World Cup 2014

Elephant said:

I have said it before and I will chime in again....some have touched on it, the talent pool is the key. Where is the USA going to get the talent for soccer? The same pool has been providing talent in this country for my entire life and beyond...middle class kids. This is a limited pool. Where are the world leaders in the sport getting their talent? In this country, the very talented, athletic kids are not going to play soccer if they are from poor upbringing...they are going where the money is. In the rest of the world, soccer is a ticket out. Here? It is not! Until the talent whom sees football, basketball or baseball as the way out of their situations, until soccer can begin to pay these kids the way the other 3 do, we will not see a US World Cup Champion.

It does not mean there is no talent among the middle class, but even most of them go for the top 3. Why isn't Robert Griffin III playing soccer? He could be one of the very best players in the world if he applied his physical talent. John Wall?

Click to expand...

I totally disagree and it's coming from the perspective of a youth coach who also played for over 20 years and still plays. Not trying to ambush, just providing context. The problem as I see it isn't that we lack talent or are limited in numbers. If a country smaller than one of our smallest states can win their group (CR) or kick our butts consistently (Belgium), it's not about the talent pool, it's about the training. We are just now starting to train our youth the way the rest of the world does. We keep pumping out the same athlete because we have been training the same way for decades. A method that doesn't address ball handling skills and personal training the way other sports do. As a result we raise players who are passionate, fast, tough, can run forever and make some really nice plays on the ball. What we DON'T produce are little ball handlers who can take over a game by themselves at times. Until we have trained an entire generation in the European way for their entire youth, we'll continue to see the same things. As a youth coach I'm doing it and I see it here and there with others. But it's far from ubiquitous, there's still a LONG way to go.

CounterTrey said:

I totally disagree and it's coming from the perspective of a youth coach who also played for over 20 years and still plays. Not trying to ambush, just providing context. The problem as I see it isn't that we lack talent or are limited in numbers. If a country smaller than one of our smallest states can win their group (CR) or kick our butts consistently (Belgium), it's not about the talent pool, it's about the training. We are just now starting to train our youth the way the rest of the world does. We keep pumping out the same athlete because we have been training the same way for decades. A method that doesn't address ball handling skills and personal training the way other sports do. As a result we raise players who are passionate, fast, tough, can run forever and make some really nice plays on the ball. What we DON'T produce are little ball handlers who can take over a game by themselves at times. Until we have trained an entire generation in the European way for their entire youth, we'll continue to see the same things. As a youth coach I'm doing it and I see it here and there with others. But it's far from ubiquitous, there's still a LONG way to go.

Click to expand...

I understand your argument your talking about teaching technique/skills over athletic ability and in that respect your right. In Scotland for far too long we have taught our kids that winning is everything. that is great if you want to win your local competition, but useless if you want to do more because those who are technically better will win out over you. Again as I said the Belgians have gone back to basics to teach technique over fitness for young age groups.

Scotland look like they have finally caught on to this are now slowly starting to teach technique properly.

To put it into perspective if Messi had been Scottish, his coaches would have coached his dribbling ability out of him instead of encouraging it.

CounterTrey said:

I totally disagree and it's coming from the perspective of a youth coach who also played for over 20 years and still plays. Not trying to ambush, just providing context. The problem as I see it isn't that we lack talent or are limited in numbers. If a country smaller than one of our smallest states can win their group (CR) or kick our butts consistently (Belgium), it's not about the talent pool, it's about the training. We are just now starting to train our youth the way the rest of the world does. We keep pumping out the same athlete because we have been training the same way for decades. A method that doesn't address ball handling skills and personal training the way other sports do. As a result we raise players who are passionate, fast, tough, can run forever and make some really nice plays on the ball. What we DON'T produce are little ball handlers who can take over a game by themselves at times. Until we have trained an entire generation in the European way for their entire youth, we'll continue to see the same things. As a youth coach I'm doing it and I see it here and there with others. But it's far from ubiquitous, there's still a LONG way to go.

Click to expand...

CT, I played at a fairly high level for 18 years and the only reason I don't, referee or coach anymore is because I don't have the time and I don't play because my body can't handle it. I am not saying this as someone fair weather fan.

The USA does not field it's most athletic players. And that fact will keep the US from ever getting past the round of 8. The other bigs...Brazil, Italy, Germany field their best athletes, that's why they are perennial contenders for it all.

Training is invaluable and I am not saying that it won't be an important aspect of US soccer going forward to get us a little better, but as long as the most athletic in this country do not see viable financial security playing soccer, they will cash in somewhere else and US Soccer will miss out on the RG3's of the world who could probably be as good as Messi or any other. This, in turn, will keep us from being in the top tier...ever remaining in the 2nd.

