- 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: This guy makes an excellent point about our talent pool
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:02 am to ScoopAndScore
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:02 am to ScoopAndScore
quote:
Also, what makes soccer different than the big 3 American sports
Actually the mental approach playing football and soccer is pretty similar. Different game sure, but you need the same kind of focus and organization and team unity to get anything done. Down the road I think it'll be the unique character of typical American athlete will be an advantage rather than a hindrance.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:02 am to ScoopAndScore
our team has under 6' players on it, including J. Green.
History is replete with nba/nfl stars that picked up their respective sports late in life (h.s. age). Soccer? not so much. The sooner someone master dribbling, ball control and passing, the better off they are.
History is replete with nba/nfl stars that picked up their respective sports late in life (h.s. age). Soccer? not so much. The sooner someone master dribbling, ball control and passing, the better off they are.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:10 am to dgnx6
I think another thing helping soccer's increasing popularity is America's increasing awareness of the physical and mental risk that American football puts on young kids (concussions, etc.) I can see more parents pushing kids into soccer and away from football.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:34 am to cwil177
quote:Do you know what objectively means? The only objective measure in a soccer match is the final score. By that standard Belgium is objectively better than the U.S. My opinion regarding the superior athleticism of the Belgians is a subjective observation, the same as your opinion that the Americans are one of the more athletic teams.
Which teams currently still in the cup are objectively more athletic than we are?
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:41 am to dgnx6
Plus when all us fans in our 20s start having kids we need to push soccer on them. I didn't know what soccer was until I was 7. My parent enjoyed watching but still they know nothing of the sport. My first sport was baseball, we are brought up playing sports with our hands. My father didn't kick a soccer ball around with me, we played catch.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 10:47 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
Do you know what objectively means? The only objective measure in a soccer match is the final score. By that standard Belgium is objectively better than the U.S. My opinion regarding the superior athleticism of the Belgians is a subjective observation, the same as your opinion that the Americans are one of the more athletic teams.
We may be athletic, bit just watch the south American and central American teams. They looked much quicker moving around the pitch than us and the European teams. Usually they are much smaller in stature. In years past its been hard for me to watch us play and watch the MLS. The game just moves so slow. This cycle we seemed to match up well in all physical aspects of the game. Maybe credit Jurgen for preparing the fitness of our team. Idk.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:00 am to inelishaitrust
quote:
MLS has to make a massive investment in player salaries. They've been able to stay afloat by deflating the cost of labor, but to attract the athletes we need to win the world cup with, we need to pay major league money.
The guys we need to win the World Cup with wouldn't be playing in MLS. It's not realistic now or in the foreseeable future.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:10 am to RandySavage
quote:
The guys we need to win the World Cup with wouldn't be playing in MLS. It's not realistic now or in the foreseeable future.
This is a classic case of treating the symptom, not the disease.
Yes, currently to have better players on the USMNT, we need Americans to be playing in Europe.
HOWEVER, all the best current Americans in European leagues were on this World Cup roster. And we went out in the round of 16, because the only elite European player we have is Tim Howard. How many does Belgium have? Germany? France? Brazil? Argentina??
In order to actually compete to WIN the World Cup, MLS must become a stronger domestic league. There is no other way for the USA to become better. That's the disease we need to treat.
Now, if MLS becomes stronger, then we will send more players to Europe. As we send more players to Europe, it becomes more likely that some will become elite players.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 2:44 pm to cwil177
Much of this guy's blog post strikes me as knee jerk reaction to Fellaini winning a lot of headers and Lukaku having such an impact (after 3 bad group stage matches that got him benched).
We don't really need more freak athletes. What we desperately need are simply more technically skilled players of all shapes and sizes we already have.
Our Jozy is already closer to Lukaku than our Zusi is to Hazard, our Bedoya is to Mertins etc etc
That's our problem.
Unfortunately, I don't see that convincing 13 year old athletes to play soccer really addresses that gap at all.
The players that are that technically brilliant are already prodigies well before that. They've been mastering a Totti backheel since they were in kindergarten like the kids outside my window here in Rome.k
We don't really need more freak athletes. What we desperately need are simply more technically skilled players of all shapes and sizes we already have.
