RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
dolcem
Post #61
Monday April 20, 2015 10:27pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Original post from MSantoine

Way to take something out of context. Soccer is nothing like football as a sport. one player out of 11 is the comparison I was making. Jeez


Sure, but it didn't make sense to use that comparison. Of course in all team sports (aside from bat and ball sports), an individual player is effected by his teammates, but this is more true in soccer than in any other sport. It is very possible for a gridiron football player to excel on a shitty team, particularly on defense. A shutdown corner is unaffected by a terrible defensive line that lets opposing running backs through. But in soccer, a player is so confined by the system in which he plays that a great player on one team can go to another and struggle. This doesn't really happen in football or basketball, greatness will always translate. In soccer it doesn't. Veron was one of the greatest footballers of all time and he was a big flop in England because he didn't fit in with the English style of play. Or look at how poor Balotelli has been for Liverpool this season...he was an absolute beast for ManCity a couple seasons ago but he doesn't fit into Liverpool's system and thus barely plays.

I agree with your general argument, that stats don't tell us anything and that one player's performance can't be considered in isolation (the system in which he plays has a huge impact). But using football as an example for comparison doesn't make sense because it is less extreme than soccer in terms of everything I described above. Soccer is like soccer and you shouldn't use another sport to point out that in soccer, a player's ability to succeed is affected by the system in which he plays, because in other sports, this is less the case.

I'm not trying to pick an argument about a minor point with someone with whom I'm agreeing for the sake of being ornery, I'm bringing this up because I don't like it when people do the whole American sports comparison thing on here. We Americans tend to view soccer too much like other American sports anyway, so we really shouldn't be using them as a point of reference. I don't ever want to see Russell Wilson's name mentioned here.
GET A CLUB TEAM
Mojofc
Post #62
Monday April 20, 2015 10:50pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 966
Yeah but stats proved JJ would be horrible at the World Cup in 2014. It 100% proved he would be a massive liability and they he shouldn't even make the plane.
Rain, rain, go away Come again another day - USMNT, MUFC
USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #63
Tuesday April 21, 2015 1:34pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
Original post from dolcem

Sure, but it didn't make sense to use that comparison. Of course in all team sports (aside from bat and ball sports), an individual player is effected by his teammates, but this is more true in soccer than in any other sport. It is very possible for a gridiron football player to excel on a shitty team, particularly on defense. A shutdown corner is unaffected by a terrible defensive line that lets opposing running backs through. But in soccer, a player is so confined by the system in which he plays that a great player on one team can go to another and struggle. This doesn't really happen in football or basketball, greatness will always translate. In soccer it doesn't. Veron was one of the greatest footballers of all time and he was a big flop in England because he didn't fit in with the English style of play. Or look at how poor Balotelli has been for Liverpool this season...he was an absolute beast for ManCity a couple seasons ago but he doesn't fit into Liverpool's system and thus barely plays.

I agree with your general argument, that stats don't tell us anything and that one player's performance can't be considered in isolation (the system in which he plays has a huge impact). But using football as an example for comparison doesn't make sense because it is less extreme than soccer in terms of everything I described above. Soccer is like soccer and you shouldn't use another sport to point out that in soccer, a player's ability to succeed is affected by the system in which he plays, because in other sports, this is less the case.

I'm not trying to pick an argument about a minor point with someone with whom I'm agreeing for the sake of being ornery, I'm bringing this up because I don't like it when people do the whole American sports comparison thing on here. We Americans tend to view soccer too much like other American sports anyway, so we really shouldn't be using them as a point of reference. I don't ever want to see Russell Wilson's name mentioned here.


Not that I disagree with your overall point. But this (bolded) is completely not true. You obviously have as much understanding of American Football as you claim RainorShine has of Soccer.

A Shutdown corner is VASTLY affected by his defensive line. How they can stop the run is irrelevant to a shutdown corner, but how they can rush the passer is very important (to put it simply, it's a lot easier to cover for 3 seconds than it is for 5 seconds). A great QB is negated by receivers who can't catch and by an offensive line that gives him no time. A RB will get few yards if his OL doesn't block (except for Barry Sanders...but there are exceptions in every sport). So in Football players starts are greatly affected by the performance of their teammates.

