Handball on ESPN (Final Review: Part 1): My Long Standing Prediction was Wrong… Totally Wrong

My prediction that ESPN handball coverage would be a major game changer for the U.S. came up short… way short.

The Prediction

Before the 2021 IHF Handball World Championships I trumpeted that handball being shown on ESPN wasn’t just big news, but that it was, in fact, the biggest and most important development in the entire history of team handball in the United States. The logic behind this prediction was my basic premise that getting more handball on TV trumps all other marketing objectives for the sport… because it’s a true force multiplier that greatly improves the likelihood of better results in all other areas. And, that ESPN, even if it was just their streaming platform (ESPN+), was still the world-wide leader and it would be unprecedented exposure.

A Failed Prediction

Now, a little over a month since the conclusion of the World Championships it’s pretty clear that it hasn’t had anywhere near the desired effect. How do we know? Well, there are metrics such as website traffic and social media engagement that can be tracked. I know this website had better traffic than it has during previous Men’s World Championships, but not a dramatic increase. There were a few viral moments such as Gauthier Mvumbi getting some new U.S. fans such as Rodger Sherman of the Ringer and Palicka’s great save vs France, but these moments weren’t super viral in terms of numbers and less than the brouhaha with Jay Cutler which was also not as buzzworthy as we thought it might have been.

It would be really interesting to see the actual number of viewers on ESPN+, but in the age of streaming such numbers are a closely guarded secret that platforms like ESPN+, Netflix and Hulu don’t share openly.

What Google Trends Tells Us

Lacking hard viewership numbers Google Trends data is a fairly decent proxy of viewership and general handball related interest as it tracks how many people are searching for terms like “handball”. It’s by no means a perfect measurement, but generally when more people are searching for a particular topic it’s a strong indication that something has triggered their interest. The CDC even uses such trending data to track coronavirus spread. (i.e. When more people start searching for “COVID symptoms” it’s an indication of possible virus spread. With that in mind here are the results for “handball” searches in the U.S. since Dec 2018.

As you can see there are two big spikes, both Men’s World Championships, but the 2021 WC is actually a little bit below the 2019 WC. Or, to put it another way, the NBC Olympic Channel in 2019 actually trumps ESPN+ in 2021 a little bit.

If ESPN+ handball broadcasts had truly been groundbreaking this chart would have looked much different. In particular, the 2021 WC spike would have been at 100 and the 2019 WC spike would be much smaller in relative terms. For some insight as to what that chart would look like take a look at this chart which tracks handball searches for a longer period, since January, 2016.

Think the Olympics aren’t a really big deal for handball in the U.S.?… Think again. Look how just two weeks of Olympics exposure on NBC dwarfs everything else and turns the big WC spikes on the first chart into little bumps of minor significance. Now I wasn’t expecting ESPN coverage to create another Olympics sized bump, but I was certainly hoping for it to have some positive effect.

What I Wished Google Trends had Told Us

What was I hoping for? Perhaps something like this:

Yes, maybe half an Olympics bump and with a trailing edge that stays higher with more handball continued to being broadcast on ESPN. Content like the EHF Champions League and the upcoming Olympic Qualification Tournaments. Maybe even USA related content like our College National Championships or the upcoming NACHC Sr Women’s Handball Championships later this year.

Instead, a month later handball is gone from ESPN. It’s almost like it was never even there.

So, two weeks of handball on America’s top sports network had little effect. In Part 2, I will assess “why” this was the case and what might be needed to improve the end results for future handball broadcasts on American TV and web streaming platforms.

What if Shaq Had Played Handball?

The Shaq of Handball and the Shaq of Basketball

I generally am pretty annoyed with 10 second newbie analysis of how great athletes from other sports could take up handball and totally dominate. But, the exploits of Gautheir Mvumbi got me thinking… What if Shaq had played handball?

Gauthier Mvumbi: The Shaq of Handball

With little doubt the most fun story of the 2021 IHF Men’s Handball Championships was RD Congo’s Gauthier Mvumbi. Christened the “Shaq of Handball”, Mvumbi was officially listed as 6’4″ and 242 lbs (192 cm / 110 kg), but some reports indicated he was closer to 300 lbs / 137 kg).

Regardless, of how much he actually weighed he was an absolute blast to watch. When he first ran out on the court I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who chuckled a bit as he lumbered in from the sideline and posted up on the 6 meter crease. I’m sure there were many who also snickered at the overweight player and said to themselves, “This guy has no business playing handball in a World Championship.”

However, it didn’t take long for everyone watching to assess that once he got the ball the circle runner was pretty darn effective, scoring 20 goals on 23 attempts. And, remarkably agile for some of his size. I’m a little taller and also played circle runner, but my playing weight was closer to 200 lbs. I can’t even imagine moving the same way with another 100 lbs on my frame. But, for Mvumbi it was no problem. Gather the ball… turn… shake off the would be defenders… and dive in to score.

Mvumbi’s play generated quite a bit of media attention. He even got a shout out from the Shaquille O’Neal on Instagram.

Article with links to several photos and videos of Gauthier Mvumbi in action: Link

Shaquille O’Neal: The Shaq of Basketball

But, if we are going to call someone the Shaq of Handball, it’s worthwhile spending a little time remembering the impact Shaquille O’Neal had on the sport of basketball. Our memories fade and, if one is younger, such memories don’t even exist. Shaq, especially in the early days of his playing career was a very agile player. I don’t know how many times I heard a commentator say that “it was almost unfair that a player of such size could move so well.” At the apex of his career if Shaq got the ball in the low post he was pretty much unstoppable. About the only thing most players could do was foul him and make him shoot free throws. A strategy that eventually evolved to the infamous “Hack a Shaq” whereby teams started fouling Shaq even when he was nowhere near the basket. The rules were also changed to allow zone defenses and this also made it easier for teams to defend against him and over time it arguably led to the NBA game’s greater emphasis on the 3 point shot.

For more insight this video provides a pretty good in depth analysis of just how hard he was to defend: Link

My Encounter with Shaq Many Years Ago

Just about everybody has stories where they’ve met someone famous and, while I never actually engaged Shaquille O’Neal in conversation my brief encounter with him way back in 1989, as I will explain, was a real eye opener. How brief of an encounter? Real brief. Seriously, all I did was stand next to him in the cafeteria line at the 1989 Olympic Festival in Oklahoma. The Olympic Festivals were a multi-sport event that the U.S. held in non-Olympic years and I was there playing handball while a 17 year old Shaq was there, of course, for basketball.

Back then I was a close follower of NCAA college basketball and I had heard about this big center that was going to play at LSU next year. That he had dominated in high school and that was going to be the next Patrick Ewing or David Robinson.

Well, I’ve never stood next to either of those big centers, but I’ve stood next to other folks in their height range. When you’re used to being taller than 99% of the people you meet on a daily basis it’s always a bit of a novelty to look up to someone else. And, if you’re an athlete you size them up and wonder to yourself, “I wonder if I could play against them? Could I get my turn around jumper off if I really faded away.” And, I could actually rationalize playing against taller players on offense. Not, that I would get the best of them, but that I could compete. Defense against a taller player, however, would be tougher. It’s just the nature of the game in basketball. Against taller players you’ve got to be physical and hold your ground. Still, if you’re an athlete you always think you can compete.

And, then I stood next to Shaq…

It’s one thing for someone to be tall, but it’s another thing entirely for someone be immense. And, Shaq is immense. I’ve never felt so small in my entire life. Back then he was probably around 7’1″, 290 lbs. Could I compete against Shaq on defense? If he posted me up could I have held my ground? Uh… Sorry, no chance in hell. I would have needed two of me to double team him. And, even then it would have been all about keeping him from getting the ball.

Shaq… as the Shaq of Handball

But, enough of this basketball talk. What, if Shaq had played handball? How would that have played out? It’s actually a question that I’ve pondered about since that brief encounter with Shaq many years ago.

I’ve played defense against some burly circle runners and they were always a bit of a challenge for my slighter build especially if they established a solid position on the 6 meter line. But, usually it was a challenge that I could counter with a height advantage and long arms to fend off would be entry passes. I’m not saying I won all these battles, but I am saying that I could compete.

However, I never played against anyone the size of Gauthier Mvumbi and during the World Championships I got to thinking how I would have played him. And, basically it would have been a lot of darting back and forth trying to stay between him and the ball. I’d like to think that I would have deflected a few entry passes into him, but I also saw how defenders were struggling to get around to the other side. Mvumbi takes up a fare amount of space and it’s a long way around.

And, then one contemplates the hypothetical of Shaquille O’Neal taking the place of Gauthier Mvumbi…

6’4″/300 lbs (192 cm/110 kg) vs 7’1″/320 lbs (216 cm/145 kg).

Heavier and taller. And… way more mobile and athletic. One defender guarding Shaq on the 6 meter line and keeping him from getting the ball? Sorry. No chance in hell for me and most humans. Maybe all humans? Why, I think even a guy like Bence Banhidi of Hungary/Szeged would struggle and he’s listed at 6’9″/265 lbs (206 cm/120 kgs).

Further, Shaq would not have been a one dimensional offensive player. I think Shaq would have had some limitations on the defensive side of the court, but he’d do alright. Basically he would be a quicker and more physical Dainas Kristopans. Someone that might struggle 1v1 against quicker players, but also someone that backcourt players wouldn’t like running into.

The “Would Be” Shaq Effect

How good of a handball player would Shaq have been? Well, offensively, especially after he figured out the basic circle runner placement and moves, I think he would have dominated the game much the way he did in basketball at his peak. Arguably, if Shaq were paired with one of the world’s top backcourts such a tandem would be unstoppable and even more dominating than the Kobe-Shaq 3 peat Lakers.

As I see it a Shaq that knows how to play handball would require at least 1.5 players guarding him at all times. Because of Shaq’s size and quickness it’s a virtually certainty that with just a bit of maneuvering he could set up shop anywhere he wanted to on the 6 meter line. Watch this video of Shaq pushing 7’1″, 235 lb David Robinson around: Link

One defender would need to closely guard him to deny the entry pass and one defender (the half) would need to keep an eye on him ready to closely guard him should the ball swing to the other side.

