So all you want is to have the last word to prove your point of view is the right one?
USA reaction to World Cup success so far?
7 of 7
Not bothered, my points stand up for themselves comfortably, despite having been challenged on a virtually endless basis.
Come back when you have some sort of credible argument to challenge them.
Come back when you have some sort of credible argument to challenge them.
Originally Posted by Xela M:
“Have you actually seen them play at this World Cup?
I absolutely cannot stand US football teams and I was certain this year would be no different, but the difference in the quality of football, the team play, the managerial tactics was night and day in comparison to US teams of the past. Usually, they play kick and rush football, whereas this time round they actually looked like a proper football teams with a game plan and skills to match.”
“Have you actually seen them play at this World Cup?
I absolutely cannot stand US football teams and I was certain this year would be no different, but the difference in the quality of football, the team play, the managerial tactics was night and day in comparison to US teams of the past. Usually, they play kick and rush football, whereas this time round they actually looked like a proper football teams with a game plan and skills to match.”
The USA have been playing decent football for quite some time at previous World Cups, I guess this is the first World Cup you have seen.
The more I think of it, I wonder why we wonder the USA reaction?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?
Originally Posted by bluesdiamond:
“The more I think of it, I wonder why we wonder the USA reaction?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?”
“The more I think of it, I wonder why we wonder the USA reaction?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?”
Not sure about Ice Hockey. Maybe we don't have the facilities.
We do have Basketball. Hear about it a lot on the local news.
Originally Posted by bluesdiamond:
“The more I think of it, I wonder why we wonder the USA reaction?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?”
“The more I think of it, I wonder why we wonder the USA reaction?
It is the fifth team sport in the States.
I would rank it as
American Football
Baseball
Basketball (but could alter with Baseball)
Ice Hockey
Soccer
Thinking of a Europea\n/American what do they see in the UK?
Soccer
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
why are we not doing Ice Hockey or Basketball?
sure it is nice to think The Yanks don;t get Soccer, but are us Brits as bad?”
A very obvious answer would be that ice hockey and basketball are not British sports and did not originate in the UK : basketball started out in the USA and ice hockey in Canada.
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“A very obvious answer would be that ice hockey and basketball are not British sports and did not originate in the UK : basketball started out in the USA and ice hockey in Canada.”
“A very obvious answer would be that ice hockey and basketball are not British sports and did not originate in the UK : basketball started out in the USA and ice hockey in Canada.”
Association football didn't originate in Brazil, but that doesn't seem to have stopped them.
Neither does your theory explain why baseball was very popular here before WWII stopped it in its tracks. Games attracted crowds of as much as 10'000 - Derby's old ground was known as THe Baseball Ground for that reason. In fact we actually beat the US to win the first Baseball World Cup in 1938.
Originally Posted by degsyhufc:
“Not sure about Ice Hockey. Maybe we don't have the facilities.
We do have Basketball. Hear about it a lot on the local news.”
“Not sure about Ice Hockey. Maybe we don't have the facilities.
We do have Basketball. Hear about it a lot on the local news.”
Ice Hockey is played here, they feature it on the local news where I live.
Originally Posted by snukr:
“Ice Hockey is played here, they feature it on the local news where I live.”
“Ice Hockey is played here, they feature it on the local news where I live.”
The British league seems quite lively and the Nottingham Panthers gets regular coverage on East Mids Today. Seems to give Canadians another playing option.
Anyone know what the US public interest in the World Cup is like now that USA are out? Are they still watching in large numbers (or even broadcasting) the rest of the tournament?
Because that would be a better test of the USA's interest in "soccer" as a sport IMO, rather than American's just having a patriotic interest in their own national side.
Because that would be a better test of the USA's interest in "soccer" as a sport IMO, rather than American's just having a patriotic interest in their own national side.
Originally Posted by johnF1971:
“Anyone know what the US public interest in the World Cup is like now that USA are out? Are they still watching in large numbers (or even broadcasting) the rest of the tournament?
Because that would be a better test of the USA's interest in "soccer" as a sport IMO, rather than American's just having a patriotic interest in their own national side.”
“Anyone know what the US public interest in the World Cup is like now that USA are out? Are they still watching in large numbers (or even broadcasting) the rest of the tournament?
Because that would be a better test of the USA's interest in "soccer" as a sport IMO, rather than American's just having a patriotic interest in their own national side.”
