So I would say I'm the typical American "casual" soccer fan. Like the big matches, don't really care much about anything else. Because of this I admittedly don't have much of an understanding of the in's and the out's of the professional aspects of the game.
Lately in my ESPN ticker watching I'm seeing a lot of soccer news. I'm seeing guys being sold- like they were cattle- for HUGE amounts of money. I'm seeing guys that are being "loaned" from one team to another. I'm seeing American guys leave the U.S. team to play for European club teams. I found out that the U.S. soccer team has both an 'A' and a 'B' squad.
This is very confusing to me (I can picture Kevin right now going, "What's not to get?"). Isn't the U.S. in the middle of CONCACAF to try to qualify for the World Cup? Shouldn't all U.S. players be all-hands-on-deck to not only make sure we qualify, (although I'm sure there's little doubt after their recent performances in South Africa) but to also develop team chemistry by playing together? Or is soccer one of those sports where guys can go their separate ways for an extended period of time and then magically come back together and play like they haven't missed a beat? I guess I'm wondering how much of a factor team chemistry in teams' overall success.
And why do they allow 'A' and 'B' squads? To me there should be just one. You have one international roster, and if you need to substitute players because of injuries, performance, etc., than you do it. Sending out your 'B' squad against some small country because you know you'll win is just mean. I remember in high school Okemos' tennis team accidentally registered for two tournaments on the same day, and they ended up sending their JV team to one (the one we were in). I can remember the match still, because I was so excited to play Okemos' varsity team (they were really good), and I was just tremendously letdown having to play against their JV doubles team. It just didn't have as much meaning, even though I would have probably been slaughtered by the varsity team. I can kind of imagine it being the same in some sort of small way for those other countries as well.
Why don't they do trades in soccer with the big names? In American sports you hear all the time about the greedy owners and the greedy players. Can you imagine if the Cavaliers sold LeBron James to the Knicks for 100 million? That would never happen, and if it did, American sports fans (especially the ones in Cleveland), would talk about how greedy the owner was by fattening his pockets with the millions of dollars he made. So why is it a common occurrence in soccer? Are these players being sold from one league to another, where trades cannot happen? Is that what is going on with the loan of a player as well? I just need some clarification.
To wrap this up, perhaps all of these questions contribute to what's wrong with soccer's effort to become more popular here in the U.S.. It seems that players are on 394297 teams and they are constantly moving. There's European leagues, the MLS, the national team, youth teams, and different tournaments throughout the year...it's so much to keep track of. Couple that with teams selling and loaning players, guys from the MLS going to Europe and vice versa. It feels impossible to keep up with. With American sports, I know where guys are (the main ones). Albert Pujols is with the Cardinals, and he isn't going to be traded or sold...ever (at least not while he's in his prime). Then again, soccer is the world's game, so I suppose it does make sense to have guys bouncing from one continent to another.
Wow, a soccer post. Didn't know I had that in me =).
~Mike
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Although I suppose big names, like Alex Rodriguez, have been traded and the such...hmmm...I don't know. Maybe it's just a geographical thing...A-Rod was traded, but to an identifiable team and location to us Americans.
Right now, the US is playing the Gold Cup, which is just a CONCACAF regional tournament, with no World Cup ramifications. The US is playing their 'B' squad as a tryout for the last few spots on the World Cup roster.
It's not really an 'A' team and 'B" team thing, there is a pool of about 30 players available to the National team, with about 20 being named to any individual roster. There are some guys who will definitely be there (Donovan, Howard, Dempsey, etc.) and there are some guys who still have something to prove before they make the roster. Bradley (the coach) just wants to see as many guys as he can before he sets the final roster, and the Gold Cup is the perfect place to tryout guys in international play.
Does it affect team chemistry? Well, yes and no. There are so few US National matches compared to club matches that it would be hard to develop deep team chemistry even if there was a set US roster. So yes it hurts chemistry, but not very much. I guess the thinking is that the small loss of chemistry is worth getting the opportunity to tryout more players.
There are certainly trades in soccer. However, they almost always involve small-name players or draft picks. As for the big names, think of it like baseball. The Yankees buy players off of other teams all the time.
And I don't know for sure, but I think trading between leagues would be very difficult, which is why players are treated like free agents rather than traded between leagues.
As for buying and selling players, I think the fans already assume that the owners are greedy swine. Professional soccer is a business just like other professional sports. Again, think of baseball. If a team is not in contention, they will sometimes trade or drop their big name players to cut salary costs. Or if the Cavs were allowed to use that 100 million to buy Dwight Howard and Kobe Bryant, it might be worth doing.
As for loaning players to other leagues, it's exactly that. The owner will give up his player to another team for a certain amount of time in exchange for cash. It's just another business decision (most of the time anyway)
Keeping track of all of the player transactions and roster moves and tournaments is very complicated. But that's a reflection of how much quality soccer exists in the world. If a fan only wanted the follow the MLS, it's not very complicated, or it's at least as easy to follow as the NBA or NFL or any other sport.
The difference between soccer and the main US sports is that there are quite a few quality leagues worth following. Imagine if there were 5 or 6 different basketball leagues in different countries, all as good (or better) than the NBA.
It is possible to keep up with it all, it just takes an effort. Like it would take an effort to keep up with the NBAx6 without SportsCenter or other media coverage. There would be diehards who would make the effort, but most casual fans wouldn't bother.
For example, I am lazy, so I don't know where my favorite MLS teams are in the standings, but I know that the Tigers are still first in the AL central.
.....after a quick check....
Chicago Fire lead the East, Houston Dynamo lead the West.
Go Fire!
Part of the large $ trades are that teams internationally have to pay for the rights to sign a player. Like before Daisuke came to Boston, the Red Sox had to pay his team $50 mil just to begin contract negotiations with him.
I really don't understand a lot about soccer leagues and tournaments either and agree that is part of the reason why Americans have trouble grasping on to it.
Well, I feel like I have a better understanding now! I like your comparison to an NBAx6 without ESPN coverage. That's precisely why it's tough for Americans. Nobody wants to put in the effort (if it was shown on ESPN regularly, more might want to though), and nobody really knows which league to follow. I think most Americans know the MLS is inferior to most of the European leagues, so the fact that if they want to follow the best they'd have to follow an overseas league makes it even less appealing.
***
You know, I used to play for the Fire...not sure if I mentioned that =)
Getting ESPN coverage for soccer is sort-of like the chicken and the egg.
ESPN won't show soccer until there are a lot more soccer fans, and there won't be a lot more soccer fans until ESPN starts showing soccer. (....or maybe if the US wins a World Cup...)
Haha, I forgot about your time with the Fire. (For a former professional soccer player, you don't seem to know a lot about professional soccer...)
Honestly, and I would never admitt this to the hundreds upon thousands of fans that I have, I was playing strictly for the money.
That's right, for the money, baby!!! It's all about the Benjamins!!!!!!!
Which, when money became tight, is why I ultimately left (that and they found out I can't play soccer). I wish I could say I saved up what I earned, but I pissed it all away on Intergalactic Gophers DVDs...I thought it was the next big thing, you know???
Haha, that's understandable. Intergalactic Gophers DVDs seem like an excellent investment to me.
Post a Comment