As a huge fan of both football and Twitter, I have followed the phenomenon of footballers using the social media platform to talk directly to fans with nothing short of delight (and indeed written, and no doubt tweeted, about it too). From Ryan Babel mocking-up Howard Webb in a Manchester United shirt to Darren Bent allegedly telling Spurs owner Daniel Levy in no uncertain terms to sort out his transfer to Sunderland, the medium has contributed significantly to breaking down the barriers between player and fan, which, in this age of the sheltered millionaire footballer, I’m definitely not alone in welcoming with open arms.

However, this summer I made a new, and even more exciting, discovery – @Joey7Barton. With Barton’s tweet that “somewhere in those high echelons of NUFC, they have decided, I am persona non grata” attracting significant media coverage (in fairness, more for the revelation that Newcastle United were letting him go, than the flowery language), I was lured into his Twitter world. There I found Joseph Barton, the footballer philosopher, offering up daily quotes from Nietzsche, lyrical poetry from The Smiths, and reviews of his trips to London museums.



Surely this wasn’t the same player I’d seen drag Gervinho off the floor by the scruff of his neck during the first game of the Premier League season at Newcastle? And yet, whilst the red mist is still prone to descend, the rehabilitation of Joey Barton is in full swing, helped in no small part by his ability to create his own brand on Twitter. Yes, many remain if not unconvinced then at least a bit confused by his culture vulture social media persona, but there’s no doubt that without Twitter, he wouldn’t have been able to convey it to the world as he has done.

Of course, the phenomenon of sports, and in particular football, stars as brands in their own right is by no means a feature borne of the Twitter age. Remember, Twitter is only five years old, younger than brand Beckham and younger still than Gazza, Kevin Keegan and George Best. Indeed, footballers have been commercial entities in their own right for years (and see this amusing history of their attempts to cash in on this).

George Best lends his name to Best Potato Crisps

And yet I do believe that Twitter has brought something new to the party. It gives footballers a way to convey to the world who they want to be, no longer restricting their public image to that carefully defined by their club and publicist, or by the tabloid headlines. Whilst these were the channels through which a footballer’s brand would be built in the past, players are now able, in at least some small way, to bypass them, possibly defying an image crafted by a PR, or using Twitter to defend the on and off the field transgressions reported in the papers.

But whilst I may love the fact that Twitter allows footballers and famous individuals to talk directly to me (and, I accept, their thousands, or indeed millions, of other followers), the interesting question is whether using Twitter can significantly build a commercially successful personal brand. Will it impact upon the value and nature of sponsorship deals and endorsements? At the moment, not really. Nike terminated its boot contract with Joey Barton in 2008 after he was imprisoned for assault, and the deals have not exactly been forthcoming since then.

Twitter might be a good place to start building your brand (and a forum for – declared – advertising by celebrities), but it is most definitely not where it ends. A Twitter personality is still only one small element of a footballer’s commercial arsenal; the money follows skills on the pitch, good looks, big clubs and to a certain extent, the ability to stay out of trouble (though brands have shown themselves willing to stick by big names even when scandal has descended in the past).

However, that is certainly not to say that footballers should stop tweeting – mainly because without Joey Barton’s philosophical gems my days would most definitely be that little bit worse! Click here for a fun infographic of sports stars on Twitter, and try the following for some insights/hilarity from some of our favourite footballers:

Jack Wilshere: @JackWilshere

Rio Ferdinand: @rioferdy5

Kaka: @KAKA

Wayne Rooney: @WayneRooney

Darren Bent: @DarrenBent

By Jessica Enoch on October 10th, 2011

Tags: Barclays Premier League, Celebrity, Default, Football, Newcastle United, Twitter

No comments

The Twittersphere was buzzing yesterday, and the question everyone was asking was: how can Andy Carroll be worth £35m? The general consensus was that he wasn’t worth that amount of money and that the footballing world had gone crazy.

