Join NowBEAT ENGLAND
Endless Summer
Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 06:12 PM by Dan Loney
Updated 26 Aug 2009 at 01:31 PM by Dan Loney (Proofreading before posting is for sissies)
Updated 26 Aug 2009 at 01:31 PM by Dan Loney (Proofreading before posting is for sissies)
Relax - this post is nice and short.*
The "Summer of Soccer" was bullshit. But, it was important bullshit.
Take a look at the attendances from the big international summer friendlies MLS played these past couple of months. The numbers are damning. Take the statistics closest to me (and therefore, the most important) - high-priced sell-out for AC Milan, 81,000 for Chelsea-Inter, another 90,000 to see Barcelona, plenty of great seats available for Galaxy-Chivas USA.
What do these numbers say about the sport in America? What does it say about we as fans?
A little context would help. And if a little context would help, a LOT of context would help more. I've assigned you some reading.
Yes, I know. You hate clicking on links. And I'll try to quote the important parts of them. But I don't put these links up just to show off my mad HTML skeelz, y'know. There's a lot to disagree with in each individual excerpt, but take them together and it paints a picture.
We're going to skip around a bit. This is something Jennifer Doyle wrote about Barcelona fans and the soul of soccer in the United States. I swear to God I didn't write the Eurosnob diatribe in response to it. Sure, it seems like it, but I didn't.
My immediate reaction was that Doyle was wrong, offensively wrong, blindingly wrong, destructively wrong.
Why shouldn't Americans one day dream of having their own heroes? Why should they settle for distant heroes? Why can't we enjoy the professional game on our shores? Why do Americans have to settle for a kind of fandom that has roughly the impact of trying to salt the ocean by pissing off a pier?
Why would we assume that the game isn't "low-fi" in other nations? Do we think they don't have pickup games in Africa and South America and Europe? If we're trying to shun creepy capitalist greed, isn't following world soccer just about the dumbest thing we could possibly do?
And these are all very good questions, and Professor Doyle is still blindingly wrong. But she's a lot closer to the truth of our future as soccer fans than a lot of us, including Professor Doyle, would admit.
Many of you have heard Bill Veeck's famous line, "If you depend solely on those who know and love the game, you'll be out of business by Mother's Day." Through the miracle of Google, two seconds of research can put the quote into context, and it's utterly fascinating. Let me quote in length, hopefully this side of copyright violation.
Quick aside. Veeck wrote that in 1962.
This is an excerpt from Simon Kuper's upcoming book, Soccernomics aka Why England Lose, link via Du Nord.
I'm going to take it as read that American fans as described in this segment are English fans on steroids, when it comes to rootlessness, lack of class identity, fickleness of team identification, and overcompensation because of that fickleness. (Two seconds of research didn't find an apple-to-apple comparison of US rootlessness, but according to Pew Social Trends, while nearly 40% of Americans have never left their home community, the remaining 60% or so tend to move around a lot.)
The big difference I can think of off the top of my head is the franchise system that is a fact of life in the United States, and is a feared pariah abroad. People puke in England when you say "MK Dons"; they should puke in the US when you say "St. Louis Rams," but they don't. I think that just exacerbates the helpless distance of the average American big-time sports fan.
Peter Wilt just started a series for Pitch Invasion. He is pretty much soccer's Bill Veeck, without the carnival crassness. (It's impossible to see the Red Stars fielding a midget, for one thing.)
You probably read this one already - Mark Purdy in the San Jose Mercury News. Boy, I gotta reset the Bill Veeck stuff when I get around to talking about the Earthquakes' stadium problems. Anyhooligan, Purdy took a little stick from we sensitive MLS partisans, but just like with Professor Doyle's opinion, it's good to take another look at what he said in the broader context:
Oh, okay, well, Purdy got stick for his attitude, and the NASL folded because it was run with all the foresight of Evel Knievel jumping Snake River Canyon. But I don't think we can argue the gap between the attendances of the friendlies and the allegedly important games.
