[Heathree]

Without showing disrespect to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, these countires at the moment have no one who is better then anyone in the current England team. The only exception is Gareth Bale of Wales.

About English Premier League blooding English youngsters, that is not going to happen. Most of the Premier League teams are owned by rich foreign business people who have no absolutely interest in the England national team. They just want to fill their clubs with ready made, highly skilled foreign talent to win trophies and make money by tapping into the tv broadcast revenue.

[dukecro]

I don't know if anybody mentioned over here there is online World cup stickers album
http://en.stickeralbum.fifa.com
I find it addictive waiting for new packets each day.It is not a real thing but it is free and nice time waster.
There is also Android/IPad app.

[Que enspastic]

I only just noticed Belgium's abundance of talent the other day - I rate them as a chance :

Jan Vertonghen, Mousa Dembele, Nacer Chadli all play at Spurs.

Kevin De Bruyne, Romelu Lukaku and Eden Hazard are with Chelsea.

Thibaut Courtois with Atletico Madrid

Vincent Kompany (Belgium captain) is Manchester City captain.

[Lufty]

(05-18-2014 03:19 PM)Heathree Wrote:  

Without showing disrespect to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, these countires at the moment have no one who is better then anyone in the current England team. The only exception is Gareth Bale of Wales.

About English Premier League blooding English youngsters, that is not going to happen. Most of the Premier League teams are owned by rich foreign business people who have no absolutely interest in the England national team. They just want to fill their clubs with ready made, highly skilled foreign talent to win trophies and make money by tapping into the tv broadcast revenue.

You forgot Aaron Ramsey. You could make the argument that he was the best box to box midfielder in the premier league this season.

I'd put money on the Germans all things being equal. Spain is a bit old, Italy isn't quite there. Argentina is really overrated, Messi isn't Messi in international play.

Brazil could also win it, obviously a very good team with homefield advantage. If the refs are anything like the confederation cup refs they have a huge advantage in officiating as well.

Don't sleep on the USA, our team while lacking a bunch of stand out players is deep and actually pretty good. Landon Donovan has scored more world cup goals than Messi or Ronaldo combined. Portugal lives and dies by Ronaldo so I do think that the US could sneak out of the group stage.

[Maciano]

(05-18-2014 03:19 PM)Heathree Wrote:  

Without showing disrespect to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, these countires at the moment have no one who is better then anyone in the current England team. The only exception is Gareth Bale of Wales.

About English Premier League blooding English youngsters, that is not going to happen. Most of the Premier League teams are owned by rich foreign business people who have no absolutely interest in the England national team. They just want to fill their clubs with ready made, highly skilled foreign talent to win trophies and make money by tapping into the tv broadcast revenue.

The FA can set all sorts of rules to incentivize clubs to give youngsters a chance. If it can work at Barcelona, I'm pretty sure it can work in a few Premier League clubs. Come on, now. 40 million people Spain vs. 60+ million people UK?

And I'm referring not just to the current generation, but the whole of UK's football history. The talent pool would have been much larger the past decades if there had been one UK team, not four.

Anyway, it's only hopeless if you believe it's hopeless. It really isn't.

[HeyPete]

I have a serious question for any and all soccer er football fanatics.

How good could the US team become if we had some of our best athletes go into or come up playing soccer? Instead of the rejects who can't play football, basketball, baseball or even hockey.

Would it matter?

Everyone I grew up with and now their kids quit playing soccer around age 8 or 9 when a more interesting, well-liked sports catches their eye.

[cardguy]

USA would do very well - they are not far off already.

The problem is that the MLS is run diiferently to leagues elsewhere.

You have to have big clubs that dominate every year - in order to attract the best players in the world.

The problem would be not being able to play in the Champion's League though...

[El_Superbeasto]

(05-18-2014 09:28 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  

I have a serious question for any and all soccer er football fanatics.

How good could the US team become if we had some of our best athletes go into or come up playing soccer? Instead of the rejects who can't play football, basketball, baseball or even hockey.

Would it matter?

Everyone I grew up with and now their kids quit playing soccer around age 8 or 9 when a more interesting, well-liked sports catches their eye.

