View Full Version : what team should i support?
Bemsims
16 May 2008, 12:40 PM
And forget anti-madrid :)
Bye
City Dave
16 May 2008, 02:38 PM
You can't go round switching teams.. choosing who you want to support is one thing, and supporting more than one team aswell, but switching teams when you get bored of them is stupid.
I suggested no such thing. Look, it's different for you in England. The man has no MLS team within several hundred miles of him. I forgot about Miami FC of the USL, I should have suggested them. But for many people in the US, they have no local soccer. So, does that mean that when a team actually starts in their town, they can't support them because they've already started supporting a team far away? Does it mean if they do start supporting the local team at the expense of the old one that they are stupid? That they are some sort of hollow fan? I didn't say to stop because he's bored. You're acting like it's some sort of bandwagoning or dishonorable thing.
Imagine that you lived some place where the closest Premier League side was several hundred miles away, and the closest Football League team was over an hour drive from you, if you had one at all. That is the case for most of the US. Take a look at the map linked to below and then tell me what a person is supposed to do.
http://www.footiemap.com/?co=usa
Now compare that to a country that is over 50 times smaller(and I didn't count Alaska, Hawaii, and the lakes), yet has 88 teams in the top four leagues. Our second and third leagues aren't even professional. And you still have twice as many teams in comparison to our top three leagues. Plus, a large portion of your teams have been around for over a century, nearly all for several decades.
BoltonMassiv
16 May 2008, 06:32 PM
I don't think you can ever say you supported a team if you leave them when a team nearby pops up.
BoltonMassiv
16 May 2008, 06:35 PM
The main difference is that in England they are clubs, in America they are teams.
Footstomper
17 May 2008, 12:56 AM
The main difference is that in England they are clubs, in America they are teams.
In America they are not teams they are franchises
BoltonMassiv
17 May 2008, 08:27 AM
Exactly, it's a team representing the franchise.
Beazley17
17 May 2008, 11:13 AM
I suggested no such thing. Look, it's different for you in England. The man has no MLS team within several hundred miles of him. I forgot about Miami FC of the USL, I should have suggested them. But for many people in the US, they have no local soccer. So, does that mean that when a team actually starts in their town, they can't support them because they've already started supporting a team far away? Does it mean if they do start supporting the local team at the expense of the old one that they are stupid? That they are some sort of hollow fan? I didn't say to stop because he's bored. You're acting like it's some sort of bandwagoning or dishonorable thing.
Imagine that you lived some place where the closest Premier League side was several hundred miles away, and the closest Football League team was over an hour drive from you, if you had one at all. That is the case for most of the US. Take a look at the map linked to below and then tell me what a person is supposed to do.
http://www.footiemap.com/?co=usa
Now compare that to a country that is over 50 times smaller(and I didn't count Alaska, Hawaii, and the lakes), yet has 88 teams in the top four leagues. Our second and third leagues aren't even professional. And you still have twice as many teams in comparison to our top three leagues. Plus, a large portion of your teams have been around for over a century, nearly all for several decades.
Yeah, that is what I was thinking. Miami might get their club back, but that wont be back for at least 4 to 5 years, so in the mean time, I was thinking about supporting a team. I know we have Miami FC, but they are not MLS, I do not pay attention to the USL, and really have no way to watch. As for now, I just got MLS Live today, so I think I'm gonna watch almost every game, and then decide.
anythingforme
18 May 2008, 03:29 PM
when start new season /
tomwilhelm
18 May 2008, 03:55 PM
Exactly, it's a team representing the franchise.
Oh do please enlighten us on the subtle differences between Bolton the club and Columbus the team...
pookspur
18 May 2008, 05:40 PM
Oh do please enlighten us on the subtle differences between Bolton the club and Columbus the team...
glad to.
a club is it's own entity. should it fail to qualify for the prem, or the league, or the conference, it would continue to exist. bolton existed before the league in which it plays existed, and does not, therefore, owe it's subsistance to that league.
columbus, on the other hand, is a product of it's league; or better yet, a facet of it's league. MLS created the crew. if the league goes tits up, the crew no longer exists. it is not it's own entity.
tomwilhelm
18 May 2008, 05:50 PM
glad to.
a club is it's own entity. should it fail to qualify for the prem, or the league, or the conference, it would continue to exist. bolton existed before the league in which it plays existed, and does not, therefore, owe it's subsistance to that league.
columbus, on the other hand, is a product of it's league; or better yet, a facet of it's league. MLS created the crew. if the league goes tits up, the crew no longer exists. it is not it's own entity.
