Predictions of US Soccer

You mean the domestic competition? It's called Major League Soccer, and it's never been really huge. :( When people think of soccer, they usually think of the European leagues. As a result, MLS usually gets stuck on ESPN 2 between spelling bees and bridge tournaments.

In time, I think it'll become bigger in America. It's so hard for soccer to compete with American football and baseball. Eventually, maybe the MLS will get enough money to attract better players. The improving national team will help too - everyone stood up and payed attention when they made the quarter-finals at the last World Cup. If we had beaten Germany, it might have been happening already.
 
Originally posted by Hagbart


So how big is the American Championship in the US, I never really hear anything about it... is it called Copa America or something??
As far as the competition for national teams it is called the Gold Cup. It is not a very big deal because the only perenially good teams are the US and Mexico. Sometimes Trinidad or one of the Central American countries have a good team but not on a regular basis. When the US plays in Mexico or Central America it can be quite a sight. The crowd really gets into it since the US is the last team they want to lose to. A few years ago at a World Cup qualifying match in San Jose, Costa Rica the fans threw stuff at the US team the whole match, hitting them frequently. The US still won though.

People here pay more attention to the international game than the MLS. My guess is that will change during the next of baseball's periodic strikes. Baseball is a wounded sport, the last players strike almost killed the Major Leagues.
 
Interesting thread. The US is finally starting to develop exciting young players like Donovan, Beasley, and Adu. I think 10 years is a bit soon, and it's difficult (understatement) to win the WC, and it only occurs every four years. If the US makes it to the quarterfinals in Germany, I think they will finally have stepped onto the world stage.

On another note, If the best US athletes played footie (:)) like in other countries, it would be a whole 'nother story. Allen Iverson and Randy Moss up front would be quite the formidable combination....
 
Originally posted by Speaker

On another note, If the best US athletes played footie (:)) like in other countries, it would be a whole 'nother story. Allen Iverson and Randy Moss up front would be quite the formidable combination....

That's under the assumption that athletes that excell at one sport would do so at any other. And that is not a plain fact cough Michael Jordan cough.

But if football was as popular in the US as it is in other parts of the world, certainly the US would be a mjor power indeed.
 
Baseball (or are you referring to golf?) requires a total different skill set than other sports, relying less on raw athleticism than on other unique skills that cricket players could no doubt relate to. The athletic skills used in basketball and American football are similar to those used in footie, so I think world class athletes in those sports could have been great at pretty much any sport if they had dedicated themselves to it at an early age (talk about a serious run on sentence). To use your example, is there any doubt that Michael Jordan would have been an amazing footie player if that's what he wanted to be as a child?
 
Originally posted by Speaker
To use your example, is there any doubt that Michael Jordan would have been an amazing footie player if that's what he wanted to be as a child?

There haven't been any amazing football players with a 1,98 m height, except at the goalie position. In football, the action is taking place at your feet's level, while in basketball or american football is mainly at your hands. That means it's hard for a tall guy to coordinate his movements in football because the difference between the ball and his own center of gravity is bigger. The only big guys you see in football are normally either on the goal or as playing as strikers to use their height as advantadge in headings.
 
We've seen that he can do it with a ball in his hands, and I've seen 2,10 m or 2,20 m guys doing the same in basketball, handball or volleyball as well. But in football you have to play a ball with your feet. As I told you, I've never seen any great football player over 1,90m. That much height is a disadvantadge in football. Also, MJ had a huge hand, which was one of his weapons, and that means nothing in football of course.
 
Originally posted by MCdread
As I told you, I've never seen any great football player over 1,90m.

Jan Koller ain't bad. And Van Nistelrooy, Van Hooijdonk and Kluivert approach the 1.91 reaaaally close too.
 
Jan Koller, 'two meters tall, but fortunately not 50 meters wide' (translated comment, Holland-Czech rep 1-0)...
 
The tricky guys who I consider entertaining players are mostly in the range 5' 5" - 5' 9" (1.65m - 1.75m), the likes of Javier Saviola, Raffa van der Vaart, Paul Scholes, Hide Nakata, and Roberto Carlos. There's exceptions, of course, but in general having a center of gravity closer to the ground is advantageous when dribbling.

That said, my favorite player is Ronaldo, 6' 0" 190-ish pounds, and no-one ever accused him of being clumsy. ;)
 
:lol: I think you're right though. The defenders are usually a bit taller and stronger, and most important, a bit slower or with less agility. Raffa sometimes plays basketball with them: he gets the ball with his back towards the goal, the defender right behind him, and he just puts his leg around the defender, takes the ball with him and shoots....sometimes it's as if he's near the bucket :p
 
Wales were missing 17 first choice players. Hardly their first side on display.

And the pitch was illegally small anyway, so I'm going to ignore the result.

:)
 
Back
Top Bottom