You can find examples in any sport of guys overcoming that. Messi, Ronaldo, etc are going to score a lot of goals regardless of how their teammates play and regardless of what system and/or team they play for.

Yes in Football there are systems that greatly change how a player will play (just like in Soccer). Soccer may be MORE, but Football is still a lot. I don't think you are picking an argument with him to be ornery, I think you are doing it because you don't have near the depth of knowledge about Football as you do Soccer.

There are no bigger team sports in the world than Soccer and American Football.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
dolcem
Post #64
Tuesday April 21, 2015 2:23pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Original post from USAGunner



Not that I disagree with your overall point. But this (bolded) is completely not true. You obviously have as much understanding of American Football as you claim RainorShine has of Soccer.

A Shutdown corner is VASTLY affected by his defensive line. How they can stop the run is irrelevant to a shutdown corner, but how they can rush the passer is very important (to put it simply, it's a lot easier to cover for 3 seconds than it is for 5 seconds). A great QB is negated by receivers who can't catch and by an offensive line that gives him no time. A RB will get few yards if his OL doesn't block (except for Barry Sanders...but there are exceptions in every sport). So in Football players starts are greatly affected by the performance of their teammates.

You can find examples in any sport of guys overcoming that. Messi, Ronaldo, etc are going to score a lot of goals regardless of how their teammates play and regardless of what system and/or team they play for.

Yes in Football there are systems that greatly change how a player will play (just like in Soccer). Soccer may be MORE, but Football is still a lot. I don't think you are picking an argument with him to be ornery, I think you are doing it because you don't have near the depth of knowledge about Football as you do Soccer.

There are no bigger team sports in the world than Soccer and American Football.


American football was always my favorite sport as a kid. From the mid 90's and to the mid to late 00's, I followed it as much as anyone I knew, including adults.

I am well aware that every position is affected by everything else that is happening on the field. Your example is true to a certain extent. Obviously what a corner does is not completely in isolation, nor is any other position on the field. But you have to admit that in gridiron football, this is not nearly as much the case as it is in soccer. Messi and Ronaldo are surrounded by the best teammates in the world, and considering they are the two greatest players of our era, they aren't the best examples. Gridiron football is absolutely full of examples of bad players excelling on shitty teams. This is a fact. In soccer, this is not the case (and it's not just the salary cap; when a player emerges on a low to mid-tier team, he usually never becomes truly world class until he moves to a better team, where he plays with teammates that can take advantage of his quality). And in soccer, you can have a world class player completely fail on another team if he doesn't fit the system.

This is much, much less the case in American football or basketball. Sure, it's possible, but the odds are firmly stacked a great running back going to a team with a great O-line and failing. I can't think of an example of this ever happening (can you?). But when Diego Forlan went to ManU and was surrounded by quality players, he was a flop because he didn't fit into the system, even though he was a great player.

This was my point, that in soccer, more than any other sport, a player is affected by the system in which he plays, so to use gridiron football as an example for why one player's individual performances (and stats) should be taken for a grain of salt makes little sense. We should avoid using American sports as a point of comparison here because our problem as Americans is to view soccer too much through the lens of gridiron football. And frankly I'm sick of people trying to explain things in terms of American sports here because I come to YA to get a break from American sports. Not that I was trying to pick on MSantoine.
GET A CLUB TEAM
USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #65
Tuesday April 21, 2015 5:00pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
Soccer players are affected by the system in which he plays more than other sports. But American Football is much closer a comparison to Soccer than it is to basketball.

My point wasn't to negate what you said in Soccer, but to say that Football is MUCH more system and team oriented than you are giving it credit for. (I coached HS for 7 years and played for a decade).

Want an example of a great RB that wasn't good with a bad OL, but was very good with a great OL. Look at Demarcus Murray's first 3 years. Then Dallas invests in their OL last off-season and now he explodes on to the scene. Murray didn't suddenly get better, he's always been that good. His OL was suddenly very good. We can go to how a RB is used to and the system they are in. Look at Reggie Bush in New Orleans, he did nothing. Then he goes to the Dolphins and they use him better in a different system and suddenly he is rushing for 1,000 yards. He would have with the Lions too if he had stayed healthy.