Yes, the ratings are holding up pretty well. Brazil vs Colombia had an audience of around 12m between ESPN and Spanish language TV, which is not 'too' far behind what the US games were attracting (around 20m).
All the games are being shown live on ESPN and the main network channel ABC are showing some matches live too.
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“Yes, the ratings are holding up pretty well. Brazil vs Colombia had an audience of around 12m between ESPN and Spanish language TV, which is not 'too' far behind what the US games were attracting (around 20m).
All the games are being shown live on ESPN and the main network channel ABC are showing some matches live too.”
“Yes, the ratings are holding up pretty well. Brazil vs Colombia had an audience of around 12m between ESPN and Spanish language TV, which is not 'too' far behind what the US games were attracting (around 20m).
All the games are being shown live on ESPN and the main network channel ABC are showing some matches live too.”
The fact that its only shown on ESPN and Spanish Language TV implies that its still only considered something of a minority interest though doesn't it?
If soccer was really taking off in USA like some people make out surely they'd broadcast it on the major networks like NBC etc?
Edit - sorry just read that you said that ABC is broadcasting some matches.
Last edited by johnF1971 : 07-07-2014 at 14:32
Originally Posted by johnF1971:
“The fact that its only shown on ESPN and Spanish Language TV implies that its still only considered something of a minority interest though doesn't it?
If soccer was really taking off in USA like some people make out surely they'd broadcast it on the major networks like NBC etc?
Edit - sorry just read that you said that ABC is broadcasting some matches.”
“The fact that its only shown on ESPN and Spanish Language TV implies that its still only considered something of a minority interest though doesn't it?
If soccer was really taking off in USA like some people make out surely they'd broadcast it on the major networks like NBC etc?
Edit - sorry just read that you said that ABC is broadcasting some matches.”
Yes, but audiences of 15-20m are absolutely huge in relative terms and well ahead of most other sporting events in the US this year ; it's not as if ABC, CBS and NBC are attracting audiences of 30-40m for other sporting events, far from it in fact.
It's not at all comparable to Sky Sports vs ITV and BBC in the UK.....the World Cup has definitely been one of the sporting events of the year on TV in America.
Found this on another forum:
Still a long way to go....
Quote:
“Yeah, but you have to pay the folks to run the leagues, organize the teams, pay the refs, rent the field, buy the goal nets... heck, even pay the coaches. It doesn't come free, you know. And outside of (maybe) a few overpaid administrators for the biggest clubs, nobody is getting seriously rich and buying yachts out of all this.
As @ebbro pointed out, someone has to pay. Elsewhere, it's the clubs. Here in the US, they don't even pay many players that much, much less have lots of money left over to fund programs for youth players. Others have also pointed out coaching is key. I recall an article (rats... can't find it) stating that in 2004? 06? when the DFB set about remaking their program, that they spent money to train and deploy literally thousands of coaches across the country. When is USSF going to pay for my A license course, eh? I've spent a lot of my own coin getting a coaching education.”
“Yeah, but you have to pay the folks to run the leagues, organize the teams, pay the refs, rent the field, buy the goal nets... heck, even pay the coaches. It doesn't come free, you know. And outside of (maybe) a few overpaid administrators for the biggest clubs, nobody is getting seriously rich and buying yachts out of all this.
As @ebbro pointed out, someone has to pay. Elsewhere, it's the clubs. Here in the US, they don't even pay many players that much, much less have lots of money left over to fund programs for youth players. Others have also pointed out coaching is key. I recall an article (rats... can't find it) stating that in 2004? 06? when the DFB set about remaking their program, that they spent money to train and deploy literally thousands of coaches across the country. When is USSF going to pay for my A license course, eh? I've spent a lot of my own coin getting a coaching education.”
Still a long way to go....
An article on the subject from the BBC
Fad or forever smitten: Has the US finally fallen in love with soccer?
Fad or forever smitten: Has the US finally fallen in love with soccer?
Originally Posted by Joey Boswell:
“The USA have been playing decent football for quite some time at previous World Cups, I guess this is the first World Cup you have seen.”
“The USA have been playing decent football for quite some time at previous World Cups, I guess this is the first World Cup you have seen.”
Err... no. Kick and rush (very fast) is not good football. They never looked like an actual well-organised football team with tactics and quality players.
Originally Posted by Xela M:
“Err... no. Kick and rush (very fast) is not good football. They never looked like an actual well-organised football team with tactics and quality players.”