Of course, this is how defense against circle runners is often done against mere mortals. There’s some variance as to the defense alignment and the relative strengths of the offensive players. And, that’s where a Shaq like player would just trash up defenses. That’s because that “1.5 players” guarding him would sometimes become for all practical purposes 2 players.

And, if one pairs Shaq with a backcourt like Mikkel Hansen or Sander Sagosen… What does the defense do? If they come out to help out at 9 meters they leave Shaq with just one defender and he’s a big target for an entry pass. If they stay close to Shaq it’s too easy for a quality backcourt to score.

In a sense we already have an example where this dilemma is played out. It’s basically what happens when defenses pull their goalkeeper and go 7v6. The extra circle runner typically forces defenses to a 6-0 defensive alignment thereby opening up backcourt scoring opportunities. Of course, the drawback of the 7v6 is the open goal at the other end.

But, the Shaq effect would essentially be almost like playing 7v6 without having to pull your GK.

There’s Only One Shaq

Long time readers to this site know that I’ve religiously maligned and taken to task handball newbies who speculate how athletes like Lebron James (Part 1 and Part 2) would dominate team handball. So why doesn’t this logic also apply to Shaq? Two reasons:

  1. Shaq would clearly have played circle runner. Circle runner is the easiest position to learn how to play. Not surprisingly it’s also where there have been some successful transitions from other sports like basketball. Teaching someone how to play backcourt effectively is a much more difficult prospect. It can be done, but not quickly.
  2. There’s only one Shaq. Seriously, only a couple of people have even come close to the combination of size and quickness. Wilt Chamberlain in his era. Zion Williamson is kind of a miniature Shaq. But, yeah Shaq is pretty much literally a 1 in 10 billion kind of a guy. And, just like he forever changed basketball he would have done the same thing in handball.

2021 Handball World Championships Betting Review (Part 1): Hunches, Descat and a Humbling Performance

Hugo Descat: Sharp Action’s MVP for the 2021 World Championships.

During the 2021 IHF Handball World Championships, I conducted another daily betting experiment. Joining me this year was Sharp Action, who’s Twitter profile reads, “Former Handball player for HBC Nantes providing expert advice for sport betting.” We both started with a $1,000 bankroll a couple of days after the tournament started. Our bet sizes varied, but the standard “unit bet” was $100. Here’s how our respective bank rolls went up and down on a day to day basis:

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out who had a better campaign. I lost a hypothetical $282 while Sharp Action made a tidy profit of $732.69.

Overall, I made 12 bets, winning 4 and losing 8. As most of my bets were less than 50-50 propositions, a .500 betting mark would not have been required to break even. Probably, a winning percentage of .460 or a 6-7 record if I had made 13 bets instead of 12. Regardless, I clearly fell short of that expectation and lost money.

As mentioned, Sharp Action had a phenomenal tournament with several good calls and far fewer misses. His betting W-L record for the tournament was 18-9. Since he tended to bet favorites this record is a bit inflated, but no matter how you slice it’s pretty damn good.

Arguably, his most astute pick and observation was noticing a huge disconnect on the total goals scored props that were being offered for French left wing, Hugo Descat. Descat was sharing a lot of playing time with veteran Michael Guigou and perhaps the bookies didn’t think he would get enough playing time. Or, maybe they did not recognize what an effective and consistent scorer he was. Regardless, Sharp Action saw that they were really underestimating Descat, and “Victor” Hugo came through 3 times for a nice profit of $273. Seriously, seeing how Descat blew right past 2.5 goals each time, after the fact, it looks like taking candy from a baby.

Sharp Action “Victor” Hugo Bets

Humbling Results, but Don’t Feel Sorry for Me

Well, the hypothetical debt is start to pile up. Last year, I participated in a similar experiment and lost $115. This year I did even worse, losing $282. Maybe, I’ve got a gambling problem? Good thing I moved out of Vegas, but maybe not such a good thing that online sports betting is now legal in Colorado?

Rest assured everyone. I didn’t lose my shorts. Let’s just say my typical betting unit is around $10 (not $100), meaning I loss $28.20 for the bets recorded above. And, did I make other bets? Did I by chance, jump on the Sharp Action bandwagon for some of his suggestions I found persuasive? I sure did. I haven’t done a full accounting, but I’m actually on the plus side for the World Championships in real money.

Really, the only thing I’ve lost is my handball expert pride. Because I clearly don’t have anything to back up my would be knowledge. On the contrary, there’s now documented evidence that clearly demonstrates that I don’t know what I’m talking about. And, this leads to the following rhetorical question:

Ever Wonder Why “Experts” Rarely (if Ever) Make Betting Predictions?

Seriously, there’s probably not a more powerful way to demonstrate how much you really know about a sport then to open your wallet and go out and consistently pick winners.

Well, there are a number of reasons why so called experts don’t make predictions. It could be that they have personal morality issues with gambling or simply don’t want to be seen as endorsing something that others have issue with… But, there’s one reason that rises above all others.

  • It’s really hard and there’s a solid chance when all is said and done that they are not going to look like much of an expert.

Yeah, your credibility is at stake. It’s better to just take a pass.

Flensburg 2014

At times like this I will always, always take solace with having been remarkably right once. And, that was when I made my EHF Champions League Final Four predictions prior to the 2013-14 season. I selected all 4 teams that would make it to Cologne and the eventual winner, Flensburg before even a single match had been played. It’s on YouTube and no matter how poorly I screw up forever forward, I will always look back and smile… They can’t take that away from me.

Gloating from 2014: I Heart Flensburg: Link

Preseason Perfection: Documented on YouTube

But, could someone be more consistently win on handball bets by relying less on hunches and more on discipline and predictive models. The answer appears to be yes and I will explore this in more detail in a follow on commentary

USA Men after the 2021 World Championships (Part 1): A Review of What Might have Happened

The U.S. Team training in Denmark. How the U.S. might have fared at the 2021 World Championships.

Summary page of all USA news and commentary related to the 2021 IHF Men’s Handball World Championship: Link

A Missed Benchmarking Opportunity

Participation in a major handball tournament is often a point for further discussion. An opportunity to assess where a program currently stands and where it might be headed. Most definitely, the U.S. Men’s participation in a World Championships for the first time in 20 years would have been such an opportunity. Alas, due to multiple positive COVID test results such benchmarking didn’t get to take place. However, that doesn’t preclude me from providing some informed speculation as to what might have happened.

Projected Team USA Results (Assuming our Full Roster had been Available) 

As someone who has seen almost every match the U.S. has played in the past two years I feel that I’ve a pretty good idea of what they were “capable” of achieving and I was really looking forward to the prospect of Team USA surprising the Handball world. I say “surprising” because the expectations of most people were pretty low based on past results that simply weren’t very relevant anymore. In particular, much was written about how Greenland had performed historically better in North American Championships, but such writeups also neglected to mention that the U.S. roster had recently added several accomplished dual citizens to its roster.

Overall, with these new roster additions, I would assess that the U.S. is roughly comparable now to a 2nd Division German Bundesliga team. A big part of this logic are two of those additions, Ian and Patrick Hueter, who both start for Dormagen, currently in 4th place in that league. If one substitutes the other positions at Dormagen with athletes like Drew Donlin (Leon) and Alex Chan (Cisne) who play in the Liga ASOBAL, Pál Merkovszki who plays in Hungary’s top division (Gyöngyösi KK) and Abou Fofana (Angers SCO) in France’s 2nd division, I essentially see another HBL 2 team, perhaps a bit further down in the standings. Further down because our wings and backups at other positions are playing for lower level clubs in Europe. Still some very capable players, but just a notch lower in talent.

And, while a middle of the pack, 2nd Division Germany team would have had little hope against teams like Norway and France, such a side would have done fine vs many of the teams in the President’s Cup. And, if the U.S. had played really well and gotten some luck, they could have even beat Austria, a side that might be comparable (with their 2 top backcourts missing) to an all star 2nd Division Bundesliga side. I’m not in any way saying such a victory would have happened, just that it wasn’t as crazy a proposition some people thought it was.

For a more detailed analysis of the U.S. 20 man roster check out this previous post: Link

Taking into account the relative strength of the U.S. roster and their would have been opponents here is my assessment of how likely each team would have won a head to head matchup

  • Preliminary Group E
    • USA (10%) vs Austria (90%)
    • USA (<1%) vs Norway (>99%)
    • USA (<1%) vs France (>99%)
  • President’s Group II
    • USA (60%) vs Morocco (40%)
    • USA (15%) vs Chile (85%)
    • USA (75%) vs S Korea (25%)
  • Placement Match (would have been one of the following)
    • For 25th: USA (10%) vs Tunisia (90%) or
    • For 27th: USA (60%) vs DR Congo (40%) or
    • For 29th: USA (40%) vs Angola (60%) or
    • For 31st: USA (win by forfeit) vs Cape Verde

Team USA Results (Assuming our Full Roster had NOT been Available) 

It’s worth noting, that the U.S., according to press reports, briefly considered sending a significantly weaker roster to the World Championships after several players tested positive for COVID-19. This roster would have consisted of 12 players that had tested negative with the addition of 8 more athletes from the provisional roster that hadn’t been at the training camp.

I don’t know the exact composition of who would have been on this revamped roster, but U.S. Head Coach, Robert Hedin, is quoted as saying we didn’t have any defense. That could be interpreted in a number of ways, but I’ll interpret it to mean that it wasn’t clear who our goalkeeper would be and that most of our stable of 6’4″ plus defenders in the middle 4 positions would be unavailable.

While I respect the hard work and effort of all of the athletes on our 35 man provisional roster, there’s a considerable drop off in talent after the first 10 or so players. I would assess that a U.S. team missing several key players would not have won any matches and I suspect some of the losses could have been major blowouts in the 30 goal range. Again, it’s hard to say without seeing exactly who would have been available. But, keep in mind, that most, if not all of the 8 athletes that would have been added had not, due to the pandemic, even played handball for several months. Further, there probably would have been even more positive test results after the team arrived in Egypt that very likely would have resulted in a Cape Verde situation with limited athletes available and an eventual withdrawal from the tournament.

