U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Soccer
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-30-2010, 10:26 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
5,763 posts, read 9,759,816 times
Reputation: 2809

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
Two things:

I understand supporting a team because you like them. I get being a fan of a team because of proximity. But if the team continues to struggle and isn't doing well after a few years, why would you continue to go? Why would you continue to scream and yell and go crazy at the stadium if they lose often? You are wasting your money and, obviously, the team's management is wasting money not fielding a viable team. The point is to contend, right?
Are you not a sports fan? Sports fans all over the world stick by there team, win or lose.

If they are your team, they are your team.

Also, we are talking about relatively new teams. It usually takes expansion teams a few years to compete.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
Second, I'm not a huge geography buff, but Portland, Seattle, AND Vancouver fielding professional soccer teams? Three teams within shouting distance of each other? Are there (1) that many soccer fans, and (2) that many professional soccer players? (tongue in cheek kinda on the soccer fans part, don't yell at me.) On second thought, maybe it isn't too different from Philly, D.C. and Maryland having pro football teams... But maybe it is...
We are talking about 3 entirely different metropolitan areas. Big metropolitan areas. Soccer is huge in the Pacific Northwest too.

It also helps having teams that close together because it makes for bigger rivalries and easier road trips for fans. I wish we had a team closer than 8 hours from KC.

We are also talking about 3 established fanbases too. All three of those teams have been around for years as they competed in Division 2.





Of course you can give me exceptions like Messi (I guess that's who you're referring to). I can give you exceptions in every sport. But the difference between 5'8'' guys in Argentina and Brazil that are superior and gifted athletically in soccer is that
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
THAT'S ALL THEY HAVE GROWING UP! They kick soccer balls on the way to school in other countries. They don't have football. No one else has football (except Canada). We have tons of options here.
For some reason, Americans think that other countries only play soccer. That they dont have other sports like we do and that is false. Other countries have plenty of other options but most choose soccer.

Basketball is huge in South America and is played in both Brazil and Argentina.

Other sports that are played worldwide that are more popular than football and baseball: rugby, volleyball, cricket, and others that kids play in other countries.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
There are plenty of sports to make millions of dollars in. Plus, those other countries have something else we don't have: pride in playing for their country. Their best athletes care more about repping their country. That's what they dream about growing up. They only play soccer and want the chance to play in the World Cup and in the best leagues in Europe. Not our best athletes. We only cared about our Olympic basketball team when the rest of the world started catching up to us in talent. The league title means more to our guys than a gold medal. We wanna make that money. Football has 32 teams and 55 players on each team. There are 100 something division 1 college football teams and many of them are on television regularly. A good athlete has a chance to get exposure and make the NFL. In basketball, you can go to the pros after bull-ishing a year in college. It's easy. It's fast. It's American. It's what our kids see on tv.
I'd agree with all that.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
Look, soccer is a good sport. And it's more popular today than it was 50 years ago. It's growing. I get it. But it's never gonna be in the top 5. Football (no discussion), basketball, baseball (whatever order), hockey, nascar, then soccer, mma... Every 4 years soccer gets hype because we can root for our country. It's easy. It's kinda fun. But it wears off after we're out of it until 4 years later. Unless we win the damn thing, then maybe it'll jump long-term... But that's what was supposed to happen with women's soccer after they won it all, but their league folded in a year or so. And rumor is Manchester United wants to buy or rent Landon Donovan? There goes our most recognizable player...

It's already Top 5. The MLS has attendance averages equal with the NHL, it has more TV contracts than the NHL, and has about the same per game revenue as well. It is equal to or above the NHL in about every category. Not to mention several of the NHL teams are having financial troubles. Just a year ago the Sports Business Journal reported that up to a 1/3rd of the NHL could fold within 5 years. The MLS isnt having the problem at all. In fact, the Sports Business Journal has called the MLS the best ran sports league in the country t

I dont count NASCRAP as a sport.

It will catch the NBA someday but I have desire for it to catch MLB or the NFL and I dont think it will.

This World Cup created more interested than any other. It creates more interest every single time because there are more soccer fans than there were the previous 4 years. Not all the buzz is temporary. I have 2 friends that were soccer bashers 5 years ago and now not only do they like the sport, they have MLS season tickets.

