- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Which country wins a World Cup next...USA or England?
Posted on 8/2/15 at 5:18 pm to mynamebowl
Posted on 8/2/15 at 5:18 pm to mynamebowl
quote:
I understand you guys get sick of this conversation, but it's an interesting topic and fun to discuss for those folks who don't frequent this board all the time and have to look at this same topic over and over again.
I'm not really among those that's easily bothered by any conversation on this board since any topic can be interesting depending on the level of discussion.
I am skeptical that many of the same physical traits which American and basketball absolutely demand aren't merely a bonus for elite soccer players at best and, at wort, actually an impediment (where their ability to dominate in lower age groups with physical gifts actually keeps them from developing technically).
I think American football and basketball rules have evolved to accentuate the athletic marvel whereas international soccer has not.
I think Brazil can be a particularly interesting example as I brought up in the previous post. Since Brazil is a huge country like the USA and also has a wide range of elite "athletes", Brazilian clubs have increasingly valued physical attributes in developmental stages because these players tend to bring quicker cash returns from international clubs. The effect of this practice has actually been an overall negative for their NT and likely due to marginalizing some of the skinny, short kids that have turned into superstars in the past. It's somewhat similar to the criticism many have of England's development dynamic.
The USA would do well, in my opinion, to not follow the English down that particular road, but they likely will.
3
Posted on 8/2/15 at 5:32 pm to wm72
quote:
The effect of this practice has actually been an overall negative for their NT and likely due to marginalizing some of the skinny, short kids that have turned into superstars in the past. It's somewhat similar to the criticism many have of England's development dynamic.
The USA would do well, in my opinion, to not follow the English down that particular road, but they likely will.
That's been our "model" (if you can call it that) for some time, but I think with the improvement in our academy system you are starting to see more appreciation of the technical players rather than the athletic man child who outruns all the other 13 year olds to the ball because he has the body of a grown man.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 7:51 pm to wm72
I have not read the rest of this thread, but I don't think the United States will ever win the World Cup.
England may at some point... therefore I think the answer has to be England.
England may at some point... therefore I think the answer has to be England.
Posted on 8/2/15 at 10:29 pm to wm72
quote:
I am skeptical that many of the same physical traits which American and basketball absolutely demand aren't merely a bonus for elite soccer players at best and, at wort, actually an impediment (where their ability to dominate in lower age groups with physical gifts actually keeps them from developing technically)
Agreed. Skilled, clever players with more technical ability have an advantage because of the way the modern game is played and refereed. These players are protected to a degree. And that's the way it should be. The more skilled, technical, clever players SHOULD be rewarded because those attributes (at an elite level) are more rare than brute strength or straight line speed.
But it's not like America has a dearth of skilled, technical, clever athletes. It's not the 80's anymore. Have you guys watched football or basketball lately? Those dudes ooze foot skills, change of direction, etc. The NFL and NBA are basically different sports than what they used to be, style wise. Smaller, quicker players are able to be utilized more now than ever because of either rule changes or different philosophies that have been introduced.
The whole point of what I'm trying to argue is moot, really. This hypothetical scenario of America devoting the majority of it's sporting resources to soccer is never going to happen. But we do have enough people, diversity, and money to make it work, if done correctly.
I'm a little older now and out of touch with high school and college aged kids, but it seems like it's actually cool to play soccer now. This was not the case when I was younger. And I'm not old, I'm 30. The strides the sport has made here in a short amount of time have been incredible.
Posted on 8/4/15 at 1:43 pm to DoreonthePlains
quote:
as has been pointed out ad nauseum when the "our best athletes don't play soccer" argument comes up, soccer requires a different type of athlete than most basketball and football players. You can tell just by looking at the build of the average soccer player compared to the other two.
The "superior athletes" premise is commonly presented in a flimsy manner. I believe the suggestion is far more nuanced than, "can you imagine if Lebron or Kobe were soccer players?"
Ibrahimovic has excelled as a 6'5" physical outlier. In addition to his excellent agility and footwork, his size and athleticism are uncommon and valued weapons that have contributed to his being one of the best strikers in the world. There is a place for athletic freaks in the world of soccer.