In short, it would have been a very bad look for a U.S. team returning to the world stage. I don’t know how everything was factored into the U.S. decision to withdraw, but this announcement does indicate that the U.S. would have been unable to field a competitive team prior to the first match vs Austria.

The USA Withdrawal Announcement

Benchmarking the USA Team

So, assuming that the U.S. had been able to send a full roster what would have been the overall assessment? Well, this largely becomes an assessment of how the U.S. would have performed in all of their matches. Using the expected win percentages of individual matches above here’s my qualitative assessment of how the U.S. might have fared overall:

  • Spectacular: Upset over Austria or Winning the President’s Cup; Further, surprisingly competitive matches against top teams like France and Norway.
  • Great: 3 wins (S Korea, Morocco and RD Congo) for 27th place
  • Average: 2 wins (S Korea and then either Morocco or Angola) for either 28th or 29th place
  • Disappointing: 1 win (S Korea) and 30th place
  • Disaster: No wins and 31st place only because Cape Verde had forfeited

There are so many variables and circumstances to consider here that it would be an increasingly speculative narrative to guess what might have happened. With that in mind, I’ll benchmark with what I think was the most likely outcome: 2 wins in the President’s Cup.

But narratively, there would have been a lot more to talk about than those 2 wins. I think the U.S. would have first performed respectively in the Preliminary Group, perhaps giving Austria a good match before a run of turnovers put the match out of reach. Against France and Norway there would never have been any doubt as to the outcome, but there would also been sequences of good play where folks watching the match would have said, “These Americans are competing. They’re making France/Norway work a little here.”

In the President’s Cup against teams with similar individual talent levels, there would have been more revelations especially with the U.S. picking up a couple of wins and showing further improvement and cohesiveness as a team.

By the end of the tournament, the consensus of most would be that this was a U.S. team that had shown they could play some real handball. Further, thanks to a relatively young roster and an Olympic Games in 2028, it was a side with strong potential for further improvement.

We’ll Never Know… but there’s a Point to this Speculation

Frustratingly, we’ll never know what would have actually happened. So, you might rightly argue what’s the point of this speculation?

Well, the point is that whether folks realize it or not some major decisions will need to be made in the not too distant future regarding the future direction of the U.S. Men’s National Team Program. These decisions will center around how to make the U.S. team more competitive and how much should be spent to make that happen.

And, what does the U.S. want to officially make happen? Well, according to the USA Team Handball Strategic Plan the U.S. wants to finish in the top 12 at the 2023 World Championships, qualify for the 2024 Olympics and finish in the top 6 at the 2028 Olympic Games: Link

Is that realistic? I’ve got my doubts: Link But, regardless if one is going to plan for the future you really, really need to benchmark where you currently stand first. How else can one even begin to project what “more” is needed if you don’t understand what you have?

It would have been far better to have the definitive benchmark of actual competition, but lacking that informed speculation is the next best thing.

So, it’s not perfect, but we’ve got an idea now of “what we have”. In part 2, I’ll address what’s needed to further improve the U.S. Men’s National Team.

3 Quarterfinals at the Same Time: Big Problem? Not Really. Just Watch 2 of Them on Thursday

Why not watch These 2 Huge Quarterfinals on Thursday. Even with Bonus English Language Commentary from me and Chris O’Reilly.

I haven’t written about “time shifting” in a while, but with 3 quarterfinal matches scheduled for the exact same time… There may never be a better time for handball fans to adopt this viewing strategy.

What’s Time Shifting?

Basically, it’s just a fancy way of saying watching something later instead of live. It’s certainly not rocket science, but honestly I’m a bit puzzled why more folks don’t do it. Basically, all you’re sacrificing is real time social media engagement. And, yes it actually is a bit of a sacrifice when you’re watching a match alone. Reading tweets and IG during the match and at halftime can create a fun “two screen” community experience.

But, with 3 matches all at the same time? It won’t be a two screen experience. No, it will be a 4 screen experience and that any pilot will tell you that is “task saturation.” Honestly, two matches at the same time is impossible for me… At least from a true enjoyment/engagement perspective. I typically end up spending 90% of my time on one match and occasionally glancing at the other during timeouts. Heck, I often even find myself psychologically happy when the other match is a blowout because I can say to myself, “Well, I’m not missing much.” But, tomorrow, I won’t be surprised if all 3 of those late matches are close. Surely, at least two of the three will be.

Don’t Worry. We Got You Covered

So here’s the game plan for the quarterfinals. Watch the 1st match between Denmark and Egypt which is on all by itself and then watch the Sweden-Qatar match live. Both of these will have English language commentary with Paul Bray. In the U.S. you can watch these matches on ESPN+. In the rest of the world you can watch them on the IHF Youtube channel. Depending on where you live though you might need to take some extra measures.

Then after you’ve watched those 2 matches live you can watch Norway-Spain and France-Hungary at your leisure. And, with the semifinals not taking place until Friday, you will have all of Thursday to watch.

Bonus English Language Commentary

As an additional bonus I’ll post some English language commentary for both of those matches. I’m doing the France-Hungary match while ehfTV commentator, Chris O’Reilly will do commentary for Norway-Spain. These commentaries will be on an MP3 file and I will provide instructions on how to synch up the English with the video here: Link

UPDATE: Here are Direct Links to the Video and Audio

  • Spain vs Norway (-1.5) (YouTube)
    • Commentary MP3 with Chris O’Reilly: Full Match MP3
      • 1st Half (Set YouTube Clock to 7:30)
      • 2nd Half (Set YouTube Clock to 1:00:30) (MP3 time: 42:20)
    • Be sure to listen to Chris and the other lads on (Un)Informed Handball Hour
  • France (-2.5) vs Hungary  (YouTube)
    • Commentary MP3 with John Ryan

Social Media Habits Die Hard

Of course, for maximum enjoyment you’ll want to watch oblivious to the final outcome. And, doing so can be real hard…But, just do it. Put down the phone. Trust me, you’ll be glad you did.

Handball on ESPN+ (A Review at the Halfway Mark)

The current Handball icon at ESPN+. Can somebody out there design a better one?

As we are about halfway through the IHF Men’s Handball World Championships I thought it might be a good time to review the ESPN+ Handball web streaming product.

The Viewing Experience

Overall, the viewing experience has been pretty good, albeit with a few hiccups. For me personally, watching streamed content is pretty much like watching regular TV. Occasionally, I’ll get a little buffering or pixelation, but overall the picture quality is outstanding and better than what I get via YouTube. I’ve been watching via the ESPN+ app on Roku and it’s pretty much like watching Netflix or Amazon Prime for me.

There have been a few glitches with the audio as sometimes the English commentary track has been missing. Usually, just a few minutes at the start of the first match, but on the 19th it went missing the whole day for some reason. I tweeted to @espnfansupport, but perhaps a few more voices were needed to get their attention to fix it.

Finding the matches has also been a bit challenging at times. Most notably, upcoming handball matches don’t show up in the upcoming matches section on the app until maybe 5 minutes prior to the start of the match. This has led to my consternation and to others who would message me “where’s the match?” when there is nothing to see on the ESPN+ app related to handball.

A Disappointing Lack of Promotion (So Far)

As one who’s trumpeted ESPN’s broadcasting of handball as the biggest and most important development in the entire history of team handball in the United States let’s just say that so far the promotion of the sport has been underwhelming. (For an amusing discussion on my expectations and the resigned viewpoint from another longtime follower of the sport (Chris Cappelman) check out this Facebook discussion: Link).

I guess my expectations were directly related to the way ESPN hypes and promotes sports on their very popular social media channels. Most notably, two Sports Center Instagram posts (Link 1 and Link 2) from back in 2017 and 2018 are probably the most viral handball related posts in U.S. history. Simonet’s behind the back shot got 1.2M views and Sigurdsson’s penalty shot punch in got 2.2M views. My logic: Wow, if ESPN was hyping handball when it wasn’t even being shown on ESPN, just imagine what they will do when it’s their content. (Background stories on ESPN posts: Link 1 and Link 2).

Sigurdsson on ESPN’s Instagram Account

And, if one goes back further in time, who can possibly forget the attention that Scott Van Pelt and others paid the sport during the 2012 Olympics: Link

Scott Van Pelt’s “Handball Talk” was a daily feature during the 2012 Olympics

Again, I kind of figured that if ESPN talk radio got excited about handball when it was broadcast on NBC, maybe they would get really excited when it was their own product. At the very least I thought they would talk a little bit about handball while it was simultaneously being broadcast on ESPN+. Interviews with U.S. coaches or players. Maybe some discussion on Gauthier Mvumbi’s viral videos and shout out from Shaquille O’Neal? Instead, I haven’t heard a peep. Heck, at times it feels as if handball was still on beIN Sports.

We’re only half way through the Championship, though, so there’s time for things to pick up. We shouldn’t also forget that the U.S. withdrawal from the tournament was a huge setback. One, that for a short while even had me worried that ESPN wasn’t going to broadcast any matches. It also didn’t help that the NFL playoffs were in full swing. After Sunday’s conference finals there’s a two week lull until the Super Bowl. And, at the same time the World Championships really get going with the Quarterfinals, Semis and the Championships on the 31 when there is no football on TV. Yes, things could definitely pick up.

A Bright Spot: Handball on ESPN+ Long After the World Championships are Over

While I would greatly prefer for the World Championships to be on ESPN’s linear channels where it would reach virtually every home in the U.S. there are some advantages to being on the lower profile, web streaming only, ESPN+.

A Targeted Audience: The first advantage is that this smaller audience is also very, very sports oriented. Or, to put it another way, the type of sports fan who would be more inclined to watch something they maybe have never seen before or perhaps just once or twice during the Olympics several years ago. Further, they are more inclined to become a greater fan of the sport. And, if they are young enough they might even investigate finding out more about possibly playing the sport.