So who went to those games, and why? And what does it all mean, anyway? Let's try to draw some conclusions.
Fans may BE lackadaisical, results-oriented, fickle pickles. But they SEE themselves as, and want to be TREATED as, hardcore diehard diecore hardhards. Not in spite of that they may only see one game a year live. Precisely because they may only one game a year live. Or one every two years. Or maybe, depending on the team they love most, one game ever. If it's that big an occasion for them, they're going to invest a lot of themselves into that event. Especially if the ticket cost is, in the words of Donald Trump, yooge.
But when it comes to these friendlies, and when it comes to big names, it's about the event. American soccer has found a way to make money without building a winner. The Galaxy are now infamous for trotting out David Beckham against his will. By definition, nothing was at stake between Milan and the Galaxy, Real and Toronto, Seattle and Chelsea.
So those fans supporting the international team absolutely saw themselves as the soul of soccer. They felt it, for those two hours, bedecked in red or blue or whichever.
Are the international fans reachable? No. I agree with Purdy - they made up their minds.
But they are useable. And that's just what MLS is doing. They may never come back for an MLS regular season game. But they'll come back for another big-money friendly next year. If not them, someone very much like them. Three or four G-14 teams coming over, playing three or four friendlies each...plus the midcard teams who will play the All-Star game...don't forget America, Chivas, and a few of the other FMF sides...and we haven't touched TV rights for those games yet.
I'm not sure about my math, and I sleep comfortably knowing MLS will swim in blood sooner than tell me whether I'm right. But those friendlies may be enough to subsidize the rest of the league. If not, it's pretty close. Otherwise, why would they do it every year?
Think about what that means. MLS has found a way to make money from people who hate MLS.
This is where ChampionsWorld went wrong a few years ago, apart from being run by a couple of yahoos like Stillitano and Chinaglia. Two big teams, one game, two high fees for one gate. With SUM? One big name team, one high fee, one bunch of jobbers. Same big gate, half the expense.
So...where does that leave us, the diehard American soccer fan? Veeck never said how long a team would last without those who know and love the game, but in MLS, the answer is "a lot longer than you'd think." (Better than the NFL, at least, where the answer is "forever.")
Well, geez, we're still useful. Even though we're not as important as the lowliest sponsor, we can still show up and make MLS teams look sort of popular. Take me, for instance. Right now, I'm on the banner at the official Galaxy site with a bunch of my pals. I'm the rilly rilly pale one, seemingly returning a fascist salute to Eddie Lewis. I look like I'm having a ball! I'd pay to have that good a time, and I did already, apparently!
But there are limits. And speaking of Dallas, how are they responding to the doldrums?
Says it all, really. Plenty of sizzle for sale.
It's admirable that MLS is exploring ways to sell a pig's squeal, and at short notice - who the hell knew anyone was going to care about the US national team at the Cornfed Cup? And where did MLS get the brass to take credit for it? - but it shows a commitment to profitable shortsightedness.
Take the whole "Summer of Soccer" thing. First of all, MLS games are still going on. Allegedly important games. What happens when some wiseass calls the playoff season the "Fall of Soccer"?
Hey, the fans for several years now have responded to the latest shiny object. Freddy Adu, David Beckham, shiny new expansion teams, the occasional Nats triumph - can MLS just keep hopping on the latest soccer fad?
Probably. I have a 20th century viewpoint, of local teams as civic institutions supported by diehard fans who demanded a winner. If that ever really was true in sports, it ain't true now.
"Hey, what about Seattle? Hey, what about Toronto? Hey, Philadelphia will be traditional diehard fans! We don't need gimmicks!" Maybe. Check back with me when the novelty wears off. In a few years, your team may be running tripleheaders with Chivas and the state fair, too.
And either you'll love it, or someone nothing at all like you will.
