The USA is not participating in any of the four ongoing PATHF Junior and Youth competitions. The rhetorical question is, “Why not?”

Well, with the USOC‘s decertification of USA Team Handball, there isn’t a functioning National Governing Body (NGB) to organize and send teams to this competition. The USOC could theoretically field teams, but this would be extremely challenging with the current state of affairs. I know that the US has sent teams to Junior competitions in the past and hopefully they will be able to participate in future events.

Participating in these age based championships, however, is challenging for the US for a number of reasons.

The most glaring reason, of course, is the relatively late age that players have traditionally picked up the sport in the US. For many, myself included, the first exposure to the sport was in college after their career playing one or more of the traditional American sports has ended. If an athlete is only beginning the sport at age 19 it is unrealistic to expect that he will be competitive against athletes that have been playing the sport for years. There are and have been some youth programs in the United States, (notably the Rock Handball program http://www.rockteamhandball.org/ and the Community Olympic Development Program in Atlanta http://www.communityteamhandball.com/ ) but this is still a pretty thin talent pool to work with.

Another challenge for US teams is the scheduling of the Pan Am Championships. Often this tournament has taken place while schools are in session. As the tournaments are currently ongoing it might not have interfered with some school schedules, but it would have interfered with classes at West Point and the Air Force Academy- two programs that have contributed several players to previous championships.

Finally, there is the issue of cost. Funding a trip down to South America isn’t cheap. With limited resources sometimes choices have to be made concerning which tournaments and programs will be supported. It would be nice if there was enough money to fund everything, but unfortunately that is not the current state of affairs.

Participating in Youth and Junior competitions should become an integral part of the US program as these players could then become the core of the Senior Programs. Additionally, if talented athletes were to participate in these World Championships they could also parlay strong individual performances into contracts with European Clubs. The American athletes playing overseas could then become the stars that US teams could be built around (like Bruno Souza for Brazil and Eric Gull for Argentina).

Without question Club Team Handball in Europe is the best in the world in terms of quality of play and organization. To even begin to compare it with the handball club system in the United States would be ridiculous. But, if you compare European Club Handball with flourishing amateur and professional leagues in other American Sports it’s Handball that clearly has a lot to improve upon.

Case in point is the overwhelming disparity between the top and bottom clubs in the Champions League.

The Champions League tournament is modeled after the European Soccer equivalent and includes every national club champion from the previous season, plus extra top teams from Spain, Germany, Denmark, France, Hungary, and Slovenia. In total, this competition includes 39 teams and is a combination of group play and two game aggregate knock out competition. But how many of these 39 teams have a realistic shot at the title? If you believe the oddsmakers, the answer is that only 5 teams have a better than 11-1 shot of winning (Ciudad Real, Barcelona, Porland San Antonio, Kiel, and Flensburg), while 8 other teams are given an outside shot (17-1 to 66-1) (Valladolid, Celje, Veszprem, Chambery, Montpellier, Zagreb, Gummersbach, and Chehovskie Medvedi). This leaves 26 other teams with odds no better than 100-1 and in many cases much worse. These teams have no chance of winning the tournament and just advancing out of the group stage would be major upset. The reality for these teams is that just being in the Champions League and having the opportunity to get a lucrative home date with Ciudad Real or Kiel is their victory.

Well, you might say this is to be expected. It’s not really very realistic to think that the top team from Luxembourg, Iceland or Poland can compete against the big money salaries provided to players in the German and Spanish leagues. Fair enough, but why have this system in place? Wouldn’t it be much better to take the top 16 teams and set up 4 very competitive groups from top to bottom. I know that Portland San Antonio- Kiel would have much greater appeal to me than say Portland San Antonio vs Sarajevo. And this is precisely why the German and Spanish Leagues want to move the Champions League matches from weekend nights to midweek. Quite simply they feel that they are losing money at the turnstiles when they have to switch their more marquee national league matches to mid-week to make room for less than stellar Champion League matches on the weekend.

