This may be a tad unpopular, but I am going to defend Steinberg here. And before you all go nuts on me, check out my tagline (StormFire). I mean I go to Fire and STORM games for pete's sake - and I post on Big Soccer sometimes. So I do qualify as another one of the guys on this board and not some Sun-Times plant or something (not that we are that paranoid here on BS). Full disclosure - I read Steinberg and enjoy him. So for me this is like watching two relatives fight. Do you think that the reason everybody is so mad at Neil is because we (soccer fans) are a tad insular AND that he may have hit a sore spot? I mean really, he stepped on a nerve. Heck, I rip on NASCAR and hockey (sorry - don't get either one though I have a basic respect for hockey tradition), and if somebody went off on me for ripping on them I would look at them like they were nuts. Or if they, even logically, argued with zeal that my points were not 100% correct (although my points are, hypothetically, in the ballpark) I would think of them like many of us look at zany religious zealots. Let me address his paragraphs one by one. Americans don't care about soccer. And we never will care. Never ever ever. Well really, how many do? I know it has growing interest, yada, yada, etc. But come on, I have invited people to soccer games. Most run in horror, some come. Some that come enjoy it, many don't. American's may care for soccer someday, but right now the World Cup is an event (like Olympic figure skating) and most regular Joe's wouldn't be caught dead watching MLS. Just doesn't really happen. Maybe it will, but maybe not. He may be wrong, but past history hasn't given us a big indicator that he is. A Fire ticket is pretty easy to get. The Los Angeles Galaxy, a soccer team -- who knew? -- is throwing away a quarter of a billion dollars over the next five years, assuming they don't go bust first, paying the salary of David Beckham, who may be a star in England, and may be married to the former Posh Spice, but is going to be a fortnight flash followed by soccer-induced obscurity here. A couple of things, Neil is not a sports guy. At all. He notes that in his columns. He is missing that essential guy gene. That's OK, some guys are music guys, some are home-repair guys, and some are some combination. I find it unusual, I am a sports guy. Not all are. As for the "who knew", really, what % of Americans have heard of and know who the LA Galaxy are? I work in a Fortune 500 office in Chicago, tons of pools, sports talk, etc. And the guys here generally have NO idea who the Galaxy are. Sure, most have heard of the Fire, but most think they still play in Soldier Field. And he may be right, heck Pele was in a lot of respects a flash then obscurity. The NASL died, and we can argue it planted the seeds for MLS, but it died. And MLS sprouted up MANY years later. And it could still die. As for the $250 million, heck the way the press reported it most think that is the salary. You really have to dig to get at the details, and they are still fuzzy. And it is a QUARTER OF A BILLION DOLLARS for SOCCER IN THE USA. That is amazing. You could argue that it is a sign that soccer is big-time now. But my guess is a year from now nobody in my office will have heard of Red Bull, Real Salt Lake, the Wizards, etc. Remember Pele? The Brazilian superstar who, like Beckham, having lost his edge in the international soccer world, decided to put in a few very profitable pre-retirement years playing in America. It was good for him, no doubt, but did nothing to popularize the sport here. This is popular conception, and, hate to admit it, it is arguable. I do believe he raised the collective consciousness. But we all could argue to what level, and if that level was really material. Why? Why couldn't soccer take off in the United States? Easy. There's no room for it. We have too many pro sports as it is -- baseball and football, hockey and basketball. Sports fans care about tradition, about legacy. Few fans ever shift their loyalty from one team to another, never mind embrace an entirely new sport, surrendering precious moments that could have been spent glued to NFL football in order to pay attention to a gang of perfumed foreigners kicking a ball pointlessly around an enormous field. Really, there may be no room for soccer here. That may be right. As for the foreigners, think Fire fans about our Fire heroes - guys like Nowak. And often when we get an American, they have names like Ante Razov. Well that sure doesn't sound really all-American - folks will guess he is a foreigner. We have guys like Damarcus Beasley, but we still have a lot of foreigners. So do the NHL and the NBA, but the American/Canadians came first. Same w/ MLB. The NFL is