Now, MLS is in a new world. Winning is nearly irrelevant, the big money comes from games where the result doesn't matter, from fans who despise the teams. I'm not prepared for that world. Are you? Is anybody?
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot kicking a ball in a meaningless friendly - forever."
*I know! I just straight up lied to you! How about that?
The "Summer of Soccer" was bullshit. But, it was important bullshit.
Take a look at the attendances from the big international summer friendlies MLS played these past couple of months. The numbers are damning. Take the statistics closest to me (and therefore, the most important) - high-priced sell-out for AC Milan, 81,000 for Chelsea-Inter, another 90,000 to see Barcelona, plenty of great seats available for Galaxy-Chivas USA.
What do these numbers say about the sport in America? What does it say about we as fans?
A little context would help. And if a little context would help, a LOT of context would help more. I've assigned you some reading.
Yes, I know. You hate clicking on links. And I'll try to quote the important parts of them. But I don't put these links up just to show off my mad HTML skeelz, y'know. There's a lot to disagree with in each individual excerpt, but take them together and it paints a picture.
We're going to skip around a bit. This is something Jennifer Doyle wrote about Barcelona fans and the soul of soccer in the United States. I swear to God I didn't write the Eurosnob diatribe in response to it. Sure, it seems like it, but I didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Doyle
I found myself asking: "What do we want, really, for and from this sport?"
Is making a corporate success of the MLS - and lining the pockets of the dubious executives who run it - the lone measure of the game's success? Is rooting for the Galaxy, and giving our dollars to the creepy monster that is AEG the only way to express one's loyalty? Aren't there other ways to imagine what the passion of fútbol fans looks like?
Perhaps it looks like tens of thousands of people playing the game on nights and weekends in pick-up games, and youth and adult leagues. Maybe it's people congregating in local cantinas to cheer and jeer mythological giants on bootlegged broadcasts. Maybe it's the conversations it lets you strike up with the guy sitting next to you on a bus ride.
Perhaps the game practiced here is migratory and local, massive and low-fi.
Why not imagine that one of the best things about soccer in the U.S. is that it isn't a "national" sport, and that it's most successful here where global capital hasn't quite figured out how to exploit us as either a market or a pool of labor?
Maybe we should work on making the submission of our pleasure to the machinery of corporate greed harder, and not easier.
Is making a corporate success of the MLS - and lining the pockets of the dubious executives who run it - the lone measure of the game's success? Is rooting for the Galaxy, and giving our dollars to the creepy monster that is AEG the only way to express one's loyalty? Aren't there other ways to imagine what the passion of fútbol fans looks like?
Perhaps it looks like tens of thousands of people playing the game on nights and weekends in pick-up games, and youth and adult leagues. Maybe it's people congregating in local cantinas to cheer and jeer mythological giants on bootlegged broadcasts. Maybe it's the conversations it lets you strike up with the guy sitting next to you on a bus ride.
Perhaps the game practiced here is migratory and local, massive and low-fi.
Why not imagine that one of the best things about soccer in the U.S. is that it isn't a "national" sport, and that it's most successful here where global capital hasn't quite figured out how to exploit us as either a market or a pool of labor?
Maybe we should work on making the submission of our pleasure to the machinery of corporate greed harder, and not easier.
Why shouldn't Americans one day dream of having their own heroes? Why should they settle for distant heroes? Why can't we enjoy the professional game on our shores? Why do Americans have to settle for a kind of fandom that has roughly the impact of trying to salt the ocean by pissing off a pier?
Why would we assume that the game isn't "low-fi" in other nations? Do we think they don't have pickup games in Africa and South America and Europe? If we're trying to shun creepy capitalist greed, isn't following world soccer just about the dumbest thing we could possibly do?
And these are all very good questions, and Professor Doyle is still blindingly wrong. But she's a lot closer to the truth of our future as soccer fans than a lot of us, including Professor Doyle, would admit.
