If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN FC)   USA defeats Mexico 0-0   (espnfc.com) divider line 311
    More: Cool, Klinsmann, USA, corner kicks, Tri, Mexico, World Cup qualifying, centre back, penalty kicks  
•       •       •

10961 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Mar 2013 at 10:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



311 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-27 07:04:00 PM

literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.


Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

i.imgur.com

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.
 
2013-03-27 07:04:38 PM
trappedspirit: Oldiron_79: A game with a 0-0 tie... that sounds about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

It's soccer.  I don't think even removing the goalies would improve things much.


LOL, well I kind of enjoy playing soccer, but seriously, watching it is about as entertaining as watching paint dry.
 
2013-03-27 07:08:42 PM

trappedspirit: Oldiron_79: A game with a 0-0 tie... that sounds about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

It's soccer.  I don't think even removing the goalies would improve things much.


I don't see it ever becoming a successful spectator sport. Its something little 9 year old girls play because it takes no skill or toughness, but who would want to watch soccer over exciting sports like football, baseball, basketball and hockey? Practically no one, that's why its relegated to the Third World where they can't afford our sports.
 
2013-03-27 07:16:31 PM

carnifex2005: tylerdurden217: fo_sho!: If Michael Jordan had devoted his life to playing baseball would he have been a hall of famer?

Absolutely! Did you ever see Bo Jackson? That dude was dominant at track and field, baseball, and football. Had MJ dedicated his life to baseball, he would absolutely have been a hall of famer. If MJ had dedicated his life to sand volleyball, he would have dominated that too. There is absolutely NO substitute for pure athleticism. I can play basketball my entire life and at age 33 (same as Kobe Bryant I think) I would get embarrassed by a decent High School player, just based on his athleticism.

Here's a better example than MJ: Hakeem Olajuwon did not play basketball until he was 15, in Nigeria. He was previously a soccer player. He came to the USA to play basketball for the University of Houston, hopefully you know the rest. He is one of the best basketball players in the history of the game, and it wasn't because of his early coaching. He was a superior athlete. Of course, his body type is suited well for basketball, he is 7 feet tall. In my examples, I purposely listed people who were between 6' and 6'4" ... I even through in LeBron as a goalie.

He's right. The US is ranked in the mid-20's in soccer. They would be a lot higher if the development system wasn't so scatter-shot. The more elite players, eventually that trickles up to more pros.


That wasn't the original argument. The original argument was that the NFL and NBA stars of the US would be dominant world soccer players if they had played soccer from a young age. I still don't think that is true because:

1. Athleticism is not the same as talent - and talent in one sport at world class level does not translate directly
2. The US lacks the same type of early training as soccer powerhouses (this argument got changed along the way)
3. To assume that the US would dominate at soccer "if they wanted to" is arrogant and sounds like sour grapes. The US was knocked out of the last TWO world cups by GHANA, ferchrissakes.

Actually - one thing that struck me last night was that the US team looked like a bigger, more "athletic" side compared to the mexicans. The defense played well, especially in the air and they didn't get as gassed in the high altitude as you'd expect. The gameplan was clearly to dig in and play for the draw, and it worked.

Where the team was lacking (and the Mexicans too, especially after the first 30 mins) was in the creativity and skillful passing and one on one. Not athleticism. Those same qualities are what make the greatest players.

Statements like:
If all things were the same for someone like Clint Dempsey and Reggie Bush (not a huge Reggie Bush fan, just trying to stay with the same example) then Reggie would be a far superior soccer player. He would dominate soccer on an international level, as would at least 50 NFL and NBA players.
Are clearly just wanking. Granted, there would be some good players, possibly a few great ones, but 50 dominant international soccer players from the current pool?
 
2013-03-27 07:21:40 PM

nwave: literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.

Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

[i.imgur.com image 648x439]

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.