It's Manchester City that is interested in a transfer for Landon. Landon has played in Europe 3x before. He hasnt spent his entire career in MLS. It's not a big deal for him to transfer. It will help him develop more as a player.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-30-2010, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
5,763 posts, read 9,759,816 times
Reputation: 2809
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
Size matters. Period. Look at the best players in our country.

Do you know why size matters in those leagues? Because they are playing against players that are that size.

Do you think a QB would need to be 6'4" if he wasnt playing against guys that we 300 pounds and 6'6"?

Do you not think other countries have men that are 6'6" and 250 pounds? They do but you wont see them playing their sports except on rare occassions because athleticism is far more important than size in most places except for here.

As I said in another thread, I will take Lance Armstrong over an overgrown NFL or NBA player anyday of the week. There isnt a player in either of those leagues that could hold Armstrongs jock strap in terms of athleticism.

Americans think the best athletes in the world play our sports and they dont. Overgrown 6' 6" men are not the best athletes. Soccer players, cyclist, runners, swimmers, and others are far greater athletes than most of the beast that play in the NFL. A lot of those guys in the NFL are sucking air after running a 100 meters. That is what I am talking about. Americans have this obsession with size when size doesnt mean great athlete. Take body builders for example, they are some of the most unhealthy people on the planet but they are huge. However, most of them couldnt run a mile to save their life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Extreme Southeast Philly, NJ
219 posts, read 220,859 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
Are you not a sports fan? Sports fans all over the world stick by there team, win or lose.

If they are your team, they are your team.
Let me be specific, fanatics stick by their team win or lose... I'm a fan of sports (I'm a strength and conditioning coach and athletic trainer, I love sports). But I'm not dropping hundreds (maybe thousands) of dollars to watch a team that doesn't compete. I don't live and die with my favorite team. My weekend isn't ruined when my team loses. I don't feel like they owe me anything but a competitive effort, and if I don't get that, I'm not watching. I live in Atlantic City. The Sixers, Nets, Knicks, and Wizards are all awful. The Lakers are 10 times more interesting than all of my local teams combined. I have favorite teams in just about every sport. But I root for teams and games that are interesting. Kobe is interesting. Yankees are interesting. Manny Ramirez is interesting. Brett Favre is interesting. Stephen Strasburg is interesting. NFC East football games are interesting. Jimmie Johnson in NASCAR is interesting. Teams that go 2-14 without superstar players aren't interesting. The Pittsburgh Pirates aren't interesting. The Patriots without Tom Brady aren't as interesting.

My point is that I'm no less a "fan" because I hold my team more accountable for their performance than you do. If your team stinks, stop paying. Then, the owners would actually take competing more serious. Fanatics root for the team no matter what. You'll never leave. If you're always gonna pay the hundreds (or thousands) to the owner, they never have a reason to change to get better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
We are talking about 3 entirely different metropolitan areas. Big metropolitan areas. Soccer is huge in the Pacific Northwest too.

It also helps having teams that close together because it makes for bigger rivalries and easier road trips for fans. I wish we had a team closer than 8 hours from KC.

We are also talking about 3 established fanbases too. All three of those teams have been around for years as they competed in Division 2.
Cool. Never been to the northwest. Just learned something.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
For some reason, Americans think that other countries only play soccer. That they dont have other sports like we do and that is false. Other countries have plenty of other options but most choose soccer.

Basketball is huge in South America and is played in both Brazil and Argentina.

Other sports that are played worldwide that are more popular than football and baseball: rugby, volleyball, cricket, and others that kids play in other countries.
So? All I hear is that soccer is "the world's game". It's the world's game because of how easy it is to play, and everyone has access to it. The only equipment you need is a ball. Anything can serve as the goal, and you don't even need a ton of space. I've seen people in my town playing soccer on basketball courts. Rich and poor can play it. I know there are other sports that are played in other countries, but soccer is by far number #1. Soccer is bigger in South America, Africa, and Europe than football probably is here. And like you said, most choose soccer. It's their game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
It's already Top 5. The MLS has attendance averages equal with the NHL, it has more TV contracts than the NHL, and has about the same per game revenue as well. It is equal to or above the NHL in about every category. Not to mention several of the NHL teams are having financial troubles. Just a year ago the Sports Business Journal reported that up to a 1/3rd of the NHL could fold within 5 years. The MLS isnt having the problem at all. In fact, the Sports Business Journal has called the MLS the best ran sports league in the country
The NHL SHOULD fold 1/3 of their teams. Baseball should too. For the MLS to be the best run league in the country, I should hear more about it (I'm not saying I'm the official barometer, but I watch a lot of sports, more than just the big 3 or 4). It gets no national run until their championship. That's like Arena Football. I'm sure it's well run and has an excellent commissioner. But I don't think it's grabbing casual sports fans to the tv yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
It's Manchester City that is interested in a transfer for Landon. Landon has played in Europe 3x before. He hasnt spent his entire career in MLS. It's not a big deal for him to transfer. It will help him develop more as a player.
That's part of the problem, in my opinion. It's not a big deal for him to transfer, but what about us? What about people who only know his name here? Are people (outside of die-hards) really following his team in Europe? So he goes over there to play, we forget about him until a few years later, like around the time of the next world event. Meanwhile, who are we rooting for here?