Don't know exactly how good the US would be, but the athleticism would be off the charts compared to what it is now. I recently had the chance to play on a practice squad in a scrimmage against a major Div 1 NCAA squad, and I pretty regularly play hoop with/against a bunch of guys on the (american) football squad (they made one of the BCS bowl games this season). Comparing them there is a huge gap in athleticism. The (american) football players are just bigger, faster, and stronger.

I also had the misfortune in Jr High of being stuck behind a guy who went on to make an NBA squad (no minutes for me). The guy was an absolute freak athlete. He was dunking on a 10 ft regulation hoop when we were 12 years old. I remember practices being like going against a grown ass man

[Excelsior]

(05-18-2014 09:43 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

USA would do very well - they are not far off already.

The problem is that the MLS is run diiferently to leagues elsewhere.

You have to have big clubs that dominate every year - in order to attract the best players in the world.

The problem would be not being able to play in the Champion's League though...

MLS has got the right idea. The European model (pro/rel + absence of financial balance) isn't sustainable in the USA. The Americans could do it and have a couple of huge clubs, but the league they play in would die sooner rather than later (this aside from the fact that they'd have nobody to play - they're in the USA, not Western Europe). This is what happened to the American top-flight leagues that preceded MLS, and it is the lessons learned from those failures that governs MLS' financially cautious approach. They're being proven right - MLS is healthier as a top flight league than any predecessor has been and will last much longer.

[Vacancier Permanent]

The part in bold is the core reason why football has not and cannot/will not truly take hold in the US. It's a cultural thing, which the US do not have. In every other country where football is big, it's due to it being a strong cultural phenomenon. In the US, football is not even recognized as a major sport. Which baffles the mind of every one from outside of it as football is the worlds game, the most popular sport in the world.

Your comment s very telling of how football is seen and perceived by the masses there, as a sport for rejects who couldn't make it in the other US sports.

The media need to give it more importance, and promote football not as a sport for rejects but a world game. This cultural mindset that Americans and their medias have about football needs to be drastically changed for the US to develop a strong football culture. And fom there, a strong domestic league with strong football academies in clubs and schools/universities throughout the country for football to really develop there and as a result, get a truly competitive national team. Fitness is one aspect of the game. Technical ability, flair, discipline, tactical knowledge and an overall strong footballistic culture are other crucial ingredients to having a strong national team. All of which, the US are currently sorely lacking.

(05-18-2014 09:28 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  

I have a serious question for any and all soccer er football fanatics.

How good could the US team become if we had some of our best athletes go into or come up playing soccer? Instead of the rejects who can't play football, basketball, baseball or even hockey.

Would it matter?

Everyone I grew up with and now their kids quit playing soccer around age 8 or 9 when a more interesting, well-liked sports catches their eye.

[HeyPete]

Thanks for the answers.

I always want the US to do well in the World Cup, but I know it takes a huge commitment. You can't just throw a team together.

But, I think I'm like a lot of US sports fans. I will watch the US games in the World Cup -- if they are winning. If they get down 3-0 or something I'll change the channel, because I much rather watch a regular season baseball game or whatever is in season when the world cup is played, than see the US lose.

And I won't watch Belgium vs. Poland or Italy against Russia. Even if you paid me. I just can't muster any interest.

I wish the US could field a world class team, but I know I'm part of the problem.

[cardguy]

I used to laugh at Americans for not being interested in soccer.

But as I get older - and my interest wanes a little - I can see where they are coming from.

Football is so random. The manager has little ability to influence what goes on during a match in the way he does in US sports.

And it is incredibly how often luck or a bad referring decision costs the team a match. In about half the games I see - the other team could easily have won if they had had a couple of breaks which went with them and not against them.

Then there are the games that never spark to life - or in which little is at stake. They can be pretty dull. I pretty much just limit myself to the biggest football games now - since a big part of football is the tension that develops when the team knows that one mistake could destroy their entire season.

I also sense the majority of football fans are losing interest in the game. The reason I say this is because most of the discussion in football these days are about what happens off the pitch (bad decisions, racial incidents, disciplinary actions, club takeovers, new contracts, controversial statements from managers, transfer rumours, sendings off, bad injuries, players falling out with each other and the manager - and the continuing narrative about which manager is most likely to be fired next).