1. No one cares what Euros and poors watch
2. At least the football, baseball, basketball, and hockey figures are low (the NFL made almost as much from TV alone in 2009 as is shown in that chart)
3. That figure combines in "soccer" more than five separate leagues across a number of countries, and they didn't include things like Japan's and various South American baseball leagues in the baseball figure

great chart, good job
 
2013-03-27 07:25:31 PM

BigJake: nwave: literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.

Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

[i.imgur.com image 648x439]

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.

1. No one cares what Euros and poors watch
2. At least the football, baseball, basketball, and hockey figures are low (the NFL made almost as much from TV alone in 2009 as is shown in that chart)
3. That figure combines in "soccer" more than five separate leagues across a number of countries, and they didn't include things like Japan's and various South American baseball leagues in the baseball figure

great chart, good job


You are so farking mad right now. You can't stand that soccer dwarfs your favorite sport in every measure of success there is. You wish it wasn't true and your only retort is "No one cares what Euros and poors watch ".

Lel @ not even being able to read a chart and thinking its in US dollars.
Lel @ denying that includes all revenue for all sports (including south american/japanese baseball leagues)
 
2013-03-27 07:26:49 PM

You're the jerk... jerk: rickythepenguin:

/ok, change the game to add a ref in each half of the field.  the ball can go from penalty box to penalty box  in 5 seconds.  the ref just cannot see all the stuff going on and a second pair of eyes on the field (the lineman response is unsatisfactory) would help.  but yeah, that willl never happen either so WFC.

3 or 4 refs in high level games, serious repercussions for flopping (not just a soccer problem) and an independent time keeper are my top three wants from soccer.

/And a change to the handball rule when behind the goal keeper to award more than the penalty shot


What would an independent timekeeper do? The referee is perfectly capable of keeping time, he has a watch on his arm, it's not hard.

The 4th referee communicates the added time towards the end of the match, so that everyone knows how much time has been added.

The referee then stops the match when that time is up + whatever else has been added, once any ongoing attack is over.


There is no problem to solve.
 
2013-03-27 07:31:34 PM
WTF, Mexico! You had ONE JOB!

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-27 07:36:43 PM
tylerdurden217: fo_sho!: If Michael Jordan had devoted his life to playing baseball would he have been a hall of famer?

Absolutely! Did you ever see Bo Jackson? That dude was dominant at track and field, baseball, and football. Had MJ dedicated his life to baseball, he would absolutely have been a hall of famer. If MJ had dedicated his life to sand volleyball, he would have dominated that too. There is absolutely NO substitute for pure athleticism. I can play basketball my entire life and at age 33 (same as Kobe Bryant I think) I would get embarrassed by a decent High School player, just based on his athleticism.

Here's a better example than MJ: Hakeem Olajuwon did not play basketball until he was 15, in Nigeria. He was previously a soccer player. He came to the USA to play basketball for the University of Houston, hopefully you know the rest. He is one of the best basketball players in the history of the game, and it wasn't because of his early coaching. He was a superior athlete. Of course, his body type is suited well for basketball, he is 7 feet tall. In my examples, I purposely listed people who were between 6' and 6'4" ... I even through in LeBron as a goalie.


Well most NBA players are taller than is ideal for soccer, and most NFL players are far bulkier than is ideal for soccer, so you are probably looking at MLB and NHL players who would be the soccer stars if soccer was the same kind of big deal in the U.S. that football, basketball, baseball, and hockey.
 
2013-03-27 07:40:06 PM

nwave: You are so farking mad right now. You can't stand that soccer dwarfs your favorite sport in every measure of success there is. You wish it wasn't true and your only retort is "No one cares what Euros and poors watch ".

Lel @ not even being able to read a chart and thinking its in US dollars.
Lel @ denying that includes all revenue for all sports (including south american/japanese baseball leagues)


lol ok miss cleo

I didn't think it was in US dollars, NFL TV revenue alone in 2009 was 5.07 billion euros and there are several billion more in stadium and merchandising revenues, aka

BigJake: "the NFL made almost as much from TV alone in 2009 as is shown in that chart

"

It doesn't include those foreign baseball revenues, as MLB revenues alone in 2009 were 5.15 billion euros and Japan's league earns about 1/3 of that by itself, putting those two countries' totals at 6.85 billion euros
 
2013-03-27 07:40:35 PM
If you don't like watching soccer, don't watch it. Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched? Whether you watch or not it will continue to dwarf your favorite sport in viewership and there is  no amount of soccer bashing that will change that.

