Where? That's simply false, and either you know it or you choose to remain ignorant of it. You're unwittingly making part of my point for me. He's got plenty of his own success. He's just a gadfly. There needs to be more critical voices, whether genuine or not in US Soccer as a whole. At times, broadcasts on both the men's and women's side sound like a gigantic circle-jerk. On what do you base that?
That's like saying "The Charlotte Eagles will wrap up a 3rd USL-2 trophy before Chivas USA wins 1 MLS trophy."
Thanks. I thought I heard something... I wonder who his inside source was. Was he browsing BS again or did Foudy get mad at him or something? Thanks, but I was referring to new comments Waldo made today regarding his initial comments.
I'm sure he was just browsing the BS boards. During another game, he said something like "I'm sure someone on bigsoccer will correct me on that" (in reference to some player stat being wrong). So one would think he visits often...
I'm not trying to start something, but it irks me when people compare the popularity of the women's team vs. the men's team, implying that somehow their (WNT) accomplishments aren't as difficult to attain or important because not as many people watch the games.
When you asked if we "REALLY" wanted to get into this question, as if you might make everyone cry with your penetrating insights. It's false that many, many nations have much better MNTs than the USA? You have to be seriously deluded to deny that. Unlikely, since you don't seem to have any coherent point. I like Wynalda, and I definitely agree he mainly just likes to stir things up. On the other hand, he certainly displays jealousy of accomplishments other than his own. Re: Wynalda and the EPL (which he never managed to get into), Wynalda and soccer's lack of popularity in the USA, and Wynalda and Jim Rome. My own experience. What do you base your opinions on, messages from God?
The accomplishments aren't as difficult. But you're right in that it's not because fewer people watch. That would be the world's silliest contention.
You make far too much of it. Retract the claws and stand down. MUCH better? 10, maybe. "Many, many"? Not hardly. Mostly better? A couple of dozen, perhaps. "Many, many"? Come on. Don't be silly. Yesterday, you saw what the men were capable of in a cycle widely considered to be a rebuilding one. Wynalda is jealous of, say, baseball and football and Jim Rome? I'd say he really doesn't LIKE Jim Rome and would venture to guess that he's a baseball and football fan like many other people in this country. Now maybe he feels hard done by to not have played in the EPL/Division I. Has he actually criticized England in some important way? Personal experience, while true for the person in question, is a bad indicator for anything else. It's a cousin of anecdotal evidence, which is pretty much worthless. I think you underestimate the level of admiration people (mostly kids) feel toward the men's team. But that's beside the point. Divining an overall "feeling" - which is very personal - for a large population based on one's own personal feelings and interpretations is...well, just divining and nothing more.
Ok, now I see where you are coming from. You want to compare apples to oranges and say that one is more important because they are not inherently the same. Yes, the men's games and women's games are different, but they are also not comparable to each other.
Where did I mention importance? You seem to be the only one mentioning that. I'd like to avoid apples-to-oranges comparisons, but where the comparison is semi-valid (hardware quantity), that brings in the necessity to contrast every aspect of the divergent developments of the men's and women's games. Indeed, as far as game aspects go. But when you bring hardware and relative difficulty of acquiring same, you must also bring in all the other differences in order to come to the conclusion that a comparison is completely useless.
Well, I've just watched the USA-N.Korea game and before getting some sleep have just a couple of comments. First, Wynalda's "yellow card" was spot-on. N. Korea looked the more composed, organized, and consistently aggressive side. It seemed the USA started with great confidence, but become frustrated, and eventually panicky. A lot of mental mistakes. Whatever the preparation brought into this WC, it was the Koreans who looked the more fit and the mentally tougher. And, lo, the wonder, we have another manager who is poor with substitutes. .....That said, the goal to tie it, by Heather[?], was beautifully shot, and at the end Solo finally showed us the hard edge a keeper needs. I hope this was a warning shot which rouses them to full action. Second, the midfield seemed weak in the center. I'm not sure it's because the counterattacking strategy we employed [I'm getting a sick feeling about so many US national sides adopting this approach to matches] created so much space between the mids and forwards that Korea held the mid by default, or because our mids are not sufficiently capable [which would shock me] , or because they were not, after all, well prepared for the opponent they faced. I would love to hear the manager take a few questions after this opening game. It's a very tough group, and I hope each team has been approached with respect and intelligence. Third, the North Koreans were the most "manly" women I've seen since the reunion party for the old East German women's track and field team. Seriously, at first I was wondering if I had the wrong channel. It took a few moments to remind myself that it was the USA women's side out there, and so they had to be playing women. NK was a hard hard side. Anyway, we have an obviously talented group of players, and let's hope it all comes together quick.
What analysis? Everyone knew Korea was going to be a tough team to beat. He thought the USA was overconfident. I don't think so. Wambach's toe and Boxx's knee had no impact on the game. Boxx just played a crap game with all her bad clearances. Abby scored with her supposedly broken toe.
I have to apologize to you guys (and maybe to Eric Wynalda, if its true that he reads these boards). I got him mixed up in my mind with Marcelo Balboa, whom I came to dislike as an announcer during the MWC last year, for the reasons I wrote about in my intial post. Although, I do have a little problem with Wynalda's comment (I think he over-exaggerated the injury situation), I don't have a problem with his game calling. In fact, there were a couple of times during the Brazil/US game I thought, "Wow, he's really gotten a lot better in just a year." Then I read something about Balboa and I realized my mistake...So here's to you, Eric! Sorry.
Balboa is quite possibly the most useless, horrible excuse for a "color commentator" I've ever witnessed, in ANY sport. He's truly awful, in just about every way.
Amen. Waldo tells it like it is. Actually, I think Cosell might be proud of his ass. And the rest of him.
right. some of what he was saying was on the mark, but i fail to see why any of it merited a "yellow card".
It was supposed to be a warning, like "look out or you're going to lose". A couple more "yellow card" performances and Wynalda could be giving the U.S. a "red card" for being bounced early from the World Cup.
I just watched N. Korea for the first time and I learned a couple of things. They are a lot better then I expected. I heard they were good, but I didn't know they were that good. For the most part they dominated the USWNT. The other thing I learned is, they got to be the most physically ugliest team I have seen. I kind of expected them to be ugly, but I thought I could spot a half-descent looking chick. Not one! And I like asian chicks (I'm married to one).