Discussion in 'San Jose Earthquakes' started by tonyh01, Aug 29, 2007.
Gary just keeps rolling them out! Keep up the great work Gary!
No mincing words there.
Actually, MLS is the only soccer league in the world that I follow (though I hadn't for the last two seasons until just recently), and the only other pro sports leagues I follow are all in the U.S. (NFL) and U.S./Canada (MLB, NBA, NHL).
But otherwise, absolutely spot-on article, Gary!
GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!!
No Juve? :-(
Yeah, but you follow the USMNT, don't you?
Those other sports don't have that equivalent -- it is perfectly possible to be a baseball fan, and only follow MLB, and not care about the Japanese league, the Dominican league, little league or any of those silly world baseball championships they have been coming up with for the last few years. But in soccer, I don't know anyone who follows their league and then turns off the TV when the World Cup comes on.
I guess I now have my favorite Italian team.
GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!!
Of course. I was referring to pro leagues.
Don't worry, I know what Gary meant.
I certainly watch more soccer than just MLS. By "follow", I meant following as a fan of a particular team, caring whether it wins or loses. For me in soccer, that's only the San Jose Earthquakes (pro) and the USMNT (national team).
OTOH, when I watch ManU-Liverpool or Real Madrid-Barcelona game or any other such game, I'm certainly entertained but it hardly matters to me which team wins.
But I suppose for fun, I should adopt a team from each country as "my team" for that country. So far I have Juventus for Italy (see my previous post here ) - what other teams should I adopt?
GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!!
World Cup is a bit different, though. The only non-soccer equivalent are the Olympics. He made a statement (I'm paraphrasing): "no good soccer fan follows only his own team".
Now, if he meant World Cup, then I agree he's dead on.
If he meant being a good soccer fan means following more than 1 country's club sides, then I still agree (I follow Juve and MLS, obviously).
If he meant following every country's club sides, then I would say "BS".
If he meant following every country's national side, I would say "double BS"
I love the Metro.
I always follow our Yanks. While I don't care too much if they win or lose, I root for the Beasleys, McBrides (ouch, that knee injury was fierce!) and Bradley's of the world.
These days, I keep tabs on Reading and Fulham in the EPL, Hannover in the Bundesliga and Chivas (the one from Guadalajara, not the compromised second draft in LA) just because of family ties.
Yanks Abroad is a favorite online destination of mine. In case you didn't already know it, here is a link to their list of players. Granted, it has MLS players in there but you can easily spot the foreign teams.
Without a doubt, Villarreal is the most fun team to follow in La Liga. They're from a little town yet they dare to battle the big boys. They're not infiltrated with divers and drama queens, they have heart, and they play pretty football. And if people refer to the "yellow submarine," there's no doubting who they mean.
Gary, layin' it down! Testify, brother.
send this article to the usual culprits...i did
Nice choice welcome aboard FORZA JUVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's a good article, but the problem is that the people who really need to learn from it Don't Care!. They won't read it, won't recognize themselves, and nothing will change.
Time to add Derby County to the list with Benny Feilhaber and of course, the former Quakes winger, it's wuh wuh peddlin' guitar twangin'.... Ehhhhhhhhdie Loooooooooowis.
The easiest way to keep up with how the US players are doing in the Prem is to check the relegation places.
Actually, as of right now it would be
20. Derby Co.
The team at number 17 is only there temporarily by the way, en route to a Champions League place.
Of course, I love 'em all. Keller was a great servant at Spurs, Eddie has played well at Preston, Leeds, and has already assisted at Derby. McBride has been an absolute warrior at Fulham (The other Yanks at FFC have been a bit dodgy but there you go). Hahny has been solid in the Reading goal. Convey was blossoming until he got crocked.
Oh, and the article -- tres bon as usual from Mr Singh. Pity the Merc can't get its act together but what else is new.
Gary is great! I sent a letter to the editor at Metro thanking them and praising Gary.