As to "Why doesn't soccer change to be like American sports?"

Soccer would have to shrink massively, lose hundreds of millions of fans and billions of revenue in order to be like American sports. It doesn't want that. They are the ones making changes in hope of growing to soccer's level one day.

tl;dr: American haters gonna hate, GOAT sport gonna GOAT.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-27 07:43:08 PM

This text is now purple: detroitdoesntsuckthatbad: In CONCACAF, the US should seriously schedule every game for someplace with snow in the forecast. Denver was perfect for a warm-weather, sea-level opponent like Costa Rica. Like the altitude at Azteca, it's our strongest homefield advantage. We should only ever play Mexico in Seattle or Portland, or failing that, Phoenix. But only after arresting the families of Mexico's players for being illegals.

As for being pleased, only 8 countries have ever won at Azteca (the US is one of them), and only Brazil and Peru have done it twice.

We're only two or three hundred feet above sea level in Portland. I mean, it does rain a ton but the temperature is pretty temperate. Not exactly hostile territory for a team from El Carib up here.

Team Mexico typically plays in Mexico City, a high-altitude, warm-weather, arid-climate.

Portland is the opposite of that. It's a sea level, cold, wet climate. It's everything the non-EPL Mexican players aren't used to.

Sort of how we played Costa Rica (sea-level, humid, hot) in Denver in a blizzard (high-altitude, arid, frigid). The US has a fabulous amount of geographic diversity. It's about time we exploit that to our own advantage. Our first home win over Mexico came when we finally stopped playing in LA and took Mexico to Fort Lauderdale, where the locals hate Mexicans. The threat of being murdered by the locals tends to make a team play below their talent. We have to play in the shiathole that is Mexico City and Guatemala City; it's only fair. We should bring them to Detroit.


You keep saying that CR is sea level.  San Jose is at 3800 feet elevation.
 
2013-03-27 07:47:23 PM

nwave: Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched?


because it's awful and we don't want it to catch on anywhere north of the Rio Grande
 
2013-03-27 07:54:11 PM

BigJake: nwave: Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched?

we don't want it to catch on anywhere north of the Rio Grande


Well you're a fighting a losing culture war. At this point point the evil soccer foreign sports terrorism virus has been planted and no amount of peer pressure from the older generation is going to remove it. ESPN really doesn't care what anti-soccer dinosaurs think anymore, because your kind is dying out. Welcome to 2012, give me my country back!

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-27 07:55:21 PM
Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched?

Because Europeans and American soccer fans feel an incessant need to tell us we should be watching soccer instead of our sports that we already watch and enjoy.

Its not like we haven't heard of it or its not available we just don't care for it. piss off and stop trying to tell us we need to watch it.
 
2013-03-27 07:57:19 PM

Oldiron_79: Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched?

Because Europeans and American soccer fans feel an incessant need to tell us we should be watching soccer instead of our sports that we already watch and enjoy.

Its not like we haven't heard of it or its not available we just don't care for it. piss off and stop trying to tell us we need to watch it.


This is ass backward.
 
2013-03-27 08:01:07 PM

nwave: Well you're a fighting a losing culture war.


nope

nwave: the older generation


still a long way from this

seumasokelly: This is ass backward.


nope again
 
2013-03-27 08:04:19 PM

Oldiron_79: Why do American feel his incessant need to tell others that soccer shouldn't be watched?

Because Europeans and American soccer fans feel an incessant need to tell us we should be watching soccer instead of our sports that we already watch and enjoy.

Its not like we haven't heard of it or its not available we just don't care for it. piss off and stop trying to tell us we need to watch it.


Nobody in Europe gives a shiat about what Americans watch.

