RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
MSantoine
Post #16
Wednesday August 7, 2013 1:35am

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

What great English players do the Manchester clubs have??


Thats my point. The media loves to pump up team England as a favorite every world cup but there team really isnt that good. Not many people on there national team play for Man U, Man City, Barca, Real, Bayern. The true top teams that all players aspire to play for.

MSantoine
Post #17
Wednesday August 7, 2013 1:49am

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

@MSantoine: I disagree about Slovenia and Ghana. Slovenia beat Russia to get into the World Cup not Andorra, Russia. They were no slouch but we should have beaten them. Ghana was a team that should have beaten a pretty good Uruguay team. I don't get the negativity when there is no context.


Any team that makes the world cup is technically a good team. However was drawing vs Slovenia, drawing vs a bad england team, needing a last second win vs Algeria, and losing to Ghana "defying expectations" It was posed that because we take players that "play hard" over talent we defy expectations. Going back to 1998 in world cup and confed cup play we are 4-3-11 vs non-CONCACAF opponents in official matches. Algeria and Egypt were arguably 2 of the worst teams of their respective tourneys. That puts us at 2-3-11 vs decent to good teams in official competitions. Maybe we should give talent a chance...

tardis91
Post #18
Wednesday August 7, 2013 12:44pm

Joined Jun 2013
Total Posts: 84
First off fans like me and fans like you are the reason soccer is growing in this country, not being held back. The mentality that the game is SO hard to learn is whats holding us back. The reason our youth teams and coaches are the way they are is not because of lack of knowledge, its the desire to win games over everything else. Forget teaching the children lets get wins so we can look good. Kick it long get one good player and make everyone else stand there. The insane reasoning that winning is more important than getting better is why the teams are like that. While I of course do not know everything or as much as a manager I know enough to know whats happening all over the field. I learned that because I wanted to, in about 5 months. No I dont know it all and yes I learn new things daily, but to act like you must watch the game years to get it is just absurd to me.

I personally have been watching soccer for 10+years closely and loosely before that. I can say that I am still learning new things about the game, but what I mean is after 4 months of watching Barecelona or any specific team, a fan can learn the tactical part of the game. Of course new things develop, and that means they may have to learn that too, but if you are really interested in learning the game, it is vastly overrated as to how hard the game is to learn. Now while I agree, that playing at a high level will always increase the knowledge of a person, thats a separate argument. My point here is that I feel we talk the complexity of the game up so much, that people tune it out before giving it a chance. While the complexity is there its not like trying to solve a physics equation. The beauty in the game is that while it is cerebral, strategic and fun to watch, but its also suspenseful as one simple mistake or loss of attention causes a moment where the game is changed entirely. In any other sport if a team scores, its not that big of a deal, but in soccer 1 goal changes everything from that point forward.

About the prices argument, the reason NFL is so successful is because of good marketing, and its about the only game outside of basketball that translates really well to TV. Every other sport is better experienced live, while the NFL is actually slightly better on TV. MLB opening day is a day where families all come out and enjoy the game together, soccer needs that. In fact every sport needs that, the problem with baseball is the season goes on so long, casual fans lose interest over the summer and then jump back in when the playoffs start. The NFL has just enough games where everything matters. Again Im not saying advertise discounted seats, but advertise family plans. There are a lot of people in a state where no soccer is played would like to take their children to a game, but in most cases with travel and room cost ontop of tickets and concessions, they chose to not go. It doesnt even have to be one every game just a handful of games a year to give them a taste of the game. I think it would really benefit the next generation of fans.

I do think a lot of people tune out soccer because the international team for the US is good but not great YET. But I also think a lot of times there are just no games on TV. I know I would rather it be MLS but Im hoping NBCs EPL coverage brings in more fans. If NBC can capitalize on the World Cup hangover where most people watch at least the US, it will be really good for the sport.