But the problem of disparity is not just a cross-border competition phenonmenon. It is also a very stark problem in the national leagues as well. According to the oddsmakers the Spanish, German, French and Danish leagues also are case of the have’s and have not’s. Here are the odds for these 3 leagues

Spanish League (odds to win)
CIUDAD REAL (1 to 1)
FC BARCELONA (2.15 to 1)
PORTLAND SAN ANTONIO (4 to 1)
VALLADOLID (17 to 1)
ADEMAR LEON (17 to 1)
CAI ARAGON (80 to 1)
ANTEQUERA (100 to 1)
DARIEN LOGRONO (100 to 1)
GRANOLLERS (150 to 1)
ALGECIRAS (500 to 1)
ALTEA (500 to 1)
ARRATE (500 to 1)
BIDASOA (500 to 1)
CANTABRIA (500 to 1)
KEYMARE ALMERIA (500 to 1)
TORREVIEJA (500 to 1)

German League
THW Kiel (-133) (Bet 133 to win 100)
SG Flensburg-Handewitt (1.7 to 1)
SC Magdeburg (8 to 1)
VfL Gummers Bach (13 to 1)
HSV Hamburg (19 to 1)
TBV Lemgo (19 to 1)
FA Göppingen (79 to 1)
HSG Nordhorn (79 to 1)
SG Kronau-Östringen (79 to 1)
TV Großwallstadt (79-1)
MT Messenger (349 to 1)
Wilhelmshavener HV (349 to 1)
HBW Balingen-Weilstetten (349 to 1)
Eintracht Hildesheim (349 to 1)
GWD Minden (349 to 1)
TuS N-Lübbecke (349 to 1)
HSG Wetzlar (349 to 1)
HSG Düsseldorf (349 to 1)

Danish League
GOG Svendborg TGI (1.35 to 1)
KIF Kolding (1.65 to 1)
FCK Håndbold (6.5 to 1)
Viborg HK (11 to 1)
Århus GF (16 to 1)
Skjern Håndbold (16 to 1)
Team TVIS Holstebro (74 to 1)
AAB Håndbold (80 to 1)
Bjerringbro-Silkeborg (100 to 1)
TMS Ringsted (1000 to 1)
Elite 3000 Helsingor (1000 to 1)
Ajax Heroes (1000 to 1)
Lemvig Håndbold (1000 to 1)
Fredericia HK (1000 to 1)
Elite 3000 Helsingor 1001.00
Lemvig Haandbold 1001.00

French League
Montpellier (-400) (Bet 400 to win 100)
Chambery (6.5 to 1)
Paris (6.5 to 1)
Ivry (14 to 1)
Dunkerque (20 to 1)
Creteil (28 to 1)
USAM Nimes (80 to 1)
Porte-Normande (100 to 1)
Istres (400 to 1)
Pontault-Combault (400 to 1)
Toulouse (400 to 1)
Selestat (500 to 1)
Tremblay (500 to 1)
Villeurbanne HA (500 to 1)

Once again, the disparity between the top and bottom is striking. The Spanish league has Ciudad Real at even money to win and only 4 other teams have a realistic shot. In Germany, Kiel is better than even money, Flensburg is not far behind and only 4 other team are even within striking distance. In Denmark, Svendborg and Kolding are huge favorites and 4 others follow close behind. The French League situation is the most split, with my “favorite team” http://teamhandball.blogspot.com/2005/10/top-10-reasons-why-i-love-to-hate.html
an overwhelming 1 to 4 favorite, a cluster of 5 teams between 6.5 to 1 and 28-1 and the rest of the league at 80-1 or higher. Big deal, you might say, all leagues consists of favorites and longshots. True, but the difference here is simply too great. Compare and contrast for instance the odds to win with the upcoming NFL, NBA, and the NHL titles in North America:

National Football League
INDIANAPOLIS COLTS (6 to 1)
NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS (9 to 1)
CAROLINA PANTHERS (12 to 1)
DALLAS COWBOYS (12 to 1)
PITTSBURGH STEELERS (12 to 1)
SEATTLE SEAHAWKS (12 to 1)
CHICAGO BEARS (16 to 1)
DENVER BRONCOS (16 to 1)
WASHINGTON REDSKINS (16 to 1)
CINCINNATI BENGALS (20 to 1)
KANSAS CITY CHIEFS (20 to 1)
MIAMI DOLPHINS (20 to 1)
NEW YORK GIANTS (20 to 1)
PHILADELPHIA EAGLES (25 to 1)
SAN DIEGO CHARGERS (25 to 1)
ATLANTA FALCONS (27 to 1)
BALTIMORE RAVENS (27 to 1)
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS (30 to 1)
TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS (33 to 1)
ARIZONA CARDINALS (40 to 1)
CLEVELAND BROWNS (60 to 1)
MINNESOTA VIKINGS (60 to 1)
GREEN BAY PACKERS (66 to 1)
ST LOUIS RAMS (66 to 1)
NEW ORLEANS SAINTS (80 to 1)
BUFFALO BILLS (100 to 1)
DETROIT LIONS (100 to 1)
NEW YORK JETS (100 to 1)
OAKLAND RAIDERS (100 to 1)
TENNESSEE TITANS (125 to 1)
HOUSTON TEXANS (160 to 1)
SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS (200 to 1)