Hating soccer on the other hand is a national sport in America. You guys get so damn threatened that its growing in your country, every time its gets national attention you have a wave of anti-soccer traditionalists trying to peer pressure other Americans from accepting soccer and trying to tell them to watch American sports. This doesn't happen with any other sport except soccer. Why?

i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-27 08:08:14 PM

nwave: Nobody in Europe gives a shiat about what Americans watch.


huh. wonder who came up with "armoured wankball" then

must have been Aussies
 
2013-03-27 08:09:51 PM
nwave:

Hating soccer on the other hand is a national sport in America. You guys get so damn threatened that its growing in your country, every time its gets national attention you have a wave of anti-soccer traditionalists trying to peer pressure other Americans from accepting soccer and trying to tell them to watch American sports. This doesn't happen with any other sport except soccer. Why?

[i.imgur.com image 850x750]


Because curling or Greco-Roman wrestling don't have tons of fanbois running around telling us how we should be watching them because the rest of the world does.
 
2013-03-27 08:11:14 PM
also most American soccer fans are awful hipster wannabe Eurotrash which probably has something to do with it
 
2013-03-27 08:11:56 PM
Let me rephrase that to most WHITE American soccer fans...
 
2013-03-27 08:43:00 PM

nwave: Soccer wasn't a 5 year trend. Its been dominant over all other spectator sports for over 50 years. Your favorite spectator sport has never had, and likely never will have, as many viewers as soccer does today.


Doubtful - millions of people are watching porn on the Internet as we speak.
 
2013-03-27 08:45:47 PM

nwave: Nobody in Europe gives a shiat about what Americans watch


You seem to care a whole lot. American's honestly don't care about what the rest of the world does, that's why they rest of the world hates us. We barely care about ice hockey. Soccer is growing in the US, but if soccer fans keep acting douchey about their role in American sports they wont get too many new converts.
 
2013-03-27 09:09:17 PM

fo_sho!: There are 6 EPL teams in London, 3 Championship teams, 2 League one teams and 3 league 2 teams - 14 teams of professionals (big wage disparity though) and a lot more semi pro teams.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_in_London

There are 92 professional teams in England - although the lower league teams may well have semi pro players. Allegiances are a lot more local than NFL teams. The same goes for a lot of the big cities - in fact I think just a ...


That's what makes the English football fan even better than a fan of say, Alabama, Oklahoma, a Steelers fan, a Celtics fan, etc..  They could easily ditch those smaller clubs and follow the big sides like a Chelsea or Arsenal; they, however, are truly devoted to their local side.
 
2013-03-27 09:11:55 PM

Trocadero: [userserve-ak.last.fm image 400x400]
[rudsoccers.com image 400x400]
Yes, let's try to emulate the Euro leagues! Great idea!
/the Euro leagues will resemble the NFL before MLS adopts promotion/relegation


Yes, let's...and you know why?  They're not always interested in "the bottom line" like most American teams.  Yeah, they'll be situations like the one at Rangers or Pompey.  For every one of those however, you'll have a Swansea City that are run in the right matter and still win trophies and an Arsenal that regularly compete in European football.
 
2013-03-27 09:16:17 PM

nwave: BigJake: nwave: literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.

Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

[i.imgur.com image 648x439]

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.

1. No one cares what Euros and poors watch
2. At least the football, baseball, basketball, and hockey figures are low (the NFL made almost as much from TV alone in 2009 as is shown in that chart)
3. That figure combines in "soccer" more than five separate leagues across a number of countries, and they didn't include things like Japan's and various South American baseball leagues in the baseball figure

great chart, good job

You are so farking mad right now. You can't stand that soccer dwarfs your favorite sport in every measure of success there is. You wish it wasn't true and your only retort is "No one cares what Euros and poors watch ".

Lel @ not even being able to read a chart and thinking its in US dollars.
Lel ...


I was discussing the US market; the worldwide revenues are irrelevant. MLS and its team owners are in it to make money themselves, and they don't benefit from the fact that teams in other countries are raking it in.