I kind of think that I would rather have really astute, average technical skills, who work train and study hard, over a bunch of really technical players who just show up and try to win. Its when you find really technical players who have that desire that you get something special. So I can see both sides point on that issue. Anyway the discussion has been good so far, thanks for that.

recycledhumans
DFWTX
Post #19
Wednesday August 7, 2013 1:46pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
Original post from USnLFCfan

What great English players do the Manchester clubs have??


Ashley Young, Joe Hart, Rooney (for now at least), Ferdinand, Gareth Barry, Cleverly are all I can think of off the top of my head that have been regularly capped for the 3 lions.

Techskillz416
Post #20
Wednesday August 7, 2013 2:19pm

Joined Aug 2013
Total Posts: 114
Original post from recycledhumans

Ashley Young, Joe Hart, Rooney (for now at least), Ferdinand, Gareth Barry, Cleverly are all I can think of off the top of my head that have been regularly capped for the 3 lions.


IMO the only player you listed that can even remotely help 3 lions win a WC is Joe Hart. None of those other players are anything special. Ferdinand is always a questionable challenge in the box, the England name is the only thing that carries any sort of weight with that National Team.

CBoyd3142
Probably far from where you are...
Post #21
Wednesday August 7, 2013 3:08pm

Joined Aug 2012
Total Posts: 320
Just a note - Ferdinand has retired from international football. Jagielka & Terry aren't getting any younger, nor are Cahill or Cole. Smalling is promising though, and a lot of people think Phil Jones can produce more if he stays healthy. The English defense is a question for the future, but maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can add some light.

Hart's probably the best player mentioned in a previous post, and even he's not near the best in his position (I still believe Buffon is the best 'keeper in soccer).

England clearly suffers from the exact opposite of the USA: overhype. Yes, they do have excellent players who are world class and deserve respect, but do they really compare enough to be in the top 5? Many people think so, but I just don't see it. Obviously an opinion, but just the same - I think in WC '18 we'll see where England truly lies. A lot of players are getting older and will likely retire after Brazil - Gerrard, Terry, possibly several more. That's where we'll see the younger players take over and see how they adapt to the international game.

England's going to get the favor due to the money they put into the game and the enormous attention it receives over there, period. Until the US brings its domestic league to a pretty high point from an attention and cash perspective, players are going be devalued. England, as well as other countries, are going to enjoy the American "discount players" when they come in and produce and casually forget them when they're gone. Sad, but true.
Toffee Fan....for the moment
MSantoine
Post #22
Wednesday August 7, 2013 5:13pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
One other benefit England has over USA is in their youth teams. Most youth teams are filled with domestic players due to laws and location. Because teams like Man U, Chelsea, etc lock up some of the best 18 and 19 year olds in the world just so they have them when they are ready for 1st team soccer (and lots of times sell them without using them) That means that most of Englands U15 through U20 players get to practice and play against some of the best young players world wide. MLS academies are filled with mostly people who will be lucky to make NASL.

recycledhumans
DFWTX
Post #23
Wednesday August 7, 2013 6:43pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
Original post from Techskillz416

IMO the only player you listed that can even remotely help 3 lions win a WC is Joe Hart. None of those other players are anything special. Ferdinand is always a questionable challenge in the box, the England name is the only thing that carries any sort of weight with that National Team.


I tend to agree with you, but trying to make an argument that there aren't any good English players playing for either of the Manchester teams is just silly.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #24
Wednesday August 7, 2013 7:04pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
I really disagree with those saying that Soccer has more strategy and differing mentalities to the game (in differing locales) as opposed to other sports.

You really don't know the nuances of American Football that well. I'm a huge Futbol and Football fan (both of them). In terms of strategy there really isn't one that stands out over the other. Different? Yes, but neither one is more "difficult" persay.

