I dare you all...

[mlsrevs]

to go through this forum and look for threads containing "Soccer Bashers". This is ridiculous. Every time a writer criticizes soccer, I can always count on coming here to see "Tony Kornheiser bashes soccer" and "The New York Post hates soccer" threads. Why do we really car every time someone bashes soccer? Do you all have to immediatly flock here to let everyone know what you just heard or read. It enough.
The media always will bash soccer and we dont need to talk about it in 50 threads.

I dont intend on being rude here. I just think this is stupid.

[CrewDust]

People are way too sensitive these days I guess. I remember when people never talked about the sport wether for good or bad.

[PhilipReed]

Those threads actually belong in the "Articles and Links" (or is it v-v?) subforum, but apparently no one knows it's there or realizes what it's for.

[Viking64]

Ok, I'll take this bait.

It's simple. MLS is a business. It's not about sports, it's not about fun, it's about business. If you want to watch MLS soccer for much longer, it has to be a successful BUSINESS. The talking dogs that rip soccer are HURTING THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS. For that reason alone, I usually go after the anti-soccer dogs to cut them down and make them think twice about hurting THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS through their media outlet. Do I care about them personally? No. Will I ever care that they like soccer? NO. But I am determined to help MLS succeed AS A BUSINESS and so I attack the anti-soccer heads because they are anti-competitive IN A BUSINESS SENSE and they use their lucrative positions TO DAMAGE THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS.

Every time an antisoccer dog vents his spleen in a way that HURTS THE IMAGE OF SOCCER, MLS, OR OTHERWISE MAKES IT LESS DESIRABLE FOR ANYONE TO GIVE MLS MONEY, I'm going after them with my pen and ink. After all, it's all fair game, it's just business. I can say whatever I want, it's just business.

Get the picture now?

[mlsrevs]

Why dont we just have official one thread for all soccer bashing stories. It will probably help the bigsoccer servers in some way at least. And we wont need to see 50 threads of it every day.

[notebook]

Originally posted by mlsrevs
Why do we really car every time someone bashes soccer? Do you all have to immediatly flock here to let everyone know what you just heard or read.
Yes.

[kwikstah]

Originally posted by mlsrevs
Why do we really car every time someone bashes soccer? Do you all have to immediatly flock here to let everyone know what you just heard or read.

Because we feel hurt that our tastes have been insulted yet again, and since there are no other soccer fans around us to whom to seek comfort, we all go on BS and start whining about it, but also making ourselves feel better so we can go productively jerk around once again.

[Thunderpac]

Originally posted by Viking64
The talking dogs that rip soccer are HURTING THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS.

No, they are hurting themselves. Every time they point their fingers at soccer, they are pointing three fingers back at themselves. The same holds true for people who point at soccer bashers.

[GoDC]

Originally posted by mlsrevs
Do you all have to immediatly flock here to let everyone know what you just heard or read. It enough.



Yes we do. They are doo doo heads and we need to let them know that.

[The Cadaver]

Originally posted by mlsrevs


I dont intend on being rude here. I just think this is stupid.

If the thread is identified appropriately by its title, and you feel that way, skip it. No one is holding a gun to your head and requiring you to read it.

[BallStateMiddie]

Originally posted by GoDC


Yes we do. They are doo doo heads and we need to let them know that. Yeah, and Jim Rome sucks! He should go to Hell and die. And ESPN is conspiring with Nike to kill soccer in this country, even though they both have a vested interest in it being popular. Crazy, huh.

[GoDC]

Originally posted by BallStateMiddie
Yeah, and Jim Rome sucks! He should go to Hell and die. And ESPN is conspiring with Nike to kill soccer in this country, even though they both have a vested interest in it being popular. Crazy, huh.

Now this guy knows of what he speaks.

[sydtheeagle]

Originally posted by Viking64
Ok, I'll take this bait.

It's simple. MLS is a business. It's not about sports, it's not about fun, it's about business. If you want to watch MLS soccer for much longer, it has to be a successful BUSINESS. The talking dogs that rip soccer are HURTING THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS. For that reason alone, I usually go after the anti-soccer dogs to cut them down and make them think twice about hurting THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS through their media outlet. Do I care about them personally? No. Will I ever care that they like soccer? NO. But I am determined to help MLS succeed AS A BUSINESS and so I attack the anti-soccer heads because they are anti-competitive IN A BUSINESS SENSE and they use their lucrative positions TO DAMAGE THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS.