For the record, I'm not anti-soccer. While it's not a sport that I like all that much, I respect that it is the biggest sport on the planet, and I would be happy to have it succeed in the US (it would actually be a lot of fun to have a sport with actual overseas competition). I was simply arguing for why changes might be necessary for it to succeed in the United States in the near-term.
 
2013-03-27 09:24:28 PM
I don't watch soccer very often (usually WC and then I'm out) and I glanced at the first half while I was playing Bioshock, but I did watch the second and it was farking awesome. I don't know how the US eked that out with how bad anyone could tell Beasley was, but that was cool. What was it, 11 injured US players going into the match?

/no snark
//no cynicism
 
2013-03-27 09:35:26 PM

bearcats1983: I'm really loving Guzan after these last few games. I was nervous with Howard being out due to injury, but Guzan is an awesome alternative.

It's really unsettling they only had one legit shot last night. That kind of offensive performance will barely contend with CONCACAF's shiattiest teams; they're toast if that's what they can put up against the Spains and Germanys of the world.


Mexico is not CONCACAF's shiattiest team, and that one SOG is a result of that.

As for Guzan, I'm surprised how few people expected this from him, since he's pretty much single-handedly keeping Aston Villa from relegation right now.
 
2013-03-27 09:46:58 PM
Great, we are the Hull FC of the international football world.  While leaving with a point was/is an accomplishment, but at what point does USA Soccer finally get over the hump and go into a place like El Azteca and not play a cynical match where all we need is 10 players parked in the defensive area and a healthy dose of luck just to get one point?

I do have to give credit to this team as they will never (almost never) be criticized for a lack of effort, unfortunately this team as constituted today has all the flair of a grey crayon.

IMO, the problem with the USA is a severe lack of depth in the midfield and attacking end of the field, not Klinsmann's tactics.  I do like what Klinsmann is trying to do by casting a wide net trying to find players.  At this point, USA Soccer either needs to take a significant step forward, or accept that the general public has lost interest in the national team.  I am of the opinion we need to hook our wagon to JK and convince him to stay for the foreseeable future-overhauling every level of American soccer with the aim of creating a self sustaining program where players don't have to leave the country in order to get a level of competitive soccer that will get them ready for the international game.

If JK is not the coach for USA Soccer, we need to make that decision sooner rather than later and IF he were to be replaced, the only acceptable option would be hiring someone who has a big picture vision of the future of soccer in America, not just simply a national team manager.
 
2013-03-27 10:27:31 PM

literaldeluxe: If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any international standards in an instant.


MLS started with a goofy system of rules where there were no ties and the games went to overtime periods and penalty shootouts where the player started with the ball at midfield and had 5 seconds to shoot or something like that.  What resulted was a bastardized game that nobody wanted to watch.  MLS has seen its biggest amount of growth since it decided to bring the game more into the realm of how the world plays and scores it. The only real thing left for it do is promotion/relegation, go to a single table, eliminate the playoffs and make it a fall-winter sport as they do in the rest of the northern hemisphere.

MLS needs to figure out how to be more like soccer since long ago it abandoned trying to be like basketball
 
2013-03-27 10:29:25 PM

rka: tylerdurden217: Each and every one of these guys is a better athlete than any soccer player from any country that you can name. Now of course you would need to have played the sport and have some decent coaching, but the USA would dominate.


And if none of them could creatively handle a soccer ball in traffic it wouldn't matter one bit. "Decent coaching"? You're going to need more than decent coaching,  world class athletes or not. It takes DECADES of coaching, generations even. From an early age. And it takes a massive feeder infrastructure to find, funnel and train those kids.

The US doesn't lag the world class soccer countries because we don't have the athletes playing, that's absurd. We lag because we don't have an entire infrastructure dedicated to finding, nurturing and training those kids that show an aptitude at the levels other countries do. Kid gets good in soccer here in the US he still has to run the gauntlet of his local HS coach (maybe someone's dad volunteering) and local rules on the amount of games played and time to practice, maybe he finds some traveling all-star team with a better coach, maybe not. And then where does he go? College? Again, rules on number of games played, practice time, GPAs to maintain. Plus, name me a soccer factory College powerhouse on par with an Alabama or Miami for football. By the time a US player gets to a MLS team his counterpart in Europe has already been playing pro, with pro level coaching, for years.

