustle.  Meanwhile Team Fatsis, led undoubtedly by a cheerful Tebow would still be motoring along.  It would only get uglier in the 2^nd half.   Another aspect that Fatsis probably stumbled upon is having a few left handers on his squad.  This would make a dramatic difference on the right side of the court.  I’m guessing we’re  looking at an ugly score line, perhaps 35-22.

Tim Tebow: Future American Team Handball Star?

The Tebow story has been fascinating to follow this year.   For those who don’t follow American Football, Tim Tebow is a quarterback for the Denver Broncos, who’s open religious displays have made him a polarizing figure.  Additionally, there had been great debate as to whether this great college player could become a great professional player.  This season he started out on the bench, but midway through the season he became the starter and led Denver to several  improbable, crazy comeback victories. In short, there are  Tebow lovers and Tebow haters.  And as someone who has rooted religiously against the Denver Broncos for almost 30 years, you can probably guess which side of the debate I fall under.  Still, even a Tebow hater like me has to begrudgingly accept that he is a tremendous athlete with undoubtedly strong skills as a leader/motivator.  That being said he’s got no long term future as an NFL quarterback.  I think that will become apparent to all (even Tebow himself) after a couple of seasons.  Is it conceivable that this unconventional QB will then seek other opportunities off the mainstream, even ones without a big pay day?  After all, the Broncos, have already had one quarterback, Jake Plummer, retire early to play handball (albeit, the wrong one). Tim Tebow, Olympic Athlete, leading American Team Handball to the promised land.  Even I can get on board with that.

Slate:  Hang up and Listen Year End Podcast: http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/hang_up_and_listen/2011/12/hang_up_and_listen_s_special_.year_end_call_in_show_.html

THN (11 Nov 2010): America’s most famous handball player talks about his legacy http://teamhandballnews.com/2010/11/america%e2%80%99s-most-famous-handball-player-talks-about-his-legacy/