A Home for More Handball Content: This ties to another advantage of ESPN+. Namely, it could become a home for additional handball content. Suppose these new fans want to continue to watch handball. Many of those potential new fans probably think they will have to wait for the next Olympics or World Championships. After all, this is just some game that a P.E. teacher made up. Well, what better way could there possibly be to educate these new fans on the wonders of the EHF Champions League than to put Champions League matches on ESPN+ (ATTN ESPN: Those rights are available) Or, what about adding some U.S. content like our National Team matches or the Collegiate National Championships. Just think what a recruiting tool this could be? Why imagine some intramural all-star at Wake Forest seeing North Carolina playing Virginia in the Collegiate Handball Final Four and instantly thinking, “We could kick those guys asses.”

Forever Content: And, this leads to the final advantage of handball on ESPN+. The fact that streaming services aren’t limited by hours in a day. During the dog days of summer when there’s nothing new on TV, handball could still be on ESPN+ just waiting for someone new to discover. New fans, new player, new sponsors not just during a magical two weeks during the Olympics every four years. But, a trickle coming in at all times of the year. Here’s what that handball sub-channel could look like:

A Better Handball Icon is Needed

It took awhile, but ESPN has finally added handball to its list of sports on the ESPN+ App.

Unfortunately, it’s not the best icon or logo for handball, but just a placeholder. Maybe we can help out ESPN with a better icon. There are several examples from other sports there for comparison. But, this is actually a little bit tricky, for a couple of reasons. One, there is the other handball in the U.S. so that causes confusion. And, then a simple ball drawing could easily result in something that looks like another soccer ball. So, we need something simple that says “our handball.” If anybody out there has got some artistic or design talent… show us what you got.

Why do Handball Coaches Insist on Using the 7v6 Offensive Strategy?: Because it Works Really Well Sometimes: Revisiting Serbia’s Upset Victory over the Netherlands

Lois Abbingh and Martine Smeets are all smiles after back to back empty net goals give the Netherlands a 6 goal lead over Serbia with 17 minutes left in the match. Yet again, the stupid, desperation 7v6 strategy is failing miserably…

We’ve all seen it… We’ve all thrown objects at the TV… We’ve all cursed at the stupid coach when yet another ball is casually thrown into the empty net. The 7v6 strategy is a hopeless strategy and it never works… Except when it does.

Down 6 at the Half and Running out of Options

Lost in the midst of Croatia’s incredible run of surprising wins at the 2020 Women’s European Championship was arguably the most remarkable upset of the entire tournament: Serbia’s come from behind 29-25 defeat of the Netherlands in the preliminary round.

The match surely didn’t look like an upset for the first 43 minutes of the game. At halftime the defending World Champions, the Netherlands, had a commanding 15-9 lead and to make matters worse for Serbia they had lost their star player, Andrea Lekić, to injury. Without any obvious solutions, Serbian coach, Ljubomir Obradovic, decided to switch things up dramatically at halftime, choosing to employ the 7v6 offensive strategy. This tactic involves pulling your GK on offense and replacing them with an extra player on offense. This is called 7v6 since the offensive set has 7 offensive court players playing against 6 defensive court players.

7v6 Pros and Cons

The one obvious advantage to this strategy is that, in theory, one offensive player is always open and unguarded by the defense. The other less obvious advantage is that the extra circle runner generally forces defenses to hug the 6 meter line more closely, thus opening up more jump shot possibilities.

The obvious drawback to this strategy is the open net at the other end of the court. If you turn the ball over chances are the defense is going to get an easy goal. The same is true if the GK makes a clean save and retrieves the ball quickly, or worse, catches it. Perhaps nothing demonstrates this more ably than this video compilation that the (Un)informed Handball hour put together to highlight Croatia’s use of the strategy against Brazil at the 2019 Men’s World Championship. The six empty net goals were certainly a huge factor in Brazil’s 29-26 upset win.

The First 11 Minutes of the 2nd Half: Decent Results, but Simply Trading Goals

The first 11 minutes of the 2nd half: Trading Goals

Serbia – Netherlands Match Video: Link (The 2nd half starts 1:03:27 on the ehfTV clock.)

For the first 11 minutes of the 2nd half the strategy works fairly well. Serbia has 9 possessions using the 7v6 strategy and they score on 5 of them. And, the Netherlands also fails to cash in on two empty net opportunities with GK Tess Wester whiffing on a long shot and Dannick Snelder getting blocked on a fast throw off shot after a made goal, by a just in time return by Serbian GK, Jovana Risovic. At the 38:42 minute mark the score is 20-14 with both teams have scored 5 goals a piece. The Netherlands then gets a 2 minute penalty and Serbia scores 2 goals when playing 6v5, cutting the lead to 20-16.

A Huge Setback: Back to Back Empty Net Goals

Disaster Strikes

With the lead cut to four goals Serbia seemed to be showing some signs of life, but then at the 41:36 minute mark everything seemingly falls apart. On back to back possessions Serbia turns the ball over to the Netherlands for 2 open net goals. In less than a minute the score is 22-16 and the game is right back where it was at the start of the 2nd half, a 6 goal deficit.

There aren’t too many things more demoralizing to a team than a string of empty net goals in quick succession. It’s one thing to give up a goal after playing tough defense for 40 seconds. It’s another thing entirely to watch the other team effortlessly score against literally no defense whatsoever. On more than one occasion I’ve seen obviously demoralized players hanging their head, or worse, glaring with not very well concealed anger toward their coach and the stupid 7v6 strategy the coach is making them play.

We don’t see anything like that, however, from Serbia in the video feed. Instead, we see the Netherlands team with all smiles. The defending World Champions have weathered the storm. They’ve got a 6 goal lead and things are seemingly looking good for them in their opening match of the tournament.

Cue Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture: Time for a 7 Goal Barrage from Serbia

Relentless Execution: 7 straight goals in 6 minutes

But, as we all know in handball, “seemingly” is often replaced with “reality.” And, the reality that happens in just 6 minutes is a combination of great defense at one end combined with a textbook, masterclass in how to execute the 7v6 tactic at the other end. 7 offensive possessions for 7 straight goals and a 22-16 deficit turns into a 23-22 lead. One of the goals is on a fast break, but the other 6 are all scored using the 7v6 offensive strategy. And, the shots come from all over the place. Wing shots, breakthroughs and jump shots now coming from a bit shorter range thanks to the strategy.

Why, if I had better video editing skills I would make a video like the (Un)informed Handball Hour did, but this time I would replace the Dating Game theme with the 1812 overture with each of the 7 goals being synchronized with the cymbal clashes.

Seriously, it’s a rapid and relentless beatdown worth reviewing. For the full effect, start by first watching the Netherlands score their two fast break goals (1:17:15 on the ehfTV clock)

Continued Execution, but at a Less Efficient Pace

Continued success, albeit at a less successful rate.

The remaining 11 minutes offer more of the same, but the success rate drops from perfect to just pretty good. Serbia just scores on 5 of its 8 remaining 7v6 possessions. They also turn the ball over a couple of times with one of those turnovers leading to an empty goal for the Netherlands. Serbia’s defense also allows a couple of more goals for a final score of 29-25.

Keys to Success

Here are a couple of summaries of the 2nd half. First, a look at Serbia’s offensive possessions.

Key 1: High offensive efficiency: 16 of Serbia’s 26 7v6 possessions resulted in a goal, a success rate of 62%. That’s pretty good and certainly better than the 9 for 28 (32%) success rate in the first half. I’d have to do more research on Serbia’s average over several matches, but I think it’s safe to say that 2nd half performance was well above average.

Key 2: GK Readiness: Perhaps, just as important if not more important was Serbia’s GK readiness following 7v6 possession. Of the 26 7v6 possessions their GK was read in the net on 20 of those possessions. And, the Netherlands was only able to cash in with goals on just 3 of the 6 possessions when the GK was either late or not in the goal at all.

The Real Key (scoring instead of turnovers): However, it should be noted there is a huge correlation between 7v6 offensive success (scoring a goal) and GK readiness. And, of course, there is a huge correlation with turnovers and GKs not being ready on the other end.

An Outlier?

Well, clearly this match is documented proof that the 7v6 strategy can be very, very effective. But, is it simply an outlier amongst an overwhelming number of failures like the Brazil-Croatia match? I wish I knew the answer to that question, but I don’t. To varying degrees I’ve seen this strategy work before. In fact, back in 2016, I saw Belgium almost pull off a similar upset against France. At the time, I chalked this up to an unprepared French team that didn’t know how to counteract this new fangled strategy. Four years later, no such excuse can be valid anymore.

Anecdotally, I can assess that this strategy fails more often it works. But, I don’t have the hard data to say how often it works and how often it fails. And, even if I did it would be hard to read too much into it because there are so many other factors to consider. In particular, a big part of Serbia’s comeback was their defense in the 2nd half.

But, here’s one aspect to consider: If one changes just 2 Serbia 7v6 possessions from goals to turnovers it’s likely a 4 goal swing, meaning 29-25 becomes 27-27. One always wants more goals than turnovers, but with 7v6 the impact of that ratio is even more pronounced. Perhaps one could even come up with a benchmark ratio for success if they had enough data.

Finally, regardless of what the numbers might say regarding how unlikely 7v6 was to work for Serbia, the reality is that it worked. And, it surely was more likely to have worked than a conventional strategy would have.

Translation: Sorry 7v6 haters: This strategy isn’t going away anytime soon. Not without a change to the rules, anyway.

Link

A Closer Look at the U.S. 2021 Men’s World Championships 20 Man Roster

Coach Robert Hedin and the selection committee have released the official 20 man roster for the 2021 IHF Men’s World Championships. Here’s a review of the roster from a few different perspectives.

U.S. Roster (By Age)

The USA Men’s National Team Roster (By Age: Youngest to Oldest)

The 20 man roster ranges from 17 Jakob Rysgaard Christensen) to 36 (Gary Hines) and has a very young average age of 23.5. Five of the athletes (Jonas Stromberg, Amar Amitovic, Paul Skorupa, Rene Ingram and Nicholas Robinson) were on the U.S. Jr World Championships team and Pal Merkovsky was on the Hungarian Jr World Championship team.