The closest thing the US has to the soccer factories elsewhere is maybe Junior Hockey, where you take a kid at 16 and send him to play a much tougher schedule than he'd ever see in high school, or even college. But in soccer terms as defined by the countries that are really serious, 16 is already too late to really start.


correct:   when you add up the number of touches per hour, under pro coaching supervision, plus playing tiki taka with your soccer monkey friends after practice in the barca academy vs the same in US rec, club and HS soccer, it's an insurmountable lifetime of difference in quality
 
2013-03-27 10:48:03 PM

bearcats1983: I'm really loving Guzan after these last few games. I was nervous with Howard being out due to injury, but Guzan is an awesome alternative.

It's really unsettling they only had one legit shot last night. That kind of offensive performance will barely contend with CONCACAF's shiattiest teams; they're toast if that's what they can put up against the Spains and Germanys of the world.


Guzan was a thrill to watch at Chivas USA matches. Didn't matter how bad the rojiblanco back line was--and they let Panchito play right corner back for an entire season--El Guzano was going to have a clean sheet. He did get a bizarre straight red for "impeding a striker's ability to score a goal." In the NBA, the offensive player would have been called for a charge*, but it was Houston in a year the Dynamo were the team of destiny.

* Offer not valid in Miami, Los Angeles, nor Chicago c. 1990's.
 
2013-03-27 11:06:46 PM
Many international soccer officials, managers, administrators, etc are not white and most Americans are racists.
 
2013-03-27 11:10:45 PM
 
2013-03-28 12:12:31 AM

nwave: literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.

Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

[i.imgur.com image 648x439]

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.


Your chart is wrong. NFL football made $9.5B in league revenues in 2011 - and that is just the game. Adding all of the branded products will probably add a few billion more. I think soccer is bigger, but it doesn't dwarf American football by that much.
 
2013-03-28 01:28:00 AM

Anonymocoso: http://espnmediazone.com/us/press-releases/2013/03/mexico-vs-usa-espn s -most-viewed-and-highest-rated-fifa-world-cup-qualifying-match/

TV rating on ESPN = 1.4.  Add in Univision, and that's almost respectable.


It got the best rating in Birmingham, Alabama??? Dafuq?
 
2013-03-28 01:28:48 AM
Fast-kicking, low scoring, and ties? You bet!
 
2013-03-28 08:11:05 AM

nwave: trappedspirit: Oldiron_79: A game with a 0-0 tie... that sounds about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

It's soccer.  I don't think even removing the goalies would improve things much.

I don't see it ever becoming a successful spectator sport. Its something little 9 year old girls play because it takes no skill or toughness, but who would want to watch soccer over exciting sports like football, baseball, basketball and hockey? Practically no one, that's why its relegated to the Third World where they can't afford our sports.


You're claiming that soccer "takes no skill?"  Seriously, WTF?

American Football: A bunch of fat pricks push each other over and then one guy runs really fast through the gaps.. Yeah, that really takes skill. One guy on the team has the ability to pass the ball, and is thus revered as some kind of god. Occasionally a dude has the technique to actually catch the aforementioned ball. Did I mention that you get a whole 11 minutes of this during a 3 hour game? Because that's like totes awesome.

Basketball: Skill = being born tall.

Baseball: Vastly dumbed down version of cricket. Primarily invented to sell hot dogs, peanuts and beer to ignorant rubes. Free vial of snake oil and a palm-reading with every ticket.
 
2013-03-28 09:58:30 AM

spawn73: You're the jerk... jerk: rickythepenguin:

/ok, change the game to add a ref in each half of the field.  the ball can go from penalty box to penalty box  in 5 seconds.  the ref just cannot see all the stuff going on and a second pair of eyes on the field (the lineman response is unsatisfactory) would help.  but yeah, that willl never happen either so WFC.

