I watch some of the games every weekend, but I don't have a team I follow, so I am kind of ambivalent. Usually just watch one of the big teams.

I don't think that the MLS will ever be insanely popular, but I can see the Premiership becoming very popular in the US as more people get the soccer channels in the states and are exposed to it more. I just think its hard for America as a whole to get behind an inferior product.

I've never heard soccer called kickball. That would just be confusing since there is already another sport called kickball.

I could well be off on that. My point is that it isn't like there is a flood of Americans playing in Europe.

I think the US is currently a top 20 team so I agree with you that they will be top 15 flirting with top 10 at some point in the reasonably near future.

BTW to keep this thing random, one thing that bothers the **** out of me as a (hopefully not former ) referee is how poor and sloppy the ARs are with their signaling. It's not uncommon at all for matches at the highest level to see the linesmen running with their flag up, not signaling at the appropriate angles (should be vertical, horizontal or at a 45 degree angle, never in-between), or not keeping a consistent distance from the touch line. These things are all pretty basic and while I'm not nearly competent or fit enough to be an AR at this level, I think I can safely say that I am better at these things than most of these guys. It's not the most important thing obviously, but it's so easy to fix that I don't understand it.

I'm not trying to make this a America is the Best type thing with this question, its just out of curiosity, but if Soccer was the #1 sport in the US, do you guys think the US would be the auto #1 country on the international stage?

I guess it would depend on how popular the other sports are, etc. But lets say that the MLS was the highest paid sports league in the world, and most great athletes were pushed to soccer growing up, would it still be close with say Argentina and Brazil since the best of the US wouldn't be greater than the best from other powers?

Pretty useless question I know, but i always wonder how good guys like A.I. and Randy Moss would be if they played soccer their whole lives.

Been discussed a ton over the years in this forum. You end up with two camps:

1. LDO, more money, better athletes = US dominates 4evah!
2. No way, not enough history, passion, and will never have the flair of the top footballers - how egotistical of you Americans to think that you'd dominate just because you set your mind to it.

Personally, I think it's somewhere in the middle.

I'm with Clark. I think the US is in the top tier, but you certainly won't see Tiger Woods type domination.

This is how I pretty much feel also. There would still be a ton of great athletes who chose the other major sports because their skill set fit better.

The fact that soccer/football is by far the major sport in all of these other main countries is a huge factor imo.

the problem is that the sport just doesn't have roots here in the states yet, and the domestic product isn't exactly the most aesthetically pleasing.

the thing is, if a more attacking style of play happens in the MLS and the speed of the matches picks up, I would have no doubt that it would become more popular.

It took the NFL to have a more attacking style of american football for it to grow(when the AFL passed more while the old NFL had a more stoic style of play) and then keen marketing for the NFL to become as big as it has

the other factor is in making the sport attractive to more then just white suburbanites. It's pathetic that there aren't more domestic hispanic players playing in both the MLS and national team. When Mexican clubs come into the US to play matches the games sell out and the spanish language channels do very good ratings for club matches.

It would also be nice to see the USSF try to make the game more appealing to some of the inner city schools as I would personally imagine that there are some guys who are good at basketball that would be able to translate that athleticism to the pitch

its a matter of harnessing all of avenues available. The MLS doesn't need to be the main league in the US for the US to be more of a football power, it needs to be able to get more of a foothold and become even the 3rd league in the US

Popularity and money.

The best athletes in the US are playing basketball, football, and baseball. Even a bench player on an MLB team makes more than MLS's STAR players (minus Beckham), so it's easy to see why young athletes aren't attracted to soccer.

In European and South American countries, most of the athletic talent goes into soccer. It doesn't in the US, which is why the US will never be a top-10 team in the world.