NBA
SA Spurs (4.5 to 1)
DAL Mavericks (5.5 to 1)
DET Pistons (5.5 to 1)
MIA Heat (4.5 to 1)
PHX Suns 7/1
NJ Nets 14/1
DEN Nuggets 16/1
CLE Cavaliers 16/1
LA Clippers 20/1
IND Pacers 22/1
HOU Rockets 25/1
LA Lakers 28/1
MEM Grizzlies 28/1
SAC Kings 28/1
CHI Bulls 33/1
WAS Wizards 33/1
MIL Bucks 40/1
ORL Magic 40/1
PHI 76ers 40/1
UTA Jazz 40/1
BOS Celtics 50/1
NO Hornets 50/1
GS Warriors 66/1
MIN Timberwolves 66/1
SEA Supersonics 66/1
TOR Raptors 80/1
CHA Bobcats 100/1
NY Knicks 125/1
ATL Hawks 150/1
POR Trailblazers 150/1

NHL
Detroit Red Wings 6-1
Ottawa Senators 7-1
New Jersey Devils 12-1
Calgary Flames 12-1
Buffalo Sabres 12-1
Philadelphia Flyers 12-1
Carolina Hurricanes 10-1
Dallas Stars 15-1
San Jose Sharks 15-1
Anaheim Mighty Ducks 12-1
Nashville Predators 20-1
Edmonton Oilers 25-1
Colorado Avalanche 20-1
New York Rangers 18-1
Vancouver Canucks 20-1
Tampa Bay Lightning 25-1
Montreal Canadiens 30-1
Atlanta Thrashers 30-1
Florida Panthers 30-1
Toronto Maple Leafs 40-1
Columbus Blue Jackets 40-1
Minnesota Wild 40-1
Los Angeles Kings 50-1
New York Islanders 50-1
Boston Bruins 48-1
Phoenix Coyotes 50-1
Washington Capitals 100-1
Chicago Blackhawks 100-1
St Louis Blues 100-1
Pittsburgh Penguins 90-1

Yes, there are favorites and longshots here, but there are also two key differences. First, the favorites are not overwhelming favorites. The top favorite is certainly not even money and is no better than 4.5 to 1 for the NBA co-favorites San Antonio and Miami. Additionally, there is a grouping of teams all within the neighborhood of the top favorite. In the NFL and NHL, in particular, there are a lot of teams that can realistically start the year and think they can win the championship. The second major point is that the longshots are not out of this world longshots. Teams have come out of nowhere to win titles in these leagues or at least have given the bookies a tremendous scare with a totally unexpected successful season. This is why you won’t see 500-1 or 1000-1 very often in professional US sports. The NFL concept of “on any given Sunday any team, can beat another team” is very true.

There are several reasons behind this parity, but the principal reasons are franchise stability, revenue sharing, player drafts and salary caps. Franchise stability is a result of American teams not having to worry about relegation to the lower league. Revenue sharing, is the concept by which league money (principally TV money) is shared equally between all the teams. Player drafts are a means to allow the worst teams from the previous season to have exclusive rights to sign new talent. Salary caps are a league provision that limits the overall total of money each team can spend on players. To my knowledge, revenue sharing is the only element of these four parity measures that are used by any of these leagues.

If European Handball Leagues were to institute some of these provisions the result would be more evenly matched teams and more compelling competition. But this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as what could be improved upon. In part 2, I’ll discuss the presentation of the games, scheduling and marketing.

Video on the internet is still in its infancy. Any Handball addict who’s strained his eyes to watch a match on his computer monitor can certainly attest to that fact. While I certainly would prefer a high quality signal straight to my TV this can’t be done yet for a combination of technical and cost/delivery issues. For handball fans in many parts of the world where virtually no TV broadcasts are available, however, internet broadcasts have been a godsend, allowing them to stay connected to the Handball world beyond written media and snail-mailed videotapes.

Aside from the technical challenges that need to be solved, there is also an ongoing debate of how this new media format will best work economically. Essentially, two different models are being experimented with: Fee Based and Advertiser Supported.

Mainstream TV shows have for the most part chosen the fee based model. Shows like Desperate Housewives and Lost can be downloaded for a $1.99 via ITunes . And downloaded they are in large and increasingly profitable numbers.

