Underdogs made World Cup boring?

[soccerdome]

All right. Who in their right mind agrees with this? No really, I want to know. I know some of ya do. A guy in the July issue of World Soccer said they did. That is one of the stupidest opinions in soccer that I've ever heard. What... is Brazil, Argentina, Germany, and all the other "soccerpowers" supposed to win it ever time. I hope not! THAT would be a boring World Cup!

[timmy409]

i have to agree with the guy who would u of rather watched in final brazil-germany or south korea-turkey

[Elninho]

South Korea - Turkey wasn't a bad game, and the two teams were among the more entertaining in the tournament. I actually wouldn't have minded seeing them in the final.

[Craig the Aussie]

The underdogs knocking a couple of big fish out is what makes the WC (and all Cup competitions) fun. Otherwise we may as well just invite 4 or 8 teams, and noone else worry about even trying to qualify.

[soccerdome]

But I mean it would be the same teams winning over and over. No variety. No upsets. No humiliation (did I spell that wrong?) And things would be predictable. U couldn't see the up and coming stars in other growing nations like the US, South Korea, Turkey, Senegal, and so on. I, personally would have loved to see South Korea- Turkey in the Final. They were both very entertaining. I hated the fact that Germany made it that far. I compare their football (at least in the finals) to a world without color.

[photar74]

Anyone who says that underdogs make the WC boring is the worst kind of snob--much, much beyond regular Eurosnob status here.

Think about it this way--if you always know who is going to win (aka, if the favorites always win) how on earth is that exciting?

Without underdogs, the WC is boring.

In '06, I hope Germany, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, France and England all fail to make the quiarters. Now that would be exciting!

[soccerdome]

Originally posted by Craig the Aussie
The underdogs knocking a couple of big fish out is what makes the WC (and all Cup competitions) fun. Otherwise we may as well just invite 4 or 8 teams, and noone else worry about even trying to qualify.

Right on Aussie! Said wonderfully!

[nicodemus]

My favorite is the people that complain about fans "deserving" a title or "deserving" that their team advances, that's the lamest crap ever. If it is a competition between rabid fans, why don't we just line up Brazil vs. England in the final every four years and save the other 30 federations some travel money.

[Mobile]

Originally posted by nicodemus
My favorite is the people that complain about fans "deserving" a title or "deserving" that their team advances, that's the lamest crap ever. If it is a competition between rabid fans, why don't we just line up Brazil vs. England in the final every four years and save the other 30 federations some travel money.

Sounds good to me. Although I think England 'deserve' the WC more so Brazil should be handicapped in some way, perhaps by having their legs tied together.

[timmy409]

i mean it would be exciting but say how about if it were a england-argintina wouldt that be more exciting then senegal-saudiariba(sp?)

[bungadiri]

Originally posted by Elninho
South Korea - Turkey wasn't a bad game, and the two teams were among the more entertaining in the tournament. I actually wouldn't have minded seeing them in the final.

I totally agree. They played some entertaining matches to get to the semifinals, as well. FourFourTwo rated the Brasil vs Turkey match as the best of the group phase and SK was fun to watch in almost every game, despite the controversial calls. I would have liked to see a match between SK in their group phase form against Brasil (see what frenzy could do against finesse).

[Fender playa]

Whoever said a world cup with underdogs winning is a idiot thats whats fun about the world cup anything could happen. Hell thats what happened in this world cup i liked the senegal turkey games turkey brazil games. korea played okay except they lake scorers who can put the ball in the net!

[Foxhound]

Shocks do help enhance a world cup but so do the big games ie Brazil v Argentina, England v Germany etc. This World Cup, for numerous reasons, we saw too many eastablished countries under-performing which I dont think you can argue against had a detrimental effect on the tournament. Good football will only create part of the excitement. What really gives the World Cup it's edge are the matches that have a history and prestige behind them. There were too few of these games in Japkorea.

[Korean Football]

Originally posted by timmy409
or south korea-turkey

I'm with this

[John Steed]

I personally thought this World Cup was one of the more exciting ones.

[soccerdome]

Originally posted by Foxhound
Shocks do help enhance a world cup but so do the big games ie Brazil v Argentina, England v Germany etc. This World Cup, for numerous reasons, we saw too many eastablished countries under-performing which I dont think you can argue against had a detrimental effect on the tournament. Good football will only create part of the excitement. What really gives the World Cup it's edge are the matches that have a history and prestige behind them. There were too few of these games in Japkorea.

But some of the "underdogs" can start to establish big rivalries, too. Example, Mexico- US is really getting big and I think Turkey- Brazil could get good also.

[fox point fury]

Originally posted by soccerdome
But I mean it would be the same teams winning over and over. No variety.

Which is really what this WC was too. Brazil won their 5th title and Germany played in their 5th final out of the last 8 tournaments. USA, SK and Turkey did great and France did horribly but there are always a few surprise teams and a few giants killed.

I thought this was a great WC, but I don't see it as being radically different from past WC's.

[FiveXChampion]

Originally posted by fox point fury

I thought this was a great WC, but I don't see it as being radically different from past WC's.

I entirely agree. Underdogs always have caused trouble for big teams. Now we don't many have teams like Czechoslovakia, USSR, Eastern German, Yugoslavia, etc and US, Korea, Turkey, Senegal and Japan are just taking the places that used to belong to those once good teams.

That doesn't mean that now the US, Korean, Turkey, Senegal and Japan are the new powers in football. They will have to do more than playing well in one cup to reach that status. I wouldn't be surprised at all if some of those teams don't qualify for WC 2006.

[bolas]

I compare their football (at least in the finals) to a world without color. [/B][/QUOTE]

WELL, THEY DO WEAR BLACK AND WHITE.

[fox point fury]

Originally posted by FiveXChampion
That doesn't mean that now the US, Korean, Turkey, Senegal and Japan are the new powers in football. They will have to do more than playing well in one cup to reach that status. I wouldn't be surprised at all if some of those teams don't qualify for WC 2006.

Exactly. Look to Bulgaria or Croatia for perfect examples.