Many of you have heard Bill Veeck's famous line, "If you depend solely on those who know and love the game, you'll be out of business by Mother's Day." Through the miracle of Google, two seconds of research can put the quote into context, and it's utterly fascinating. Let me quote in length, hopefully this side of copyright violation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veeck As In Wreck
We are in the entertainment business, competing for the entertainment dollar.
....
Indirectly, we are competing with pro football and basketball and I suspect one day we will be competing with soccer. It is only a historical accident, after all, that baseball is our national game instead of soccer, which is the national game in almost every other country in the world.
....
Indirectly, we are competing with pro football and basketball and I suspect one day we will be competing with soccer. It is only a historical accident, after all, that baseball is our national game instead of soccer, which is the national game in almost every other country in the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Veeck
I have discovered, in 20 years of moving around a ball park, that the knowledge of the game is usually in inverse proportion to the price of the seats.
If you depend solely on those who know and love the game, you'll be out of business by Mother's Day.
With the casual fan, then, it is not the game, it is the winning or losing. The average fan identifies himself completely with the home team. If the home team wins, he wins. If the home team loses, he loses. It is not pleasant to lose; we spend too much of our life losing our own galling little battles. You cannot expect a man to pay good money to come into your park to be humiliated when it is so easy to stay home.
....
There is no known substitute for winning, and no known cure for losing.
....
How important are concessions to a major league operation? This important: for most clubs, it is the difference between finishing in the red and finishing in the black. (Take away concessions and the radio-TV receipts, and there isn't a club that would operate in the black.)
If you depend solely on those who know and love the game, you'll be out of business by Mother's Day.
With the casual fan, then, it is not the game, it is the winning or losing. The average fan identifies himself completely with the home team. If the home team wins, he wins. If the home team loses, he loses. It is not pleasant to lose; we spend too much of our life losing our own galling little battles. You cannot expect a man to pay good money to come into your park to be humiliated when it is so easy to stay home.
....
There is no known substitute for winning, and no known cure for losing.
....
How important are concessions to a major league operation? This important: for most clubs, it is the difference between finishing in the red and finishing in the black. (Take away concessions and the radio-TV receipts, and there isn't a club that would operate in the black.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccernomics
Then there is a dirty secret of English football: many fans support more than one team. Hornby himself, in Fever Pitch, supports Cambridge United while he is attending university in the city, as well as Arsenal. In fact, whereas the usual analogy for football fandom is idealised monogamous marriage, a better one might be music fandom. People are fans of The Beatles, or The Cure, but they generally like more than one band at the same time, and are capable of moving on when their heroes fade.
And yet, against all evidence, the stereotype persists that the typical British football fan is a full-on Hornby. This is no surprise, because the tiny percentage of fans who are Hornbys dominate the national conversation about fandom – naturally, as they are most motivated to enter it.
However, there is a deeper reason the Hornby version of fandom remains so popular. In a country that is unusually rootless, this account of fandom tells a story of roots, of belonging – a lifelong love of the club your father or grandfather supported before you.
Britain was the first country on earth where peasants left their native villages to go and work in rootless industrial cities.
Today the average Briton changes his residence about once every seven years.
...
All this makes the “true fan” a particularly appealing character to Britons. He is our version of a blood-and-soil myth. The fan has roots. Generations may pass, and blue collars turn to white, but he still supports his “local” team in what is supposed to be the “working man’s game”. Many Britons who aren’t Hornbyesque fans would like to be. The fan is more than just a compelling character. He is a British national fantasy.
And yet, against all evidence, the stereotype persists that the typical British football fan is a full-on Hornby. This is no surprise, because the tiny percentage of fans who are Hornbys dominate the national conversation about fandom – naturally, as they are most motivated to enter it.
However, there is a deeper reason the Hornby version of fandom remains so popular. In a country that is unusually rootless, this account of fandom tells a story of roots, of belonging – a lifelong love of the club your father or grandfather supported before you.
Britain was the first country on earth where peasants left their native villages to go and work in rootless industrial cities.