Maybe the conventional wisdom is correct. But one thing “Moneyball” (in my opinion the best Sports Business book ever written) taught us is to ignore conventional wisdom. Moneyball is about the Oakland A’s baseball team and their General Manager Billy Beane and is currently being turned into a Brad Pitt/Philip Seymour Hoffman movie, due for release later this year:

The basic premise is this: In 2002, the Oakland A’s had the second smallest budget in baseball (around $40m) – less than a quarter of the New York Yankees ($126m). But for the previous 3 years, they had consistently been one of the top four teams (though they hadn’t won a World Series). That is the equivalent of Wolves qualifying for the Champions League for 3 years in a row on their current budget (the A’s didn’t increase their relative budget as a result of their success in the first two years).

The secret to the A’s success was to completely re-think the way they evaluated players. Using a new set of statistical analyses (called Sabermetrics) and throwing out all conventional wisdom, they were able to see that the market for players was hugely inefficient. Some player attributes were highly overrated in terms of their correlation with success, while others were highly undervalued. So the key to running a successful team on a budget was simple:

sell those players who have overrated attributes (for lots of money) and buy players who have the underrated attributes (for much less)

So why is this all relevant for Liverpool and Andy Carroll?

Well first and foremost, John W Henry, the new owner of Liverpool is a convert to Sabermetrics. Many of the techniques used in Sabermetrics came from the financial markets, which is Henry’s background. And when Henry bought the Boston Red Sox in 2003, his first move was to offer Billy Beane a job for a guaranteed $12.5m over 5 years (which he turned down). Nevertheless, he installed Sabermetrics at the Red Sox, who then went on to win multiple World Series.

So Liverpool is now a Sabermetric club with the best brains in the business analysing players’ value. Would they really pay £35m for a player if they didn’t see the value?

And what did that analysis look like?

Success in football is defined by winning points. Given the financial rewards at stake (eg. qualifying for the Champions League), it is relatively easy to calculate the value of each Premier League point. And if points are the asset, then goals are the currency. To quote from Moneyball:

“Before the 2002 season, Paul DePodesta (the A’s sabermatrician) had reduced the coming six months to a maths problem. He judged how many wins it would take to get into the play-offs: 95. He then calculated how many more runs the Oakland A’s would need to score than they allowed to win 95 games: 135. (the idea that there was a stable relationship between season run totals and season wins was another Jamesean (the father of Sabermetrics) discovery)”

It is possible to determine how many goals you need to score in order to acquire your targeted number of points. And therefore, each goal has a value. Before we have any Ossie Ardiles and Kevin Keegan arguments about teams who score lots of goals but don’t necessarily win points, here are the facts:

1) Currently, the top 4 teams in the table are the four teams who have scored the most goals

2) In the seasons 2006/2007, 2007/2008 and 2008/2009 the top four teams in the table were also the teams who scored the most goals

3) The only exception to this rule in the recent past is last season, where Manchester City, who finished 5th, scored more goals than Tottenham, who finished 4th

So, each goal that Carroll contributes can be valued in terms of ‘acquiring’ points.

But how do we determine how many goals he is likely to contribute?

One of the cleverest bits of analysis discussed in Moneyball is the disentangling of the link between what actually happens on the pitch and what is expected to happen. To quote again:

“Any ball hit any place on a baseball field had been hit just that way thousands of times before: the average of all those hits was the Platonic Idea (of an average run value). Call it a line drive that is hit at x trajectory and y speed to point #968. From 10 years worth of data, you can see that there have been 8,642 practically identical hits. You can see that 92% of the time the hit went for a double, 4% for a single and 4% it was caught. Suppose the average value of that event is .50 of a run scored. No matter what actually happened, the system credits the hitter with having generated .50 of a run…”

So let’s apply that to football and Andy Carroll.

The first thing we do is to forget the number of goals he scores and the number of assists he makes (what actually happened) and concentrate on the expected value of his actions on the pitch.