Much has been said and written about the U.S. getting an unwarranted helping hand to participate in this championship. That the U.S. didn’t earn it’s slot. There’s some truth to that, but no one can argue with one of the rationales for the U.S. bid: That participating in this World Championship will help develop athletes in preparation for the 2028 Olympic Games.

It’s difficult to project out 7.5 years, but the bulk of this talented and youthful roster has a future with the U.S. National Team. We will be seeing several of these athletes in a U.S. uniform in Los Angeles at the 2028 Olympic Games. How many? I’m thinking 5, but it could be as many as 10.

U.S. Roster (By Nation Where Athletes First Played Handball)

The USA Men’s National Team Roster (By Country Where they First Played Handball)

All of these athletes are Americans, but the U.S. is a large nation with a global population. Estimates vary, but as many as 9M American citizens live in another country so it’s no real surprise that some of those 9M learned to play handball where they grew up. In fact, 85% (17 of 20) of the U.S. roster originally played handball in 13 different countries. Germany leads the way with 6 athletes while Denmark, France and Sweden have 2 each. Other nations: Bosnia & Herzegovina (1), Croatia (1), Egypt (1), Hungary (1), Spain (1).

(The fact that the U.S. has so many dual citizen athletes is sometimes seen as controversial, but it shouldn’t be. I addressed this reality and its implications for the U.S. National Team and the sport’s development previously in a series of commentaries Part 1Part 2Part 3)

In terms of the 3 U.S. athletes that were raised stateside, 1 athlete (Drew Donlin) first learned to play at a college club (Air Force), 1 athlete (Ty Reed) is a product of the former Auburn Residency Program and 1 athlete (Gary Hines) was a product of an Atlanta based youth program and the Condors club.

U.S. 20 Man Roster (By Position)

When the 35 Man Provisional Roster was released I did a projection of who I thought would make the Final 20 Man Roster. I was 17 for 20. Here’s a closer look at the 20 Man Roster with some analysis as to why these athletes were selected.

USA Left Wings

Only PANAM Games veteran, Sam Hoddersen, made the 20 man roster. I projected that Lukas Hansen would also make the cut, mostly based on the fact that he plays for a top division Danish Pro Club, Fredericia HK. I’ve heard there may be some issues with his passport, but I don’t know if that was the deciding factor or not. The fact that only 1 left wing was selected and 4 right backs were taken leads me to believe that we will also see a lot of Gary Hines at left wing as well.

USA Left Backs

It was pretty much a given that Fofana and Hines would be selected, but it was less clear who else might get selected here. I had chosen Seb Wheeler based in part on his PANAM Games Alternate selection last year, but the coaching staff went with Amar Amitovic.

USA Center Backs

Again, there was zero doubt that the Team Captain, Ian Hueter and newcomer, Alexandre Chan Blanco, who leads his Liga Asobal club, Cisne, in scoring would make the team, but I went with Amir Seifert as the 3rd option. The coaching staff decided to just take 2 center backs and have identified Michael Williams and Philipp Scholz as potential replacements.

Also, another factor to take into account. Chan and Hueter might both be worthy of starting and playing a lot of minutes. I won’t be surprised to see both of these athletes on the court at the same time with one of them moving to left or right back.

USA Right Backs

For me right back was the hardest position to project. The PANAM Games roster had no true right backs on its roster. A situation that was problematic at times. Now for the World Championships the U.S. will have 4 right backs. However, each of these athletes have question marks. Briffe played professionally in France, but hasn’t been able to play indoors in the U.S. due to the pandemic. Elzoghby played great for the U.S. back in 2010-11 but was less impressive in friendlies last year. Stromberg played well at Jr World’s, but is he ready for the Sr level? And, of course, the same is true for Christiansen who is just 17. (He must really have potential to be selected at that age). I suspect that the coaching staff (like me) is a little in the dark and will use the training camp to figure out who emerges from these 4 options.

USA Right Wings

I only projected Reed and Binderis getting selected here, but Nicolai Weber must also have impressed with his game film. Reed is the projected starter and I suspect the coaching staff will use the training camp to evaluate who will be the primary backup.

USA Circle Runners

The U.S. is well stocked at circle runner and I think these four athletes will all get significant playing time. And, we will likely see two circle runners playing on offense some of the time and on defense most of the time with one of these 4 also subbing in as a defensive specialist. Alex Binderis is the victim of a deep depth chart and was selected as an alternate.

USA Goalkeepers

Last year, I thought the U.S. was lucky to have 2 young, quality goalkeepers with a future. Now we have 3? And, the new addition, Pal Merkovsky, may even be better. That’s crazy good fortune. It should be a great training camp with all 3 GKs looking to impress the coaching staff. I know nothing about the other 2 GKs selected as alternates, but in this time of COVID, where multiple positive test results is a real threat, keeping extra GKs as alternates that can be called up is a wise move.

Previous Articles Assessing the USA Men’s Player Pool

  • American Citizen Male Athletes (Overview): Link
  • USA Men’s Elite Player Pool (Overview): Link
  • USA Men’s National Team (Part 1: A Closer Look by Position- GK and CR): Link
  • USA Men’s National Team (Part 2: A Closer Look by Position- BC and RW/LW): Link

Breaking Down the U.S. Men’s National Team 2021 Handball World Championships Provisional Roster

The IHF and USA Team Handball have posted the 35 man provisional roster for the 2021 World Championships.  Here are some break downs of the roster by age, where athletes first learned handball and by position.

USA Provisional Roster (Youngest to Oldest)

U.S. Provisional Roster (Youngest to Oldest)

The ages on the 35 man roster range from 16 to 36 with an average age of 23.9. This is surely one of the youngest teams every for the U.S. and this is due to quite a few younger dual citizens list on the provisional roster. Almost a third of the roster (11 of 35) are under 21 and could form the nucleus of a pretty decent Jr team.

USA Provisional Roster (Nation Where they First Played Handball)

U.S. WC Roster (Where they First Played Handball)

All of these athletes are Americans, but the U.S. is a large nation with a global population. Estimates vary, but as many as 9M American citizens live in another country so it’s no real surprise that some of those 9M learned to play handball where they grew up. In fact, 80% (28 of 35) of the U.S. roster originally played handball in 13 different countries. Germany leads the way with 7 athletes followed by Sweden with 5. Other nations: Denmark (3), France (2), Bosnia & Herzegovina (2), Croatia (2), Austria (1), Colombia (1), Egypt (1), Hungary (1), Israel (1), Norway (1), Spain (1).

(The fact that the U.S. has so many dual citizen athletes is sometimes seen as controversial, but it shouldn’t be. I addressed this reality and its implications for the U.S. National Team and the sport’s development previously in a series of commentaries Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

In terms of the 7 U.S. athletes that were raised stateside, 3 athletes (Hamm, Kennedy and Donlin) are products of Collegiate Clubs, 3 athletes (Lee, Reed and King) are products of the former Auburn Residency Program and 1, Gary Hines, was a product of an Atlanta based youth program and the Condors club.

USA Provisional Roster (By Position)

I’ve broken out the provisional roster by each position listed for the athletes on the roster. I’ve also taken a stab at projecting the 20 man roster. As, often is the case, this was a relatively simple task for the first 15 or so, but much more difficult as one gets nearer the cut line. Further complicating the task are these factors:

  • Some of these athletes have never played for the U.S. before (and, I’ve never seen them play before).
  • Some of these athletes have been playing regularly and some athletes haven’t been playing at all due to the pandemic. This could clearly boost the chances of athletes who are already in game shape.
  • The coaching staff might factor in long term plans for the U.S. and this could give a boost to a younger player’s consideration.
  • Generally, rosters contain 2 at every position and then a couple of extra players. With an expanded 20 man roster it’s tougher to project which positions will take 3 or more athletes.

That said, here’s my depth chart at each position with the athletes in green getting my nod. Again, I’m flying somewhat blind here, but we’ll see how close I come. For sure, I don’t envy the tough, real decisions the coaching staff will have to make.

USA WC Roster (Left Wings)

Sam Hoddersen was a steady performer at the PANAM Games, but projecting the #2 is challenging. Lukas Hansen is an unknown quantity, but plays on the youth team for one of Denmark’s top clubs, Frederica. And, he’s even played a few matches for their pro team in Denmark’s top level of play. Michael Lee and Michael King were alternates For the PANAM Games and will also get consideration. Juan Felipe Zabala Carvajal plays for Inter Miami and I’m not familiar with his play. A further wild card: Gary Hines has shown that he can play this position as well.

USA WC Roster (Left Backs)

Abou Fofana is the projected starter at Left Back and Gary Hines will also likely play some there as well. Hines could also, however, ending up playing Right Back like he did at the PANAM Games or Left Wing as well. I see Seb Wheeler as the 3rd option here ahead of the other Left Backs listed.

USA WC Roster (Center Backs)

Ian Hueter is the key to the U.S. offense and has been playing well this season for his club team, Dormagen. Alexandre Chan Blanco is the biggest newcomer to the U.S. roster and leads his Liga Asobal club, Cisne, in scoring with 79 goals this season in 14 matches. He’ll play some at CB, but I’m thinking he might also be moved to RB as well. Certainly, he is in playing form and the U.S. will need to find a spot for him. I think Amir Seifert is the 3rd option here, but, a case could also be made for Aaron Hamm, who played at Jr Worlds. Also, Michael Williams makes a return after a long absence. He was a key player on the 2011 PANAM Games squad, but I haven’t seen him play since.

