Regarding Brazilian Coaches, Carlos Ancelotti, SAF and Waves of SAF Projects
The speeches by Emerson Leão and Oswaldo de Oliveira at an event held at CBF1 summarize, from different angles, the position of a class; or, at least, the position of a (numerous) segment of the class, overlooked or threatened by the influx of foreign coaches.
Beyond the inappropriateness and rudeness that motivated institutional, journalistic, and personal reactions, the speeches can be defined as a kind of untimely defense of an irreversible situation, caused by the main stakeholders who, until recently, shared a certain job market – and did not perceive the transformations occurring in their own environment.
Given these characteristics, they should not be surprising – except, as already mentioned, for the timing of their public statements.
Positions of this nature occur, moreover, frequently in various spheres, such as the economic, political, and, of course, sporting spheres, when some interest is threatened by new players or (simply) by the advancement of techniques or technologies mastered by newcomers.
The reaction, whether individual or collective – in this case, through association or the formation of informal groups – consists, sometimes with defensive arguments, sometimes aggressive ones, in an act of survival. Survival, not infrequently, without structural change, due to convenience or the costs of investment and training.
When the debate involves, for example, state interest, the interested party may (or should) provide economic or legislative means for national private agents to position themselves on the geopolitical chessboard, according to established policy; or, depending on the strategic relevance, intervene, directly or indirectly, in the sector to ensure the achievement of state (or governmental) policies.
The interest may, on the other hand, involve the dismantling of backward structures that impede adequate competition, better service to the population or consumers, and, no less importantly, sectoral or technological development. So-called market openings, in general, aim for such results.
Despite football's importance to the country, the State—not the intervener, but the regulator—has never seen it as part of its internal development strategy—social and economic—or external affirmation (soft power), in the way that the United States of America did with Hollywood cinema and its disposable products, the Italians with their trattorias and pizzerias scattered around the world, and the South Koreans with K-pop.
From this state-driven disregard stems, in large part, the individualism that guides the football industry and causes the current structural backwardness, revealed in the pronouncements of Emerson Leão and Oswaldo de Oliveira.
This is not, therefore, an isolated or occasional act. It expresses concern about changes, even without planning, in the dominant structures; but which, despite the impropriety of means and form, also exposes a potential problem: the disorderly influx, and potentially inadherent to local reality, that seeks only work, and not environmental and social transformation.
In this context, the hiring of Carlos Ancelotti may have been a historic and necessary move for the repositioning of Brazilian football, both locally and internationally. And it could (or should) contribute to introducing the theme of the social and economic function of football in society, thus enabling a quality debate for the benefit of the community – fans, investors, sponsors, broadcasters, etc.
All of this can be leveraged in another, even more important area, of a structural and existential nature, which nevertheless integrates the same system: the SAF (Sociedade Anônima do Futebol – Football Limited Company).
The SAF law, authored by Senator Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD/MG), may be (or should be) the answer for clubs – and managers – that need solutions to structural or current problems; but it can also be seen as a threat to those concerned with position and interests, whether group or personal.
This has been the case since its inception. Desperate clubs quickly joined, forming the first wave of SAFs. Soon came the clubs that, despite their difficulties, could wait for a future moment to submit projects, making up the second wave.
And when it was imagined that a third wave would come, made up of the most solid clubs or those with the largest fan base, to prevent the gap from closing in on the SAFs of the first and second waves, reactionary forces (or conflicting interests) are hindering the movement, generally with retrograde arguments comparable to those of the coaching duo.
These leaders do not realize, or rather, they realize and intend to mask, or worse, believe they are masking, either the prevalence of political and domination projects, to the detriment of the interests of teams and fans, or the reduction in the level of their clubs, which missed the opportunity to inaugurate the third wave and positioned themselves as late repeaters of the first and second waves.
Instead of confronting reality, which may be uglier than it appears, they attempt, with reactionary or propagandistic arguments, to justify the prevalence of an associative model incompatible with existing challenges.
Worse: they project a virtual reality, consisting of the supposed work of recovering prominence, without financial and human resources.
The SAF (Sociedade Anônima do Futebol - Football Corporation), in short, is not and will not be a solution in itself, but, except in one or, at most, two cases in the country, it already constitutes a necessary condition for avoiding announced tragedies.
It remains to be seen whether, as is the case in the coaching market, there are high-quality foreign agents interested in this nascent and still hostile market.