Every time an antisoccer dog vents his spleen in a way that HURTS THE IMAGE OF SOCCER, MLS, OR OTHERWISE MAKES IT LESS DESIRABLE FOR ANYONE TO GIVE MLS MONEY, I'm going after them with my pen and ink. After all, it's all fair game, it's just business. I can say whatever I want, it's just business.

Get the picture now?

Well, I have to say that I agreed entirely with the original poster, and for whatever reason I am moved to take you to task for your reply, which I think is wholly wrong for the most part. So let's take your assertions one by one.

"MLS is a business. It's not about sports, it's not about fun, it's about business."

MLS IS about sports. I agree that the management of sports does not have to be, nor necessarily is "fun", but if the sport doesn't take hold then the business doesn't exist. You cannot have a business promoting a product that doesn't work or isn't desired, and as the product in this case is sports, thus that is the core of any hope the league has of succeeding as a business or otherwise. Thus, the MSL has to be about sport first, and business later. Only once the sport has become established can the business hope to flourish.

"The talking dogs that rip soccer are HURTING THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS."

I would agree that they are not making the life of either soccer in the States or the MSL as an entity any easier, but the talking dogs alone CANNOT destroy either. History is littered with advances in business and otherwise about which people were sceptical at first but which are now "best sellers". And guess what? Journalists DON'T rule the world, either. They say what they say and the public then does what the public wants. The journos are, possibly, hurting soccer a little, but not THAT much (unless you really believe that all Americans are completely stupid and they are prepared to buy whatever is written in a newspaper hook, line, and sinker. I doubt this is the case).

"But I am determined to help MLS succeed AS A BUSINESS and so I attack the anti-soccer heads because they are anti-competitive IN A BUSINESS SENSE and they use their lucrative positions TO DAMAGE THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS."

You help the MLS succeed as a business by showing up at games. I expect you already do this. It's the ONLY way you can really help, other than by taking people with you.

The anti-soccer reporters are NOT anti-competitive. That is a ridiculous, and groundless assertion. They are just journalists who happen to prefer other sports, and who bide their spare time by writing the odd cynical article about soccer, which is entirely their right, even if I think they are idiots for doing so. I seriously doubt there is a cabal of US writers who have violated the Sherman (anti-trust) act by joining together to deliberately and wilfully diminish competition in the broad arena of professional sports. If their scribblings do diminish the MLS, that is a corollary rather than a deliberate goal of what they write. If you believe otherwise, I think you're getting a bit carried away with conspiracy theories.

As for your right to go after them, it's a free country and by all means vent your spleen and say what you think. Just keep it rational and you'll win more respect. I think you make the original posters point for him. The people who over-react to everything negative that's written about soccer in the States are actually far more of a turn-off when it comes to liking the game than they are effective evangelists. If people spent as much time lauding the positive as they do over-reacting to the negative, then the sport might just be a little better established than it is now.

[SoFla Metro]

Originally posted by mlsrevs
Why dont we just have official one thread for all soccer bashing stories. It will probably help the bigsoccer servers in some way at least. And we wont need to see 50 threads of it every day. Because it won't work. You'll get somebody who starts a thread with "I didn't see another thread about this, so..."

[PhilipReed]

Originally posted by The Cadaver




If the thread is identified appropriately by its title, and you feel that way, skip it. No one is holding a gun to your head and requiring you to read it.

There is a forum for these (the Links and Articles one). This is not that forum. Therefore, no matter how well-identified it is, THIS IS THE WRONG PLACE for it.

If i go to the USMNT forum and post about the Qatari first division, it doesn't matter that my heading is "Qatar 1st div results [R]". It's still the wrong place, and it clutters the forum so you can't see things that are on topic.

What's so hard to understand about that? I mean, if people aren't aware of the subforum, well, i mentioned it so now you are. But if people are deliberately posting in the wrong place then that's a problem, no?

[FlashMan]

It's all part of it. It's bound to get some people's dander up. If a gun control advocate writes an essay it's bound to get a response from some anti-gun control advocates. It's natural. Of course, soccer bashing isn't politics so the analogy isn't perfect, but it's still the nature of the beast.

