Not the worst I've seen, but I did write NUVO to set Hammer straight:
I thank Steve Hammer for writing on soccer ("Why does America hate soccer? With or without Beckham, we yawn."). I'm glad to see that Steve has come to embrace a sport that many Americans, including me, already love.
While I agree with some of the sentiments that Steve expresses in his column, I'd also like to take issue with some of his conclusions, particularly because I've been following soccer in this country since the early 1990's and have seen how far the sport has come since then. I suppose that I have a more positive outlook on soccer's possibilities in America than Steve does, and yet I try to maintain some realism in that outlook as well.
First, to say that Americans "suck" at soccer is to be overly simplistic. There's no question that the U.S. National Team has not been able to consistently compete with soccer's big guns--with the exception of Mexico, whom we routinely beat--and that the team's World Cup performances have been unconvincing in two of the last four World Cups. But Steve neglected to mention that our World Cup squad qualified for the knockout stages of the 1994 World Cup and were quarterfinalists in the 2002 World Cup, narrowly missing the semifinals after outplaying Germany. Furthermore, the U.S. has qualified for five straight World Cups, which is no easy task in itself. And, as someone who watches the game, Steve ought to know well that soccer is a notoriously fickle sport. For example, France, who won the World Cup in 1998, didn't win a single game or score a single goal in the following World Cup tournament in 2002. In other words, even the powerhouses of the soccer world--not just the U.S. team--have bad cycles as well as good cycles.
Second, MLS really doesn't need a savior and is a better league than it is given credit for. While the "experts" whose analysis Steve relies upon claim that MLS teams would struggle against English League 2 teams, I've read articles in which other "experts" claim that the top MLS teams could survive in the English Premier League, which is the country's top tier league. So who's correct? The fact is that we won't ever know unless an MLS side competes in one of these leagues for a full season, and that's not going to happen. What is true, as Steve says, is that MLS is clearly not as good as the big European leagues. But then what would any sensible person expect from MLS, which is only twelve years old? In short, instead of listening to what "experts" have to say, NUVO readers should watch some MLS games and form their own opinions.
When I look at MLS, I see a league that is taking firm steps toward success. From my perspective, the level of play has only gotten better over the last twelve years. Most MLS teams have built or are currently building new state-of-the-art stadiums (such as L.A.'s Home Depot Center), allowing them to gain more revenue in their enterprises so they can spend money on better players. More investors are interested in starting MLS franchises than at any time in the league's history. Attendances across the league are steady at an average of just over 15,000 per game. And the league has been crucial in the development of the American player and an important supplier of players to the U.S. National Team. MLS is not the Premiership, but it's moving along just fine at this point in its short history.
Finally, as I mentioned above, millions of Americans already love soccer. No sensible American soccer fan would ever claim that the sport will overtake "the big three" American sports in popularity. But more Americans watched the World Cup last year than ever before. The 2006 World Cup final had better television ratings than most games of the 2006 NBA Finals. More Americans watched the CONCACAF Gold Cup final last month (the championship of our World Cup qualifying region, which the U.S. won by beating Mexico) than the Stanley Cup Finals. There are now three television channels in this country devoted almost exclusively to soccer. And ESPN is throwing its weight behind MLS broadcasts this year, primarily because of David Beckham's presence. While it remains to be seen what effect Beckham will have on MLS and soccer's popularity, it sure seems foolish to buy into stereotypes by saying that Americans hate soccer.
In closing, by bringing Beckham to MLS, the league doesn't seek a mass conversion of "average American sports fans" into soccer lovers. Rather, MLS is aiming straight at the millions of Americans who already like soccer but don't follow MLS closely or at all. We'll know whether this tactic has worked in at least five years time, when Beckham's contract with the L.A. Galaxy expires.
We have some lazy sports/competition reporters in this country. Whether it is 'America hates soccer' or 'NASCAR is a hillbilly festival' or 'poker is an evil addiction'. How can people continue to be employed and get paid by writing the same tired words?
6 comments:
Not the worst I've seen, but I did write NUVO to set Hammer straight:
I thank Steve Hammer for writing on soccer ("Why does America hate soccer? With or without Beckham, we yawn."). I'm glad to see that Steve has come to embrace a sport that many Americans, including me, already love.