It's like saying you Spinach tastes so much better than Asparagus, and you've never really tasted Asparagus only Asparagus soup.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
bbakerxyz
Post #25
Wednesday August 7, 2013 8:46pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 237
Original post from dolcem

I don't want to be harsh on the OP but this mentality is what is keeping American soccer in the stone age.

Most Americans view soccer as just another sport, like basketball or football. One that you can figure out after watching for a few months (scoring a goal is not much different than hitting a home run, you're just seeing a ball go in a direction). The most knowledgeable fans are the ones who read the boxscores/magazines/whatever (the internet in soccer's case since it isn't really well-covered in the US mainstream media) the most. The ones who have the best player knowledge and who know the most stats.

Yet soccer is a completely different sport and one far more complex than anything Americans play. While playing soccer helps you understand it more deeply, it's not the only thing that does. Soccer is unique in that one's approach to the game, the way they think about it (which one learns from watching it and talking about it), affects the way they play it. Soccer players are produced by cultures in a way that other athletes are not: a player acquires the game by constantly, playing, watching, and talking about it with his countrymen, who share a similar understanding of the game.

Some cultures are great and produce great players. The Argentines and Brazilians, for example, believe in the aestheticism of the game and the importance of flair and skill. Of course they believe footballers should play that way because the fans deserve it but they also believe that this is the best way to learn and play the sport, and that the ability of a footballer is measured by what he can do with the ball. It's no surprised that historically speaking, these are probably the two best soccer nations of all time (Maradona, Bochini, Batistuta, Messi, Pele, Garrincha, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, etc.).

Some places have done a great job of building cultures through youth academies, where it is instilled in them. The best example (aside from maybe Ajax) would be La Masia, where the players that come from it share such an understanding that outsiders, even if they're world class, can't ever really understand. Barca players actually do share the same DNA, and people that know the sport well recognize that. You wouldn't ever see this in an American sport...they aren't complex enough to allow for those kind of differences. While there are real style differences between the conferences, there is no PAC 12 or Big 10 DNA. One athlete in one could play in another. But soccer plays aren't just athletes, they're a lot more than that. An all-time great in one league may be ineffective in a league of similar quality (Veron, for example).

Certain cultures can be better than other from a technical standpoint (another concept lost to American sports fans, where grit and athleticism is all that matters). For example, Koreans view soccer as a game of stamina and try to play it the way they approach everything in life: with teamwork and sheer willpower. While they can run all over the place, they never play a style of play that allows for creativity or rewards skill. The result is that Korean players usually can't offer anything more than a great work rate. Considering how good Koreans are at other pursuits (including baseball) their inability to produce good soccer players despite its long-time popularity is evidence of the importance of culture in player development.

In America the problem is worth. Listen to Taylor Twellman talk about soccer. While players raised in the American mentality and boot and root tactics might someday play in Europe (it's a numbers game, we have more registered soccer players than any other nation in the world), it doesn't mean that their approach to the game is going to produce truly quality players (and quality is a concept foreign to American sports and thus many American soccer fans). Even Michael Bradley told Altidore to play for Hull instead of St. Etienne or Olympiakos, which would have been infinitely better for his development from a technical standpoint, because "when you for a team fighting relegation, you learn a lot about yourself." In other words, the way his team played and his role in it were completely irrelevant in his development; the only that mattered was playing in the environment that would 'toughen him up' psychologically the most. American coaches seem to share the same philosophy about soccer, and while this is obvious from what they say, it's even more obvious from their archaic tactics. It's clear that they view the game as similar to gridiron, which is rigid and requires its players to react to events rather than create anything (even the guys are offense are just following a play). Outdated British tactics are used and size and athleticism are valued over anything (because that's what matters in football and basketball).

