Comets on FSW

As always Spoon your informative posts always manage just a touch of that positive vibe you love to sprinkle on things.

 

now if only Matt Mckeon was playing for the Comets....

 

LOL! Hilarious.

 

That punk!

 

I will give $20 bucks to the person who goes to the game and holds up a sign that gets seen on television. The sign must be clearly visible and has to do something with Dade being a worthless draft trade. or MLS-reject, or some remark of Retirement home

 

That does sound interesting, but unfortunately, the game is being rebroadcast from an earlier one-The schedule of games and when they were actually played is out on www.misl.net/tvschedule/. I think that FSW is trying this out to see what the ratings and if it is worth showing them.

 

Man, an grave yard!

Nino DaSilva -KC

Goran Hunjak - former Tampa Bay, I remember a sweet goal he scored against KC in MLS

Jake Dancy! - KC - remember this guy, highly touted, former U-20, hot head!

Andrew Gregor - played for Cleveland Force last night, not much of a factor.

I was sad not see Samuel Ekeme, I remember him playing for the Attack one year.

That's all I remember, maybe more... KC did open up a can of woop a$$, winning 26 to 10, they said that was the highest point total of the season for any team!

James

 

Except, the above game wasn't the one played Friday night. That game, the same one televised, was 16-13 Dallas.

I'll say further that many MLS players could not play MISL style soccer. Dog MISL out if you wish, but even on a bad night it's more entertaining than a great MLS game. One game in the "battle zone" should easily convince you...or remain an ignorant bigot. It's up to you.

 

I think its a matter of preference. Many MISL players have proven they cant cut it in MLS. Its two totally different games. I dog it because its not the type of soccer that I like.

I dont think I'm an "ignorant bigot" if I'd prefer watch a 0-0 defensive match on an outdoor field than a 24-23 score-fest in an arena. It's just the type of soccer I like.

 

The last time I went to a game was last year. It was alright the Comets came from behind to win it, but if it wasn't a come from behind win I would have lost interest way before the 2nd was over.

 

the case For MISL

OK. Me, I've never seen a 0-0 MLS tie that was as entertaining a half of an MISL game. Not even Meola's pk stopping performance in late '02 at dc.

Why do you go to sporting events? What is it you are looking for? I assure you if you give MISL an honest chance you can find it at an MISL game. Is it the scoring that you don't like? To me, that is just the reverse of other people, let's call them ignorant bigots, dismissing soccer as a boring, no-scoring sport. Rediculous. Do you dismiss MISL just for the fact that a small percentage of MISL guys are MLS cuts? Is there some other reason?

Ignorant may well be a strong word. I would point out that in the last 10 MISL games, the average score was 17-9. That's a far cry from 24-23. At some point the idea of MISL as a no-defense "score-fest" does approach a certain lack of facts. MLS offers more easily recognized offensive sets, set plays, and transitional mistakes, more opportunities within a game to see them, proximity to the action, and there are definitely more opportunities to stand up and yell; I think you have just a few of the many reasons to give MISL a half-chance.

Arena football, like MISL, is not my first choice either. Still, there are entertaining things to see in each sport. It seems a couple of AFL allumni have done pretty well in recent Super Bowls.

 

Re: the case For MISL

I was going to say this earlier, but for lack of time I left if out. You're more of an "all around" sports fan than I am, or most people that I know. Just from getting to know you I've learned this. Me, I'm pretty straight forward in what I follow/watch/care to watch. I like outdoor soccer of any type, I like NFL football (preferably outdoors), I enjoy college basketball. Conversly I cant stand indoor soccer, I hate the NBA games, and arena football sucks and only exists (IMHO) for those who cant go from Feb. to Aug. without some sort of football.

Specifically on soccer, I played the game competitvely from ages 5 to 20. I played both indoor and outdoor most of that time. From the time I became a fan, not just playing for the sport of it, I've hated the indoor game. I've been to Attack/Comet games, and it doesnt do much for me.

And I know, there arent many MLS games that are exciting 0-0, but outdoor in general there can be. In the end I think it comes down to me being more specific in the sports I really love, and the ones I could care less about because I dont find them exciting.