Reggie Bush didn't suddenly get better when he went to Miami, the coaches just used him better.

I think what you get in soccer all too often is stubborn managers who are so stringent in their views on formations/schemes that they refuse to adapt their system to the players they have (which also goes to buying the wrong kind of players).

One reason you see Wenger stay on top, he not only buys players to fit what he wants to do, but he has also adapted how his team plays (Finally) based on what he has. Thus you see Sanchez able to do a lot more 1v1 outside of the team constructs.

But that's a tangent and I digress (about managers buying just to buy and not being smart with the buying).

In regards to this argument it should be ranked like this

1-Soccer

2-American Football

3-everything else
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
dolcem
Post #66
Tuesday April 21, 2015 7:37pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Original post from USAGunner

Soccer players are affected by the system in which he plays more than other sports. But American Football is much closer a comparison to Soccer than it is to basketball.

My point wasn't to negate what you said in Soccer, but to say that Football is MUCH more system and team oriented than you are giving it credit for. (I coached HS for 7 years and played for a decade).

Want an example of a great RB that wasn't good with a bad OL, but was very good with a great OL. Look at Demarcus Murray's first 3 years. Then Dallas invests in their OL last off-season and now he explodes on to the scene. Murray didn't suddenly get better, he's always been that good. His OL was suddenly very good. We can go to how a RB is used to and the system they are in. Look at Reggie Bush in New Orleans, he did nothing. Then he goes to the Dolphins and they use him better in a different system and suddenly he is rushing for 1,000 yards. He would have with the Lions too if he had stayed healthy.

Reggie Bush didn't suddenly get better when he went to Miami, the coaches just used him better.

I think what you get in soccer all too often is stubborn managers who are so stringent in their views on formations/schemes that they refuse to adapt their system to the players they have (which also goes to buying the wrong kind of players).

One reason you see Wenger stay on top, he not only buys players to fit what he wants to do, but he has also adapted how his team plays (Finally) based on what he has. Thus you see Sanchez able to do a lot more 1v1 outside of the team constructs.

But that's a tangent and I digress (about managers buying just to buy and not being smart with the buying).

In regards to this argument it should be ranked like this

1-Soccer

2-American Football

3-everything else


I just wrote a really long post on Reggie Bush and realized that I was being a hypocrite for spending so much time talking about gridiron on a soccer forum. All I'll say is that sure, the system in matters in football, but Reggie Bush aside, you put together an all-pro running back behind an all-pro line, he'll do well. And if you spend a ridiculous amount of money and buy all the best defensive players, it will be a very good defense. There are sometimes really rare exceptions but this is the general rule. Soccer is not like this at all. You can assemble a great group of players and it can completely fail. So maybe soccer is number one and your list and American football is two, but there is a huge gap there.

And even then, as far as gridiron football vs. basketball goes...I don't know. I think you're confusing basketball for the NBA. NBA players are incredibly individualistic and don't really listen to coaches. More than any other sport, individuals can build brands, and so NBA players tend to be extremely selfish. They will always try to score first and pass second because they want to pad their stats and increase their brand value (and bargaining position come contract renegotiation). And of course referees are extremely lenient on things like traveling, which only further encourages individual play. If we look at the college basketball or European or South American basketball, it is much more team and system oriented. The players have to fit the system, and if they don't, they won't succeed (or they'll get benched by the coach, something that can't happen to big name players in the NBA). And of course lots of players are great in college because they fit their system perfectly when they really aren't quality players. It is harder to draft in basketball than it is in football. That to me is evidence that we could make basketball number two on our list.
GET A CLUB TEAM
USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #67
Tuesday April 21, 2015 9:44pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
I think you are switching the argument. Regardless of the system you are in, in basketball, you can have 1 great player and 4 JAGS (Just Another Guy) and you will quite a few games. If you have a bunch of JAGs and no great player you are the Boston Celtics this year (who are going anywhere, and truthfully are only in the playoffs because the east is so good).