Today the average Briton changes his residence about once every seven years.
...
All this makes the “true fan” a particularly appealing character to Britons. He is our version of a blood-and-soil myth. The fan has roots. Generations may pass, and blue collars turn to white, but he still supports his “local” team in what is supposed to be the “working man’s game”. Many Britons who aren’t Hornbyesque fans would like to be. The fan is more than just a compelling character. He is a British national fantasy.
The big difference I can think of off the top of my head is the franchise system that is a fact of life in the United States, and is a feared pariah abroad. People puke in England when you say "MK Dons"; they should puke in the US when you say "St. Louis Rams," but they don't. I think that just exacerbates the helpless distance of the average American big-time sports fan.
Peter Wilt just started a series for Pitch Invasion. He is pretty much soccer's Bill Veeck, without the carnival crassness. (It's impossible to see the Red Stars fielding a midget, for one thing.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wilt
FANS ARE IN CHARGE. While professional soccer teams have an ultimate fiduciary responsibility to the investors in the team, I believe two important factors steer decision making towards the premise that soccer executives should work for the fans. First, professional sports teams are a community asset that represents the community in a fashion unlike any traditional business. The investors are (usually temporary) caretakers of this asset for the fans. Secondly, what is good for the fans is usually good for the organization and investors. If the fans are happy, engaged and supportive of the team, they will spend more money, watch more game broadcasts and promote the team better themselves. Fans, and I am one also, ultimately cheer for the badge, the team it represents. They don’t cheer for the organization or the owners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Purdy
See? See? That's what the soccer-holics will say. See all this? It's proof! Proof that soccer has an unbounded future in America! Proof that the Earthquakes and Major League Soccer are on their way to stellar heights of glory!
Uh, no, actually. It proves just the opposite.
Those louts who snicker at soccer and claim that it lacks a mass following in America are wrong and in denial. The crowds that show up for events such as Saturday's demonstrate that the United States has a strong and sophisticated soccer audience.
The problem is, much of that audience wants nothing to do with MLS, the top American pro league.
....
See? See? That's what I say to my soccer-holic friends. See how this doubleheader shows once more that "soccer" and "MLS" are definitely not one and the same thing? Last Saturday when FC Barcelona faced the Los Angeles Galaxy at the Rose Bowl, more than 93,000 showed up. It takes the Galaxy three or four games to draw that many against an MLS opponent — even when David Beckham deigns to suit up for Los Angeles.
....
Back in the day, I covered some of those NASL games. I'm sure the reunion was fun and sentimental. But to me, it was also a reminder of a team and league that folded in 1984 — not because there weren't enough soccer fans, but because there weren't enough soccer fans who wanted to watch that kind of soccer. They wanted better. They still do.
Uh, no, actually. It proves just the opposite.
Those louts who snicker at soccer and claim that it lacks a mass following in America are wrong and in denial. The crowds that show up for events such as Saturday's demonstrate that the United States has a strong and sophisticated soccer audience.
The problem is, much of that audience wants nothing to do with MLS, the top American pro league.
....
See? See? That's what I say to my soccer-holic friends. See how this doubleheader shows once more that "soccer" and "MLS" are definitely not one and the same thing? Last Saturday when FC Barcelona faced the Los Angeles Galaxy at the Rose Bowl, more than 93,000 showed up. It takes the Galaxy three or four games to draw that many against an MLS opponent — even when David Beckham deigns to suit up for Los Angeles.
....
Back in the day, I covered some of those NASL games. I'm sure the reunion was fun and sentimental. But to me, it was also a reminder of a team and league that folded in 1984 — not because there weren't enough soccer fans, but because there weren't enough soccer fans who wanted to watch that kind of soccer. They wanted better. They still do.
So who went to those games, and why? And what does it all mean, anyway? Let's try to draw some conclusions.