It's good for soccer bashers to know there's a small but ever growing contingent of soccer enthusiasts who believe in their sport and their league, and are willing to work hard for it and not take a bunch of tripe laying down. Having said that, if we spent more time promoting soccer rather than reacting to soccer bashers, soccer in general and MLS in particular might be a little better off.

Sort of a two-way street I guess.

[Viking64]

Originally posted by sydtheeagle


Well, I have to say that I agreed entirely with the original poster, and for whatever reason I am moved to take you to task for your reply, which I think is wholly wrong for the most part. So let's take your assertions one by one.

"MLS is a business. It's not about sports, it's not about fun, it's about business."

MLS IS about sports. I agree that the management of sports does not have to be, nor necessarily is "fun", but if the sport doesn't take hold then the business doesn't exist. You cannot have a business promoting a product that doesn't work or isn't desired, and as the product in this case is sports, thus that is the core of any hope the league has of succeeding as a business or otherwise. Thus, the MSL [sic] has to be about sport first, and business later. Only once the sport has become established can the business hope to flourish.

Wrong. I'm sorry to be so undiplomatic, but you are wrong. MLS has to turn a profit, or earn enough to make the losses acceptable, or it's going away. That is a business question. While the quality of the games etc is important, if it doesn't make money soon, it's not going to survive as a league. Soccer will, but MLS will not. Example: the Dallas Stars (NHL). Does any appreciable number of the 20,000 people watching the game live really understand the sport? Is hockey "established" in Dallas Texas? Originally posted by sydtheeagle

"The talking dogs that rip soccer are HURTING THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS."

I would agree that they are not making the life of either soccer in the States or the MSL as an entity any easier, but the talking dogs alone CANNOT destroy either. History is littered with advances in business and otherwise about which people were sceptical at first but which are now "best sellers". And guess what? Journalists DON'T rule the world, either. They say what they say and the public then does what the public wants. The journos are, possibly, hurting soccer a little, but not THAT much (unless you really believe that all Americans are completely stupid and they are prepared to buy whatever is written in a newspaper hook, line, and sinker. I doubt this is the case).

In a country dominated by media buzz, what is on TV and radio is 75 percent of what people think is true. If you don't believe me, you don't follow American politics. And yes, I know enough about rhetoric to know that modern politics and the sports business are in fact comparable. If you don't like comparing the sports business marketplace to politics, head to the recording industry. Do any of the current pop stars have discernible talent? Perhaps, but that 200 million dollar image machine isn't hurting either. I'm sure the Spice Girls became famous on their singing talent, and the value of their CD recordings. Not. They were the recipients of the mega media promotion machine. MLS has a 20 million dollar image machine, and we don't get the full impact of it because the cash value of the column inches and air time that anti-soccer dogs use is literally bigger than what MLS elects to spend on its own image. Is there 20 million dollars worth of media out there telling you Britney Spears is boring, not talented, and not worth your $500.00 at the next concert? I don't like the fact that really good songwriters never see the light of day, while the latest boob job and short skirt gets rich. But I know it happens and why.
Originally posted by sydtheeagle
"But I am determined to help MLS succeed AS A BUSINESS and so I attack the anti-soccer heads because they are anti-competitive IN A BUSINESS SENSE and they use their lucrative positions TO DAMAGE THE LEGITIMATE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF MLS."

You help the MLS succeed as a business by showing up at games. I expect you already do this. It's the ONLY way you can really help, other than by taking people with you.

Wrong again. I'm a season ticket holder, since year 1. Just paid cash for 8 people to go to an away game. When they asked me how much to pay me back, I replied "nothing if you promise to go to another game." But soccer fans need to demand coverage from every media outlet, or they will never get it.

Originally posted by sydtheeagle
The anti-soccer reporters are NOT anti-competitive. That is a ridiculous, and groundless assertion. They are just journalists who happen to prefer other sports, and who bide their spare time by writing the odd cynical article about soccer, which is entirely their right, even if I think they are idiots for doing so. I seriously doubt there is a cabal of US writers who have violated the Sherman (anti-trust) act by joining together to deliberately and wilfully diminish competition in the broad arena of professional sports. If their scribblings do diminish the MLS, that is a corollary rather than a deliberate goal of what they write. If you believe otherwise, I think you're getting a bit carried away with conspiracy theories.