Our Jozy is already closer to Lukaku than our Zusi is to Hazard, our Bedoya is to Mertins etc etc
That's our problem.
Unfortunately, I don't see that convincing 13 year old athletes to play soccer really addresses that gap at all.
The players that are that technically brilliant are already prodigies well before that. They've been mastering a Totti backheel since they were in kindergarten like the kids outside my window here in Rome.k
Posted on 7/3/14 at 3:12 pm to wm72
quote:Agreed.
The players that are that technically brilliant are already prodigies well before that. They've been mastering a Totti backheel since they were in kindergarten like the kids outside my window here in Rome.k
Sure we can look at kids as they get older and say "you're not gonna make it in x sport, why don't you give soccer a try" but is that kid going to be successful enough to make an impact for us on the world stage? Highly unlikely.
Sure, it may help with the popularity, but like you said, most of these kids in other countries have developed amazing ball control and touch and tricks from practice since they were able to walk. That's something that's difficult to replicate when just picking up the game as you get older. Most kids aren't gifted enough with that kind of coordination, not even taking into account tactics and being able to pick out passes while maintaining good control of the ball.
I know this could totally take the thread into a different direction, but along with the argument that kids focus too much on one sport and need to keep a variety playing multiple sports, soccer needs to make that push to be one of the other sports kids are playing with football, basketball, baseball, or whatever. It offers something that no other sport does in adding the coordination and motor control aspect with their legs. And then it would at least be a little more open for kids to say they can stick with soccer rather than pursue a career in one of the other big 3.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 3:53 pm to wm72
quote:Where were American kids supposed to have seen a Totti backhell to even think about trying to master? Before the internet and YouTube our kids weren't exposed to the ball control skills of a Ronaldinho. That is starting to change, but it takes time. I see American kids today with ball skills that were unimaginable when I was a kid. The U.S. will produce its prodigies, and they will come in all shapes and sizes, including the freak athletes.
The players that are that technically brilliant are already prodigies well before that. They've been mastering a Totti backheel since they were in kindergarten like the kids outside my window here in Rome.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 3:54 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
The U.S. will produce its prodigies, and they will come in all shapes and sizes, including the freak athletes.
This is what we all want.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 7:45 pm to crazy4lsu
When is our prodigy coming though? God when!! Maybe he'll never come..... what about China? A nation of a BILLION people and going by the Olympics, China and the USA are basicially the top athletic countries in the world now but China has yet to produce someone as good as even Landon Donovan, let alone Messi. What about India or Canada or the former USSR?
ETA: I think the USSR had a Euro title and India is athletic, they've just gone all in on Cricket.
ETA: I think the USSR had a Euro title and India is athletic, they've just gone all in on Cricket.
This post was edited on 7/3/14 at 7:46 pm
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:09 pm to Tiger Phil
quote:
In order to actually compete to WIN the World Cup, MLS must become a stronger domestic league
Strong domestic league has little bearing on our WC chances. Period.
Look at England and the EPL. The Prem is an incredibly strong domestic league, so obviously England is still...oh wait, no.
Look at France. Ligue 1 is fairly blah as far as power rankings go so France was bounced in the group stages right? Right?
Does Colombia even have a domestic league? I bet they didn't even qualify.
Brazil's domestic league has never had much in the way of international standing, so Brazil must be an after thought when it comes to World Cups. Right guys? Right?
The league means DICK ALL. Don't get me wrong, I would love for the MLS to improve in quality (and I think it will) but whether or not some kid practices his back heel in an alley because he's a fan of the Seattle Sounders or Bayern Munich means dick all. The interest has been growing by leaps and bounds. The understanding of the game, likewise.
It just takes time. The growth of the sport here in the last 20 years has been absolutely tremendous and it is going to continue, with or without the MLS.
Don't get me wrong, having a domestic league helps the game in the States. But it is so not necessary to create a talent pool.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:22 pm to Lordofwrath88
quote:
When is our prodigy coming though? God when!! Maybe he'll never come..... what about China? A nation of a BILLION people and going by the Olympics, China and the USA are basicially the top athletic countries in the world now but China has yet to produce someone as good as even Landon Donovan, let alone Messi. What about India or Canada or the former USSR?