Saying the USMNT has a problem with skill and not athleticism is ignoring the fact that our best athletes still aren't playing soccer. Along with increasing the attention to developing skilled players, we should also work to bring in our best athletes. That's how the US can go from being competitive on the world stage, to dominant. In basketball, other countries have caught up and, in some instances, passed the US with regard to skill. But no one in the world produces skilled super-athletes like the US. It's what sets the US apart. It's what sets LeBron apart. The skill along with unrivaled athleticism.
It may take decades for the US to build the academy system to a level comparable to that of top European academies. But we don't have to wait years to reach out to black, underprivileged youth and get them involved in the game. It's a numbers game, and there will always be top-tier athletes who don't have the skill (Altidore), but you need more Altidores and Yedlins in the pool to increase the probability of producing skilled top-tier athletes.
You say football and basketball players aren't built for soccer. When considering the extremes, you may be correct. Maybe LeBron and Kobe are too tall and don't have the coordination. But looking at NFL and NBA rosters, you won't have any trouble finding strong, quick and coordinated athletes measuring 6'5"-200 lb (Ibrahimovic) or 6'2"-200 lb (Drogba).
Posted on 8/4/15 at 1:57 pm to Pecker
quote:
Saying the USMNT has a problem with skill and not athleticism is ignoring the fact that our best athletes still aren't playing soccer.
Even if our "best" athletes played soccer, they wouldn't have the requisite skill to compete with the best in the sport. That's the point. All the athleticism nonsense doesn't make a lick of a difference until we can develop more technical players.
quote:
But no one in the world produces skilled super-athletes like the US.
What?
You're joking, right?
Posted on 8/4/15 at 2:07 pm to cwil177
Well you have to get those players involved. It may not matter right now, but why would you willingly choose inferior athletes to develop? Tell me how that's logical.
No one in the world produces skilled, super-athletes in basketball like the US. Do you disagree?
No one in the world produces skilled, super-athletes in basketball like the US. Do you disagree?
Posted on 8/4/15 at 2:14 pm to cwil177
This debate is a dog chasing its own tail.
Posted on 8/4/15 at 2:19 pm to StraightCashHomey21
It's pretty straightforward:
1. Our young players need better technical training and development in a professional environment.
2. Our best young athletes aren't involved in the game. We should find better ways to get them involved.
Disregarding our best athletes is naiive.
1. Our young players need better technical training and development in a professional environment.
2. Our best young athletes aren't involved in the game. We should find better ways to get them involved.
Disregarding our best athletes is naiive.
This post was edited on 8/4/15 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 8/4/15 at 2:20 pm to Pecker
quote:
1. Our young players need better technical training and development in a professional environment.
This is the only thing I care about right now.
Posted on 8/4/15 at 2:30 pm to Pecker
quote:
1. Our young players need better technical training and development in a professional environment.
Then they need to go to Europe and MLS academies need to get better.
quote:
Our best young athletes aren't involved in the game. We should find better ways to get them involved.
Disregarding our best athletes is naiive.
they don't need to be
if you played soccer you damn well know a team of superior athletes can have circles played around them.
Once again we are more athletic than most the teams we play. Its about taking the pool we have an developing them technically and how to think like a soccer player.
Its about finding those kids with amazing touch, vision, ability to place a ball on the dime and how to make runs.
The best players who do those things are not always the best athletes around. Its about scouting kids with those natural talents and then going from there.
This post was edited on 8/4/15 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 8/4/15 at 6:41 pm to StraightCashHomey21
Maybe we just fundamentally disagree about the athletic abilities of Kyle Beckerman, Brad Evans, Chris Wondolowski, Ventura Alvarado and Aron Johansson. A group of players that had trouble dealing with the pace and physicality of Haiti, Jamaica and Panama.
Are you under the impression that these qualities are innate? These are qualities children develop, they aren't born with them. Why would you want to take the pool we have and develop them technically? As opposed to taking a pool of even better athletes and developing them technically? What you're saying isn't logical.
A big part of natural athleticism is coordination and reflexes, which translates into technical ability after it is molded through years of training.
