Inside: U.S. Soccer's March to Brazil
-
I can't make you think its exciting. My comment was in response to yours saying they aren't trying to achieve the goal. The goal is winning BTW, not necessarily scoring. Each pass, run, etc serves a purpose towards the goal. They aren't just doing whatever they feel like. Comments like that really kill your credibility and any opinion you may have about the sport. For example, the number of WC teams from each region.
We don't need a boom, I'm just hoping for one. Increased support will also make us better on the world stage. Plus, if it happens to replace the airtime of another sport, say baseball, I'm OK with that.
-
I can't make you think its exciting. My comment was in response to yours saying they aren't trying to achieve the goal. The goal is winning BTW, not necessarily scoring. Each pass, run, etc serves a purpose towards the goal. They aren't just doing whatever they feel like. Comments like that really kill your credibility and any opinion you may have about the sport. For example, the number of WC teams from each region.
We don't need a boom, I'm just hoping for one. Increased support will also make us better on the world stage. Plus, if it happens to replace the airtime of another sport, say baseball, I'm OK with that.
I can't make you think its exciting. My comment was in response to yours saying they aren't trying to achieve the goal. The goal is winning BTW, not necessarily scoring. Each pass, run, etc serves a purpose towards the goal. They aren't just doing whatever they feel like. Comments like that really kill your credibility and any opinion you may have about the sport. For example, the number of WC teams from each region.
OK, sure, every move is made in an attempt to try to score or get an advantage.....so is every move in chess, but that does not make chess a palatable spectator sport.
As to your comment about World Cup teams from each region....I think that it is MY position that serves the goal of having soccer become more popular on the total world stage. If you want it to have worldwide appeal, yet you have most of the field come from Europe or SA, then it is not acheiving that goal, now is it?
We don't need a boom, I'm just hoping for one. Increased support will also make us better on the world stage. Plus, if it happens to replace the airtime of another sport, say baseball, I'm OK with that.
I'm not. Baseball is by far a superior sport. It is only because baseball is not popular with the Eurofags was it taken out of the Olympics. Its a sport popular in NA, SA, and Asia.
-
0-0 draws can be very entertaining, either with a load of missed chances/great saves, or from being an extremely engaging tactical affair - though I'm aware that the latter is not everybody's cup of tea, and some people won't be happy unless it ends up 5-4.
Here is the deal......hockey and soccer are really the exact same sport more or less. They are both played on a rectangular playing field with a "goal" at each end being guarded by a goalie. One is ice, the other grass, but the purpose is the same, put a ball/puck into that goal. Essentially the same tactics are used. Except in hockey those tactics are employed constantly....trying to get into a good position to have the object put into the goal.....whereas in soccer it seems that the teams are almost completely passive at attaining what the purpose of the game is: attack that goal. They twiddle about in the huge surface until finally someone gets an idea in their head that the object of the game is to score, not just possess the ball. Too many times they fail to be aggressive.
It is like back when the NCAA did not have a shot clock and teams would go into the 4 corners offense. All they did was pass the ball around the perimeter, and sometimes they would hold the ball for like 5 minutes at a time. It became so awful that they had to put stop to it and install the shot clock. Maybe soccer needs a shot clock.
Here is the deal......hockey and soccer are really the exact same sport more or less. They are both played on a rectangular playing field with a "goal" at each end being guarded by a goalie. One is ice, the other grass, but the purpose is the same, put a ball/puck into that goal. Essentially the same tactics are used. Except in hockey those tactics are employed constantly....trying to get into a good position to have the object put into the goal.....whereas in soccer it seems that the teams are almost completely passive at attaining what the purpose of the game is: attack that goal. They twiddle about in the huge surface until finally someone gets an idea in their head that the object of the game is to score, not just possess the ball. Too many times they fail to be aggressive.
It is like back when the NCAA did not have a shot clock and teams would go into the 4 corners offense. All they did was pass the ball around the perimeter, and sometimes they would hold the ball for like 5 minutes at a time. It became so awful that they had to put stop to it and install the shot clock. Maybe soccer needs a shot clock.