 

I think bringing the game to indoors is a change like adding the shot clock to a basketball game. Sure you can have exciting games both ways, but when a sport takes steps to up the score then it loses its fundamentals, but in the end it is still put the round ball in the square net.

I personally would go to a game for the experience of going to one. A game like this is more important with the people you go with than the game itself.

That being said I think that a night out in the cauldron is never a boring experience, except for the occasional 7-0 schlacking, but even if it is like that Mike Gone is entertaining to watch.

 

I only saw highlites later and it was on radio via 'net. I don't know if they came from the Shootout package, a halftime recap, or KC Kicks. It was exciting, mostly due to the playoff implications, not because of the games' quality. The point is the "best" bar isn't a high one to clear. Every MISL/MSL game I've ever seen was more entertaining.

 

I completely disagree on all counts. Taking them one at a time:

1. The skills don't translate exactly, but, on average, they do. Name MLS players who have gone indoors and haven't done well. Name MLS players who sucked and now are very good in the MISL. The second list is a lot longer. Obviously, some players are going to be really good at one and mediocre at the other (vid. Sean Bowers) because of the differences.

2. It's only more entertaining if you think it's more entertaining. That's hardly an objective categorization.

3. Battlezone or no battlezone...indoor soccer's just fine; I just don't care as much. I used to bash it, I haven't for a few years, I go to a game or two a year...but it just doesn't do it for me.

 

Got to disagree with you. Yes there are little indoor intricacies that are not easily picked up, but it's just not as good of a game.

Soccer has boring 0-0 ties, and it has edge of your seat exciting 0-0 ties.

To compare to other sports, this years Super Bowl was not entertaining, it was blowout, but in the end, the scoreline was respectable. That's often the case in indoor as well.

I've gone to a ton of indoor games, the Attack's championship over Cleveland, I went to every playoff game, and had a great time.

But I would never choose that over a regular season Wizards game, or even a US game on TV.

There are some players in the MISL that could make it as far as skill, but are undersized. Then again, look at Ben Olsen and DMB and tell me they can't take it outdoors. Height is often a factor in the MISL vs Outdoor.

I like indoor, to play & watch, but much prefer outdoor. With more space, more can happen, and it does, just not necessarily on the scoresheet.

James

 

Re: Re: Comets on FSW

Agreed, but the overwhelming majority of 0-0 ties are not worth the effort. Case in point, there are only 2 remotely memorable goalless draws in Wizards' history: Meola's effort at dc and the power outage game at dc that was only :45. I'm guessing KC has had 0-0 15 draws, less decided by OT (vs SO), and only one is memorable for on-field events. On balance, I'll take MISL.

Me either, I wouldn't EVER miss a Wizards' game by choice. The point is that an MISL game would always have more to capture the imaginanation than the normal 0-0 MLS draw.

 

[soapbox]If skill level is the only thing you need, then fine. For me, I like to see the game be entertaining rather than just high level skill. Brazil's "A" team went to China and was held by all accounts to a "dour 0-0 draw". No arguing the skill level, I'd have been disappointed to pay for it on PPV, or even watch it. Also, no arguing that many on this board would rather see KU bash some hapless nobody at Allen than watch a much higher skilled NBA game. I'd rather see NU/KSU football than most NFL games, etc. All of us have seen HS sports that were memorable. I'm not talking about atmosphere or loyalties.

The other point would be this: If you turned the clock back x years and looked at the game, the majority of the best players only played indoor. Thankfully we have MLS, but if skill is what you crave then the indoor game had the corner on it. Preki in his prime would be the easiest example on this board.

Objective? OK. I like goals. Most fans like goals over defense. Most MLS 0-0 draws are not worth watching. One season of watching every game via Shootout might convince you of that. You like defense better? OK. There's plenty of other stuff to see in MISL. There is a higher skill level than most here give credit. There is actual strategy, individual matchups, on-ball skill, and anything else you happen to enjoy in watching any other sport. Like most things, it is required that eyes and mind are open to actually see it however. Not my rule, just a fact of life. I'm at Arrowhead first choice, obviously. Barring that, I'll take MISL vs a 0-0 draw.[/soapbox]

 

KC vs. Philly

I have no clue when the actual match is, but KC is going to be on FSW again this week playing against Philly. That is, if Philly can dig out from two feet of snow.