Plus, the highest level of soccer competition is in Europe, right? All the best players are from Europe and South America, right? Even our best players play over there, right? (Altidore, Bradley, Davies, Dempsey, Howard, Onyewu are considered our best right? These are the names I recognize outside of Donovan.)

I agree it's growing. Every World Cup or Confed Cup brings a couple more people to follow the sport. ESPN does a good job forcing it down our throats and featuring some of the players in commercials. But we're still talking years away from big time fanfare. And if our national team doesn't ever win the World Cup, on the biggest stage against the world's best, it's never going to be fully respected with (let's stick with 3) NFL, NBA, MLB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
5,763 posts, read 9,759,816 times
Reputation: 2809
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
Let me be specific, fanatics stick by their team win or lose... I'm a fan of sports (I'm a strength and conditioning coach and athletic trainer, I love sports). But I'm not dropping hundreds (maybe thousands) of dollars to watch a team that doesn't compete. I don't live and die with my favorite team. My weekend isn't ruined when my team loses. I don't feel like they owe me anything but a competitive effort, and if I don't get that, I'm not watching. I live in Atlantic City. The Sixers, Nets, Knicks, and Wizards are all awful. The Lakers are 10 times more interesting than all of my local teams combined. I have favorite teams in just about every sport. But I root for teams and games that are interesting. Kobe is interesting. Yankees are interesting. Manny Ramirez is interesting. Brett Favre is interesting. Stephen Strasburg is interesting. NFC East football games are interesting. Jimmie Johnson in NASCAR is interesting. Teams that go 2-14 without superstar players aren't interesting. The Pittsburgh Pirates aren't interesting. The Patriots without Tom Brady aren't as interesting.

My point is that I'm no less a "fan" because I hold my team more accountable for their performance than you do. If your team stinks, stop paying. Then, the owners would actually take competing more serious. Fanatics root for the team no matter what. You'll never leave. If you're always gonna pay the hundreds (or thousands) to the owner, they never have a reason to change to get better.
You're what I would call a casual fan. You dont really have a team, you just like to watch sports.

That's really a foreign concept to me. I have my teams and those are my teams until I die.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
So? All I hear is that soccer is "the world's game". It's the world's game because of how easy it is to play, and everyone has access to it. The only equipment you need is a ball. Anything can serve as the goal, and you don't even need a ton of space. I've seen people in my town playing soccer on basketball courts. Rich and poor can play it. I know there are other sports that are played in other countries, but soccer is by far number #1. Soccer is bigger in South America, Africa, and Europe than football probably is here. And like you said, most choose soccer. It's their game.
All games are easy and cheap to play on the most basic level. You can play football in an open field with a $5 ball. You can play hockey with a large stick and a .99 cent tennis ball. You can play baseball with the same thing. You can play basketball with a $5 ball and a flat surface.

When you get into competitive levels, soccer is just as expensive as any other sport. Ask my parents, they will tell you just how much it cost to play.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
The NHL SHOULD fold 1/3 of their teams. Baseball should too. For the MLS to be the best run league in the country, I should hear more about it (I'm not saying I'm the official barometer, but I watch a lot of sports, more than just the big 3 or 4). It gets no national run until their championship. That's like Arena Football. I'm sure it's well run and has an excellent commissioner. But I don't think it's grabbing casual sports fans to the tv yet.
The MLS doesnt have steriods, megastars flip flopping in and out of retirement, players carrying guns into night clubs, and all the other headline grabbing bull**** that the other leagues have.