“Err... no. Kick and rush (very fast) is not good football. They never looked like an actual well-organised football team with tactics and quality players.”
I think the Americans are well organised but they have few quality players. That's why I couldn't understand why Jurgen didn't take Landon Donovan. Ego getting in the way again. With him and Dempsey running things they would have been even more effective.
I got the impression it was a bit of a Nasri decision. "He's a great player but I don't see him as in my first XI and I'm not sure if he'll take well to being on the bench, so I'll just leave him behind." I think Deschamps said as much in an interview and I guess Klinsmann had similar reasons.
Not sure if I agree with it but I can see their point of view. It's perhaps much easier to have an enthusiastic kid as back up than someone sulking thinking they should be first choice. Maybe it makes for a better environment for everyone.
Not sure if I agree with it but I can see their point of view. It's perhaps much easier to have an enthusiastic kid as back up than someone sulking thinking they should be first choice. Maybe it makes for a better environment for everyone.
Originally Posted by Jim_McIntosh:
“I got the impression it was a bit of a Nasri decision. "He's a great player but I don't see him as in my first XI and I'm not sure if he'll take well to being on the bench, so I'll just leave him behind." I think Deschamps said as much in an interview and I guess Klinsmann had similar reasons.
Not sure if I agree with it but I can see their point of view. It's perhaps much easier to have an enthusiastic kid as back up than someone sulking thinking they should be first choice. Maybe it makes for a better environment for everyone.”
“I got the impression it was a bit of a Nasri decision. "He's a great player but I don't see him as in my first XI and I'm not sure if he'll take well to being on the bench, so I'll just leave him behind." I think Deschamps said as much in an interview and I guess Klinsmann had similar reasons.
Not sure if I agree with it but I can see their point of view. It's perhaps much easier to have an enthusiastic kid as back up than someone sulking thinking they should be first choice. Maybe it makes for a better environment for everyone.”
It's better than avoiding eye contact.
Originally Posted by Xela M:
“Err... no. Kick and rush (very fast) is not good football. They never looked like an actual well-organised football team with tactics and quality players.”
“Err... no. Kick and rush (very fast) is not good football. They never looked like an actual well-organised football team with tactics and quality players.”
Rubbish.
They have had to be well organised to overcome the fact that they don't have any world class players.
They don't play kick-and-rush football. They play football based on forward passes rather than possession football. As well as being very fit and having a never-say-die attitude; never knowing when they are beaten (a typically American characteristic).
Originally Posted by Eurostar:
“A very obvious answer would be that ice hockey and basketball are not British sports and did not originate in the UK : basketball started out in the USA and ice hockey in Canada.”
“A very obvious answer would be that ice hockey and basketball are not British sports and did not originate in the UK : basketball started out in the USA and ice hockey in Canada.”
Although basketball has big similarities to netball which Britain do well in.
Ice-hockey is similar to field hockey (just on ice, with smaller teams and a smaller pitch). Again a sport in which Britain have traditionally done well.
Britaiin does do basketball and ice-hockey anyway (albeit on a much smaller scale to the USA, there are national leagues for these sports here).
I will say that we do virtually ignore baseball in this country though.
Originally Posted by carnivalist:
“Association football didn't originate in Brazil, but that doesn't seem to have stopped them.
Neither does your theory explain why baseball was very popular here before WWII stopped it in its tracks. Games attracted crowds of as much as 10'000 - Derby's old ground was known as THe Baseball Ground for that reason. In fact we actually beat the US to win the first Baseball World Cup in 1938.”
“Association football didn't originate in Brazil, but that doesn't seem to have stopped them.
Neither does your theory explain why baseball was very popular here before WWII stopped it in its tracks. Games attracted crowds of as much as 10'000 - Derby's old ground was known as THe Baseball Ground for that reason. In fact we actually beat the US to win the first Baseball World Cup in 1938.”
I believe football was a rapidly expanding sport in the USA in the first thirty years or so of the 20th century too.
For some reason, it seemed to die in the fifties and sixties though.
Originally Posted by degsyhufc:
“An article on the subject from the BBC
Fad or forever smitten: Has the US finally fallen in love with soccer?”
“An article on the subject from the BBC
Fad or forever smitten: Has the US finally fallen in love with soccer?”
Love this v ideo
Americans love soccer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-z1b8bx1QE
Flippin good soundtrack.
7 of 7
