Manga News: Check out these new manga (5/18/15 - 5/24/15).
New Forums: Visit the new forums for Boku no Hero Academia!
Forum News: Cast your votes to determine the best parent in the Anime Showdown.
I don't really know how many people go to NHL games anyway, and with all the lockouts that it's had the last 15 years, it's been losing more and more viewership. Plus, unlike how you can watch NFL, MLB, and NBA games for free, all NHL games must be paid for with a special package, like how Sky charges an arm and a leg for English viewers to watch the Premier League. There are sports packages that the tv corporations sell to show you all of the games per week (for actually very decent prices, usually), but we get a certain number of games per week free, usually dictated by the area you live in. For example, every week, unless it's a special game like the Patriots vs Rams in London this year, I get to watch the Patriots play free of charge. I think the fact that NHL isn't free at all also hurts the viewership.
Gary, imagine if LeBron were a CF. A nice big, strong target man who has great movement.
The US has probably five decent players in the world, Tim Howard, Brad Friedel, Oguchi Onyewu, Dempsey, and Landon Donovan (even though he's horribly overrated by American commentators). Without any great offensive or defensive players, we can't do anything on the world stage, so there's no way to really bring national attention to football.
---------- Post added at 12:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:38 AM ----------
Perhaps Gary's right and I am too jaded. :P
I do know that in the last six years (basically since the 2006 World Cup), football coverage in the US has really expanded. We've gotten to see more football than every before, and as Gary said, the idea of watching a Premier League match on a Saturday morning would've been unbelievable 10 or so years ago.
It's a topic for another thread, but the NHL is free. They have a game of the week every weekend and are broadcast on local channels. That's how the Capitals are treated here anyways
You can't watch every game for free in any sport. They have packages for all four of them.
---------- Post added at 12:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:47 AM ----------
We do have a pyramid system here for purposes of organizing teams into different tiers by the USSF, the issue is there isn't promotion or delegation between said tiers.
Yeah, I know, I mentioned that, but free games do help viewership and once you've watched it, you'd be more inclined to buy packages.
A 6'8" target man? Assuming he could stay healthy and would have the coordination then yes...that would be frightening.
We have many decent players, that's sort of an exaggeration. You don't play professionally unless you're decent. I think you meant a "world-class" player, to that I would agree. Thought Gooch hasn't been much for the national team...but whatever. I'd also include Michael Bradley in that list, though he doesn't have the resume the rest have.
---------- Post added at 01:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 AM ----------
Yeah, that's why I said it's key for it to get on Broadcast TV. It has happened before, but it is not on a regular basis. I think the PL premiers have been on FOX the last two years and occasionally you'll see a PL match on FOX on Saturday or Sunday. NBC now has some national MLS rights I think for NBC Sports, so maybe they'll end up on NBC as well.
I'm not sure if on what end it would be on the cause and effect flowchart, but the national team getting better and maintaining a good international ranking would do a lot for the popularity here. I think it would be easier for the sport to gain more attention if this happens. I don't see the league getting better on it's own merit.
I think LeBron would be able to stay healthy.
I don't consider any American player truly "world-class," although Dempsey would be the closest to that moniker of any of our players.
Onyewu has had some success on the club level, especially this season where he's been a big part of why Malaga won their CL group. Michael Bradley plays for Roma, right?
Yeah, it is. FOX has been starting to get more games and they do have Fox Soccer as well. I think that they showed a Liverpool match or two (hours after the original broadcast) on FOX this year. There's also Bein Sports which shows a lot of English and Spanish football, as well as some Ligue 1 stuff. Right now, they're showing a Championship match from last weekend, I believe.
The national team has been getting worse, so it hasn't been helping anything. :P
I don't know if we'd ever have a true pyramid system though. Even if the structure's already in place, a pyramid system isn't used in other American sports, so...
I mean world-class as in able to play in the best leagues and have success. They've all done that. And yeah, Bradley plays for Roma. He used to play for Mönchengladbach, was on load to Aston, played for Chievo and then signed with Roma this year.
That's not entirely true. When Klinsmann first came on as manager they had some growing pains while he was figuring out the talent and scheme. But they've had some historic success with beating Italy and Mexico away...friendlies, I know. But it's still something. There not at the same level they were during last WC Qualifying though.
---------- Post added at 01:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:47 AM ----------
I would watch the Premier League over College Football every time. I just don't care about it at all. When it's two juggernauts playing each other, it might be a different story. But I don't care to watch Alabama play Louisiana-Monroe. College Football is the biggest joke going IMO.
---------- Post added at 01:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 AM ----------
There are a lot of varied theories on football development. But what is generally agreed on is that the technical aspects of a footballer have to be developed early on. Between childhood until the early onset of puberty. The theory goes that if a child doesnt have the technical aspects for professional football by the ages of 13-14 they will not become professional footballers. There are very few exceptions to this rule (and none that I know of). That is why Academies take these kids in at 6+. The best academies have their talents from really early on and begin developing that. So you have the situation in which if someone can be a footballer, its practically decided before the reach highschool which is when the American system really starts to kick in. Football has to try and reach these kids really early on. Here is Wenger speaking on the what I just described (by way if analogy). He explains it in more general detail.
---------- Post added at 07:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:02 AM ----------
---------- Post added at 02:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 AM ----------
I don't think there's any age requirements, no. Just look at Freddy Adu. They made a big deal out of that because it wouldn't happen in any other sport, even without rules excluding minors.
Well, that's not how I view world-class. If you're counting that, then we have a good number, but none of them are truly top players.
---------- Post added at 12:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 AM ----------
What do you think? Do you think not sending off Sunderland's player in the first minute was the right decision? It meant that there was still everything to play for instead of instantly handing the match to Chelsea.
In today's match, in the first minute, Hazard was clean through, but was yanked back off the ball (and then Mignolet slide tackled him), but Bardsley wasn't called for any foul. It would've been a professional foul and a penalty, so the match would've been ended immediately and then Chelsea would've racked up a rugby score. It was pretty clearly a professional foul, but the referee Halsey made the decision not to award anything. It really seemed as if he didn't want to just end a match in the first minute. Perhaps there's a new mandate not to bring matches down to 11v10, which a lot of the matches this season have ended up as, I'm not sure, but it was a very odd decision by Halsey.
Moreover, there were a bunch of very cynical stamps and kicks from the Sunderland players on our AMs which went largely unpunished. Mata had his ankle stood on and then was kicked in the leg, but not even a foul was given either time. I think there was a kick on Oscar which was called for a yellow, but there were just some shockingly awful decisions by Halsey. Gardner picked up a yellow and committed a foul deserving of a second yellow, but Halsey did not want to send anyone off. I think that there's a problem when a ref doesn't want to make match-changing decisions, even if they are warranted. Halsey did rightly award a penalty when Ramires was tackled from behind and completely upended, so he wasn't all wrong.
My feelings on questionable refereeing weren't helped when Howard Webb bought into Cazorla's dive and awarded Arsenal a penalty, which Arteta converted.
What are all of your thoughts on this matter?
I'm gonna throw this out of no where, but I actually like NY red Bulls (because Angel played there and later Henry).
Messi breaks the record even with the bruise, as he gets goals 85 and 86 today.
Not every great player has won a WC. It's true that quite a lot of them have, but plenty haven't. Even if you can score goals, if the players behind you can't defend and leak goals like a sieve, it's not your fault if you can't bring a victory home for your country.