Here are a few examples (by the way, these are all completely made up assumptions but it wouldn’t be too difficult to calculate them):

1) A penalty is scored 79% of the time. Every penalty he wins is worth .79 of a goal (regardless of whether he takes it or even whether it is scored)

2) A goal results from a corner kick 4% of the time. Every corner kick he wins is worth .04 of a goal

3) Divide the pitch up into sectors and calculate the percentage of time a goal is scored from a free kick taken from that sector. If a goal is scored 7% of the time a free kick is taken from sector 4, then every free kick Carroll wins in sector 4 is worth .07 of a goal (and the same for all the other sectors on the pitch)

4) Divide up the goal into 6 sectors (top left, top middle, top right, bottom left, bottom middle and bottom right) and calculate the expected goal value of a shot on target in each of those sectors. If 46% of shots into the top left sector are goals, then award him .46 of a goal for every shot he hits into that sector

5) A successful pass within the opponent’s penalty area results in a goal 8% of the time. Every successful pass he makes in the penalty area gets .08 of a goal

6) Winning a header in the opponents penalty area results in a goal 5% of the time. He is awarded .05 of a goal whenever he wins a header in the opponents area

…and so on

From this type of analysis, we can calculate the expected number of goals Carroll will contribute to Liverpool and we will also know the value of each goal.  If that is more than £35m over the course of his contract, then it could represent great value.

Of course, this has been simplified a little bit. The real analysis is the ‘marginal’ impact of Carroll compared to another striker. In other words, how many more goals would he be responsible for than another striker?

And this is where the idea of undervalued attributes comes into play. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that “winning headers in the opponent’s penalty area” is worth more in terms of expected goals than people give it credit for. If Carroll is the “Greek God” of winning headers in the opponent’s penalty area, then he is worth much more than people think he is.

Would we really be surprised if John W Henry’s Sabermatricians have been doing this type of analysis since they bought Liverpool? Maybe they have just sold a player for £50m who has ‘overrated attributes’ and bought one who, even at £35m, is undervalued.

By Carsten Thode on February 1st, 2011

Tags: Barclays Premier League, Brand marketing, Consultancy, Default, Football, Football Sponsorship, Newcastle United, Public relations

3 comments

Who would have thought a simple name change could cause such a rumpus? St James’ Park, more a cathedral to the Geordie Nation then a stadium, has been given the catchy title by its beleaguered owner of ‘sportsdirect.com@St James’ Park’. Cue much uproar across the media and more importantly among the fans.

However, rather then add to the derision already rightly poured on this bizarre move, we think there could be an opportunity for a canny brand here. Any brand in sponsorship is fundamentally looking to engage, not alienate, fans and this naming rights debacle actually offers up a unique opportunity.

The answer is simple – try and strike a short term deal with the Newcastle United commercial team, buy the naming rights for the rest of the season and call it – this is the simple bit – ‘St James’ Park’.

In other words, give it back to fans: they’ll love you forever and no doubt you’ll get more than a few column inches to boot – for the first naming rights deal to get rid of the brand name.

By Dominic Curran on November 17th, 2009

Tags: Communications, Football, Football Sponsorship, Naming Rights, Newcastle United, Public relations

No comments

With AIG, shirt sponsors of Manchester United, now having followed Northern Rock, shirt sponsors of Newcastle United, into nationalisation, it occurred to me that the sponsors’ lounge at the next Toon versus Reds match could bring a whole new meaning to the term Premier League. Because, of course, the effective heads of the teams’ two sponsors are now the Premiers of the US and UK.

But who’ll be in those respective hot seats come next March? Over there, will it be John McCain or Barack Obama. Over here, will Gordon Brown still be around? And whoever it is, will they use the occasion for a pow-wow at St James’ on Wednesday March 4? Lovely thought, but somehow I doubt it.

Maybe Gordon could send noted Toon Army member Tony Blair – remember him? – to deputise…

By Tim Crow on September 18th, 2008

Tags: Barclays Premier League, Brand marketing, Default, Football, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Newcastle United, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants

No comments