I'm just not seeing it E. That is no doubt making it harder for us but I don't see us being outclassed with the quality of our athletes, I see us being outclassed because of the type of athlete we pump out. Those countries have a fraction of our population, even if they pump out the best, the percentage is so against them that their talent pool is still smaller than ours. A few countries are different but the talent is there for the U.S. and the money is bigger in Soccer, but if we continue to train mediocre players by comparison why would someone with the skill to make it elsewhere bother? Your chance at big money is gone before you even try out because your mentors didn't give you the tools and training to take that next step. It's why the Jamaicans have exploded in track and why any other small country with a tiny population that is in large part living in 3rd world conditions can excel...training.

Apparently Landon Donovan is the MVP of this years USA team

oh boy...here goes:

- I just don't see the excitement in soccer. sure...great athletes can use their bodies to maneuver a ball up & down the field. but then what? little scoring. nowhere near the complexity/permutations for a given set of moves/plays that real football or baseball have. I get the part about moving the ball up and down the field and positioning two or three players to score. seems to me to be very static at times - I understand that players can't be running constantly for 90 minutes. but the game just doesn't haven't the constant feedback that other sports like b-ball have. gratification culture? you betcha! from what I saw on TV....the attraction from a fan pov was another opportunity to paint the face, drink beer and celebrate a very high miss to score ratio.

- PO'd? I'm gonna bite you on the shoulder!!!! why I might even trip you! pretty manly stuff there.

- US men who happen to be bigger...on average... are going to gravitate to sports like football, baseball, basketball.

sooooo....blast away. label me small minded and clueless.

btw....while I was working in DC area I used to see crowds occasionally collecting for soccer games at RFK. Amazing how often flags from other countries tended to dominate among fans entering the stadium. so...on the bright side...perhaps recent increments to the population are a clever way to grow the talent base from a young age!

cmon now fellas/gals! I'm expecting someone to take some shots so I can gauge a better understanding of the nuances of a game I freely admit I don't see.

No offense Al but if that is all you see then you aren't watching enough of the sport. It is so much more than just kicking the ball around. There is a beauty to the movement of every player, usually without the ball, to watch. It is a seriously complex sport that doesn't appear complex until you educate yourself. I thought I understood the game before I seriously watched at the WC in South Africa 4 years ago. I learned different watching that tournament. Then I thought I knew a thing or two as I picked up watching club matches in the MLS and EPL. Again, I learned different. This is a strategic sport with deep tactics every bit as complex as any NFL offense or defense. The difference is that there is no break for these guys, no coaching time out for adjustments to be made and only 3 subs.

American men are also not bigger than European men, nor African men. As for static and boring...see baseball. That can be like watching cement set. Heck they have a 7th inning stretch for fans who have gotten stiff sitting on their butts waiting for a reason to get up and cheer for so long. The whole "Soccer is boring" theme is amusing to me when actually broken down and compared to a lot of other ball sports. I think a major part of the problem is camera work. They scale it all back so far in soccer that you often don't see the actual action taking place, you see what looks like a giant video game with small figures without detail. I also have to laugh at the implication that it is a soft sport or a "Girl's" sport...that's coming from people who DON'T have a clue about the actual game and haven't actually played it anywhere close to a high level. I'm black and blue after an actual club game from all the contact and ready to literally drop I'm so exhausted from all the running, sprinting and contesting for balls. I don't feel anywhere close to that drained after 90 minutes of running at around 7:30 pace. Yes the pros milk the drama in order to get the calls, but so do pros in our sports, specifically Basketball and Football.

Soccer has the same problem Hockey does...it doesn't translate to TV as well as it plays live. Hockey can be breathtaking live but downright boring on TV, same with Soccer.

The tactics argument is an interesting one that usually comes from people who haven't played a given sport at a high level. EVERY sport has tactics and many of them that look boring and simple have a lot more tactics involved than the average layman would ever even get a hint of. Heck running is VERY tactical and sports don't get any simpler than running. When I'm "out on the pitch", especially during WC time, the tactics and depth of the games in question come up almost every session. I play with a very international crew and I can't help but laugh at these conversations because they mirror each other. The soccer guys make the exact same claims about our games being tactically simple comparatively and boring to watch. Except on their side they come at ya with scoring commentary, the fact that Baseball is so ponderous and devoid of action for 80-90% of the game...everyone watches the pitcher or batters taking timeouts to step out of the box (soccer fans find timeouts hilarious and the ultimate statement of wussiness), or the fact that the NFL takes more time in between plays than they do actually playing (the average game only has less than 20 actual minutes of action IIRC) and on and on. The bottom line for me is all of these games are much more nuanced than the average non fan will ever be able to even conceptualize, so I will continue to find amusement from sentiments of that kind from BOTH sides.

I gotta admit, having a fairly extensive background in the sport, I think soccer is boring...and I understand what it takes to move the ball upfield, get into position to score, and utlimately put the ball in the net. But I must admit, I was a meat-headed goalie who was mostly concerned about the cross where I could legally take someone's head off going for the ball in the air. It was a sight to see this 5' 9" goalie soaring through the air, fist first at the ball. .