Fans may BE lackadaisical, results-oriented, fickle pickles. But they SEE themselves as, and want to be TREATED as, hardcore diehard diecore hardhards. Not in spite of that they may only see one game a year live. Precisely because they may only one game a year live. Or one every two years. Or maybe, depending on the team they love most, one game ever. If it's that big an occasion for them, they're going to invest a lot of themselves into that event. Especially if the ticket cost is, in the words of Donald Trump, yooge.
But when it comes to these friendlies, and when it comes to big names, it's about the event. American soccer has found a way to make money without building a winner. The Galaxy are now infamous for trotting out David Beckham against his will. By definition, nothing was at stake between Milan and the Galaxy, Real and Toronto, Seattle and Chelsea.
So those fans supporting the international team absolutely saw themselves as the soul of soccer. They felt it, for those two hours, bedecked in red or blue or whichever.
Are the international fans reachable? No. I agree with Purdy - they made up their minds.
But they are useable. And that's just what MLS is doing. They may never come back for an MLS regular season game. But they'll come back for another big-money friendly next year. If not them, someone very much like them. Three or four G-14 teams coming over, playing three or four friendlies each...plus the midcard teams who will play the All-Star game...don't forget America, Chivas, and a few of the other FMF sides...and we haven't touched TV rights for those games yet.
I'm not sure about my math, and I sleep comfortably knowing MLS will swim in blood sooner than tell me whether I'm right. But those friendlies may be enough to subsidize the rest of the league. If not, it's pretty close. Otherwise, why would they do it every year?
Think about what that means. MLS has found a way to make money from people who hate MLS.
This is where ChampionsWorld went wrong a few years ago, apart from being run by a couple of yahoos like Stillitano and Chinaglia. Two big teams, one game, two high fees for one gate. With SUM? One big name team, one high fee, one bunch of jobbers. Same big gate, half the expense.
So...where does that leave us, the diehard American soccer fan? Veeck never said how long a team would last without those who know and love the game, but in MLS, the answer is "a lot longer than you'd think." (Better than the NFL, at least, where the answer is "forever.")
Well, geez, we're still useful. Even though we're not as important as the lowliest sponsor, we can still show up and make MLS teams look sort of popular. Take me, for instance. Right now, I'm on the banner at the official Galaxy site with a bunch of my pals. I'm the rilly rilly pale one, seemingly returning a fascist salute to Eddie Lewis. I look like I'm having a ball! I'd pay to have that good a time, and I did already, apparently!
But there are limits. And speaking of Dallas, how are they responding to the doldrums?
Quote:
FC Dallas' Sept. 30 match against the New England Revolution will be played at the historic Cotton Bowl as part of a special doubleheader that will also feature the Mexican National team.
The match, presented by WingStreet, will kick off at 6 p.m. CT and will precede the final stop on the 2009 U.S. Tour for Mexico as the team faces the Colombian National Team at 8:30 p.m. CT.
Your ticket gets your entry to both games, as well as the State Fair of Texas.
The match, presented by WingStreet, will kick off at 6 p.m. CT and will precede the final stop on the 2009 U.S. Tour for Mexico as the team faces the Colombian National Team at 8:30 p.m. CT.
Your ticket gets your entry to both games, as well as the State Fair of Texas.
It's admirable that MLS is exploring ways to sell a pig's squeal, and at short notice - who the hell knew anyone was going to care about the US national team at the Cornfed Cup? And where did MLS get the brass to take credit for it? - but it shows a commitment to profitable shortsightedness.
Take the whole "Summer of Soccer" thing. First of all, MLS games are still going on. Allegedly important games. What happens when some wiseass calls the playoff season the "Fall of Soccer"?
Hey, the fans for several years now have responded to the latest shiny object. Freddy Adu, David Beckham, shiny new expansion teams, the occasional Nats triumph - can MLS just keep hopping on the latest soccer fad?
Probably. I have a 20th century viewpoint, of local teams as civic institutions supported by diehard fans who demanded a winner. If that ever really was true in sports, it ain't true now.