3 or 4 refs in high level games, serious repercussions for flopping (not just a soccer problem) and an independent time keeper are my top three wants from soccer.

/And a change to the handball rule when behind the goal keeper to award more than the penalty shot

What would an independent timekeeper do? The referee is perfectly capable of keeping time, he has a watch on his arm, it's not hard.

The 4th referee communicates the added time towards the end of the match, so that everyone knows how much time has been added.

The referee then stops the match when that time is up + whatever else has been added, once any ongoing attack is over.


There is no problem to solve.


Coming from an American perspective, where every sport has an independent time keeper, I like the idea of a referee having no influence and/or concern over how much time is left in a game. His focus should be 100% on the action. Of course I also prefer a countdown clock, so maybe soccer is never going to satisfy me.
 
2013-03-28 10:53:37 AM

You're the jerk... jerk: spawn73: You're the jerk... jerk: rickythepenguin:

/ok, change the game to add a ref in each half of the field.  the ball can go from penalty box to penalty box  in 5 seconds.  the ref just cannot see all the stuff going on and a second pair of eyes on the field (the lineman response is unsatisfactory) would help.  but yeah, that willl never happen either so WFC.

3 or 4 refs in high level games, serious repercussions for flopping (not just a soccer problem) and an independent time keeper are my top three wants from soccer.

/And a change to the handball rule when behind the goal keeper to award more than the penalty shot

What would an independent timekeeper do? The referee is perfectly capable of keeping time, he has a watch on his arm, it's not hard.

The 4th referee communicates the added time towards the end of the match, so that everyone knows how much time has been added.

The referee then stops the match when that time is up + whatever else has been added, once any ongoing attack is over.


There is no problem to solve.

Coming from an American perspective, where every sport has an independent time keeper, I like the idea of a referee having no influence and/or concern over how much time is left in a game. His focus should be 100% on the action. Of course I also prefer a countdown clock, so maybe soccer is never going to satisfy me.


Unless you change the rules, the timekeeper would just be doing the same as the referee.

Given that the referee only adds time when there's no action, I don't see him being distracted by this duty though.
 
2013-03-28 10:53:47 AM

madgonad: nwave: literaldeluxe: The Southern Dandy: Raging Whore Moans: literaldeluxe: Nana's Vibrator: low scoring of hockey

Both the NHL and NCAA have changed a number of hockey rules over the last several years with the specific intentions of increasing scoring and reducing the number of ties, in order to maintain or increase their audiences. Soccer may need similar changes to catch on in the US.

[cdn3.mocksession.com image 850x478]

Except soccer already has the largest audience of any sport in the world, so why would they want to change the rules?

2011 Revenue for US sports
NFL: $11.0 billion
MLB: $7.0 billion
NBA: $4.3 billion
NHL: $3.3 billion
MLS: $0.3 billion
Source

If MLS caught up to hockey in the US, it would mean an additional $3 billion in revenue per year, 11 times the current amount. If team/league owners thought they could do that, they'd forget about any
international standards in an instant.

Are you really comparing the 28th biggest soccer league to the biggest league in each of those sports?

You do realize that soccer makes more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL combined right?

[i.imgur.com image 648x439]

Why would soccer change for a smaller market? When your king, you don't change yourself to be more like niche sports.

Your chart is wrong. NFL football made $9.5B in league revenues in 2011 - and that is just the game. Adding all of the branded products will probably add a few billion more. I think soccer is bigger, but it doesn't dwarf American football by that much.


Being so mad that soccer dwarfs american football that you can't accept reality and have to lie on the internet.

Stay beta soccer hating Americans.
  https://www.atkearney.com/paper/-/asset_publisher/dVxv4Hz2h8bS/con tent /the-sports-market/10192
 
2013-03-28 10:55:43 AM

This text is now purple: We should only ever play Mexico in Seattle or Portland, or failing that, Phoenix.