USA WC Roster (Right Backs)

Overall, I found this position the toughest to project. For the PANAM Games, coach Hedin chose to have Gary Hines play quite a bit of RB which was a bit out of position for him. In theory, none of these players could make the roster in favor of left backs and center backs moving over to right back. If, however the U.S. chooses to go with a left hander at this position, Benjamin Briffe is the most experienced option. He played a few years in France’s highest pro league, but he is currently living in the U.S., and thanks to the pandemic, he’s unlikely to be in game shape. Jonas Stromberg is an up and coming player that is showing progress and Adam Elzhoghby is another experienced option. There’s something to be said, as well, to having an Egyptian American on your roster at a WC that is played in Egypt.

USA WC Roster (Right Wings)

Ty Reed, currently training in Flensburg, is the obvious starter here, but it’s not clear who his back up will be. Max Binderis is a known quantity, but I have no idea as to pedigree of the newcomer, Nicolai Weber.

USA WC Roster (Circle Runners)

The U.S. has it’s most depth at the circle runner position so I see the U.S. taking 4 or even 5 players at this position. I’ve seen both Hueter and Donlin play several times this year and I give the overall edge to Hueter here. Donlin, however, has been making great strides while playing backup at Liga Asobal side, Leon, so he will see plenty of playing time. Domagoj Srsen is a bit of a question mark since he’s not actively playing. Still it’s hard to see a defensive specialist who’s played for Zagreb and Hannover not making an impact. Paul Skorupa edges out Alex Binderis, but I wouldn’t be surprised if both are taken.

USA WC Roster (Goalkeepers)

The U.S. goalkeeper situation is also fairly clear. Rene Ingram (IFK Kristianstad) and Nicolas Robinson (Elverum) were the U.S. GKs during the PANAM Games and are both training with Champions League clubs thanks in part to the Forum Club Handball. I haven’t seen Pal Merkovsky play, but he appears to be the backup GK for Gyongyos which is professional club that plays in Hungary’s top league. It will be interesting to see how he stacks up against the other two keepers.

Previous Articles Assessing the USA Men’s Player Pool

  • American Citizen Male Athletes (Overview): Link
  • USA Men’s Elite Player Pool (Overview): Link
  • USA Men’s National Team (Part 1: A Closer Look by Position- GK and CR): Link
  • USA Men’s National Team (Part 2: A Closer Look by Position- BC and RW/LW): Link

Commentary: Re-Imagining the U.S. Collegiate “Olympic” Sports Model (Part 2): “Free” Development Courtesy of American Football. Why? And, Why Just for some Sports?

This Collegiate System doesn’t make much sense… It just doesn’t.

In Part 1, I highlighted the dramatic funding disparity between club and varsity sports. In Part 2, I review how much “Olympic Sports” cost Ohio St and why to a large extent American Football pays for everything.

There are a lot of ways one can classify or categorize the sports that are played at American colleges and universities. It can be confusing and sports are often lumped together in categories that can be misleading. Here are some of those categories and some basic definitions for them:

  • Revenue Producing Sports: These are sports which produce significant amounts of revenue and at many colleges they have a positive balance sheet.
  • Non Revenue sports: These sports do not generate much revenue and in most cases have a negative balance sheet.
  • Varsity Sports: These are sports that are managed and funded by a school’s athletic department
  • Club Sports: These are sports managed and partially funded by a school’s Student Services or Recreation Services department.
  • NCAA Sports: These are sports that are sanctioned by the NCAA. Schools choosing to participate in NCAA competitions are required to follow NCAA rules, particularly when it comes to recruiting and scholarships.
  • NCAA “Head Count” Scholarship Sports: These are sports where the NCAA requires every scholarship athlete to receive a “full ride” scholarship. (In other words everything is paid for.)
  • NCAA “Equivalency” Scholarship Sports: These are sports where “partial” scholarships can be awarded and split among the roster of athletes. Coaches can still choose to award full ride scholarships to some athletes, but this will then limit the number of partial scholarships available.
  • Olympic Sports: These are Olympic sports, but the definition is pretty fluid. Non varsity sports (which also happen to be Olympic) are usually not part of the discussion. Additionally no distinction is typically made as to what role these college competitions actually have in terms of developing athletes for Olympic competition.

These categories can overlap into some fairly complicated Venn diagrams, but I’ve tried to group them in terms of net revenue and their relevance to athlete development for future Olympic competitions. Remember this analysis is for just one college, Ohio St, and it was compiled using this publicly available data: link

Net Positive Varsity Sports

At Ohio St, and at most colleges, there are only two sports that generate significant amounts of revenue: American Football and Men’s Basketball. At Ohio State they are also way on the plus side and generated $55M and $14M respectively in 2019. And, as we shall see as we look at the rest of the categories they essentially pay for all the other sports that lose money.

Varsity Sports (Olympic: Primary Development Pathway)

These 21 sports are Olympic sports where college programs are the primary development pathway for future Olympic athletes. It can be debated somewhat as to how vital college programs are for each individual sport, but I think it’s fairly safe to say that the vast majority of the athletes in the sports listed above would not have been Olympians if these college programs didn’t exist.

Here’s some food for thought:

  • How much value is the USOPC and the individual sports National Governing Bodies (NGB) getting out of these programs at Ohio St? Well, if one divides the net revenue (-$27M) by the total scholarships (179.3) it amounts to roughly $150,000/year for each full scholarship athlete. Multiply that by 4 and that is $600,000 over 4 years of college education… all for 1 potential Olympic athlete. (Yes, if one wants to further divide by partial scholarships and walk on athletes (total 702) you’ll get a smaller number: $38,000/year or $153,000 over 4 years.) That being said, in most cases the top athletes with the most potential will probably have a full ride scholarship.
  • Keep in mind… that these college sports program cost the USOPC and the individual sports NGBs nothing. All of this development of athletes is “free” and does not come out of their budget.
  • And, this is just for one college. Ohio St is big college with a fine tradition and one of the largest budgets, but it’s still just one college. There are 130 large schools (D1 Football Subdivision Schools (FBS)). There are an additional 217 Colleges with sizable budgets (D1 basketball schools without a D1 FBS football program). And, then there are several hundred smaller colleges with sports programs, albeit with fewer or no scholarships.
  • All of this is paid by college football and to a lesser extent Men’s college basketball? How does that make sense? Did the players sign up for this?

Varsity Sports (Secondary/Very Limited Olympic Development and Non Olympic)

The 12 varsity sports above have only marginal or zero benefit in terms of the development of Olympic athletes. The reasons vary, but are mostly related to athletes turning pro without collegiate careers or in the case of gymnastics and synchronized swimming athletes become high level competitors without college training. And, then the last 4 sports listed aren’t Olympic sports. Baseball and softball will be back for Tokyo, but won’t be played in Paris. Lacrosse hasn’t been an Olympic sport since 1908 although they surely would like to get back on the Olympic Program.

A Side Note on Fuzzy Math

It should be noted that all of this self reported data from Ohio St should be taken with a grain of salt for multiple reasons. One big reason is the actual cost of a scholarship is open for a lot of debate. In most instances schools are not actually paying that full cost or losing out on the money that another non scholarship athlete would pay. Further, if one reviews the Ohio St database there’s some big accounting lines that aren’t associated with any particular sport. A whopping $75M (expenses) and $61M (revenue) is not explained or attributed to any individual sport. (See pages 15 and 16 in the report) I’m thinking one could probably actually attribute those costs if they really wanted to. As an example, how much time to you think the Athletic Director spends on football and synchronized swimming issues respectively?

Why this Crazy System?

If you ever live outside your home country, you’ll get the chance to see first hand how other countries do things and inevitably you’ll find yourself questioning how things are done back home. For me, personally, there were two big topical areas that came to mind. Health care and our sports structures. I won’t get into health care, but let’s talk a bit about how sports are organized in the U.S. and specifically, our college sports structure.

The European sports model is by no means perfect, but once exposed to it, it doesn’t take long for an American to compare it to the system they are familiar with… and start to scratch their head. Honestly, it’s pretty hard to look at the numbers above and defend this crazy system. Certainly it is impossible to do so from a fiscal viewpoint. Men’s football and to a lesser extent men’s basketball subsidize almost everything. That just doesn’t make any sense. And, worse the athletes playing those sports are not paid their market value and they have to become college students in order to play. Don’t get me wrong. Getting a college education is a good thing, but there’s no real reason it has to or should be tied to playing a sport.

So why do we have this crazy system? Well, if you do a little research you’ll discover that over time a system which made sense for amateur collegiate competitions gradually made less and less sense as two sports, American Football and Men’s basketball, grew into bigger and bigger sports with professional leagues. Instead of these sports becoming fully professionalized from age 18 and up, colleges hung on to these sports creating pseudo professional leagues which also became the de facto development competitions for the pro leagues.

At the same time other collegiate sports did not grow to the same extent, but since they were part of school athletic departments and the NCAA they were still provided substantial levels of support. This support was provided in part due to tradition and in part, due to NCAA requirements. Further, a U.S. law, Title IX required colleges and universities to provide equal opportunities in terms of sports and scholarships for women.

So essentially, over time we have created a system where hundreds of colleges in order to keep their cash cow revenue sports have agreed to fund dozens of other sports which are a net revenue loss.

A Crazy System, but it’s not All Bad

This system might seem a little crazy, but depending on where you stand it’s not all bad. More opportunities for women to play sports… That’s a good thing.

If you are involved with one of the dozens of sports propped up by this system it’s a great thing. If you are an athlete you have the opportunity to perhaps earn a scholarship and play in a well organized competition. If you are a high level coach there are multiple, good paying job opportunities. If you are part of the youth sports industry this system will help ensure that plenty of youth athletes will be interested in furthering developing their skills via sports clubs. If you are a sports NGB all of this development from youth to college is infrastructure that you don’t have to pay for. Indeed, it is often an additional source of revenue.

Of course, I know what supporters of these dozens of sports are saying as they read this. They are saying that their sport isn’t being propped up, but rather the demand from athletes was already there. That colleges are just responding to the growing demand from their sport.

I would argue, however, that they are exaggerating this demand in most cases. For sure, all sports have some level of intrinsic demand. Sports are fun and people play them just for fun. That being said most sports if they lost NCAA status, the great organized competitions that come with that status and, of course, the scholarships would see a significant decline in interest at all levels.