still mostly all American. And he pokes fun at football fans here before commenting on soccer "kicking a ball pointlessly around an enormous field" which is just a non-sports guy comment. And I don't know about the rest of you, but I am not really going to change the teams or the sports I care about. Some make minor inroads from time to time, but for the most part my interests don't change a lot. I would guess that is true of most folks. Soccer is like bidets. Do you know what a bidet is? Some strange hygienic device usually parked next to the toilet in European bathrooms. Very big over there. But nothing over here. Don't need 'em, don't want 'em, never going to have 'em. Ditto for Beckham, even at a million dollars a week. Especially at a million dollars a week. Man this is just funny. Hits a nerve, but funny. I laugh at Catholic jokes, or German jokes, and for me those hit a nerve, but they are funny. So the guy doesn't like sports (in general) and thinks soccer will never make it here. Not a huge deal. He may be right, and if wrong so what. I enjoy the games, and I do wish they were more popular. Heck I want the Fire in a 35K stadium that sells 30K per game (and leaves 5K open for walk ups ) and I want the Storm to average a good 18K a game and function more like the NBA. If somebody pokes fun, before I get enraged, I just wonder if they hit a sore spot. Neil is harmless, and he loves to get a rise out of folks. Some of his e-mail responses could have been kinder, but ah heck, Kenn here on BS could be kinder sometimes too (Man Kenn you can rip guys up sometimes when they don't know what they are walking into). That is just they was he/Neil is. And the poor guy has some alcohol issues, let's not sink to too low of a level. Read a few of his articles, he will either drive you nuts (like Mariotti) or you will find yourself agreeing with most of his stuff while being amused. As for soccer, let's check back in another 20 years and maybe see who is right. I woudn't be either way. Oh - and GO BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You make some interesting points. Some I agree with and some I don't, but I wanted to focus on this quote from steinberg and your response. It is just flat out wrong. If he isn't a sports guy, that is fine. But if he doesn't know the subject matter why is he opining on it? Your anectdotal evidence of inviting people to games aside, let me go back to the quote. I have posted this before but it bears repeating here. In 1989, the Nats had a home game in St. Louis during world cup qualifying. Not just any home game. If they won, the US would break a 40 year drought since its last appearance in the world cup finals. The game was scheduled to be played at St. Louis Soccer Park, which I believe had an official capacity of 6,500 at the time. It was chosen, I presume, because of St. Louis long history and reputation as a hot bead of American soccer. I recall reading an article about the game and how US Soccer officials were turning cartwheels about 2 days before the game because they had "officially" sold out the 6,000+ tickets in advance of the game. Of course, the US did not win that game, and had to get a result in T&T where Caliguri hit the shot heard round the world. The point is that this game is not THAT long ago. Fast forward to today, and you would have big soccer posters demanding that we move the US soccer team because of its abysmal attendance. Now, we ridicule teams for weeknight games in MLS that out draw that important game. In 2003, Man United and Juventus drew the third largest crowd in the history of giants stadium behind Pope JP II and ONE Giants playoff game. Now, a US friendly involving B-teamers in the traditionally non-soccer loving deep south can draw 25,000 or better. In 1990, it was difficult to get a single soccer game on tv. Now, we all have to tivo multiple games at a time on weekends. If you believe the most dire attendance estimates, the league averages more than 10,000 paying customers for games. On top of that, we all know that MLS has utterly failed to tap into a huge market of soccer-loving Americans that just haven't bought into the domestic game yet. The point is that Americans do care about soccer in not insignificant numbers, and those numbers are growing by the year. I emailed him on the quote above and suggested that he take a look at the tv ratings for the WC final this year and compare that number to any world series game over the past two years. I received only a smart-ass reply, but I think I made a point. For me, that is why the guy touched a nerve. He is free to write about something that he admittedly has no knowledge about, but then he should expect to be called out when he gets it wrong.