Thank you for the explanation. As expected, it's a pointless difference with no meaning outside of historical interest.
pookspur
18 May 2008, 06:42 PM
Thank you for the explanation. As expected, it's a pointless difference with no meaning outside of historical interest.
you are, of course, free to ignore the differences and their ramifications as you wish; but that hardly makes them meaningless.
if you cannot distinguish between a player signing a contract with a club and him signing a contract with a league*, and what that implies, then, frankly, you're not really trying - which is, again, your prerogative.
*not that this is even remotely the most pertinent difference, of course.
Footstomper
18 May 2008, 06:50 PM
Thank you for the explanation. As expected, it's a pointless difference with no meaning outside of historical interest.
Actually there is a real gut churning difference. Look at what happened to Leeds, Notts County. MLS is sealed, there isnt a great deal at stake. The cost of dropping out of the EPL is about $40 million; that can ruin make or kill a club. Which would probably survive, nevertheless, as a different entity run on tradition and debt
Footstomper
18 May 2008, 06:52 PM
Thank you for the explanation. As expected, it's a pointless difference with no meaning outside of historical interest.
Bloody hell! You're a Fulham supporter! Have you no idea what would have happened if you'd gone down? Or if Al fayed tired of his plaything?
tomwilhelm
18 May 2008, 07:32 PM
Bloody hell! You're a Fulham supporter! Have you no idea what would have happened if you'd gone down? Or if Al fayed tired of his plaything?
I know just what would have happened and agonized over it over... well, pretty much the entire season.
It seems that people are using the team vs club thing as a proxy for the single entity vs relegation argument, when really the two aren't the same thing at all.
And for the record, while I acknowledge that without single entity MLS would probably not exist, I don't like it. Even if relegation does threaten the team I support... every... $&# #*$@ year...
Sorry for dragging the thread off track. 835 posts later and still going strong...
BoltonMassiv
20 May 2008, 02:49 PM
The difference is that when supporting a club, you feel it represents you. When supporting a team, you are supporting a business.
Especially since in Boltons case we are sponsored by Reebok a company from Bolton aswell, I feel it is truely representative of our Town, and this History stays here and everyone feels proud or embarassed.
tomwilhelm
20 May 2008, 04:09 PM
The difference is that when supporting a club, you feel it represents you. When supporting a team, you are supporting a business.
You're a nice guy, BM. But you're being very naive.
Footstomper
20 May 2008, 04:41 PM
You're a nice guy, BM. But you're being very naive.
OH come on the Bolton team is full of local talent, like... umm...ah...:rolleyes:
The_ChelseaSupporter
21 May 2008, 01:44 AM
The difference is that when supporting a club, you feel it represents you. When supporting a team, you are supporting a business.
You have no clue how American sports work. Teams are basically clubs that actually make money instead of going into debt. You have a very ignorant view of all of this.
I suggest you follow an American sports team (I suggest a baseball team, as the game operates much like soccer because it has no actual salary cap) and then you might get a better idea.
pookspur
21 May 2008, 11:47 AM
You're a nice guy, BM. But you're being very naive.
with all due respect (and acknowledging the element of accuracy within the comment), i disagree.
i won't speak for bolton massive, but i'll suspect that he's accutely aware of how english football is changing in this regard for the worse - that is, how the gap between the english and american models is narrowing - but there is still a difference.
i would (however vaguely) describe it thus: english clubs have 'members'. american franchises have 'customers'.
easy now! don't bother articulating how those clubs are treating their 'members' more and more like 'clients' all the time - it's well known. nor how american fans may cherish their teams - that's not the point. still, there is a communal element in english football that is simply not as prevalent in american professional sport. it may not seem as obvious if one simply views english football through the prism of massive prem clubs like man u and arsenal, which rape their 'fans' on every possible occasion; but spend some time around the lower divisions, and you'll see.
taken literally, sure, boltonmassive's quoted comment may not be fair. but for all the business-like similarities between the two nations' professional team sports, neither is it unfounded. anyone who's spent significant time amongst both will attest not only to how they're alike, but to how they fundamentally differ, as well.