Soccer-dominated countries might not be trotting out Calvin Johnson, Chris Paul and Russell Westbrook, but their best players are often their best athletes in terms of speed, endurance, coordination, and agility. These attributes are just as influenced by genetics as height, size, and leaping ability, and American athletes who score the highest in them have historically been more likely to focus on basketball, football, or baseball at an early age than soccer. Landon Donovan has been our best player in the last 10 years and he was also the best pound-for-pound athlete in our pool. He is also one of the most technically sound players the USA has produced despite getting below-average training for most of his youth development. Natural athleticism makes up for a lot.
American soccer fans seem to think that downplaying the importance of athleticism makes them sound enlightened.
quote:
It's about taking the pool we have an developing them technically and how to think like a soccer player. Its about finding those kids with amazing touch, vision, ability to place a ball on the dime and how to make runs.
The best players who do those things aren not always the best athletes around. It's about scouting kids with those natural talents and then going from there.
Are you under the impression that these qualities are innate? These are qualities children develop, they aren't born with them. Why would you want to take the pool we have and develop them technically? As opposed to taking a pool of even better athletes and developing them technically? What you're saying isn't logical.
A big part of natural athleticism is coordination and reflexes, which translates into technical ability after it is molded through years of training.
Soccer-dominated countries might not be trotting out Calvin Johnson, Chris Paul and Russell Westbrook, but their best players are often their best athletes in terms of speed, endurance, coordination, and agility. These attributes are just as influenced by genetics as height, size, and leaping ability, and American athletes who score the highest in them have historically been more likely to focus on basketball, football, or baseball at an early age than soccer. Landon Donovan has been our best player in the last 10 years and he was also the best pound-for-pound athlete in our pool. He is also one of the most technically sound players the USA has produced despite getting below-average training for most of his youth development. Natural athleticism makes up for a lot.
American soccer fans seem to think that downplaying the importance of athleticism makes them sound enlightened.
Posted on 8/4/15 at 7:14 pm to Pecker
quote:
Soccer-dominated countries are FULL of major athletes as per this country´s definition, when young, and they slowly get weeded out (with few exceptions), as they advance in age
Posted on 8/4/15 at 8:02 pm to Pecker
quote:
American soccer fans seem to think that downplaying the importance of athleticism makes them sound enlightened.
No, we realize that the problem isn't athleticism. Our team is plenty athletic. The problem is that our developmental system is failing our players. I have no doubt that we have players with plenty of potential who are already playing. We have had a lot of players peak late in their careers. They simply were not being developed early enough to have long "primes". Adding more athletes might give us someone world class eventually, but it will be more by luck than anything.
The rage amongst most soccer fans when people say "we need our best athletes to play soccer" isn't that we don't want more people to play soccer. We just realize it's pretty futile to hope that is effective. We realize the real need is for more effective developmental programs.
Posted on 8/5/15 at 1:35 am to Pecker
quote:
Maybe we just fundamentally disagree about the athletic abilities of Kyle Beckerman, Brad Evans, Chris Wondolowski
As much as I hate wondo you do realize he was a fricking track star.
Track athletes are some of the best in the world
quote:
Soccer-dominated countries might not be trotting out Calvin Johnson, Chris Paul and Russell Westbrook, but their best players are often their best athletes in terms of speed, endurance, coordination, and agility. These attributes are just as influenced by genetics as height, size, and leaping ability, and American athletes who score the highest in them have historically been more likely to focus on basketball, football, or baseball at an early age than soccer. Landon Donovan has been our best player in the last 10 years and he was also the best pound-for-pound athlete in our pool. He is also one of the most technically sound players the USA has produced despite getting below-average training for most of his youth development. Natural athleticism makes up for a lot.
American soccer fans seem to think that downplaying the importance of athleticism makes them sound enlightened.
Um they play rugby or shite like handball as well. In those soccer mad countries.
This post was edited on 8/5/15 at 1:39 am
Posted on 8/5/15 at 5:22 am to StraightCashHomey21
I think England is closer in terms of their current talent, but I don't think they'll win one any time soon. They have too much expectation with too little to back it up. Rooney is still the biggest playmaker they have, and frankly, any truly dangerous player who can create a bit of magic alongside him would have led to far more success. They can produce World Class talents like Rooney, but they always stick some flavor of the month talent there with him. They just don't have a real vision when it comes to the game and rely too much on "golden boys" to make things happen.