Different Tiers, Different Perspectives

Much has been written and said about how American football and men’s college basketball athletes should be paid for their efforts. After all they are bringing in revenue. Call these sports the top tier.

Much has also been written and said about the other NCAA sports that are in some cases now being cut from some schools. And, that these “Olympic Sports” are getting short changed. Call these sports the middle tier.

And, then there are sports like team handball and rugby with no NCAA status. Call this the bottom tier.

As a proponent of a sport in the bottom tier I can only look at the middle tier’s whining and say, “Give me a break! Good lord. You guys all lose money. Quit whining. You don’t realize how good you’ve got it.”

Here’s some food for thought for you:

  • Ohio St University (just 1 college) spends more on 33 sports than USA Team Handball does as a national federation. Yes, for the last several years the expenses for USA Team Handball has been around $500,000. Divide that in two for Men/Women and only Men’s Rifle and Women’s Pistol at Ohio State have a smaller budget.
  • NGBs which have an NCAA component typically receive more grant money from the USOPC than USA Team Handball does. Contemplate for a moment where those NGBs would be in terms of competitiveness and fiscal status if they didn’t have that NCAA component?
  • Finally, here’s something else that will have you scratching your head again. Quite a few scholarships are actually awarded to foreigners. In fact, in 2019 there were 3,455 international student athletes playing Division 1 sports. Roughly 12% of Division I. Yes, U.S. colleges are spending millions of dollars to develop foreign athletes; many that have gone on to win Olympic medals. How does that possibly make sense?

Time to start over? The pandemic has exacerbated the dramatic difference between Tiers 1 and 2 with some schools dropping some sports. But, maybe this just isn’t an issue between tiers 1 and 2? In part 3, I’ll discuss how the pie should be split more equitably between tiers 2 and 3.

The USA Gets a 2021 WC Slot, While Greenland (and Others) Stay Home (Part 2): The Competitive Case

 

Greenland vs USA All Time Record:  All very interesting, but how relevant is it?

In Part 1, I endorsed the first five “business case” reasons that the IHF listed as rationale for selecting the U.S. to participate in the 2021 IHF Handball World Championships. I won’t, however, endorse the 6th listed reason:

  • From those teams that have registered for the planned qualification event and showed interest in playing the qualification (Canada, Greenland, Puerto Rico, USA), USA are the best-ranked team at the last official competition, namely the 2019 Pan American Games.

Why? Because, while true, it’s a tone deaf slap in the face to Greenland handball since Greenland is not allowed to participate in the PANAM Games. And, if you can’t compete in a competition it’s impossible to get ranked at that competition!

A Primer on National Team Handball Tournaments in the Americas

When it comes to national team competitions in the Americas a lot of folks get confused, and, for good reason as these competitions have similar names and participants. The best way to understand how everything is structured is to know which sport’s organization has overall jurisdiction for that competition. Or, to put it another way, what final tournament are the nations trying to qualify for?

For the IHF World Championships the IHF is ultimately responsible and until the Pan American Team Handball Federation (PATHF) was split into two confederations the event that qualified teams for the World Championships was the Pan American Championships. These Championships were held every 2 years and Greenland was able to participate because they are member of the IHF.

For the Olympic Games, the IOC is ultimately responsible and Greenland cannot participate because they are not a member of the IOC. Working with the Pan American Sports Organization (PASO), PATHF decided in 1987 to have the PANAM Games, which is essentially a mini-Olympics for the Americas as the handball qualification event for the Olympics. The PANAM Games are held every four years and Greenland cannot participate because they are not a member of the IOC or PASO.

As to why Greenland isn’t a member of the IOC it relates to Greenland’s semi-autonomous status as part of Denmark. The IOC currently requires full independence for new memberships. Which, incidentally, is why Puerto Rico competes in the Olympics despite their semi-autonomous state as they were “grandfathered” in as member prior to the change in policy.

Incidentally, since the North/South split of PATHF there has been no indication of any IHF plans to grant both the NACHC and SCAHC an Olympic slot. This status quo regarding Olympic qualification implies that the North and South will continue to share an Olympic slot that will be awarded at the PANAM Games.

The Tale of the Tape (All Time GRL-USA Competition Record)

So, while Greenland and the USA have never met in a PANAM Games competition they’ve met eight times in Pan American Championship tournaments, once in a North American Championship and once even at the World Championships. Here’s the all time match record based on Wikipedia results pages.

As an American, all I can say is, “Wow, this head to head summary pretty much summarizes the dismal performance of our men’s national team in the 21st century. 1-0-9 vs Greenland. A 330,000,000 population vs 55,000. This isn’t a rivalry. This is an ass whuppin. Seriously, what is wrong with handball in our country?”

At least that’s how it feels emotionally as someone who really, really cares about handball in this country. Putting on my analytical hat, however, none of this should be that surprising. So what if our population is almost 6,000 times larger. That doesn’t matter if more Greenlanders than Americans are actually playing handball. And, while our total GDP as a nation is massive, I suspect that Greenland spends more on handball than the U.S. does, from grass roots all the way to national teams.

A Trip Down Memory Lane

Looking at this historical record is quite the trip down memory lane and it really does mirror the decline of handball in the U.S. since the 1996 Olympic Games.  Note, how the sole U.S. victory is the very first match between the two countries in 1998. A ten goal victory with a roster that surely had some holdovers from that Olympic team.  But, as those players got older and nothing was really in place to develop athletes with traditional grass roots or a residency program the balance of power shifted.   In 2001, thanks to Cuba bowing out, the U.S. got a ticket to the World Championship where the U.S. was totally uncompetitive losing by an average of 22 goals, including an 8 goal loss to Greenland.  A year later with a trip to the 2002 World Championships on the line Greenland steam rolled over the U.S. 27-7.  The score at halftime:  11-2.  Two goals in 30 minutes?  To Greenland? When I first heard that result I was astonished.  When I asked an old teammate, “What the hell happened?” I got kind of a shrug and no real explanation.

And, for me personally, it was the beginning of a wakeup call, that the times they were a changin’.  A wakeup call, that was further realized by living 5 years in France and getting a close up view of what we up against on the world stage.  With support from the U.S. Olympic Committee being drastically cut and with no real grass roots structure in place it was the start of some real lean years for USA Team Handball.  Gone were the days when we could recruit some great athletes, train them up with a residency program and go take on the world.  At least that’s what was ridiculously obvious to me.  However, it was not so obvious to others and we attempted to recreate our “glory days” with an underfunded residency program that struggled to recruit athletes and couldn’t afford to travel to Europe for the competition that was needed to improve.

A Wakeup Call and a Change in Direction

Poor results continued as did the U.S. losing streak to Greenland.  In 2018 came the low water mark.  At a North American Championship, the U.S. finished 5th out of 6 nations and failed to even qualify for the Pan American Championships.  It did, however, finally elicit a wakeup call for USA Team Handball

Coincidence or not, my plea to shift to dual citizens was heeded and a totally revamped roster was put together to qualify for the 2019 PANAM Games.  Overnight the U.S. had a much better team and they qualified with relative ease over Canada winning a 2 match aggregate qualification by 12 goals.  And, having witnessed both matches in person, I would argue that it wasn’t even as close as the scores suggested.  The U.S. didn’t do as well as I would have liked at the PANAM Games, due in part to some injuries, but the score lines were better and we notched a victory over a Cuban team that’s also improved significantly.  The U.S. also performed well at the 2019 North American Emerging Nations Qualifier and the 2019 Emerging Nations Championship.

Is this new U.S. team World class?  No.  Our top prospects are playing in the German 2nd Divisions (Ian and Patrick Hueter) and the French 2nd Division (Abou Fofana).  And, then we have several players (thanks to support from the Forum Club Handball) are playing with top clubs like Spain’s Leon (Drew Donlin), Flensburg (Ty Reed, Tristan Morawski), Elverum (Nico Robinson) and Kristianstad (Rene Ingram).  With the exception of Donlin, these athletes are playing with 2nd teams, but also are training some of the time with the first team.  Those are all great training environments and every one of these athletes has improved since their PANAM Games opportunity last year.

They are not going to beat Norway and France, but they should put up a credible fight and we’ll see some flashes of real promise.  And, likely some wins in the President’s Cup.  Several of these athletes are also in their early 20s and will also likely be representing the U.S. in Los Angeles come 2028.

Better than Greenland?  (Or, Cuba for that Matter?)

Well, first to reiterate with emphasis:

No one.  I repeat no one is happy that no championship could be held to decide a winner on the court.  No one.

That being said, my educated guess if the North American & Caribbean Championship had been held this is the percentage odds as to who would have won.

  • Cuba: 40%
  • USA: 33%
  • Greenland: 25%
  • Another team 2%

Of course, this is just an educated guess, and we’ll never ever know for real, but here’s some more rationale.  Cuba and the U.S. played 4 times last year and split the matches 2-2, but I would assess that Cuba are a little deeper in terms of overall talent.

Neither the U.S. nor Cuba have played Greenland recently so it’s harder to extrapolate.  One might argue that Greenland’s performance at the 2018 Pan American Championships would make them the better team.  After all, they almost knocked off Chile to qualify for the 2019 WC, but those results are a bit tempered by the home crowd atmosphere they had pulling for them.  Further, their team is getting older with their top 3 players, Minik Dahl Hoegh and the Kreutzmann brothers all in their 30s and stepping away from full time handball.  And, there is no depth whatsoever on the Greenland roster.  Doesn’t mean they can’t overcome these shortcomings, just suggests that it would be a bit tougher for them to do so.

Does it Matter? Shouldn’t the IHF Just Look at Recent Results?

But, why just spitball how good the current teams are?  Let’s just look at the recent results.  I guess I could go along with that logic if it was written down somewhere that is the process that has to be followed.  But, lacking an established process it becomes a bit of gamesmanship.  Like the gamesmanship of using the PANAM Games as criteria to exclude Greenland.  How far back does one go in order to determine relevant results?  Should one factor in that both Cuba and the U.S. are dramatically different teams now?  Why or Why not?  Again, when one establishes criteria after the fact, one can select criteria that makes their case better.  Lacking such criteria, I would suggest that the business case for the U.S. couple with their recent improvement in performance makes the U.S. the logical, best choice to represent the NACHC.