Just because the MLS doesnt grab the headlines doesnt mean it isnt extremely well ran. It's running a clean business while the other leagues have a mess of problems and that is one of the reasons that you DO hear about those leagues.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
That's part of the problem, in my opinion. It's not a big deal for him to transfer, but what about us? What about people who only know his name here? Are people (outside of die-hards) really following his team in Europe? So he goes over there to play, we forget about him until a few years later, like around the time of the next world event. Meanwhile, who are we rooting for here?
There are plenty of other players in the MLS to root for. The EPL now has a contract with ESPN and their scores now get shown on the marquee. They also get highlights on Sportscenter too so he will still be seen just as much as he was before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Extreme Southeast Philly, NJ
219 posts, read 220,859 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
Do you know why size matters in those leagues? Because they are playing against players that are that size.

Do you think a QB would need to be 6'4" if he wasnt playing against guys that we 300 pounds and 6'6"?

Do you not think other countries have men that are 6'6" and 250 pounds? They do but you wont see them playing their sports except on rare occassions because athleticism is far more important than size in most places except for here.

As I said in another thread, I will take Lance Armstrong over an overgrown NFL or NBA player anyday of the week. There isnt a player in either of those leagues that could hold Armstrongs jock strap in terms of athleticism.

Americans think the best athletes in the world play our sports and they dont. Overgrown 6' 6" men are not the best athletes. Soccer players, cyclist, runners, swimmers, and others are far greater athletes than most of the beast that play in the NFL. A lot of those guys in the NFL are sucking air after running a 100 meters. That is what I am talking about. Americans have this obsession with size when size doesnt mean great athlete. Take body builders for example, they are some of the most unhealthy people on the planet but they are huge. However, most of them couldnt run a mile to save their life.
A few things:

Re: your last couple paragraphs... A lot of people do this, but please stop comparing athletes that have spent the majority of their lives playing one particular sport to athletes that play another sport. It doesn't make sense. Of course Lance Armstrong has tremendous aerobic capacity. Of course he can ride up mountains. He's trained many, many years and is genetically fortunate to do so, as are the runners and swimmers you mention. Of course a football or basketball or baseball player (anaerobic sports) can't run miles and miles and miles. They don't have to. It's not the nature of their sport. That's like me saying Lance doesn't have a 37'' vertical jump. He can't run a 4.4 second 40 yard dash. He can't throw a baseball +95 miles an hour. That's a LAME (repeat: LAME) argument. Aerobic endurance, speed, agility, power, etc are all athletic skills but apply to different sports. I could go into muscle fiber types and other differences at the cellular level, but that would bore most of you...

And I won't discuss bodybuilders. Anyone with a reasonable eye can tell most of them aren't natural.

Please stop comparing athletes of different sports that have completely different metabolic requirements. It's apples and oranges.

Soccer is probably the closest to being both an anaerobic sport and an aerobic sport. (Look up the difference, or pm me and I'll happily explain it if you're interested.) But that doesn't mean they have better athletes.

The average heights for athletes used to be smaller long ago. In nearly every sport, there's an advantage to being bigger, faster, stronger than average. Usain Bolt, fastest man alive, will never be challenged by anyone significantly shorter than him. 5'10'' guys with the exact same training, muscle fiber type, and desire won't ever beat him. They weren't even close. Being taller helps. A 5'8'' soccer goalie is at a disadvantage. Two guys running for the ball at the same time, have the same athletic ability, but one is taller. The taller guy will win. Yea you can overcome a lot with quick feet, shifty agility, and balance. But guys who can put more power into the ground, guys who can cover more ground, are gonna win out more times than not.

6'6'' 250 is ridiculously big for a soccer player. Actually it's not athletic for any sport, in my opinion. But I'm not saying that is what would win. There aren't many 6'6'' 250 guys in any sport (first of all). But more important, they wouldn't be able to move like a Messi or Ronaldo anyway. 6'6'' 250 guys would be better served playing football. But I mean a lean guy, 6'2'' 180-190 with the same talent as a Messi or even a step below is going to give everyone problems. You're saying some random 6'6'' 250 dude. That's not an athlete. Look at LeBron James or Usain Bolt and tell me (seriously) they aren't athletic... Athletes come in different shapes and sizes. But the best are usually taller. I gave a bunch of examples. You can look them all up. You can give me exceptions, but I know there are exceptions. The norm isn't 5'8'' guy. Spud Webb and Nate Robinson aren't the norm. 7'2'' guy isn't the norm. Size matters. Our soccer players look different than those on other teams. They just do. I agree talent is mostly important, but size is too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 12:38 PM
 
Location: Extreme Southeast Philly, NJ
219 posts, read 220,859 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
You're what I would call a casual fan. You dont really have a team, you just like to watch sports.