None of this was really in the game until about 20 years ago. And it has only gotten worse with each passing season.

It is a bad sign when what happens off the pitch is more exciting than on the pitch. Particularly when it is blatantly obvious that the footballers think the fans are stupid for being so loyal - and when they couldn't really care less about the clubs they play for.

I feel football is going the way of boxing...

[Lufty]

(05-18-2014 10:12 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(05-18-2014 09:43 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

USA would do very well - they are not far off already.

The problem is that the MLS is run diiferently to leagues elsewhere.

You have to have big clubs that dominate every year - in order to attract the best players in the world.

The problem would be not being able to play in the Champion's League though...

MLS has got the right idea. The European model (pro/rel + absence of financial balance) isn't sustainable in the USA. The Americans could do it and have a couple of huge clubs, but the league they play in would die sooner rather than later (this aside from the fact that they'd have nobody to play - they're in the USA, not Western Europe). This is what happened to the American top-flight leagues that preceded MLS, and it is the lessons learned from those failures that governs MLS' financially cautious approach. They're being proven right - MLS is healthier as a top flight league than any predecessor has been and will last much longer.

The main issue the MLS has to tackle is that in Europe the top clubs generally stay good. You rarely have the issue of having good players on bad teams for long. ( Klove on the timberwolves etc) as a player that sort of stability is great for maximizing your shot at winning over your short career. The American sport draft + trade system makes for interesting reporting and a more balanced league but when there are viable alternatives as a player it's less appealing.

[cardguy]

It is funny that America has such a left-wing socialist redistribution model when it comes to the administration of their sports.

[Excelsior]

(05-18-2014 11:48 PM)Lufty Wrote:  

The main issue the MLS has to tackle is that in Europe the top clubs generally stay good. You rarely have the issue of having good players on bad teams for long. ( Klove on the timberwolves etc) as a player that sort of stability is great for maximizing your shot at winning over your short career. The American sport draft + trade system makes for interesting reporting and a more balanced league but when there are viable alternatives as a player it's less appealing.

All this really means is that MLS teams will have a harder time attracting elite young players than major clubs in top European leagues. That's something MLS can live with. The draft/trade/salary cap/franchise system would have to be done away with entirely for any MLS team to have a chance of attracting the kind of stars necessary to rival top European sides, and that would essentially spell the end of the league (it would become insolvent very quickly). By keeping the stable system in place MLS ensures its own survival and still gives itself a chance to expand (increasing salaries later on) and attract good talent (top Euro clubs don't get all of the world's solid players).

(05-18-2014 11:51 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

It is funny that America has such a left-wing socialist redistribution model when it comes to the administration of their sports.

The irony really is that the model survives due to capitalist motives: the franchise system and the forced parity generally have been shown to be highly profitable, more so than the less stable club systems elsewhere in the world. The most heavily represented leagues in the world's top 50 most valuable sports teams are American: 30 of them in the NFL, and more in each of the NBA and MLB than in any individual European football league.

Fans like parity and stability tends to be good for a league (especially when it comes to earning the big media/sponsorship deals). Americans don't hold to their system because of its fairness, they hold to it because it is profitable. They tried alternatives (the NFL, for example, used to lack a salary cap prior to the 90's and big teams once predictably dominated the league) and abandoned them for the current "socialist" model because it mints money. Simple as that.

[Lufty]

(05-19-2014 12:50 AM)Excelsior Wrote:  

(05-18-2014 11:48 PM)Lufty Wrote:  

The main issue the MLS has to tackle is that in Europe the top clubs generally stay good. You rarely have the issue of having good players on bad teams for long. ( Klove on the timberwolves etc) as a player that sort of stability is great for maximizing your shot at winning over your short career. The American sport draft + trade system makes for interesting reporting and a more balanced league but when there are viable alternatives as a player it's less appealing.

All this really means is that MLS teams will have a harder time attracting elite young players than major clubs in top European leagues. That's something MLS can live with. The draft/trade/salary cap/franchise system would have to be done away with entirely for any MLS team to have a chance of attracting the kind of stars necessary to rival top European sides, and that would essentially spell the end of the league (it would become insolvent very quickly). By keeping the stable system in place MLS ensures its own survival and still gives itself a chance to expand (increasing salaries later on) and attract good talent (top Euro clubs don't get all of the world's solid players).