I do have to admit, that dead ball play from Dempsey to Bradley at the end of the game that almost worked, was brilliant.

Edit: We'll just have to disagree. There are plenty of coaches out there who teach ball handling skills. Our coach, a former college track star, who run us to death for the 1st 20 minutes of practice, then the next hour would be spent on skills and technic, then he'd run us some more at the end of practice. That was 25-30 years ago. When I referee'd in South Florida, I saw a number of players at the High School level who played for US Junior Nationals and these kids had tremendous ball control. If we could tap into a fraction of the young, urban athletes who choose football, basketball and baseball over soccer because they see financial gain from those sports, we would have the best athletes in the world playing soccer. You cannot tell me that of the starting 11 on that field any of them rank in the top 10 of most athletic in this country...not even Tim Howard.

Oh I'm the same I'm not too critical of people who find soccer boring to watch, especially on TV. It is slow at times and does tend to low scores. I wouldn't say they (this year's squad) were tops but I also don't see the other athletes with few exceptions as being all that much better athletically than our guys. They just look like they've been trained better. Even if we ONLY get soccer players from the middle class it's still a HUGE talent pool and finance does not dictate genetics at all. I think one of the biggest recent changes is our adult players being exposed to more international play by going overseas to play. If that continues the flow will keep increasing to MLS and our pro players will continue to improve to the point they DO stack up.

I do get world cup fever....every time.

But, just like with baseball, there is no way I could watch an entire season every year of it. There just isn't enough excitement. Now if they have a playoffs and then a championship game you can bet I will be perking up more. But like the dog days of summer...it gets repetitive and boring.

Fan, you have to come with something stronger than baseball. Is there physical contact that I'm not seeing which occurs in baseball? Aside from the rare occurrence of being hit hard by a pitch, is it even possible to get injured while playing baseball? Watch out for the hard tag?

The only sports with less contact, less action and bigger breaks between play might be golf and bowling. And attendance continues to decline.

You must not know who Pete Rose is...or you are just trolling.



or Nolan Ryan



or Roger Clemens

No need for the 'trolling' comment

As a non American, I understand and to an extent get why some (ok the majority) of Americans find Soccer boring, It is the same reason that many non Americans find the NFL boring.

It is because they do not fully understand the game, to the uninitiated both games look complex and the more complex the game the less appealing it is to the casual observer.

But if you take the time and learn the ins and outs of the games it suddenly becomes a whole lot more watchible.

If you allow me to go slightly off topic I might explain it better. I will watch most sport, especialy if being played by the best at the sport, But I find it extremely hard to watch Baseball, yet i could watch a 5 day cricket test match. Now Americans tell me constantly how can you watch cricket it is boring nothing ever happens, yet i have seen and read about baseball games that go 12, 13, 15 innings with under 3 runs scored. In response I was told those games are classics, true pitchers battles, yet in a 5 day test match that ends in a draw (which is rare these days) I will over 1000 runs scored and lots of outs (close to 40). Why do I find one hard to watch yet the other a joy? because I understand one more than the other. I understand what bowlers are doing and what the batsmen are doing to combat that. Yet although I think I know baseball, if your not at least getting the ball out of the infield your boring me to tears.

I was also speaking at to others at our Supporters trust meeting about this talent pool V coaching debate. after a decent discussion (a few beers) we agreed you needed both. You need a good talent pool size but you need the proper coaching on top of that to get the best out of the availible talent. Like others here i have done a bit of soccer coaching. I even took one of my offical SFA badges. I must admit the course opened my eyes. It was focused on ball work and getting the kids (aimed at 6-8 age group) comfortible with a ball at their feet. No tactics no games just ball work and fun games to bring a bit of a competetive element to it.

First of all, I don't think the majority of Americans find soccer boring. The World Cup is getting fantastic ratings. I think it's more that those that don't 'get' soccer, or legitimately find it boring are vocal and for some reason feel the need to bash the sport. Those that bash it don't seem to spend any of their time bashing hockey (which in many regards as pointed out in this thread, has much of the same ebb and flow as a soccer match, but which can be incredibly exciting) or baseball (which I personally think is unfit for television). I hate to say it, but I think, to the extent there are lots of American soccer critics, it's almost entirely due to it being viewed as a 'non-American' sport. The same people who think that stupid Lee Greenwood song is a timeless patriotic classic aren't patient enough to learn the game. What I love about soccer is that you can often feel an offensive attack coming - or see the patterns in the play that could lead to a goal. The buildup as you see the play you could see developing actually transpire - man, that is a beautiful thing.

I agree wholeheartedly. Well stated, as usual, Boone.

I liked it all the way until you called the Lee greenwood song stupid.