That's really a foreign concept to me. I have my teams and those are my teams until I die.
I'm absolutely more than a casual sports fan. NFL first and foremost, I watch every regular season/postseason game every Sunday, Monday, Thursday, and Saturday no matter what. I watch the NBA pretty faithfully after football season is done (since it's not as interesting in the beginning anyway). I won't watch the Clippers, for example, but I'll watch most every other team with great interest and I root for certain teams to win it all. Same for baseball. I may pick a team to follow and ride with them for the season. Or I'll follow teams in direct conflict with teams my friends are die-hards for. I'm no less of a fan because I'm not a die-hard. I USED to be a die-hard fan of certain teams when I was younger, but that got boring. It's boring when your favorite team stinks. You can't argue with anyone, it's hard to watch them play. That's not fun.

If I were a season ticket holder for the Oakland Raiders (which I'm not), I wouldn't renew until Al Davis stepped down as owner. They are a laughing stock, a doormat. He makes awful decisions and doesn't try. If he began to lose so much money that it was bad business to continue owning the team, he'd leave. Then you could get a younger, fresher face with better plans to turn the team around. That makes more sense to me than complaining about the team but spending the money anyway.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
All games are easy and cheap to play on the most basic level. You can play football in an open field with a $5 ball. You can play hockey with a large stick and a .99 cent tennis ball. You can play baseball with the same thing. You can play basketball with a $5 ball and a flat surface.

When you get into competitive levels, soccer is just as expensive as any other sport. Ask my parents, they will tell you just how much it cost to play.
I know the costs for sure. My only problem with that is that that's how it is in THIS country. Yea it's cheap in the beginning. But it turns into tennis and golf by junior high school. You know who can't keep up with that? The better athletes that don't have the means to travel across the state to play in weekend leagues. Everyone can't do that, so it turns into who's got the most money, and that cuts out a lot of great athletes. I played football all through high school and into college. Never spent more than the cost of cleats and gloves every year. Club leagues, summer leagues, etc are more important than high school leagues in soccer. That's soccer's fault.



Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
The MLS doesnt have steriods, megastars flip flopping in and out of retirement, players carrying guns into night clubs, and all the other headline grabbing bull**** that the other leagues have.

Just because the MLS doesnt grab the headlines doesnt mean it isnt extremely well ran. It's running a clean business while the other leagues have a mess of problems and that is one of the reasons that you DO hear about those leagues.
True, but that makes the MLS a lot less interesting. Sure there are tons of idiots in the other sports, but there's tons of personality as well. If you have more characters in the story, chances are some are gonna be boneheads. Regular guys aren't fun. The wild guy with personality is. The one who tells jokes and may get busted for sleeping in the back of the class is fun. It's nice to see a league with a bunch of nice guys, but it's boring to the casual fan. Where's the drama? What's at stake? That's what drives ratings.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RjRobb2 View Post
There are plenty of other players in the MLS to root for. The EPL now has a contract with ESPN and their scores now get shown on the marquee. They also get highlights on Sportscenter too so he will still be seen just as much as he was before.
Yea I've seen that. It's hard to follow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
5,763 posts, read 9,759,816 times
Reputation: 2809
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
I'm absolutely more than a casual sports fan. NFL first and foremost, I watch every regular season/postseason game every Sunday, Monday, Thursday, and Saturday no matter what. I watch the NBA pretty faithfully after football season is done (since it's not as interesting in the beginning anyway). I won't watch the Clippers, for example, but I'll watch most every other team with great interest and I root for certain teams to win it all. Same for baseball. I may pick a team to follow and ride with them for the season. Or I'll follow teams in direct conflict with teams my friends are die-hards for. I'm no less of a fan because I'm not a die-hard. I USED to be a die-hard fan of certain teams when I was younger, but that got boring. It's boring when your favorite team stinks. You can't argue with anyone, it's hard to watch them play. That's not fun.