While the main goal is the same in both sports, they are a lot farther apart then you think.
Hockey is go full blast for 45 seconds then change all 5 guys, do it again, then change all 5 guys and so on. Soccer the 11 guys are out there for 90+ minutes. They only get 3 subs the WHOLE game. And the subbed for players are not allowed back in the match.
They don't just twiddle around for no reason either. Every pass, run, play has a reason for it. If that's what you see,twiddling around, then you don't know the game.
Also I would much rather watch hockey or soccer before the NBA. Much more entertaining to me.
"And they don't really know even what they're talkin' about And I can't imagine what empty heads can achieve." -
Uh...Gipper... Idk where you've been but soccer has world wide appeal lol.
"Baseball is the far superior sport"... Haha haha haha haha. That's fucking funny man.
Alright... Now soccer is a shitty spectator sport... Lol OK. Just for the record I wasn't trying to convince you its great. You're probably too rooted in your decades old beliefs for me to change your mind about soccer. You seemed to think the players weren't trying to achieve their goal. You thought there wasn't a purpose behind their passes, movements and runs. Glad to you flip flopped on that quickly enough
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
The US team doesn't have much room to talk either.
-
Here is the deal......hockey and soccer are really the exact same sport more or less. They are both played on a rectangular playing field with a "goal" at each end being guarded by a goalie. One is ice, the other grass, but the purpose is the same, put a ball/puck into that goal. Essentially the same tactics are used. Except in hockey those tactics are employed constantly....trying to get into a good position to have the object put into the goal.....whereas in soccer it seems that the teams are almost completely passive at attaining what the purpose of the game is: attack that goal. They twiddle about in the huge surface until finally someone gets an idea in their head that the object of the game is to score, not just possess the ball. Too many times they fail to be aggressive.
It is like back when the NCAA did not have a shot clock and teams would go into the 4 corners offense. All they did was pass the ball around the perimeter, and sometimes they would hold the ball for like 5 minutes at a time. It became so awful that they had to put stop to it and install the shot clock. Maybe soccer needs a shot clock.
While the main goal is the same in both sports, they are a lot farther apart then you think.
Hockey is go full blast for 45 seconds then change all 5 guys, do it again, then change all 5 guys and so on. Soccer the 11 guys are out there for 90+ minutes. They only get 3 subs the WHOLE game. And the subbed for players are not allowed back in the match.
They don't just twiddle around for no reason either. Every pass, run, play has a reason for it. If that's what you see,twiddling around, then you don't know the game.
Also I would much rather watch hockey or soccer before the NBA. Much more entertaining to me.
While the main goal is the same in both sports, they are a lot farther apart then you think.
Hockey is go full blast for 45 seconds then change all 5 guys, do it again, then change all 5 guys and so on. Soccer the 11 guys are out there for 90+ minutes. They only get 3 subs the WHOLE game. And the subbed for players are not allowed back in the match.
They don't just twiddle around for no reason either. Every pass, run, play has a reason for it. If that's what you see,twiddling around, then you don't know the game.
Also I would much rather watch hockey or soccer before the NBA. Much more entertaining to me.
The basic format of the field they each play on is the same. The tactics designed to score are essentially the same. Hockey changes lines so often because it is a more demanding sport. With soccer the players often have a lot of time to stand around.
-
Uh...Gipper... Idk where you've been but soccer has world wide appeal lol.
"Baseball is the far superior sport"... Haha haha haha haha. That's fucking funny man.
Alright... Now soccer is a shitty spectator sport... Lol OK. Just for the record I wasn't trying to convince you its great. You're probably too rooted in your decades old beliefs for me to change your mind about soccer. You seemed to think the players weren't trying to achieve their goal. You thought there wasn't a purpose behind their passes, movements and runs. Glad to you flip flopped on that quickly enough
Uh...Gipper... Idk where you've been but soccer has world wide appeal lol.
