Pepsi Pop Quiz answer: Donovan? Didn't he start playing in MLS when he was 19? or even 18? Not sure. Also, the state about there being more goals than corner kicks in the Fire v. Wizards is delicious. Has happened only once in each of previous two seasons.
Nice article. I swear there are more on-line columns this year than national newspaper articles five years ago.
LD was 20 for the WC and all of last season, so he was only a teenager for one year, Not sure how many goals he had that first year. Quaranta has around 10 or so goals and is still a teen. Buddle has also had a bunch but I'm not sure the totals or his age. Probably one of those 3. Although the game of the week includes the quakes so it is probably LD.
When I say no one cares about Colorado, no one believes me: If I recall, the Rapids made it to MLS Cup 1997. But how bad does your team have to suck when your leading goal scorer is Jean Harbor, Aleberto Naveda or Pete Marino. MLS - You've come a long way, baby.
A Burn fan talking about nobody caring about a Rapids apperance in a MLS Cup. Better to have gotten there and lost than not to have gotten there at all... Oh and for "no one cares about Colorado", 20,690 average attendance last year (approx. 17,500 w/o 4th of July, which is still significantly more than Dallas), and 21,150 this year, top of the league both years (so far). Maybe one of these days Dallas will actually get 10,000 people into Dragon Stadium? (According to the news release when the move was announced, the stadium was expected to hold between 10 and 12K for Burn games, right?)
Forest? Damn, there are so many trees in the way that I missed it. Once again Hirdt goes on about statistics, specifically that the Revs picked up a bunch of guys who scored a bunch of goals the previous year. All true, but hardly relevant. Of the "dispersal draft" players thje Revs picked up, only Llamosa and Ralston played much of a role in the Revs late season surge. It's time we put this issue to bed, once and for all. At least we no longer hear what was last year's least relevent stat--how many Revs were ex-Miami or Tampa players, especially considering that many of them (Williams, Heaps, Cullen) were obtained in trades prior to contraction, and Brown was someone anyone could have had if they wanted to spend the cap money. Numbers only tell part of the story Tom
What's with the front page photo that accompanies the tag to the article: Dunivant's goal scoring celebration: The Chicken Dance
I'm precious, aren't I? Take that US v Mexico doubleheader of 48,476 off the top and replace it with your 17,500 average. Then what do you have? A very pedestrian 15,200. But hey, good luck with your attendance this year. That black and blue image is bringing in the fans. Evidently not. Either the Burn and / or its fans were hoodwinked into believing a few things would happen that turn out NOT to be the case. 1. Promised extra seating limited to 2500 - maxing us at 10,000 +/-. 2. Football lines covered. There isn't enough green paint in the world to do this. Heck we can't even find enough yellow paint for soccer lines. 3. No beer allowed in the parking lot. All 3 things were "promised" and subsequently broken. Not to mention season ticket holders re-upping before a certain date also were told that we would get free parking. Not true as it turns out as well. But at least we didn't change our team colors.
Not sure if I'd call the thesis of the Revs/Quakes comparison misinformed, badly reasoned, or simply deluded.
Read ToMhIlL's post. Virtually all of his "facts" are either misleading or irrelevent. How's that for starters?
You're missing the point. The point he is making is that the Quakes start is more remarkable than the Revolution's run to the MLS Cup. In fact, before the 2002 season, many people were predicting New England to at least make a good run for it. They had Serna, Chacon, Cullen, Ralston, Llamosa, all the pieces for a great team...it wasn't until August that the team began to pick up any momentum. The point he was making was that after the departure of the the previous season's top goal-scorer and goal keeper, it is more remarkable that the Earthquakes are having a good season. If he made any kind of derisive comment about New England's run to the cup (as though he dismissed as being a joke) I didn't see it. New England had all the talent to be in the cup, especially after all the allocations. It's ironic that the team that got there was a whole lot different than the one anyone thought would get there, and that may just be a testament to the coaching of Steve Nichol. Your post still doesn't answer my question though, which was why the comparison was "misinformed, badly reasoned, or simply deluded." It may have been that only in the sense that all his examples were a lot weaker than losing Graziani and Cannon (not to mention Barret), which ironically, may just make the assertion in his thesis all that more stronger.
And its gonna be a hell of a lot better than what we're gonna do this year. But this whole San Jose get the badnwagon rolling again thing is WAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYY out of proportion. They've only played 3 games. 2 wins ain't bad but its a long season. 3 games. Come back to me in 23 games or maybe at game 13.
NR: Yeah, you're absolutely right. That debate is going on over on the Quakes boards right now. However, it isn't to say that the Earthquakes have put to rest a lot of the pundits who thought the Quakes would not only do absolutely nothing, but be completely out-coached. Before the season started I had been particularly critical of Yallop, GM Johnny Moore, and their seemingly silly draft. However, the draft has probably turned out to be San Jose's most fruitful in their entire franchise history. In addition, seven points after three games is a great start. Any team in the league would like to have a start like that. Yallop has done a good job putting together a quality team with both enormous player losses and injuries. They're a team with seven points who are missing Five key players to injury and lost three key contributors. There is no bandwagon. People are as skeptical about this talk of the Earthquakes as they are of the Galaxy's season so far. Give the teams time certainly, but a great start to the season is important in any sport, and you can't ignore the fact that the Earthquakes have started off to a great start against seemingly insurmountable odds.
Not that I expect the Quakes will go undefeated, but are you saying the Quakes are going to get worse when Robinson, Ekelund, Conway, and Russell return from injury? Or maybe after they use their available cap space, allocation, and foreign slot to pick up another forward. Or after Dunivant & Alavarez climb up the steep part of the learning curve? The bigsoccer bandwagon had the Quakes wheels falling off this year. If I remember correctly, you were onboard. Now it is clear that the Quakes wagon is intact and near the head of the pack and the band is piling back on. If you've seen the team play those three games this year, as a comparison to last year, you have to agree that it is very unlikely that the Quakes will finish anywhere near the bottom of the table.
Whether or not the Quakes run of good fortune is more surprising than the Revs is kind of a silly, and completely subjective question. A) We're exactly 3 games in now. If the author just considered the facts, he would realize that the Revs were a train wreck for most of the early season last year, then they turned it around. Based on that, wouldn't it seem a little unwise to start making "end-of-season" type judgements about any team? What if DC, Chicago, or the Metros get hot? B) Two years ago the Quakes won a championship with a very good team. Until last year, the Revs never had anything approaching a solid team. C) It's a dumb academic point anyway (who's the most "surprising"team) - but that's just my opinion. Because, (and it's been said over, and over, and over, and over again now) in the big picture, the Revs did not gain that much from the Allocation draft. They got Ralston and Llamosa. They let go of Alvarez, Sunsing, and Mauricio Wright. Look I don't even care if people find the 2002 Revs to be "The Most Intriguing" or some such nonsense. But a guy who prides himself on stats should try to get the substance of his thesis right.