Why do you think that journalists are not business people? It's in their best financial interest to perpetuate the current popularity of the business interests that support their daily bread. They have a symbiotic financial relationship with MLB, NHL, NFL, NCAA, NBA, and NOT MLS. They write copy and do TV and radio segments about those leagues, players, and teams, because it attracts people to watch, listen and read. That's how they deliver "impressions," which is the short term for the number of times a given individual is exposed to an advertiser's message. The more impressions their media outlet can deliver to people buying ads, the more money they make. Right now MLS is on the outside looking in at the big boys in the US sports business.

Look at the Arena Gridiron League, now on the verge of going "network" on a major national network. Do you think there is some latent giant following out there that will support Arena League Gridiron? No, but their new network partner thinks that with enough media support, the network can eventually make money off the league. They will do this by taking a loss for awhile, hoping that impressions go up, and they can recoup their investment. Why didn't that network just decide to buy into MLS and use it as its vehicle to deliver impressions to advertisers? I wish I knew.

Originally posted by sydtheeagle
As for your right to go after them, it's a free country and by all means vent your spleen and say what you think. Just keep it rational and you'll win more respect. I think you make the original posters point for him. The people who over-react to everything negative that's written about soccer in the States are actually far more of a turn-off when it comes to liking the game than they are effective evangelists. If people spent as much time lauding the positive as they do over-reacting to the negative, then the sport might just be a little better established than it is now.

I go after them, but I don't divulge much about why. My first sentance is always "thanks for writing about soccer." On the surface it looks like soccer. Really, it's about business. I don't care whether some journalist actually likes soccer or not. If his boss says "today your assignment is to cover the Colorado Rapids" he's going to do it. If he doesn't do it, he'll be fired. Editors allow anti-soccer dogs to write their drivel, because it doesn't hurt their bottom line. The day it hurts the bottom line, is the day it stops.

[Brownswan]

Food and shelter are essential to life. Everything else is fun and games -- including business. That doesn't mean people don't get hurt, they do. For every 10 kids that go out to play, one comes home crying. That's life, and that's business, too.

Soccer bashers are just part of the sports game. We're gonna win in the long run, so just enjoy the attention.

[The Cadaver]

Originally posted by PhilipReed


Therefore, no matter how well-identified it is, THIS IS THE WRONG PLACE for it.

But if people are deliberately posting in the wrong place then that's a problem, no?

Apparently for you. Not for the people who respond and engage the issue on the merits.

You apparently have a clear idea in your mind as to what forum is to be used for what purpose. Show me the jurisdictional definition and we can debate the issue - but its not surprising that others do not accept by your fiat just because you view it that way.

If it bothers you, petition the moderator to move the thread to the "appropriate" place. That happens all the time. The fact that the mods have not intervened and moved the thread already suggest that they may not share your narrow views as to what subforum can only be used for what purpose.

[PhilipReed]

Originally posted by The Cadaver





Show me the jurisdictional definition and we can debate the issue - but its not surprising that others do not accept by your fiat just because you view it that way.




Well, that's just the problem: the only jurisdictional definition i see available is:

Links and Articles

Let's see if this works.





Before BigSoccer crashed there was a whole debate over the desirability of such a forum that got wiped out in the crash. So maybe that explains why my recollection of what this was for is apparently not shared by anyone else. Nontheless, i would think it would be common sense that if you have a forum contained within XYZ forum called "Links and Articles", that subforum should be used for links and articles on XYZ topic in the absence of some compelling reason to the contrary.



In other words, if someone has TV numbers that happen to have a link to back them up, in my mind that would be content for the main forum because the topic is the numbers, not the article revealing the numbers. But if someone posted a link to say "look what such-and-such said about soccer", whether positive or negative, that would go in Links and Articles. Is there some radically different interpretation out there that i'm overlooking?



I suspect most people posting links to articles on the main forum never really thought about what the subforum is for or why it would be desirable to segregate the two. I may be wrong in my speculation, but at any rate the point is until we get some clarification from Olympus i guess we're each depending on our own interpretation of what this forum is for.

I have a working assumption that the mods are generally reading most of the threads on here and keeping tabs on what content goes where without need for user input. That may be an outdated, 1999-era assumption. Should i just wait for clarification based on the fact that we're discussing this, or is there someone i should e-mail (since i can't PM any more)?