Sports programming, however, has been more split between the two economic models. This USA Today article http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2006-06-22-net-sports_x.htm highlights how more sports are going on the internet for a fee, but that the advertising model has worked well for the NCAA Basketball Tournament and the World Cup. I personally experienced this advertising model for the NCAA tournament. As I recall, the game was shown through a pop up browser with Marriot Hotels written on the side of the screen. This blog on Internet TV highlights how CBS took in $4.2 Million in advertising revenue using this model: http://www.reinventtv.com/archives/internet_tv/index.html
This article from the Sunday Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2103-1714494,00.html
in the UK highlights how Badminton (yes, badminton) is considering a totally dedicated channel to support the demand for content.

Here are some websites that provide video content:
Mediazone: www.mediazone.com
Setanta: www.setanta.com
Sports4all.net: http://www.sports4all.net/ (Used previously by the IHF)
College Sports TV: www.cstv.com

In terms of Handball, both models are in use. Case in point: the two previous news articles on the IHF Women’s Youth Championships and the EHF Men’s Under 20 Championships. For the IHF matches they are charging $4.95 a match and for the EHF matches you are forced to watch a 30 second Samsung commercial prior to entering the live feed.

My Opinion: A fee based system is only sustainable if the picture quality can be improved upon. I can see fans world-wide paying for top matches they can’t get any other way. I know that if I could get a decent picture and didn’t have access to TV broadcasts, I’d be willing to pay for European Championships, World Championships and Champions League Handball matches. With the current state of the technology, however, fee based, in my opinion, is a tough sell. But probably more important to consider is Team Handball’s critical need to expand beyond its currently limited market share world-wide. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that a fee based model will create ZERO new Handball fans. It is simply short-sighted to grab a smattering of revenue now from hard core fans at the expense of the long term revenue that free broadcasts could potentially create with increased interest in the sport world-wide. And as ESPN and CBS have shown, marketing needs aside, advertising supported broadcasts could even be more profitable. It’s worth at least trying!

Closing Thoughts:
EHF- Keep up the good work and thanks for helping to promote Handball world-wide
IHF- It’s time to give advertising supported broadcasts a try. Might I suggest the Men’s World Championships in Germany this January?

Recently, I stumbled on to this website: http://www.hand-ball.org/en/

This site has a lot of good material on it. Particularly noteworthy is the extensive compilation of videos (both online and CDs- for purchase) of complete Handball matches. Additionally, it has a handy compilation of handball related software that is available from several different sites. The site is based in Spain, so some pages are only available in Spanish.

The FIBA World Basketball Championships are coming up later this month. The game is similar to the US version, but one difference is the court length.

FIBA: 28 Meters or 91 Feet, 10.36 Inches
US: 28.65 Meters or 94 Feet

Did you ever wonder why? Through some logical deduction, I’ve concluded that the answer is a combination of the metric system and Team Handball. This became apparent to me from Handball matches I’ve seen on TV and from the many courts around Paris that I’ve played on for basketball matches. At all of these gyms, the baseline for the basketball court fits exactly on the 6 Meter Handball line on both sides the gym. I thought to myself, “Gee, how come that never worked out for me the many times that I made lines for a Handball court.”

Well the answer, of course, is that the dimensions for US basketball courts are different from International Rules Basketball courts.
And if you do the math: 6 meters + 28 Meters + 6 Meters = 40 Meters (the official Handball length court) you get that perfect match with the Handball 6 Meter Lines and the FIBA Basketball baselines.

I don’t think that this happened purely by chance. According to Wikipedia, International Handball matches were first played in 1925 and Basketball followed up in 1932, so Handball probably set it’s court length first. When FIBA codified the dimensions of the basketball court, they copied a lot of the American lengths despite their less than ideal Metric equivalent. For the length of the court, however, somebody probably figured out that if they cut out .65M they would not only have a nice round number of 28M they would also have a symmetrical, less line-cluttered floor for gyms that are used for both handball and basketball. Just a theory, but unless someone has a better one, I’m sticking to it.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2006-08-02-landis-lawyer_x.htm

Howard Jacobs, the lawyer hired by cyclist Floyd Landis to address his positive doping tests at the Tour de France, was also the principal attorney hired by the USOC during the USA Team Handball decertification process http://www.usoc.org/43922.htm . I’ll go out on limb here, but my guess is that this case will be a little more challenging for Mr. Jacobs.