Posted on 03/11/2009 8:56:05 AM PDT by AreaMan
Every child I know who was on a soccer team went on to “american” sports by the time they were 11.
It is a “kids and middle aged women” sport in the US.
Plus, executing an offside trap is a key part of the game. It's one of those things you don't appreciate watching soccer on TV.
Could be the Quintuple this year, first time in history. Every European game now matters. FSC has definitely improved my quality of life, in large part because I now have that cash I used to give Setanta network.
Here’s a another plug against soccer. It’s fun to play and kids like it. But kids who played baseball can play softball when they 45 years old, have bad knees, and an extra 30 lbs. They will have just as much fun as they did when they were 12. The only adults I see playing in soccer leagues are guys who never stopped playing and are stil in good shape. The adult soccer leagues in my community are primarily hispanic and the average age is in the low 20’s. The softball leagues have guys from 18 to 75.
“The thing which would perk up soccer for me is eliminating or at least greatly reducing the offside rule. A long kick to a teammate streaking to the goal to bring the score to 10-8 would be much more interesting than yet another 1-0 match.”
That’s an idea that has been tossed around the soccer powers for years. Of course, the limited scoring in soccer seems to be more annoying to those who are not soccer fans. Soccer loyalists see and appreciate more the careful strategy, ball control, positioning, fitness, and teamwork that leads up to a goal, so the game does not seem boring when no team is scoring.
For non-soccer fans, I explain that watching soccer is more like watching hockey than football or basketball. In a hockey game, there are many periods where no team scores; but to a fan who understands the complexity of hockey, that does not mean nothing interesting happened during that period.
For the record, any sport is better than no sport. Even informal activities or non-competitive leagues are great for children and adults; and the advantage to soccer is that games are easy to set up and play. My brother in law recently joined an adult soccer team because his friends needed another player. He never really played soccer before, other than occasional PE, but he is able to participate and have fun.
My favorite sport was and is rugby. That is a great game to play and fun to watch. It has the physical attributes of tackling, rucking and malling (similar to blocking), fitness requirements on par with any sport, and opportunities for certain plays to display great skill, all in an environment that requires continuous teamwork and coordination. Moreover, the excitement does not stop. And finally, not that I am thinking about it, in rugby, as with football, there is no flopping as we see in soccer and basketball. If a player tried to fake a foul or an injury, his own team would beat him up.
It’s growing in my town too. This town is so overrun by soccer that the la cross players had to make their own field in front of a school. We have two practice fields for five Pop Warner teams, while the soccer teams have access to twenty fields. It’s not right that soccer gets all the resources because the town council members like soccer.
I think that is changing as more American players are finding their way to the big European leagues. That will make pursuing soccer, as opposed to football or baseball, more enticing to US kids.
I must admit I’ve been torn between rooting for Chelsea or United, I was more for Chelsea last year. But it is a great rivalry, and I would love to see them meet again for the FA Cup or the Champions League title. The EPL is pretty much a foregone conclusion.
Soccer is for kids who can’t hit the ball.
This is just another reason why most American men will never consider soccer a real sport.
It’s the sport where everyone is ‘a winner’. That isn’t how real sports work.
And you can also be an awesome player, and play hard, and have respect of the other team and fans, even if you lose.
No, you've just described the NFL. No matter how bad a team sucks, they all get an equal share of TV revenue.
If you suck in the EPL, you get relegated to a lower division the next season.
Actually, had you read the article you would have
discovered that he a college professor and author.
You offer no rebuttal and just name calling.
Must be a soccer fan!
soccer evolved into rugby, which evolved into football.
I worship the lad who first picked up a soccer ball and ran with it, only to be tackled by his mates. There should be shrine to him somewhere.
Yeah, sure. They have been saying that for
years.
No.
Don’t confuse rules of real sports with the financial arrangements of sporting bodies. You’re lumping two separate issues together.
They are all part of the NFL. They have privately come together to determine they wanted revenue sharing that they have. I suspect it’s to ensure the stability of teams and franchises. There are some markets that innately have higher earning power than others and if they want to enter into such a sharing arrangement, then in a capitalist society they certainly can. Keeping the smaller market teams around by revenue sharing has been decided by the NFL to be a benefit to the entire league, not just to the small teams. If it didn’t make business sense it would not have been done.
But it is not the same thing as sportsmanship and why something is a real sport versus soccer.
Fair enough, but I just don’t get where this ‘everyone is a winner’ stuff came from. That is also equally applicable to any youth sport in this country, it certainly isn’t limited to soccer.
Fair enough, but I just don’t get where this ‘everyone is a winner’ stuff came from. That is also equally applicable to any youth sport in this country, it certainly isn’t limited to soccer.
“I worship the lad who first picked up a soccer ball and ran with it, only to be tackled by his mates. There should be shrine to him somewhere.”
That shrine would be the William Webb Ellis Cup, given to the champion of the Rugby Union World Cup, named after William Webb Ellis, who according to the stories first picked up a soccer ball and started running with it. He was attending the Rugby school, so his version of the rules became “Rugby Rules Football,” which became rugby, which Walter Camp, of Yale, altered into the beginning of American Football.
Every kid is a winner, and nobody is ever left behind,"
That's only in America, the rest of the world treats the game as serious competitive sport.
Blaming soccer in this regard is like blaming guns for killing people..
In fact it is AMERICAN Football that is the great bastion of Socialism, not Soccer.
Professional Soccer leagues exist world wide. The teams play everyone in their division once at home and once away in the season. The bottom two or three teams get RELEGATED to the lower division while the winning teams from below get promoted to fill their places. The winners of the Top Division are the National Champions.
What happens in the NFL?
The WORST teams get REWARDED with 1st pick in the Draft in an attempt to "redistribute the talent" and EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD (and we are talking about professional businesses here!).
In Soccer there is also a second, separate, Knock-out Cup Competition run during the season. For instance, in England, the FA Cup has over SEVEN HUNDRED teams entered in a sudden death tournament culminating in "The Cup Final", their equivalent to America's over hyped "Super Bowl".
America's attempt at a championship is to hold a domestic post season tournament between just 16 teams and then unilaterally declare the winners as "World Champions"!
Yup WORLD champions of the NATIONAL Football League...LOL!
Soccer, on the other hand, has a TRUE World Championship. It occurs every 4 years and is competed for between NATIONAL teams made up of eligible players from each country.
190 Teams compete to qualify for the WORLD CUP. The Final Tournament is played over a period of a month every 4 years. So don't tell me Soccer isn't competitive. - They don't vote their Champions like College Football does, or did, they don't hold "World Championships" where every other country in the World is excluded and they don't reward failure by redistributing the talent or by imposing wage caps. And as for boring; well, that is born out of ignorance of the game, just as it is with any sport.
But if you want to compare them, soccer is played continuously for two 45 minute periods (plus time added on for injuries) whereas Football takes three hours to play out a one hour play clock. So for two thirds of the time ABSOLUTELY NOTHING is happening. And, of that one hour play clock there is only about 12 to 15 minutes that the ball is motion, the rest of the time is run off.
So in Soccer you have an hour and a half of play in an hour and forty five minutes of elapsed time, in Football you have 15 minutes of play in three hours of elapsed time.
Seems to me that it's Football, not Soccer, that is more like Golf to watch...
Also remember NFL teams don’t have separate TV contracts, the league negotiates national contracts and splits the money among the teams.
Of course soccer really doesn’t have a “no losers” rule. Some little leagues do, but some baseball little leagues do it too. That’s got nothing to do with the sport, it’s about the pansies that organized those leagues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.