Americans fans seem to share the same mentality as well, especially the newer ones. I always notice this when I talk with (knowledgeable) soccer fans from other countries. Even though I have been studying the game intently since my teens, it's obvious that they understand the game in ways that I don't. They've learned it from the time they could walk from experts (their dads, uncles, etc.) and grasp the subtleties that someone who understands it primitively (like its gridiron) never will. And they believe, as anyone who properly understands the game does, that soccer is the best sport. It is the beautiful game and infinitely more complex and profound than any American sport. Argentines and Spaniards, in particular, speak of it like they speak of music or literature...great players are great artists, completely unique in the way they play their position and fit into their teams. In American sports, the athlete simply performs a simple task (hit the ball, throw the ball, tackle the player) that requires following instructions with perfect time: nothing that would require any creativity whatsoever (in the parlance of what American sport would you find such a word?).

This is why I'm a soccer elitist. We won't become better at the sport until we understand it better and grow a culture. And once we do, American newcomers to the game will hear about it and start to see the nuances of the game that they never get in their own sports. It's not a problem, it's the solution to our biggest problem.


Well, there you go. The elitism that our neophyte friend was referring too.

What are you smoking, dude, and can I have some?

recycledhumans
DFWTX
Post #26
Thursday August 8, 2013 1:48pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,467
Original post from USAGunner

I really disagree with those saying that Soccer has more strategy and differing mentalities to the game (in differing locales) as opposed to other sports.

You really don't know the nuances of American Football that well. I'm a huge Futbol and Football fan (both of them). In terms of strategy there really isn't one that stands out over the other. Different? Yes, but neither one is more "difficult" persay.

It's like saying you Spinach tastes so much better than Asparagus, and you've never really tasted Asparagus only Asparagus soup.


I live in Texas, football here is religion, not sport. To say that any of us don't know what we're talking about simply because we argue/acknowledge that soccer is a much more mental sport than football is just silly and presumptuous, particularly when you don't know any of us more than the opinions we've posted here.

Yes, there is use of strategy and tactics involved in football...more than soccer? Not even close. About the same? No. The very structure of the game makes it less so, because the game is not free-flowing.

Hunt Daddy
VA
Post #27
Thursday August 8, 2013 7:53pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 48
Original post from MSantoine

One other benefit England has over USA is in their youth teams. Most youth teams are filled with domestic players due to laws and location. Because teams like Man U, Chelsea, etc lock up some of the best 18 and 19 year olds in the world just so they have them when they are ready for 1st team soccer (and lots of times sell them without using them) That means that most of Englands U15 through U20 players get to practice and play against some of the best young players world wide. MLS academies are filled with mostly people who will be lucky to make NASL.


What you're saying about big English clubs signing up international talent at the youth level is true, but that's not helping English youngsters develop at all. In fact, it's hurting them due to lack of opportunities. There is a huge debate going on about this in England right now.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #28
Thursday August 8, 2013 9:37pm

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

I live in Texas, football here is religion, not sport. To say that any of us don't know what we're talking about simply because we argue/acknowledge that soccer is a much more mental sport than football is just silly and presumptuous, particularly when you don't know any of us more than the opinions we've posted here.

Yes, there is use of strategy and tactics involved in football...more than soccer? Not even close. About the same? No. The very structure of the game makes it less so, because the game is not free-flowing.


It not being "free-flowing" matters not. That just means the strategy/tactics are different not MORE.

Also just because you LIVE in a geographical locale doesn't mean you know the nuances of a sport.

I've never stated that Football has more than Futbol, just that they are different and equal in that aspect.

Both have different strategies and tactics (and both are VERY wide ranging and differing in philosophies, etc). Neither is more or less, just different.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
Fraser31
Charleston, South Carolina
Post #29
Thursday August 8, 2013 9:55pm

Joined Sep 2012
Total Posts: 1,408
Soccer definitely has more because it is a 90+ minute game, and every decision is made on the fly, so numerically I'm sure soccer imposes "more" tactics that football. The fact that they are different in tactics means nothing, and I would say, being from South Carolina, that geographical location has a lot to do with understanding the nuances of a sport, but not necessarily indicative of it. I would say a majority of you would consider the average European to know more about soccer than the average American, just as the average Texan would know more about football than the average Floridian.

dolcem
Post #30
Thursday August 15, 2013 12:57pm

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

I really disagree with those saying that Soccer has more strategy and differing mentalities to the game (in differing locales) as opposed to other sports.