I never said that it didn't have world wide appeal.....but baseball is just as popular in much of Latin America, and Asia, and Australia, and obviously North America. Like I said....it is only in Europe basically that baseball hasn't caught on. Only an ostrich can see otherwise.
"Baseball is the far superior sport"... Haha haha haha haha. That's fucking funny man.
Funny as a heart attack.
Alright... Now soccer is a shitty spectator sport... Lol OK. Just for the record I wasn't trying to convince you its great. You're probably too rooted in your decades old beliefs for me to change your mind about soccer.
Not really, I am amenable to watching interesting sporting events. I am not saying soccer isn't an interesting sport. But to me, it is just the generic brand of sport.
You seemed to think the players weren't trying to achieve their goal. You thought there wasn't a purpose behind their passes, movements and runs. Glad to you flip flopped on that quickly enough.
I think they take their good old time often enough to get into the action.
When basketball was doing the old 4 corners offense there was a purpose behind each of those movements, passes, runs as well.
-
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
While the main goal is the same in both sports, they are a lot farther apart then you think.
Hockey is go full blast for 45 seconds then change all 5 guys, do it again, then change all 5 guys and so on. Soccer the 11 guys are out there for 90+ minutes. They only get 3 subs the WHOLE game. And the subbed for players are not allowed back in the match.
They don't just twiddle around for no reason either. Every pass, run, play has a reason for it. If that's what you see,twiddling around, then you don't know the game.
Also I would much rather watch hockey or soccer before the NBA. Much more entertaining to me.
The basic format of the field they each play on is the same. The tactics designed to score are essentially the same. Hockey changes lines so often because it is a more demanding sport. With soccer the players often have a lot of time to stand around.
The basic format of the field they each play on is the same. The tactics designed to score are essentially the same. Hockey changes lines so often because it is a more demanding sport. With soccer the players often have a lot of time to stand around.
... like they're sitting on a bench?
-
You don't seem to understand the game of soccer so this debate is really pointless.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
I question some of this. I don't think soccer is necessarily #1 in China, at all. Baseball is every bit as big in Mexico.
And if soccer is so big in all those Asian and African countries, then why do they get short shrift in WC entries.
And, beyond everything, the only one that really matters is that big pick country on the left.
-
You don't seem to understand the game of soccer so this debate is really pointless.
I understand it fine. I just don't agree with your version of what its all about. They obviously don't play soccer with the same ferocity as they play hockey. Yes, soccer players do rest out there while they are watching the action occur on the other part of the field. When it is appropriate they move into position to become part of the action. Basketball players do too. Baseball players certainly do.
Not sure what it is that you think I don't understand.
I understand that it is a slow paced game. That is not the problem.
-
You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it
If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.
I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.
We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it
If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.
I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.
We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?
You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it
If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.
I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.
We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?
South America might disagree
-
South America has 10 international soccer teams and gets 4 to 5 world cup spots
Europe has 54 international soccer teams and gets 13 world cup spots
Sounds pretty fair for South America. In fact, by ratios, you could say the World Cup committee thinks there is a higher percentage of talent in SA.
I guess I should have said most skilled region as a whole. Especially with all of the top leagues in the world existing there. With these amazing professional clubs and youth teams in place, the development system would seem to be much more prevalent. This then cold lead to more skilled players. It clearly makes sense they get more spots when the region includes England, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc etc etc. (though I know you weren't arguing against that point)
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
I question some of this. I don't think soccer is necessarily #1 in China, at all. Baseball is every bit as big in Mexico.
And if soccer is so big in all those Asian and African countries, then why do they get short shrift in WC entries.
And, beyond everything, the only one that really matters is that big pick country on the left.
And, beyond everything, the only one that really matters is that big pick country on the left.
Yep, that's your problem right there. I can fix it, but it'll need something to open your mind, and I can't order the can opener for another few days.
-
You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it
If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.
I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.