If I were a season ticket holder for the Oakland Raiders (which I'm not), I wouldn't renew until Al Davis stepped down as owner. They are a laughing stock, a doormat. He makes awful decisions and doesn't try. If he began to lose so much money that it was bad business to continue owning the team, he'd leave. Then you could get a younger, fresher face with better plans to turn the team around. That makes more sense to me than complaining about the team but spending the money anyway.
I am the opposite. I find it a lot less fun when I dont have a horse in the race.

I agree about the Raiders though. There fans have a valid complaint. Luckily, teams like that are rare in sports.




Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
I know the costs for sure. My only problem with that is that that's how it is in THIS country. Yea it's cheap in the beginning. But it turns into tennis and golf by junior high school. You know who can't keep up with that? The better athletes that don't have the means to travel across the state to play in weekend leagues. Everyone can't do that, so it turns into who's got the most money, and that cuts out a lot of great athletes. I played football all through high school and into college. Never spent more than the cost of cleats and gloves every year. Club leagues, summer leagues, etc are more important than high school leagues in soccer. That's soccer's fault.
The youth soccer system does need work. The pay to play system is one of the reason the US is so far behind other countries int he sport.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RyDizzle23 View Post
True, but that makes the MLS a lot less interesting. Sure there are tons of idiots in the other sports, but there's tons of personality as well. If you have more characters in the story, chances are some are gonna be boneheads. Regular guys aren't fun. The wild guy with personality is. The one who tells jokes and may get busted for sleeping in the back of the class is fun. It's nice to see a league with a bunch of nice guys, but it's boring to the casual fan. Where's the drama? What's at stake? That's what drives ratings.
One player leaving the MLS makes it a lot less interesting?

Why? He's only one player out of a few hundred. Soccer is the ultimate team sport. One player can only do so much. Landon hasnt even been the best player on his own team this season.

I would rather the MLS stay away from controversy and get less ratings than have to deal with the crap the other leagues are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 01:17 PM
 
1,261 posts, read 1,773,136 times
Reputation: 371
I am gonna try and steer it back on course.

re; characters in sports.......I can see what you're saying Robb and it makes sense. Then again we do live in an age of HUGE celebrity worship. In the NYC tri state, all a yankee has to do is fart and they gab about it endlessly on the radio. I am not sure if people always need out and out characters to follow as opposed to athletes.

However "characters" or better put; "personalities" I believe are going to be needed in MLS sooner or later. It's doing good gradual growth, but take for example tennis and golf.

Most people I know hardly care about Tennis or Golf unless they play it regularly. BUT If you were talking to an average young person (especially an Afro American) the logic goes Tennis=Williams Sisters and Golf=Tiger. People who hate golf absolutely know who Tiger is (even before his infidelity bullcrap) same with the Williams.

The gradual generational growth has been documented and should continue, but sooner or later, MLS will have to really flex it's PR muscle on one of it's stars to hype during the regular season, can't just rely on World Cup bandwagon. I didn't know who Clint Dempsey or Landon Donovan was before the Cup.

Also maybe one thing to do is try and get people more interested in the larger CONCACAF bouts down the road. Everybody knows about the UEFA but there is also the African Cup of Nations and the AFC that gain high interest in their respective regions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 01:20 PM
 
3,029 posts, read 7,206,358 times
Reputation: 3210
Revolution? No

Slowly getting a little more popular? Yes; since most Gen X'ers played it when they were young, and also due to the increasing number of illegal immigrants from Mexico and other Central American countries where the sport is more popular.

As baby boomers like me die out, it's bound to get more popular. But to me, bowling, curling, and golf are MUCH more exciting to watch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2010, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MO
5,763 posts, read 9,759,816 times
Reputation: 2809
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETex2 View Post
Revolution? No

Slowly getting a little more popular? Yes; since most Gen X'ers played it when they were young, and also due to the increasing number of illegal immigrants from Mexico and other Central American countries where the sport is more popular.

You do realize that we have a large number of legal immigrants from that part of the world? Many illegal immigrants cannot afford tickets to games, cable television, or gear. They arent contributing to the popularity of the sport.

The crowds at MLS games all over the country and mostly Caucasian by a large margin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Soccer
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top