You can have 21 JAGs and one great player in Football and you aren't going anywhere. You will be well below .500. In Soccer you can have 10 JAGs and 1 Great player and do nothing (Unless that 1 GK is Tim Howard against Belgium...).

As far as buying great players and making a great team. You must not pay much attention to teams like the Redskins (particularly in the early 2000's). Dan Snyder tried that, and won NOTHING. You have to buy the right players for your team (see New England). Many of those guys went on and did great in other places (Before Washington and after). Look at Darrelle Revis. Was the best, went to the Jets and was less than that, went to TB and was very good, went to NE and was one of the best again. Now he is back with the Jets. We'll see how he does.

In Basketball you can do that. You can buy like crazy and win (See Miami Heat).

The simple thing that the original poster was saying was how much 1 guy can affect a game.
In Basketball 1 guy can affect a game/team in a MAJOR way.
In Football 1 guy can only have a small affect on a game.
In Soccer 1 guy can have an even smaller affect on a game.

Basketball and almost any other sport is a distant third to Football and Soccer. Football is much closer to Soccer than it is to third place (even if there is a wide gap).
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
dolcem
Post #68
Tuesday April 21, 2015 10:45pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Original post from USAGunner

I think you are switching the argument. Regardless of the system you are in, in basketball, you can have 1 great player and 4 JAGS (Just Another Guy) and you will quite a few games. If you have a bunch of JAGs and no great player you are the Boston Celtics this year (who are going anywhere, and truthfully are only in the playoffs because the east is so good).

You can have 21 JAGs and one great player in Football and you aren't going anywhere. You will be well below .500. In Soccer you can have 10 JAGs and 1 Great player and do nothing (Unless that 1 GK is Tim Howard against Belgium...).

As far as buying great players and making a great team. You must not pay much attention to teams like the Redskins (particularly in the early 2000's). Dan Snyder tried that, and won NOTHING. You have to buy the right players for your team (see New England). Many of those guys went on and did great in other places (Before Washington and after). Look at Darrelle Revis. Was the best, went to the Jets and was less than that, went to TB and was very good, went to NE and was one of the best again. Now he is back with the Jets. We'll see how he does.

In Basketball you can do that. You can buy like crazy and win (See Miami Heat).

The simple thing that the original poster was saying was how much 1 guy can affect a game.
In Basketball 1 guy can affect a game/team in a MAJOR way.
In Football 1 guy can only have a small affect on a game.
In Soccer 1 guy can have an even smaller affect on a game.

Basketball and almost any other sport is a distant third to Football and Soccer. Football is much closer to Soccer than it is to third place (even if there is a wide gap).


There's a salary cap in the NFL. As far as the Patriots go, that's because Belicheck is the greatest coach of all time (which may have something to do with the fact that he's a cheater). The Redskins threw around some money but not the amounts I'm referring to. If there was no salary cap and one time assembled an amazing group of players, they'd win everything. In soccer, this is not the case. But we both agree here, we're talking about basketball.

The problem is that you're forgetting an important part of the math: there are only five basketball players playing at once. In soccer, there are 11, and in gridiron, there's 11 on offense and 11 on defense. So if we're going to use the JAG argument, one basketball player is equal to two soccer players and in gridiron, two on offense and two on defense. As I said before, I'm not counting the NBA for basketball for the reasons I listed above. If we look at college ball, one player makes a big difference, but we have seen so many times a one-man team struggle heavily. The defense simply has to focus on that one player. If we compare it to NCAA football (a fair comparison, I think, since we're looking at college athletics), one quarterback and one running back can make a massive difference. They are easily able to stand out and influence a game. I can't count how many times I've seen one college player carry a game. And in this case, it'd be two.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I think I'd probably put gridiron number two and basketball number three, but I don't think the gap is as big as you make it to be.