This is sort of correct, Baseball has always been the top 1 or 2 sports in the US, and it will take a ton to take it down from that perch. Maybe for a few short years in the 90s baseball was no3, but in the long run, it will always be no1 or 2

as far as football though, that hasn't been the case. It took the NFL/AFL merger and the popularity of the AFL and then the genius marketing of the SuperBowl(which took a few years to really become what its become) that has made teh NFL the juggernaut it is

before the Pete Rozelle era, the NFL was a distant third in the sports spectrum in america behind Baseball and Boxing

I personally find Italian football to be too plodding to get into it all that much. I'll watch it because its football, but I wish to god that FSC still had LigueUn matches and that ESPN still showed the monday LaLiga match like they did back in the late 90s

we'd be in the top tier, but lets face this fact, there is something in the water that has made Brazil what it is and always has been

I think that the nature of team sports very rarely lends itself to Tiger Woods/jack nicklaus type domination, so it is a bit delusional to say that if soccer was by far the no1 sport here that we'd be dominating the world

I would settle for FSC broadcasting some tape-delayed matches from slightly lesser leagues instead of countless infomercials and reruns during midweek. Some Eredivisie would be kickass, for example.

those infomercials pay tons so that we can get to watch the stuff we like to watch. I'd much rather have FSC bring back super14 rugby and all of its rugby programming then bringing Ajax matches like they did(cause all we ever got when they showed eredivisie matches was either AJAX, Feynoord, or PSV)

You can find some eredivise and bundisliga matches on 317(comast) from time to time. Its in Spanish though. Sometimes Telemundo.

But yeah, FSC needs to get more games.

Alright, keep the infomercials and cut back on the reruns then, especially of the highlight shows. Swap Serie A for Bundesliga with GolTV as well.

And if we're going to include other sports in the discussion, give me some Aussie Rules please. Maybe some Twenty20 cricket too. Although those two are fairly well torrented in good quality unlike Eredivisie, which all I ever see is stream rips. Wigan88 is God nonetheless.

I dig La Liga but torrents are pretty well supplied at least for Barca and Real Madrid. Would like to see the rest of the league more often though.

They could just buy the rights to the big games. I don't care about half the teams in Spain, Italy, Germany, France, or Holland. But I would like to watch some of the games.

With regard to the "Would America be the best if Soccer was the number one sport?" question. I subscribe to the theory that says no because of good coaching.

That's right, good coaching.

In Brazil, Argentina etc. an extremely talented youngster will learn the game on his own playing with friends and family. He will try, as kids are apt to do, more or less anything that comes to mind on a soccer field or with a soccer ball.

It is this type of creativity and this lack of restraint that produces geniuses like Ronaldinho, Robinho etc.

In America, the best players are quickly put on ODP teams, elite club teams and so on. While often the soccer they will play will be at a high level, they will be forced to play within a system and a much more rigid style.

A good coach will not allow his best player to run wild all over the field and try every crazy, creative move he's ever thought of. By forcing our best players into a more rigid style of game where they get coached on tactics and formations, we stifle the type of creativity that is the calling card of the traditional soccer powers.

The USA has a good team and many excellent players, what we don't have (and I fear we never will) is the true artist. The genius that belongs in the conversation with Pele, Maradona, et al.

Stak

stak,

I think you may have a good point, but I disagree that a true 'artist' on the field will never emerge in American soccer. I think that if US soccer continues to grow as it has, and if it becomes much more popular, many more of our best athletes will play. Just think about the insane skill level of today's top NBA, NFL players. There's no reason to think that it couldn't translate into soccer as well.

teaching and coaching technical ability will lead to more creative moves.

Also, Germany and Italy are two massively successful football countries, and I can't think of an "artist" from either country, but I can think of some really good players.

Who are you pulling for in the EURO's TSC? Also, who do you think is the favorite?

I have to be honest, I am not particularly pulling for anyone. I can't root for my background, because that would mean France, Germany, Ireland, and Scotland, although two of them are there. I guess I will pull for France, since my last name is French, Arsenal have a bunch of Frenchies on their team, plus I like the French players anyway. Or the Netherlands because they remind me of the French guys, but with worse D. But I think Germany might be the favorites. Croatia would have been a sleeper, but w/o Eduardo they will be hurting. I think any game against Austria will be hilarious, since they are garbage and shouldn't even be here.

All that being said, this will be the first Euro's I will have seen.