Skip to content

Inside: U.S. Soccer's March to Brazil

Barber Shop Talk
91 8 3.1k
  • @browns149 said:

    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.

    MLD WoodyM MLD Woody wrote on last edited by
    #31

    @the-gipper said:

    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?

  • MLD WoodyM MLD Woody wrote on last edited by
    #32

    You don't seem to understand the game of soccer so this debate is really pointless.

  • The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #33

    @mld-woody said:

    13258_THUMB_IPAD.jpg

    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.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #34

    @mld-woody said:

    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.

  • MLD WoodyM MLD Woody wrote on last edited by
    #35

    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?

    The Cysko KidT The Cysko Kid wrote on last edited by
    #36

    @mld-woody said:

    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

  • MLD WoodyM MLD Woody wrote on last edited by
    #37

    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)

  • @mld-woody said:

    13258_THUMB_IPAD.jpg

    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.

    gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #38

    @the-gipper said:

    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?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #39

    @mld-woody said:

    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)

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #40

    @mld-woody said:

    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)

  • gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #41
    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.

  • 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.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #42

    @gftchris said:

    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.

    You are going to have to list all those teams for me to get to 50. Though I guess if you count Luxembourg, Monaco, Andorra, Liechtenstien, Vatican City, San Marino, Malta and all the recent splintered countries after the breakup of Yugoslavia you might get there.

    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.

    Not from a neutral point of view. It is similar. Create creases in front of the goal and get it in.

  • gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #43

    Countries in UEFA:

    Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales
  • gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #44

    Countries in CONMEBOL (South America)

    Argentina
    Bolivia
    Brazil
    Chile
    Colombia
    Ecuador
    Paraguay
    Peru
    Uruguay
    Venezuela
  • gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #45

    The current world top 31 ranked countries are made up of 3 african teams, 3 teams from north/central america, 6 south american teams and 19 european teams. The next 31 ranked countries have 8 African teams, 4 Asians, a couple from north/central america, 3 from S. America, and another 12 from Europe.

    So why exactly should the other continents get an equal amount of teams there?

  • Countries in UEFA:

    Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales
    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #46

    @gftchris said:

    Countries in UEFA:

    Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

    The nations in bold are in fucking Asia. Can't these guys read a map?

    And the Faroe Islands? Gibralter? Those are like declaring Hilton Head and Martha's Vineyard as separate nations. WTF?

  • The current world top 31 ranked countries are made up of 3 african teams, 3 teams from north/central america, 6 south american teams and 19 european teams. The next 31 ranked countries have 8 African teams, 4 Asians, a couple from north/central america, 3 from S. America, and another 12 from Europe.

    So why exactly should the other continents get an equal amount of teams there?

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #47

    @gftchris said:

    The current world top 31 ranked countries are made up of 3 african teams, 3 teams from north/central america, 6 south american teams and 19 european teams. The next 31 ranked countries have 8 African teams, 4 Asians, a couple from north/central america, 3 from S. America, and another 12 from Europe.

    So why exactly should the other continents get an equal amount of teams there?

    So, I guess what I say is correct. Soccer is merely a regional sport.....Europe and SA.

  • MLD WoodyM MLD Woody wrote on last edited by
    #48

    I showed you the map, that's not true. Its the most popular sport in the world.

    The tactics in hockey and soccer are very different, unless you're just looking at it from an incredibly high level. This belief again just plays in to you just not knowing what you're talking about.

  • I showed you the map, that's not true. Its the most popular sport in the world.

    The tactics in hockey and soccer are very different, unless you're just looking at it from an incredibly high level. This belief again just plays in to you just not knowing what you're talking about.

    The GipperT The Gipper wrote on last edited by
    #49

    @mld-woody said:

    I showed you the map, that's not true. Its the most popular sport in the world.

    The tactics in hockey and soccer are very different, unless you're just looking at it from an incredibly high level. This belief again just plays in to you just not knowing what you're talking about.

    It is not the most popular sport at all in the two largest Democracies in world....the USA and India.

    And yes, I AM looking at the two sports from a high level. Because the purpose of the game is to play on a rectangular field and to put a biscuit in a basket, the methodologies of doing so..as I said, the passing, the spacing, are all very similar. Soccer is played on a larger surface and you cannot use your hands, but the maneuvering to get into position to score are quite similar.

  • @gftchris said:

    Countries in UEFA:

    Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

    The nations in bold are in fucking Asia. Can't these guys read a map?

    And the Faroe Islands? Gibralter? Those are like declaring Hilton Head and Martha's Vineyard as separate nations. WTF?

    gftChrisG gftChris wrote on last edited by
    #50

    @the-gipper said:

    @gftchris said:

    Countries in UEFA:

    Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark England Estonia Faroe Islands Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Gibraltar Greece Hungary Iceland Israel[n 6] Italy Kazakhstan Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Montenegro Netherlands Northern Ireland Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Ireland Romania Russia San Marino Scotland Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine Wales

    The nations in bold are in fucking Asia. Can't these guys read a map?

    And the Faroe Islands? Gibralter? Those are like declaring Hilton Head and Martha's Vineyard as separate nations. WTF?

    Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan - doesn't matter, they wouldn't qualify anyway. I'm not sure why it's split up like this, but the countries have to apply to join the confederation, and so obviously they did and their application was successful.

    Israel - joined UEFA because matches with neighbouring Asian countries were becoming highly political, with lots of violence surrounding them.

    Turkey - has always been the bridge between Europe and Asia. Could go either way, they chose Europe - probably due to the improvements in their game that would come with playing against a higher standard of competition, is my guess.

    Cyrpus - half greek, half turkish. So half european, half half-european-half-asian (and just a tiny bit British) - 75% european.

    If Martha's vineyard declared independence from the USA, became a sovereign state in its own right, it would have a football team that could compete in the world cup qualifying.