Liking Unsuccessful Teams

Off Topic
41

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]Claudan wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

…We were discussing soccer…

[/quote]

Oh good grief.
[/quote]
Have to agree, this was where you went wrong. [/quote]

I strongly disagree with you, you are wrong.

[/quote]
If you are not from the US then you can talk soccer all you want.

You can start a thread about soccer and talk about all the flopping and tied games in that thread.

However do not include real sports like Football, Basketball, Baseball and Hockey with Soccer.

That is for foreign guys with no money for a real sport and I guess Hipsters in the northwest who have to be “different” for the sake of being different. [/quote]
Haha, you reminded me of a clip from an old Simpsons episode about soccer.

42

[quote]Claudan wrote:
Everything you say is true, and yet somehow you think that is a bad thing? That an extremely poor person, from a third world country can basically make a name for himself through hard-work, consistency and almost no financial commitment… and you think that is bad?

You think it’s bad that starving kids, poverty stricken areas, have something that brings joy and happiness to their incredibly depressing and unfortunate situation?

Sounds like you are either delusional(which I know you aren’t) or you are trying too hard to make soccer look bad.

Popularity wise, it’s a given that there are more popular sports in America, we know that. That’s because the quality of american soccer players are shit. You are not technical, you do not have coordination to make it work, yet.[/quote]
I doubt anyone thinks poor, starving children having fun is a bad thing. It’s just an explanation for the sport’s popularity, and why, in some people’s opinion, it’s boring. Because impoverished kids would probably rather do literally anything besides sit around feeling hungry and dying. It’s not hard for soccer to be fun and interesting by comparison.

43

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]Claudan wrote:

[quote]Derek542 wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

…We were discussing soccer…

[/quote]

Oh good grief.
[/quote]
Have to agree, this was where you went wrong. [/quote]

I strongly disagree with you, you are wrong.

[/quote]
If you are not from the US then you can talk soccer all you want.

You can start a thread about soccer and talk about all the flopping and tied games in that thread.

However do not include real sports like Football, Basketball, Baseball and Hockey with Soccer.

That is for foreign guys with no money for a real sport and I guess Hipsters in the northwest who have to be “different” for the sake of being different. [/quote]
Haha, you reminded me of a clip from an old Simpsons episode about soccer.
- YouTube [/quote]
At this point in life, the Simpsons have pretty much done everything and most life situations can be related back the Simpsons.

44

Real football (the one that doesn’t involve pussies with helmets and shoulder pads) is a quality game which hasn’t punished the laughable diving culture that is becoming prevalent, hence the reason it’s regarded by many that have never played as a ‘soft’ sport.anyone that’s ever played football in scotland, or the rest of the uk for that matter, knows better.

Original poster, pick a team you like (for whatever reason you like) and support them only.mock your rivals mercilessly and frequently, basking in their misery.

45

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

Few would consider Beckham an amazing player but, what makes Ronaldo or Beckham pussies?[/quote]

Okay maybe I went a little over the line (been a rough day). I will admit that I will watch soccer during the World Cup but only because it is the top talent in the world in that sport. Its pretty much the same thing with the Olympics. In watching Ronaldo or Beckham there just seems to be a lack of killer instinct. I understand that it is supposed to be a finesse and beautiful sport but I prefer my athletes to be gritty.

I root for the German team for that exact reason. Just seems to be a higher level of intensity.

I also hate how Ronaldo will constantly give up during the oppositions breakaways and then defends himself by saying he gets paid to play offense not defense. Umm you get paid to win. Especially in the World Cup when you are representing your country. Even in football you see the quarterback throw a half assed tackle at a defender during a turn over.

46

[quote]GrizzlyBerg wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

Few would consider Beckham an amazing player but, what makes Ronaldo or Beckham pussies?[/quote]

Okay maybe I went a little over the line (been a rough day). I will admit that I will watch soccer during the World Cup but only because it is the top talent in the world in that sport. Its pretty much the same thing with the Olympics. In watching Ronaldo or Beckham there just seems to be a lack of killer instinct. I understand that it is supposed to be a finesse and beautiful sport but I prefer my athletes to be gritty.

I root for the German team for that exact reason. Just seems to be a higher level of intensity.

I also hate how Ronaldo will constantly give up during the oppositions breakaways and then defends himself by saying he gets paid to play offense not defense. Umm you get paid to win. Especially in the World Cup when you are representing your country. Even in football you see the quarterback throw a half assed tackle at a defender during a turn over. [/quote]

Edit: some of my friends watch soccer so I have watched club play as well.

47

National team is the worst to compare a sport by, but it happens to be the only time a large amount of 'muricans watch.

Athletes don’t get paid during their time with a national team, why would they give it their all, get injured, and lose money?

The club pays, so the club gets what it deserves, full commitment and full killer instinct.

48

Since this is a soccer thread now:

49

You can like whatever team you want but soccer over in Europe is a little different than most sports here in the USA because things are much more cyclical over here with the salary cap (excluding baseball)

Teams here have their runs at the top and then will be mediocre to sucky for a while till they can rise again. So you stick with your team through the good and the bad, unless your a browns fan… Then your team just always sucks :wink:

Most people pick their teams based on 1 of 3 factors:

  1. Local ties.
  2. Cheering for your mom/dad/brother/sister/grandparents favorite team.
  3. You first start watching a sport, aren’t influenced by 1 or 2 and start cheering for a team that is good at the time.
50

lol

51

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]Claudan wrote:
Everything you say is true, and yet somehow you think that is a bad thing? That an extremely poor person, from a third world country can basically make a name for himself through hard-work, consistency and almost no financial commitment… and you think that is bad?