I'm with Gman, more or less. I care about soccer in this country, but don't really follow other leagues or teams. I sort of like Toluca in Mexico. I'll watch foreign matches, I even suffered through some of Max Bretos last night watching Argentine League highlights.
But for me, I follow:
US Men's and Women's Nats
watch other leagues from time to time
I'll be getting into MLS again, but I still haven't watch an MLS match since the demise of our proud and mighty team.
I find this statement sad.
I don't know. While I agree with the sentiments, I'm not completely sold on some of the points he made or how he made them.
For example: his response that soccer is a world game is great. But equally telling is the foreign origins of the USA's two most popular sports: football (evolved from ruby) and baseball (evolved from cricket and rounders). You can also point out that no one goes out of their way to attack hockey, a clearly 'foreign' sports. So attacking soccer because it is no American is silly.
Even more important is to challenge the archaic definition of what is "American". Soccer is by far the most popular sport among Hispanic-Americans. People who were born here and are just as much Americans as Italian-Americans or Irish-Americans. Claiming soccer is not American is a borderline racist attempt to define what an American is in narrow terms. (Let's not even get into the enormous dependence of that most American of games - baseball - on foreign players.)
Other points can also be addressed more tellingly: Low scoring? How many sportswriters wax poetic over a 1-0 pitchers duel?
But what bothered me most is the equaling of anti-soccer rhetoric with 'rubes' and 'farmers'. Need we point out the the guy who just might go down as Mr Earthquake, Troy Dyack, is an alfalfa farmer? Looking thought the player pool for the Nats, you see a lot of players from the farm belt. Frankly, I hear more anti-soccer crap coming from sports writers from major urban dailies. I think it's far more a generational antaganism than a geographic.
The best reply to anti-soccer cranks is to point out the many, many soccer fans who also like the traditional alternatives. Lots of us like soccer and baseball, for example. After that, ignore them. The anti-soccer nuts are a dying breed. Let them die off while we look the other way.
Yeah, the "it's not an American game" is both stupid and open to lots of
Hockey isn't "American" as you pointed out, but I don't see anyone attacking that.
Tennis isn't "American," neither is Golf. But those sports are both popular and not picked of for their "foreign" origins.
Volleyball and Lacrosse are both very American, but I don't see huge throngs of baseball, football, and basketball players going out to support those teams.
"It's low scoring!" Well, what about American Football? If you didn't give 6 or 7 points for every goal, it would be pretty low scoring. And they've changed the rules repeatedly to try to increase scoring. Baseball is frequently low scoring. Hockey is fairly low scoring. Basketball is so high scoring that it hardly means anything to score. What's the point of that?!
Futbol isn't the most popular sport in the world because it's boring. Please! It's the world's game because it's great. It's great because anyone can play, but certainly not at the level of the pros. It's great because it's so team oriented. It's great because it is hard to score. It's great because it is so easy to understand but so complex in its actual play.
I thought this was interesting.
I would start a thread on it, but I'm not quite sure how to put it into context. Maybe with the way the local press screws over the soccer community.
Interesting poll. Still, that's too many kids in that age group playing gridiron football. That is, if they are playing tackle. Their bodies are not developed to handle the violence and roughness of that game (I should also include, brutality, mayhem and just downright meanness).
Moronity....don't forget moronity
Cool poll! No surprise either.
An awful lot of kids playing football at that age are playing flag football. I can get behind that. Makes it more about skill and getting some exercise than about who can knock the other guy down.
One of the great things about soccer, is that a kid can be successful right away. It's much easier to kick a soccer ball than to throw a football, or hit a baseball, or shoot a basket when the hoop is five feet above your head. So kids experience success in soccer earlier, and they learn teamwork which is good for them, and that allows them to feel part of a successful organization, even if they aren't the best player on the squad. (I suppose your could make this argument for other sports also.)
In any case, our sport is growing. There will be fewer and fewer nay sayers as the years go by.