Who knows if China will ever get their act together. The population and size problems of the U.S. are multiplied in China. They've only had a professional league since 1994, which is contrasted with the US, which has had many professional leagues since the sport was introduced a century ago. They do love their soccer there though.
quote:
India
Same problems with China in terms of organization. And soccer is clearly the second sport there. Everyone loves cricket.
quote:
Canada
Canada already produced Owen Hargreaves, though he chose to play for England. They will piggy back off the MLS's success and build a nice team in a cycle or two.
quote:
USSR
Are you serious? Russia's produced plenty of players that could play for Europe's top sides, but have chosen to spend most of their career in Russia, since the money there is as good as they could get anywhere else. They just don't produce in big tournaments, especially recently.
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:25 pm to AUin02
quote:
Does Colombia even have a domestic league? I bet they didn't even qualify.
Jtapdancin´C
Posted on 7/3/14 at 11:33 pm to AUin02
quote:
Brazil's domestic league has never had much in the way of international standing
Never? Brazil's national league was one of the strongest in the world for a long time.
quote:
The league means DICK ALL.
Wrong. The incentive for player development rests with the clubs in the leagues. The clubs want to win trophies, thus they either invest in the youth or go abroad and buy talent. We need a healthy domestic league which produces talent and not a league that goes abroad and buys the best players. France's team does well even though Ligue 1 is average because the league develops talent that is sold off, and the money made is reinvested in youth development. England struggles because the money they get from massive TV contracts goes to the arms race within the league, and not to the long term goal of youth development. So the leagues are massively important.
quote:
But it is so not necessary to create a talent pool.
This is one of the worst statements I've ever seen on this board.
Posted on 7/4/14 at 1:35 am to AUin02
quote:
Don't get me wrong, having a domestic league helps in the states, But it is so not necessary to create a talent pool
My jimmies have hardly been more rustled. You posit that a domestic league is unimportant for national team growth, but how do you incentivize playing the sport without a league? Hey kid, come play this sport and if you're lucky, you can play it on the other side of the world.
Where do you think James Rodriguez started his professional career? Envigado in Colombia? Neymar? Santos in Brazil. Clint Dempsey, Jozy Altidore, Tim Howard, Michael Bradley? All started their careers in MLS. Alejandro Bedoya is the only USMNT player born and bred in America that didn't start his career in MLS from this world cup. He started in the Swedish league, which is on par or weaker. But the league doesn't matter? Maybe bring a little reality to the table next time.
You can't convince professional quality athletes to play a sport professionally that you can't get rich playing in America. Are we sending boatloads of Americans to India to play cricket? To New Zealand to play Rugby? No. They're playing big league baseball and football at home instead.
Posted on 7/4/14 at 1:36 am to AUin02
quote:
Don't get me wrong, having a domestic league helps in the states, But it is so not necessary to create a talent pool
My jimmies have hardly been more rustled. You posit that a domestic league is unimportant for national team growth, but how do you incentivize playing the sport without a league? Hey kid, come play this sport and if you're lucky, you can play it on the other side of the world.
Where do you think James Rodriguez started his professional career? Envigado in Colombia? Neymar? Santos in Brazil. Clint Dempsey, Jozy Altidore, Tim Howard, Michael Bradley? All started their careers in MLS. Alejandro Bedoya is the only USMNT player born and bred in America that didn't start his career in MLS from this world cup. He started in the Swedish league, which is on par or weaker. But the league doesn't matter? Maybe bring a little reality to the table next time.
You can't convince professional quality athletes to play a sport professionally that you can't get rich playing in America. Are we sending boatloads of Americans to India to play cricket? To New Zealand to play Rugby? No. They're playing big league baseball and football at home instead.
Posted on 7/4/14 at 6:30 am to inelishaitrust
quote:
We lost them to the dream of the NFL and NBA. We lose them to the NCAA.
I mostly agree, but he's off a little bit. I know it's just pictures in his article, but soccer isn't losing guys to D-1A schools like NC State and Miami. The guys soccer needs to get are those who are playing D-1AA, D2, and even D3 ball. Just start plucking a few of those guys every year (meaning, get to all athletes early and provide soccer as a viable option), and we'll be dominant.
But I've had this same discussion in the rugby community for years, as well.
Popular
Back to top


0