Hey Chris - you left out the rest of my comment when you quoted me. But you are right, some of my evidence is anecdotal, and you are right that interest in the US is growing. I would argue to some extent that a lot of that growing interest is in "event soccer" and not as much in regular games, but you are right. The question comes down to defining "insignificant numbers" and scale. Soccer still pales in comparison to things like the NFL. Now that is a tough measuring stick, and while we soccer fans can talk about all the growth, we are still not what many would consider a significant blip on the national consciousness. On the plus side, we are in a good place right now, and we appear to be moving in a positive direction.
If soccer is the bidet of american sports, does that make Steinberg the douchebag of american sports writers? On another note Not sure if it is a nitpick or an error, but he overstated the amount by 400%, not 80%. The number is 50 mil. His error was 200 mil. 200 mil is 400% of 50.
I don't give a rat's ass whether soccer becomes the most popular sport in the country or not. Steinberg compares the sport to a device used to clean your backside and he can't understand what all the fuss is about? He's wrong when he says he doesn't need one, because he's full of shite. Apparently, he was up late and running out of material because he stole that "who knew" joke about the LA Galaxy from SNL. Neil, it was funny the first time. He then proceeds to pontificate about the demise of the NASL, the financial stability of the LA Galaxy and the terms of the agreement without bothering to lift a finger to ensure the accuracy of any of it. I find it funny that he says there's no room for the sport in this country, but later on he points out the Latin American population in this country is going to triple.
LOL Thanks for writing this ignorant little man, Kenn, and everyone. Maybe if he has to spend 4 hours deleting emails, his tiny brain will register the fact that there are plenty of fans who truly love the game. Or maybe not. I went back and forth with Steinberg on 6 emails, I did invite him to a game, he declined. He stated that he is familiar with soccer because "my boss is a Brit, and he made me watch a bunch of World Cup games-dull affairs where the rare moments of drama were spoiled by the obviously inept or corrupt officials. Say it is'nt so."[/I] His boss made him watch, poor fellow, maybe he had a bad attitude before he even started watching. He was dissapointed with the officiating, or, someone told him he was. He wanted to use the name Carlo for me, for an article that he was working on. I asked him to change it to Bubba, to which he replied, [I]"Bubba" is too obviously false. It's important in journalism to avoid obvious falsities."[/I] I responded, "Bubba is not an obvious falsity, oh, right, ignorance and hatred, my bad. Could'nt you do a story on how some of the Fire players are working with inner-city youths? It's a little more crowd-pleasing, and does'nt feed the ignorant sports fans with lies they might use to start a bar fight. There is no doubt that the refs at the World Cup were too quick to hand out cards, but they were only doing what they were told, like you. The World Champs, Italy, were held to a draw by us, that was a good match. PS: If it's important in journalism to avoid falsities, why would you write an article filled with them?" He never answered that one.
because most people are getting their news from TV and the internet these days. The internet is killing newspapers. (not exactly a dab thing) This Neil Steinberg is a total out of touch douche. His own article contradicts itself. He fails to realize that: 1) more people watched the world cup in this country than watched the world series 2) More kids in this country play soccer than any other sport. One can hypothesize that the only reason they "fall out of it" is that there wasn't/isn't a viable domestic option to make a lot of money. (it is true most Americans have no desire to live overseas) 3) His own article contradicts itself when he goes on to talk about the growing hispanic population 4) MLS season is largely only played during baseball season and isn't competing with all that much. 5) Pele and the NASL sparked the youth soccer movement and mismanagement is what made that league collapse 6) The LA Galaxy have been a profitable team for a few years now. Last I checked profitable businesses tend not to fail. 7) Part of Beck's contract is renegotiations with existing sponsors for American market advertising. NO team in any league in the US keeps image rights like they do overseas and therefore the MLS isn't ceding anymoney by letting him advertise. (of course the team gets money if they wear their uniform here) 8) He's old and out of touch with society. 9) He's a douche. 10) He's a wife beater and his opinion is more worthless than that of a dog's I think I got all of em.
This story has been done millions of times before. He just put his name on it and inserted David Beckham and LA Galaxy and $250 million in there. He should be fired for plagiarism.