While I agree with some of the sentiments that Steve expresses in his column, I'd also like to take issue with some of his conclusions, particularly because I've been following soccer in this country since the early 1990's and have seen how far the sport has come since then. I suppose that I have a more positive outlook on soccer's possibilities in America than Steve does, and yet I try to maintain some realism in that outlook as well.
First, to say that Americans "suck" at soccer is to be overly simplistic. There's no question that the U.S. National Team has not been able to consistently compete with soccer's big guns--with the exception of Mexico, whom we routinely beat--and that the team's World Cup performances have been unconvincing in two of the last four World Cups. But Steve neglected to mention that our World Cup squad qualified for the knockout stages of the 1994 World Cup and were quarterfinalists in the 2002 World Cup, narrowly missing the semifinals after outplaying Germany. Furthermore, the U.S. has qualified for five straight World Cups, which is no easy task in itself. And, as someone who watches the game, Steve ought to know well that soccer is a notoriously fickle sport. For example, France, who won the World Cup in 1998, didn't win a single game or score a single goal in the following World Cup tournament in 2002. In other words, even the powerhouses of the soccer world--not just the U.S. team--have bad cycles as well as good cycles.
Second, MLS really doesn't need a savior and is a better league than it is given credit for. While the "experts" whose analysis Steve relies upon claim that MLS teams would struggle against English League 2 teams, I've read articles in which other "experts" claim that the top MLS teams could survive in the English Premier League, which is the country's top tier league. So who's correct? The fact is that we won't ever know unless an MLS side competes in one of these leagues for a full season, and that's not going to happen. What is true, as Steve says, is that MLS is clearly not as good as the big European leagues. But then what would any sensible person expect from MLS, which is only twelve years old? In short, instead of listening to what "experts" have to say, NUVO readers should watch some MLS games and form their own opinions.
When I look at MLS, I see a league that is taking firm steps toward success. From my perspective, the level of play has only gotten better over the last twelve years. Most MLS teams have built or are currently building new state-of-the-art stadiums (such as L.A.'s Home Depot Center), allowing them to gain more revenue in their enterprises so they can spend money on better players. More investors are interested in starting MLS franchises than at any time in the league's history. Attendances across the league are steady at an average of just over 15,000 per game. And the league has been crucial in the development of the American player and an important supplier of players to the U.S. National Team. MLS is not the Premiership, but it's moving along just fine at this point in its short history.
Finally, as I mentioned above, millions of Americans already love soccer. No sensible American soccer fan would ever claim that the sport will overtake "the big three" American sports in popularity. But more Americans watched the World Cup last year than ever before. The 2006 World Cup final had better television ratings than most games of the 2006 NBA Finals. More Americans watched the CONCACAF Gold Cup final last month (the championship of our World Cup qualifying region, which the U.S. won by beating Mexico) than the Stanley Cup Finals. There are now three television channels in this country devoted almost exclusively to soccer. And ESPN is throwing its weight behind MLS broadcasts this year, primarily because of David Beckham's presence. While it remains to be seen what effect Beckham will have on MLS and soccer's popularity, it sure seems foolish to buy into stereotypes by saying that Americans hate soccer.
In closing, by bringing Beckham to MLS, the league doesn't seek a mass conversion of "average American sports fans" into soccer lovers. Rather, MLS is aiming straight at the millions of Americans who already like soccer but don't follow MLS closely or at all. We'll know whether this tactic has worked in at least five years time, when Beckham's contract with the L.A. Galaxy expires.
Jim Dimitri
Indianapolis
That's a pretty long post...and I didn't read it, but I think I can sum it up with the following.
"Soccer is for wieners."
Heckuva job, Brownie.
We have some lazy sports/competition reporters in this country. Whether it is 'America hates soccer' or 'NASCAR is a hillbilly festival' or 'poker is an evil addiction'. How can people continue to be employed and get paid by writing the same tired words?
FYI, and not that it means anything... Brownie is the younger brother of James Brown.
You know how younger brothers are.
Nice letter, by the way.
Post a Comment