You really don't know the nuances of American Football that well. I'm a huge Futbol and Football fan (both of them). In terms of strategy there really isn't one that stands out over the other. Different? Yes, but neither one is more "difficult" persay.

It's like saying you Spinach tastes so much better than Asparagus, and you've never really tasted Asparagus only Asparagus soup.


Soccer has styles that are so different than an all-time great from one league can go into another league and be ineffective (so many examples...players like Veron). It's not like this in football. I know that the different college football conferences have different styles but a great player in one league will be great in another. Heck even sometimes a great player moves to a different team in the same league he can become completely ineffective. This doesn't happen so much in gridiron.

Original post from bbakerxyz

Well, there you go. The elitism that our neophyte friend was referring too.

What are you smoking, dude, and can I have some?


I think soccer is the best sport and superior to American sports in many ways. I think that people who really 'get' the game realize that and understand it differently than American sports (because it is so different). And as much as I love our soccer culture, I think we need to change our approach to the game before we can really tap into our potential. We have more registered soccer players than any other country in the world, great athletes, and great facilities, but we are nowhere near producing a world-class field player (we have "hustlers" like Dempsey, Donovan, Bradley, Cherundolo, etc. but not the type of players that can carry a team and change a game). You can call that "elitism" or whatever you want but I don't see what's wrong with it. Soccer, from an American perspective, can be viewed as an "elitist" sport (which is why a lot of Americans don't like it) and we need to drop our American anti-elitist sentiment if we want to 'get it' and start producing quality players. We need to look at the sport in a way more similar to how the great soccer cultures view it. Of course we'll have our own style but we should learn from them because they've been doing it longer than we have.

Original post from Fraser31

Soccer definitely has more because it is a 90+ minute game, and every decision is made on the fly, so numerically I'm sure soccer imposes "more" tactics that football. The fact that they are different in tactics means nothing, and I would say, being from South Carolina, that geographical location has a lot to do with understanding the nuances of a sport, but not necessarily indicative of it. I would say a majority of you would consider the average European to know more about soccer than the average American, just as the average Texan would know more about football than the average Floridian.


This is because soccer, even more than other sports, is cultural. Soccer players are produced by their cultures, and some are better at producing players than others. Culture matters because how you approach the game affects the way you play it, and it's something that you only learn by playing with the people around you (you can't go to batting practice). It's more team-oriented than any other sport (you're not doing plays like in football) so it's only natural that it would be more 'cultural.' And of course most importantly, it's a sport that the best learn by playing pick-up at a young age (not just starting on a team at age 6). Societies get good at producing soccer players by having lots of people in a concentrated area constantly play, watch, and talk about the sport from the time they are young. This is what we are lacking in the US...strong enough soccer cultures. The sport isn't regional so it's not really the majority anywhere, not enough to develop strong cultures in which young, gifted athletes can grow up and become great players. The northwest is a hotspot for soccer but we're not quite to the level yet where we're playing, watching, and discussing it at an age as young as Europeans (and as intelligently...few people in the older generation played or watched soccer, so it's a very new fanbase). We need for the sport to become really popular to watch and play (especially as a pick-up game among young kids) and a generation or so later (when the coaches and other people teaching the game, including parents, improve) we'll be producing amazing players.
GET A CLUB TEAM
Page 2 of 3
« Previous 1 2 3  Next »

Jesse Marsch has claimed a personal accolade as he's been named Coach of the Year in Austria.
RECENT POSTS
American Trio Wins 3. Liga Title
Konrad Commits To Barcelona
Matarazzo, Stuttgart Eye Promotion
EPB Returns To Action In Austria