An Awesome Set of Rivalries Shaping Up

I guess to end on a positive note, this little confederation is shaping up to be quite interesting.  Cuba and the U.S. have already renewed their rivalry and Greenland will be joining them.  I suspect the next GRL-USA match will be a hard fought one.  Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic are surely thinking don’t forget about us.  Yes, one can really look forward to a real championship played on the court.  The sooner, the better.

The USA Gets a 2021 WC Slot, while Greenland (and Others) Stay Home (Part 1): The Business Case

Yes, the IHF is a business and business concerns are rightly part of the decision making process

Yesterday, the IHF nominated the U.S. to participate in the 2021 IHF World Men’s Handball Championship as the North American & Caribbean Handball Confederation (NACHC). It didn’t take long for a firestorm of protest to emerge pointing out that this wasn’t deserved and that Greenland should have been selected instead. It was very predictable and on the surface it seems pretty unfair. If one digs deeper, however, one can also conclude that it was clearly the right decision.

Establishing some Bonafides

For the record, I’m an American and former U.S. National Team player. I bleed red, white & blue and, of course, one could consider me as ridiculously biased. How could I possibly be objective here?

Well, let’s take a trip down memory lane to the 2006-2007 timeframe when Greenland was unceremoniously removed from the Pan American Team Handball Federation (PATHF) for essentially being too good. (And, yes, I regret to say that my own nation was part of those machinations.) Why, on two occasions (2002, 2006) Greenland beat the U.S. to secure World Championship spots. The 2006 defeat was a real bummer because I was living in Europe and looking forward to covering the U.S. at the 2007 World Championships in Germany.

Instead, I got to watch Greenland play instead. As you can see and hear from this 2007 article/podcast I became a pretty big fan. For sure it was very obvious that the whining I had heard in the states that Greenland’s team was just a bunch of Danish mercenaries, was totally hogwash. This was a legit team with real fans that were proudly Greenlanders. That’s why I was outraged when Greenland was kicked out of PATHF and used my soap box to lobby for their reinstatement. Whether this little website played any role is debatable, but thankfully the IHF forced PATHF to reinstate Greenland.

13 years later I still am a big proponent of Greenland handball. In 2018, I watched Greenland almost pull off a big upset over Chile on home soil to secure a 2019 WC slot. What a match and atmosphere! Check out this interview with Minik Dahl Hoegh regarding that match and handball in Greenland.

Anyway… If all this doesn’t convince you I can be objective… Nothing will. Moving on.

The IHF Role: They Decide and There’s No Established Criteria

So, why is the IHF making this decision? Well, due to the COVID-19 and probably the limited budgets of the nations involved it became impossible to hold a NACHC Championship. And, let’s be absolutely clear here:

No one. I repeat no one. Is happy that no championship could be held to decide a winner on the court. No one.

So no championship. How is this resolved? Does one turn to the NACHC regulations to see what it says under force majeure? No… not even if such regulations exist. As the IHF announcement points out, the applicable regulation is IHF Competitions, Section 2.8, World Championships: Non Appearance which states in part:

“If a Continental Confederation does not use its performance or compulsory places, the IHF Executive Committee shall decide on the reallocation of such places.”

So, with no championship being held, technically, the IHF didn’t even have to give this World Championship slot to a NACHC nation. They could have decided (as some have suggested in social media) given this slot to North Macedonia.

IHF Rationale for Selecting the U.S.

So, basically this was a free ticket for the IHF with no actual requirements dictating a solution. The IHF, however, provided some rationale, which I mostly agree with. That rationale is listed below:

  • USA are a very important handball nation for the worldwide handball development;
  • In view of the size of the population, a specific strategy was developed to accelerate the progress of handball in USA, aiming to grow the IHF’s TV audience worldwide and increase the social network impact of handball, which will help to maintain the status of handball in the Olympic system and ensure the future of handball at the Olympic Games;
  • The former Pan American continent was split in order to increase the number of handball activities and offer the countries in NACHC better chances to reach IHF major events. A special focus was placed from the very beginning on the USA being a major market. 
  • An agreement with major TV broadcasters in the USA has been made to show handball matches.
  • As Los Angeles, USA is hosting the 2028 Olympic Games, having strong host teams should be an overall target;
  • From those teams that have registered for the planned qualification event and showed interest in playing the qualification (Canada, Greenland, Puerto Rico, USA), USA are the best-ranked team at the last official competition, namely the 2019 Pan American Games.

The first five sets of rationale listed all relate to U.S. development and growing the U.S. market. Strictly from a business standpoint it’s hard to find fault with this rationale. And, make no mistake, the IHF is a business. Honestly, after years of shaking my fist in frustration at the lack of effort to develop a U.S. market, it’s refreshing to see criteria I’ve championed before being listed as reasons to give the U.S. an opportunity on the world stage. To promote the sport in this country.

A Rising Tide Lifts all Boats

It’s also worth noting that what’s good for USA Team Handball is also good for handball, in general, both in North America and the World. I get how the other nations of the NACHC might be resentful of the economic weight of the U.S. dictating this decision. Even if it is a unique, one off decision that’s only be made due to a global pandemic it still can leave a bad taste in one’s mouth.

But, make no mistake if the U.S. becomes a handball nation it will help everybody, much the same way the U.S. development as a soccer nation has helped the development of the CONCACAF. Yes, the CONCACAF isn’t UEFA, but make no mistake the U.S. caring about soccer now means some big paychecks for that organization. Big paychecks that have trickled down to all the CONCACAF nations.

Could the same thing happen with the NACHC? Yes, it could. Nicer competitions with a crowd and a TV contract. The U.S., Cuba, Canada, Greenland and others battling on the court for a WC slot in a nice arena in front of cheering fans.

So that’s the business case, but there’s actually a pretty solid case to be made that the U.S. is also the better team on the court. In Part 2, I’ll take a deep dive to explain why I think that is also true.

Commentary: Re-Imagining The U.S. Collegiate “Olympic” Sport Model (Part 1): The Enormous Disparity between Varsity and Club Sport Funding

Yearly expenses for several sports programs at Ohio State University. Team Handball actually does have a bar, but at $3,376 it just doesn’t register at this scale.

The COVID-19 Pandemic has been a catalyst for several colleges and universities to reevaluate their collegiate sports programs. And, that reevaluation has resulted in 90 sports teams being dropped from the athletic departments of 26 schools. All told, around 1,500 athletes will no longer be competing at the Varsity level. (Source: NBC Sports: College sports cuts in the wake of Covid-19 are clouding the future of Olympics participation)

As you might expect a number of people are very upset with this development. This includes the 1,500 athletes who in many cases have lost a partial college scholarship, the college coaches who have lost jobs and the Sports National Governing Bodies (NGB) that have lost multiple sources for the development of potential future Olympic athletes. Not to mention the entrepreneurial $30 Billion dollar youth sports industry that has sprung up in part to develop athletes to get those scholarships.

Many articles and comments are along the lines of what a shame it is that this collegiate support for “Olympic” sports is being lost. And, that it will inevitably impact Team USA performance in future Olympics. My gut reaction to all this hand wringing is…

Hold on a second…You’re not talking about “all Olympic” sports here.  Cry me a river and welcome to my world, fencing, shooting, etc.

This visceral feeling is well founded, both as a former college handball player and coach.  I’ve seen first hand the disparity in terms of resources and support with what an Athletic Department “Varsity” sport receives and what a Club Activity sport receives.  It’s night and day.  Varsity sport athletes have scholarships, full time coaches, dedicated practice space and substantial travel budgets.  Club sports typically have no scholarships, volunteer coaches, often compete for gym space and sometimes get a little funding to defray a portion of their travel costs.

As I started working on this commentary, however, I realized that I needed to go beyond the gut reaction and that it would be better to quantify just exactly what the financial disparity actually is.  This resulted in a trip down the rabbit hole only to discover that it’s even worse than I had imagined.

Ohio State University Support to Sports Programs

There are many colleges and universities in the U.S., but only 19 collegiate handball clubs in the U.S.  For my initial investigation I chose Ohio State University which has an extensive NCAA sports program and a team handball club. 

It took a little digging and some reorganization of available data, but here is a table which lists the total expenses for every varsity sports program and the team handball club. 

Sources: Ohio State University Equity in Athletics Data Analysis (EADA) 2018 submittal; Ohio State Handball Club Financial Summary (avg of last 2 seasons)

Time to Rethink These Allocations… You Think?

For me, this data was a real eye opener. I always knew that club sports were getting the short end of the stick, I just didn’t realize how short it was. Seriously, handball’s budget is over 1,000 times smaller than men’s ice hockey. Or, just 44 times smaller than women’s pistol. Pick your varsity sport. It doesn’t matter. It’s a big difference. A really big difference.

Does such a big difference make sense? Should there perhaps be some reimagining about how this funding is allocated?

Of course, there should be. And, I’m not alone when it comes to such thinking. Recently, the New York Times published an essay by Tom Farrey of the Aspen Institute, “Colleges Are Cutting Varsity Sports. That Could Be a Good Thing.” In the essay he make several great points about why indeed it could be a good thing. How such a shift could lead to fewer parents chasing scholarships for their kids and how club sports can often provide a better balance for students between athletics, academics and just being a college student.

Overall he concludes that:

“Reducing the number of varsity teams will mean fewer athletic scholarships, but also potentially less money spent pursuing them and more university support for other forms of campus sports.

I’ve added the italics and boldface, because the words “potentially more university support for other forms of campus sports” are music to my ears… except for that pesky word, potentially. Because such a reallocation is easier said than done.

In Part 2, I’ll take I’ll examine what it might take for the word potentially to become reality. At the same time I’ll try and play devil’s advocate to justify why sports like Ohio State’s Synchronized Swimming program should continue to expend resources at a $1.1M/year clip.