I think we'll win one before they do barring some renaissance in their national side. I am against the notion of "What if our best athletes played soccer!" because I believe that most examples people use wouldn't ever make it. I also believe that our youth system won't be our saving grace alone even though it improving can only help. I think what'll put us over the edge is the opinion swaying on the sport overall in this country. There's a vast difference between now and 10 years ago. I remember being alone for 99% of the 2006 World Cup with most people who I mentioned it to making fun of me. Now, almost everyone I know enjoys the sport outside of a couple hardasses I know who just hate it using the same old bullshite excuses of it being gay and not a sport.
I think that what we've missed out on a lot of times aren't the best athletes in current sports. I think it's the kids who could have been excellent footballers who were pushed away from the sport or never exposed to it because of the way it was viewed for so long. I know a lot of guys who are pretty decent pickup players who never really played much organized football outside of when they were pretty young. They're not amazing, and talking about things like formation or positioning isn't ever going to be their strong suit. Still, I wonder how good they'd be had they spent more time playing. Hell, I wonder if I would have had more options had I been able to really seriously give it a go instead of just casual play.
I think that we shouldn't be looking for the next Lebron or Kobe or Westbrook to get them to play the game. I think we need to be getting kids playing and creating viable paths for them to pursue the sport. Once the game is truly accepted here, the numbers alone will produce talent. We just need a lot of kids playing and something for them to really aspire to as an American playing the game.
I think we'll win one before they do barring some renaissance in their national side. I am against the notion of "What if our best athletes played soccer!" because I believe that most examples people use wouldn't ever make it. I also believe that our youth system won't be our saving grace alone even though it improving can only help. I think what'll put us over the edge is the opinion swaying on the sport overall in this country. There's a vast difference between now and 10 years ago. I remember being alone for 99% of the 2006 World Cup with most people who I mentioned it to making fun of me. Now, almost everyone I know enjoys the sport outside of a couple hardasses I know who just hate it using the same old bullshite excuses of it being gay and not a sport.
I think that what we've missed out on a lot of times aren't the best athletes in current sports. I think it's the kids who could have been excellent footballers who were pushed away from the sport or never exposed to it because of the way it was viewed for so long. I know a lot of guys who are pretty decent pickup players who never really played much organized football outside of when they were pretty young. They're not amazing, and talking about things like formation or positioning isn't ever going to be their strong suit. Still, I wonder how good they'd be had they spent more time playing. Hell, I wonder if I would have had more options had I been able to really seriously give it a go instead of just casual play.
I think that we shouldn't be looking for the next Lebron or Kobe or Westbrook to get them to play the game. I think we need to be getting kids playing and creating viable paths for them to pursue the sport. Once the game is truly accepted here, the numbers alone will produce talent. We just need a lot of kids playing and something for them to really aspire to as an American playing the game.
This post was edited on 8/5/15 at 6:47 am
Posted on 8/5/15 at 6:25 am to Dijkstra
I enjoyed reading that and I agree with pretty much everything you said here, but I do want to point out that the past tense of lead is led, not lead. Lead is a metal. 
Posted on 8/5/15 at 6:33 am to Pecker
quote:
Kyle Beckerman, Brad Evans, Chris Wondolowski, Ventura Alvarado and Aron Johansson. A group of players that had trouble dealing with the pace and physicality of Haiti, Jamaica and Panama
Why did you include Johannsson in that group? He played pretty well all tournament.
Posted on 8/5/15 at 6:35 am to Pecker
quote:
Landon Donovan has been our best player in the last 10 years and he was also the best pound-for-pound athlete in our pool.
Strongly disagree with you there.
Posted on 8/5/15 at 6:45 am to cwil177
It's been a long night of programming out here. I'm usually on the ball with those sorts of things, but once it gets late, I'll start doing things like that. I'll see "lead to" and think "Oh, that's right!" without realizing it's past tense.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News