We always play the Mexico game in Columbus and it has worked pretty well.
 
2013-03-28 11:12:08 AM

Trapper439: nwave: trappedspirit: Oldiron_79: A game with a 0-0 tie... that sounds about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

It's soccer.  I don't think even removing the goalies would improve things much.

I don't see it ever becoming a successful spectator sport. Its something little 9 year old girls play because it takes no skill or toughness, but who would want to watch soccer over exciting sports like football, baseball, basketball and hockey? Practically no one, that's why its relegated to the Third World where they can't afford our sports.

You're claiming that soccer "takes no skill?"  Seriously, WTF?

American Football: A bunch of fat pricks push each other over and then one guy runs really fast through the gaps.. Yeah, that really takes skill. One guy on the team has the ability to pass the ball, and is thus revered as some kind of god. Occasionally a dude has the technique to actually catch the aforementioned ball. Did I mention that you get a whole 11 minutes of this during a 3 hour game? Because that's like totes awesome.

Basketball: Skill = being born tall.

Baseball: Vastly dumbed down version of cricket. Primarily invented to sell hot dogs, peanuts and beer to ignorant rubes. Free vial of snake oil and a palm-reading with every ticket.


Please go back to whatever shiathole country you came from. Soccer is played by little 9 year old white upper/middle class girls, it wil never be respected. Real football players would dominate soccer if we cared, that's unrefutable law.i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-28 11:55:36 AM

GQueue: We always play the Mexico game in Columbus and it has worked pretty well.


I think we ought to convert Bristol and play them there. Bigger than Azteca, it can be converted to a pitch, and you're sending the Mexicans into not only SEC country but Appalachia.
 
2013-03-28 01:18:54 PM

Trapper439: nwave: trappedspirit: Oldiron_79: A game with a 0-0 tie... that sounds about as entertaining as watching paint dry.

It's soccer.  I don't think even removing the goalies would improve things much.

I don't see it ever becoming a successful spectator sport. Its something little 9 year old girls play because it takes no skill or toughness, but who would want to watch soccer over exciting sports like football, baseball, basketball and hockey? Practically no one, that's why its relegated to the Third World where they can't afford our sports.

You're claiming that soccer "takes no skill?"  Seriously, WTF?

American Football: A bunch of fat pricks push each other over and then one guy runs really fast through the gaps.. Yeah, that really takes skill. One guy on the team has the ability to pass the ball, and is thus revered as some kind of god. Occasionally a dude has the technique to actually catch the aforementioned ball. Did I mention that you get a whole 11 minutes of this during a 3 hour game? Because that's like totes awesome.

Basketball: Skill = being born tall.

Baseball: Vastly dumbed down version of cricket. Primarily invented to sell hot dogs, peanuts and beer to ignorant rubes. Free vial of snake oil and a palm-reading with every ticket.


Still fighting your coonty fight against American sports, huh?
 
2013-03-28 01:29:00 PM

Anonymocoso: Many international soccer officials, managers, administrators, etc are not white and most Americans are racists.


Yes.  Because so many other First World Countries have a black person as president.

But you're right, Europe wasn't racist at all.  At least until people of other races began moving there.  Then shiat got real.  Quickly.
 
2013-03-28 04:52:03 PM
A lot of people grew up hating soccer and they're going to keep right on hating. The devil you know.
 
2013-03-28 07:11:33 PM

BigJake: nwave: Nobody in Europe gives a shiat about what Americans watch.

huh. wonder who came up with "armoured wankball" then

must have been Aussies


You're confusing internet trolls with the rest of society.
 
2013-03-29 08:14:08 AM

TheJoe03: Still fighting your coonty fight against American sports, huh?


Nah, just giving the "U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! We're #1!" crowd that show up in every thread about non-US sports the ridicule they so richly deserve.

Although I see now that nwave was posting with his tongue firmly in his cheek. Well played, nwave.I should have taken more notice of your other posts. My bad.
 
Displayed 50 of 311 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report