We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?
You seem to not understand the tactics, and act like they are just doing whatever they feel like. This leads me to seriously question your understanding of the game. An ignorant view of it is an easy pathway to criticize it
Again, I understand it fine. I just don't give a shit about it. What the fuck is it about that you don't understand?
If you're going to actually compare baseball to soccer when it comes to how physically demanding they are then fuck... This is even more pointless than I thought.
I am saying that there are opportunities in soccer for the players to catch a blow. If they couldn't catch blows...if they couldn't find opportunities to rest while the action is taking part in another part of the field they could not play as continually as they do.
I'm not even sure how we got to this hockey vs soccer debate. Its like you are trying to just find any way to attack soccer and are jumping all around to do so.
We got into this because hockey and soccer are played essentially the same way. A rectangular field with a goal and a goalie. And the tactics to score are almost the same. One is played on ice with a puck, the other on grass with a ball....but otherwise there is not much difference.
We've been over this before, the World Cup selection thing. The point is to get the best countries in the works cup, not to get an equal amount from each region. Europe is clearly the most skilled region, so they get the most teams. What is there not to understand?
Then here is what you do: do NOT select countries from regions. Why is there a regional selection process? Why does Europe warrant receiving 13 of the 32 entries? I don't think they do. Have the entire tournament played on a worldwide basis....disregard regions altogether.
E.g. in preliminaries, Honduras say, must play of against the US/Canada/Mexico/etc. North American countries. Why? Why can't it play Columbia/Venezuela/Suriname/Chad/Togo/Benin/Indonesia/Goa/Iraq/Iran/Bosnia...whatever.
-
South America has 10 international soccer teams and gets 4 to 5 world cup spots
Europe has 54 international soccer teams and gets 13 world cup spots
Sounds pretty fair for South America. In fact, by ratios, you could say the World Cup committee thinks there is a higher percentage of talent in SA.
I guess I should have said most skilled region as a whole. Especially with all of the top leagues in the world existing there. With these amazing professional clubs and youth teams in place, the development system would seem to be much more prevalent. This then cold lead to more skilled players. It clearly makes sense they get more spots when the region includes England, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc etc etc. (though I know you weren't arguing against that point)
South America has 10 international soccer teams and gets 4 to 5 world cup spots
Europe has 54 international soccer teams and gets 13 world cup spots
There aren't even 54 nations in Europe. How can they have more teams than they have countries? Are they like taking countries and dividing them up? Like does England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland count as 4 different "teams". Well, fuck, if they can do that, then we should have different soccer teams for California/Texas/Florda/New England/New York/Ohio/Montana etc. etc. etc.....and demand at least 10 slots for all those teams.
Sounds pretty fair for South America. In fact, by ratios, you could say the World Cup committee thinks there is a higher percentage of talent in SA.
I guess I should have said most skilled region as a whole. Especially with all of the top leagues in the world existing there. With these amazing professional clubs and youth teams in place, the development system would seem to be much more prevalent. This then cold lead to more skilled players. It clearly makes sense they get more spots when the region includes England, Spain, Germany, Italy, etc etc etc. (though I know you weren't arguing against that point)
-
There aren't even 54 nations in Europe. How can they have more teams than they have countries? Are they like taking countries and dividing them up? Like does England/Wales/Scotland/Northern Ireland count as 4 different "teams".
Basically, international matches started out as being between England and Scotland, and generally what's known as the 'home nations' over here - including Wales and the Irelands. The fact that those places still have teams is a legacy thing. but even if you disagree, and count the UK as one team, you're still looking at 50-odd teams compared to south america's 10.
We got into this because hockey and soccer are played essentially the same way. A rectangular field with a goal and a goalie. And the tactics to score are almost the same. One is played on ice with a puck, the other on grass with a ball....but otherwise there is not much difference.
Disagree entirely about the tactics to score. Other than 'get it in the net without it getting stopped' - which is also how you score in basketball - there's not much similarity, if any.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login