My reply to Neil Steinberg anti soccer article,I'll keep you updated to his reply! Neil Steinbery, Your article about soccer and American attitudes about it was very interesting,but in reading this article shades of hate came to mind. The feeling I got from your tone was hate,and a lack of understanding and no compassion for the feelings of those who are fans of the sport. It reminds me of the attitude of white America in the 1950's and 60's towards black Americans! My question to you is simple, is there a such thing as "soccer racism"? Because if you took the soccer out of your article,it sounds like hate and a lack of understanding and compassion. Maybe the sports writers all across America that wants to spared more hate about soccer, could look into this as a new topic. I think it's worth exploring the deeper inner feelings behind the words and the attitudes, maybe it would force us Americans to take a more deeper look into our selves. Neil, no matter how you look at it,soccer is growing in this country and the fact that we are even talking about soccer is a good example of that. Last summer a few European teams came over here to play in some friendlies and every stadium was a sell out for a fact. Today in our America,the largest minority group are mostly soccer and baseball fans. Our American past time is dominated by Latin players most in greater numbers from the Dominican Republic. Neil, the times have changed my brother! I for one would love to see soccer get bigger here,and someday I would love to see us the Americans beat the Europeans at their own game. Neil, keep up the good work and I hope to see that article someday soon about soccer racism in America. Len from Miami!
I must give you guys a compliment in how you write to this sneaker. Very good underbuild with fair arguments. If you would have cursed him to death he would have laughed and written something like:"Look how dumb these people are!" I saw his photo on internet, what a tosser. Face it, soccer becomes more and more popular, the guy is a dinosaur and he will extinct. This is the reason why i support US fans and should have more support from other fans world wide........ cause your in a hostile (towards soccer) envorinment. Keep up the goodwork, i think Fire does a great job!
My e-mail to Neil, who I've written to on and off because of his anti-Polish bias: You really are quite amazing. You, the self-admitted non-sports fan, decided to pick on soccer. What? Have you been hanging around the sports columnists at your paper and trying to be "one of the boys?" Were you picked on by the jocks at school? So now you've decided to be the last to join the media "dog pile" on top of soccer fans. Way to go! That's brave. You wrote: "The Los Angeles Galaxy, a soccer team -- who knew?" Ah, what wit. Quick, without looking, name the Major League Baseball team in Kansas City? What's the National Football League team in Nashville called? Even the casual sports fan can't be expected to know everything about every sport however popular it is. You wrote "surrendering precious moments that could have been spent glued to NFL football in order to pay attention to a gang of perfumed foreigners kicking a ball pointlessly around an enormous field." You don't even bother to do the minimum research before you start cranking the crap out, eh? The MLS (sorry, Major League Soccer) season is during the spring and summer. NFL is late summer and fall -- very little overlap. And most of MLS's players are Americans. And at least soccer players are athletes. They run up to 10 miles a game (so you think sweat is a perfume, eh?). Unlike baseball players who stand and sit around for about three hours and pump themselves up full of steroids. A much better target for your rapier comments, but you'd really hear it from the baseball fans and your sports department. Then after all the hate mail started, you wrote: "I still can't see what the fuss is about. Soccer fans shouldn't blame me for the tenuous nature of their sport. What's wrong with being marginal?" Maybe if you didn't compare the world's most popular sport to a bathroom fixture and make the same old tired cliches soccer fans have been forced to hear from "mainstream" sports reporters we'd be a little more forgiving. But then again, you just come off as such a weanie. His response (and I don't know what it means either): Mark -- Just because you're sick of reading about soccer, don't blame me. I've never written about it before, can't remember ever reading anything about it, and probably won't write about it again. But always good to hear from you. Neil
This is probably the most attention this pitiful hack has received in quite some time, and his insulting responses to practically every email message he has received only encourage more debate about his pathetic viewpoint. This piece o' shite will say anything to get a rise out of anyone and I'm sure his editors love it, because it sells papers. Does anyone else smell the desperation?
This is essentially what I wrote to him in a very respectful fashion yesterday morning. I have yet to hear a response. Don't expect to.