"Hey, what about Seattle? Hey, what about Toronto? Hey, Philadelphia will be traditional diehard fans! We don't need gimmicks!" Maybe. Check back with me when the novelty wears off. In a few years, your team may be running tripleheaders with Chivas and the state fair, too.
And either you'll love it, or someone nothing at all like you will.
Now, MLS is in a new world. Winning is nearly irrelevant, the big money comes from games where the result doesn't matter, from fans who despise the teams. I'm not prepared for that world. Are you? Is anybody?
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot kicking a ball in a meaningless friendly - forever."
*I know! I just straight up lied to you! How about that?
Share
Post a Comment
Total Comments 122
Comments
-
Top ten blog entry. Seriously.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:07 PM by DetroitTFC 
-
Absolutely freaking brilliant. Fantastic work.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:20 PM by Nyghtewynd
-
I hadn't considered that particular vision of the future Dan, but it doesn't feel right. While the sideshow friendlies may pay the bills, your suggestion that this is all it may ever amount to, that the AEGification of the sport will ultimately render the league itself as the sideshow, simply doesn't seem sustainable. The frendlies are window dressing - profitable, yes, but there's no there, there- without the league competition, it's all sizzle, no steak. In the long run, who cares? I'm sure the Liewickes of the world would love the pure entertainment commoditization of the sport.
My expectation is that USSF and SUM will not be so able to forget themselves as to forget just what they're raising all those profits for- to grow the sport, which of course means spending on the flagship league, grooming the young, catering to the fans, enhancing the competition. Not the once-a-year sideshow fans, but those of us who care.
At least, I hope you're wrong.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:22 PM by DougO
-
I just wonder if we're going to have to resort to the tactics of the old United Soccer Association and "import" high-dollar teams into a summer league in North America.
Chelsea can play in Detroit and be the Lions.
Glasgow Celtic can play in Boston and be the Celtics.
Real Madrid can play in Los Angeles and be the Galacticos or the Galaxy.
Etc., etc., ad nauseum.
WTF, people. Support the U.S. league already! Geez.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:28 PM by TOTC
-
Love the 1984 reference.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:31 PM by Sachsen
-
I disagree with many of your ideas there Loney. From my own unscientific research, I will assume that soccer fans just want quality soccer from MLS. The product on the field at times is atrocius, but then there are a few moments of terrific entertainment on occasion. I've watched some great MLS matches but I've also watched some MLS matches that were about as exciting as watching baseball. American's just want the best. So I think MLS has some work to do, and it's going to be a while, but they need to bring in (and develop) the players to make MLS competitive on the field with the best clubs in Europe and also to be the top league in the America's.
Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:40 PM by gibroni
-
I found Waldo! Excellent Orwell reference.
Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 07:56 PM by Defender
-
Dam! You do have a brain!
Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 08:03 PM by QuakeAttack 
-
So a St. Louis fan should puke at the idea of the St. Louis Rams but but be fine with whatever pro soccer team might end up there?
By this logic, shouldn't a St. Louis fan not only remain a football Cardinals fan but also a St. Louis Stars fan?
I was born and raised in St. Louis and found it odd when people immediately picked the Rams up. I find it also strange when BS boards have postings like "[Name of yet to be awarded team] till I die!"
And in the end, aren't they both examples of what Prof. Doyle might call greedy, capitalist pigs stripping away the disposable income of the proletariat for a product that should, in a socially just world, be free or provided for free by the government?
But wouldn't it be a better world if we chucked the whole thing and just played barefoot in a dirt lot with a rolled up ball of twine?
It is a shame that we have this thing called 'class mobility' that ruins the idea of 'class identity'. But hope and change is on the way.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 08:48 PM by GFame7
-
I'd like to see the revenue numbers for the friendlies that supposedly fund the whole league.Posted 25 Aug 2009 at 09:38 PM by woodlands
|
Post a Comment
|
Total Trackbacks 0