Nothing wrong with the MLS system, the league is faring well, hell a new stadium for the San Jose earthquakes is going up 5 minutes away from where I live. They have carved out a nice little niche for themselves. What I am trying to say is that the American sports system with the salary cap works well when all the talent is locked into one area. NBA and NFL players cant make comparable money anywhere else. Soccer players can, because Europeans are enjoy their model just fine. It's not like the MLS can shift to a European style model anyways, we don't have the talent or consumer interest.

That is changing though, FIFA is a very popular video game at college campuses, which exposes people to soccer. Migration from Latin America is bringing in lots of people who are passionate about the sport to the US as well. In the future the MLS might have the opportunity to become a top tier league by offering salaries and prestige better than its European rivals. Players want to to get paid, and they want to win.

[Tigre]

[MidWest]

undefined

[MidWest]

^^^^ This is the Coca Cola Spanish version:

[draguer]

Just realised I'll be in Iceland while the final is on, it's at 7pm over there rather than 7am where I usually am

[Vacancier Permanent]

The Shakira song is a bit weak. Would have been better to put her with Pitbul instead of J. Lo. Never been a fan if her.

What's the name of that girl singing in Spanish wearing the green dress in the coca cola song? She's sexy!

(05-19-2014 11:15 AM)Tigre Wrote:  

[caracal]

(05-18-2014 09:28 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  

I have a serious question for any and all soccer er football fanatics.

How good could the US team become if we had some of our best athletes go into or come up playing soccer? Instead of the rejects who can't play football, basketball, baseball or even hockey.

Would it matter?

Everyone I grew up with and now their kids quit playing soccer around age 8 or 9 when a more interesting, well-liked sports catches their eye.

Strangely enough, a lot of people that aren't American (and a lot of people that are for that matter) couldn't give a fuck if the USA is or isn't any good at soccer.

You could ask the same question of India: how good would our soccer team be if we didn't have cricket?

Or of South African: how good would our soccer team be if we didn't have rugby union?

Or of Japan: how good would our soccer team be if we didn't have sumo?

Or of Ethiopia: how good would our soccer team be if we didn't have long-distance running?

People play because they have a passion for the game and there are insanely talented people everywhere - Christian Karembu from New Caledonia is one (now retired) soccer example I can think of.

If soccer were more popular in the USA I'm sure they would have a better team, but it's not so speculating about it is irrelevant. I will acknowledge however that the USA does have training facilities and opportunities that are second to none.

[Maciano]

(05-18-2014 09:28 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  

I have a serious question for any and all soccer er football fanatics.

How good could the US team become if we had some of our best athletes go into or come up playing soccer? Instead of the rejects who can't play football, basketball, baseball or even hockey.

Would it matter?

Everyone I grew up with and now their kids quit playing soccer around age 8 or 9 when a more interesting, well-liked sports catches their eye.

LOL. If the US had its best talent focused on football, it'd be like the Olympics basketball tournament. There'd be very little competition for them. Still, Russia is a big country and a big football country too and they've got a very poor track record in FIFA world cups.

What's key for the US is that you should have a good domestic league, not necessarily as good as La Liga, Bundesliga or Premier League, but at the level of France or Russia. Then, US players would learn a lot about technique & certain skills. I always have the feeling Americans play football as Europeans (minus France!) play rugby -- saturday entertainment for well-to-do kids.

Take Ajax & Barcelona, for example, they select kids from 8 years old and train them all the way up to 18, 4 days a week for long hours, with the constant risk that they can be send away every year -- even then, they feel privileged to have been part of that program! It's Spartan-like how these kids get educated in football skills. I really don't think that the segment that plays football in the US has this attitude.

If football in the US would become more of a working-class sport, however, they'll be world-beaters for sure. But, why would Americans want that? You have your own sport traditions and I think that's actually a lot richer.

[funkyzeit]

I'm obviously rooting for my country and Croatia, but I'll put my money on Germany.

[JJ Roberts]

Surprised to see Donavan left out of the US WC squad.