The real gap is with soccer and the rest. A great soccer player might be completely ineffective on a different team or different league (even if he is surrounded by quality players). This is not the case in gridiron or basketball. While there are some stylistic differences between the conferences, if you take a a great SEC player and put him in the Pac-12, he'll do well, and vice-versa.
GET A CLUB TEAM
MSantoine
Post #69
Wednesday April 22, 2015 11:19am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Original post from USAGunner

The simple thing that the original poster was saying was how much 1 guy can affect a game.
In Basketball 1 guy can affect a game/team in a MAJOR way.
In Football 1 guy can only have a small affect on a game.
In Soccer 1 guy can have an even smaller affect on a game.

.


Exactly what I was getting at. In basketball stats are very telling of an individual. The top 5 scorers this year were Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, Anthony Davis, and Cousins. Other than missing Curry you have 4 of the top 5 guys in the league. Go to analytics and the top players are Davis, Westbrook, Curry, Durant, Harden, Paul, Lebron, Cousins, Griffin. Hard to argue against those being the top players.

In EPL for example the top 5 scorers are Aguero, Kane, Costa, Austin, Girouard, Sanchez. Aguero and Costa are the only world class players on that list. I dont think anyone would take the other three to build a team around (yes Girouard is good but hes not top XI good).

Thats the comparison I was trying to make. Someone was trying to use stats to show that Sacha or others were better than Mix. My point was basketball (and baseball which is an individual sport that masks as a team sport) is the only sport that stats are relevant in.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #70
Wednesday April 22, 2015 1:22pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
Wait...Alexis Sanchez isn't World class? news to me.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
MSantoine
Post #71
Wednesday April 22, 2015 2:21pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Original post from USAGunner

Wait...Alexis Sanchez isn't World class? news to me.


I guess its semantics but I dont think of Sanchez as a top 10 attacker (hard to differentiate between attacking wings, strikers, CAMs). Even counting him you still only have half of the top 6 scorers being world class. There assist leaders have the same thing. Oscar, Sigurddson, and Baines are amongst the assist leaders.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #72
Wednesday April 22, 2015 3:07pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
Anyone who has had 10+ goals in Serie A, La Liga, and 1st year in Premier League, has done very well in Champions League, has starred for 2 of the worlds biggest clubs, and was one of the stars of the World Cup...Is World Class...He can not be a top 10 attacker and still be World Class.

World Class to me is someone who does well both internationally and for club, and can start for the big clubs. (Barca, Real madrid, Chelsea, Munich, ManU, Man City, Arsenal, etc).

Sanchez has done all of the above (most we can just speculate that they can start for most of the big clubs, but he is one that has actually done it with 2 of them).
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
rainORshine
Post #73
Friday April 24, 2015 1:01am

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 2,097
couple interesting "head to head" match-ups of US u-25 MFs friday night:

- shipp v diskerud
- powers v hollingshead

interesting that its hollingshead the only one one playing for what is considered one of the better (top 5 or so) MLS teams

dolcem
Post #74
Friday April 24, 2015 2:03am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
A lot of people are predicting Sanchez will get the Premier League Player of the Year award (he's number three on the betting list, only behind Hazard and Kane...and the only reason Kane is such a popular pick is that he's English and this is the first time in years they have the chance to give it to an Englishman). If you are in the running for the player of the year award in one of the top leagues, doesn't that make you world class?
GET A CLUB TEAM
chillguy1992
Post #75
Friday April 24, 2015 6:27am

Joined May 2013
Total Posts: 1,118
Original post from rainORshine

couple interesting "head to head" match-ups of US u-25 MFs friday night:

- shipp v diskerud
- powers v hollingshead

interesting that its hollingshead the only one one playing for what is considered one of the better (top 5 or so) MLS teams


Hollingshead has been playing well so far but I would like to see if he can keep his play up for a whole season. Dillion Powers is playing at his usual high level the FC Dallas game he killed it. He has a very good workrate on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball. I would like to see him and Shipp on the 35 man preliminary list for the gold cup.

Page 5 of 10
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Next »

Pellegrino Matarazzo and VfB Stuttgart got their Bundesliga campaign off the ground on Saturday with a win over Mainz.
RECENT POSTS
Marsch Wins Coaching Honor
American Trio Wins 3. Liga Title
Konrad Commits To Barcelona
Matarazzo, Stuttgart Eye Promotion