You think it’s bad that starving kids, poverty stricken areas, have something that brings joy and happiness to their incredibly depressing and unfortunate situation?

Sounds like you are either delusional(which I know you aren’t) or you are trying too hard to make soccer look bad.

Popularity wise, it’s a given that there are more popular sports in America, we know that. That’s because the quality of american soccer players are shit. You are not technical, you do not have coordination to make it work, yet.[/quote]
I doubt anyone thinks poor, starving children having fun is a bad thing. It’s just an explanation for the sport’s popularity, and why, in some people’s opinion, it’s boring. Because impoverished kids would probably rather do literally anything besides sit around feeling hungry and dying. It’s not hard for soccer to be fun and interesting by comparison.[/quote]

You make sense on a logical level, and I like that. However, anything by comparison can seem amazing. We could probably discuss our way into a comparison where Hitler seems like the best option for us.

By the way, when you say “Some people say it’s boring” what you really mean is americans think it’s boring. Is that correct? Because I can name plenty of players who were not from poverty-stricken conditions and still chose soccer over any other sport presented to them.

You don’t think Hockey is HUGE in Europe? It is, and it’s expensive.

The same way I understand you guys’ thoughts and opinions, you guys have to understand that when ONE country, in the entire world, goes against what everybody else loves… It becomes quite strange to say “Oh yeah, you might have a point there”. No, You don’t, you are just the outlier but fail to realize it? You are literally the person outside of the group, saying the group is shit. Not a whole bunch of credibility there.

I think the issue with the difference in taste, is within the fact that ‘american’ sports are for an ADD inflicted population.

6 seconds of action, 2 minutes of rest, 6 secs of action, 2 mins of rest. A total football game has on average 11-15 minutes of action. You call that action? I call that boring. Taste is subjective.

52

[quote]Claudan wrote:
National team is the worst to compare a sport by, but it happens to be the only time a large amount of 'muricans watch.

Athletes don’t get paid during their time with a national team, why would they give it their all, get injured, and lose money?

The club pays, so the club gets what it deserves, full commitment and full killer instinct.
[/quote]

That is why I added in the edit that I have seen my fair share of club play. Hell when I was in Chinese I either had to watch soccer or cricket.

It did not really change my perspective.

54

[quote]Claudan wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]Claudan wrote:
Everything you say is true, and yet somehow you think that is a bad thing? That an extremely poor person, from a third world country can basically make a name for himself through hard-work, consistency and almost no financial commitment… and you think that is bad?

You think it’s bad that starving kids, poverty stricken areas, have something that brings joy and happiness to their incredibly depressing and unfortunate situation?

Sounds like you are either delusional(which I know you aren’t) or you are trying too hard to make soccer look bad.

Popularity wise, it’s a given that there are more popular sports in America, we know that. That’s because the quality of american soccer players are shit. You are not technical, you do not have coordination to make it work, yet.[/quote]
I doubt anyone thinks poor, starving children having fun is a bad thing. It’s just an explanation for the sport’s popularity, and why, in some people’s opinion, it’s boring. Because impoverished kids would probably rather do literally anything besides sit around feeling hungry and dying. It’s not hard for soccer to be fun and interesting by comparison.[/quote]

You make sense on a logical level, and I like that. However, anything by comparison can seem amazing. We could probably discuss our way into a comparison where Hitler seems like the best option for us.

By the way, when you say “Some people say it’s boring” what you really mean is americans think it’s boring. Is that correct? Because I can name plenty of players who were not from poverty-stricken conditions and still chose soccer over any other sport presented to them.

You don’t think Hockey is HUGE in Europe? It is, and it’s expensive.

The same way I understand you guys’ thoughts and opinions, you guys have to understand that when ONE country, in the entire world, goes against what everybody else loves… It becomes quite strange to say “Oh yeah, you might have a point there”. No, You don’t, you are just the outlier but fail to realize it? You are literally the person outside of the group, saying the group is shit. Not a whole bunch of credibility there.

I think the issue with the difference in taste, is within the fact that ‘american’ sports are for an ADD inflicted population.

6 seconds of action, 2 minutes of rest, 6 secs of action, 2 mins of rest. A total football game has on average 11-15 minutes of action. You call that action? I call that boring. Taste is subjective.

[/quote]
Actually there is a 45 sec game clock so not 2 minutes and the total came is 1 hour of action, they do replay’s on NFL.com.

The rest of the world is changing, next year will be two games of the NFL in England. It is starting to grow outside the US.

Will it be as popular as soccer, no not even close.

57

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I did it!

Soccer war FTW![/quote]
Hey Push your QB got off the hook

58

No idea what its like. I live in new england…hahaha

59

I like soccer and have watched for years now (go villa) but the culture of the sport needs to change. It is a great sport to watch when played at the highest level, HOWEVER…

They play like pussies. Have some self respect, act like a man, and dont lay on the ground writhing in pain like a bitch when someone touches you. It makes the game a joke, and a major reason why america will never get on board with the international game. Top flight “footballers” are such divas it makes TO look like Lenny Mclean, and that’s not cool.
(i understand the point of acting like a pussy bitch to get the call, but that just means they needed help from the ref to make a play. Make the play yourself, and retain respect from your fellow man)

60

[quote]Claudan wrote:
6 seconds of action, 2 minutes of rest, 6 secs of action, 2 mins of rest. A total football game has on average 11-15 minutes of action. You call that action? I call that boring. Taste is subjective.
[/quote]

And that’s why I like watching rugby. And Australia/New Zealand rugby in particular, since their camera work and color is much better.

I can’t stand the stop and go of football, all of the movement restrictions of basketball, the high action but low scoring of soccer, and the drudgery of baseball.