O.T. The Twellman doctrine for US Soccer
World Cup is over, Vive La France. I'm not the biggest soccer guy but I really get into it for World Cup, it's so cool to have the world come together for this event. To see the celebrations of wins, especially the upsets. Heck, of goals scored; does any sport celebrate scoring like soccer does? As I viewed this world stage of games, players, and fans in the back of my mind this quiet echo sounded, "we're not here". It was as if the USMNT didn't exist even on the sidelines. Even more disappointing was that we weren't even missed; no one even cared enough to make a GIF of us not being there.
The guys and gals that are involved in soccer feel the pain even more. One of them, Taylor Twellman, created a doctrine for US soccer, which he expounds upon in the following clip
http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=3566945
I don't know if you are a big Taylor fan but I really liked what he says. In 4 years I hope we can at least make the knockout round, in 8 years when Mexico, Canada, and the US co-host the World Cup it would be amazing if we could go further then that.
I really like soccer. The festival of it, the comraderie. I'd really like to have an MLS team in the state, preferably towards Ann Arbor or Detroit. What can we do to help the popularity of the sport? It's not much, but I bring this to the board. Honestly, this blog has some power in the world! Perhaps if we spread the word, it may provide some impetus for change. Thoughts?
This sport needs more scoring. It is way to boring to watch. Or allow full contact to eliminate the whining players on the ground.
Absent that, it will be relegated in the US to secondary sport status as in currently is.
It IS full contact. The diving can be eliminated with retroactive fines and suspensions and a clock that stops for injuries. I agree it's irritating as all hell, but when people say soccer is non-contact it's just not even close to accurate. Also, and I'm going off on a tangent here, but I just don't get how anyone can sit there and say they love baseball but they won't watch soccer because it's "boring". That argument shouldn't hold-up as long as people still enjoy baseball.
If the part of a game that's most interesting to a person is scoring, then it makes perfect sense why that person would like baseball more. There's far more scoring in baseball than in soccer.
I'm sure that soccer, like baseball, becomes more enjoyable as one gets to know the complexities of the game.
If you even look at a soccer player the wrong way, they fall on the ground and weep. It is not fulll contact and there is no hitting like rugby and football.
The game is like watching paint dry to the average American. 90 minutes and one or two scores with no big hits. Very boring.
I love baseball but it is slipping into many issues that need to be fixed or it risks falling into secondary status like soccer. At least in baseball there is usually a decent amount of scoring.
You don't get it.
Soccer and basketball are contact sports.
Football is a collision sport.
Now, regarding scoring.
There are tons of ways to "score" that around counted as points. For instance, in US football, a third down conversion is huge. Or a turnover. Those aren't points, but they make the game interesting. But if you don't understand their impact, they're boring. Same with soccer -- the only people who consider it boring are the people blind to the intricacies.
But this isn't gonna convince you. I suspect you just want MOAR HITTING, MOAR SKOARING!
My friend, rugby is the sport for you. Elements very similar to our beloved American football, but with a much greater emphasis on kicking the ball (and no blocking). Full-on tackling with an absolute minimum to no padding. It is no exaggeration that rugby players at almost all levels play through sprains, strains, tears, breaks, lacerations, you name it. They come off the pitch only when absolutely necessary. Not to denigrate soccer . . . it's a wonderful game played by unquestionably world-class athletes. Never ceases to amaze how people can handle the ball with their feet. It is absolutely a contact sport, and I share your disdain for the diving, or "play-acting" as they call it across the Pond. Cleaning up that aspect would only help.
Stop awarding seven points for every "goal" scored in the NFL and you would end up with an average final score of roughly 4-2--the exact score of the World Cup final.
Taylor Twellman is an idiot who is always contradicting himself to sound smart.
We need a larger pool of athletes to be successful - limiting the numbers via pay to play model will never get us to the elite level. So what we have is a large group of male soccer players that are generally from the middle class and up that are looking more at college for the academics than a future in pro soccer.
Look at the makeup of many of these successful teams France, Belgium etc. We need to make it easier for those that have immigrated to the USA that may already be skilled in soccer to play in our youth leagues etc as well as get other children involved who may view only american football and other sports as the way to escape poverty.
lol @ make it easy to immigrate. Send that to current president and propogate in this environment. Good luck.
I didn't say make it easier to immigrate
sorry misread it. But immigrating is a minefield. Screw it. Those players will play in European clubs and go for their country instead of grinding visa here in USA. Why go through that trouble?
I am talking about people that are already in the USA - maybe 2nd generation etc. For example look at Amara Darboh or Jehu Chesson.
Chances are if we develop any superstars they will go to play in Europe until we have a better pro league just as other countries best players in basketball and hockey play in the NBA and NHL
True, but 2nd generation is already "americanized" and they start playing football, bball, baseball etc not soccer. If you think about teenagers or 10+ yo immigrating well they are a bit preoccupied making it in USA.
Also this is for another commentator on scouting Latin players and giving them citizenship...yea ok. See my comments above (i.e. create a sh!tstorm at capital hill if its not already on immigration).
So answer this:
If you had the choice, would you want to watch college football RIGHT now vs soccer on another channel? I'll go CF all day everyday.
Lets be real, soccer plays 6th fiddle here in USA. We simply aren't motivated enough. While this world cup was awesome in upsets and goals, there are also tournaments where 0-0 or 1-0 on a PK happens x 10000. That is SO boring. Beautiful game? may be but its too slow. To me soccer should be revamped and be made more goal friendly. Yes it can be done, stop being stubborn FIFA / soccer "loving" nations. Example would be cricket - would you watch 5 day test series? Heck no. Watch T-20 where they are blasting sixers (think home runs) every 3rd ball and crowds going nuts.
Summary: USA athelets go football, basketball, baseball, hockey and then may be soccer if not already training for track and field to kick ass in the olympics.
All depends on who you are. I love PLAYING soccer, but hate watching it. People watch golf and baseball. I find those incredibly boring. I also find it interesting that there's very little actual game action in a football game, yet people obviously watch the hell out of it.
I agree that scoring goals in soccer is a lot of fun, and more would be better. However, if you have more you might not celebrate them as much. It's a fine line.
Baseball may be boring but atleast teams get to 2-3 combined "runs" in a game. That is NOT the norm in soccer. This world cup with 4-2/4-3 is distorting that. You play soccer and you know it. A 0-0 and 1-0 game is tough to watch. More goals and I bet more people watch it; no doubt in my mind.
Football has plenty of action. Teams move forward on 3/4 plays or give up the ball. 7-0 wins are few and defensive plays are fun to watch. Soccer defensive play is a slide tackle or opportunity to Neymar to roll for 13093 hours.
Score too many goals, and you don't have this...
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1017112538360795146
If it is "too slow" to be successful then explain why it is the most popular sport in the world? Why is Hockey not more popular and it is probably the "fastest" moving game around?
I know that I would watch soccer more if there was a team that I was specifically watching regularly. I think with any sport it is knowing the players and having some association with that team that will get my attention.
That said I do enjoy watching curling so
Because of access. You need a ball and thats it. When a kid - who just got fresh of child labor hours earning 2 cents/ day - he can kick a ball with friends on dirt ground or street.
Ice hockey requires spending good money to actually play. Also, soccer is an "older" game and has roots NOT in the West.
Still, Ice hockey is fun. Heck curling is fun too. Soccer is not bad, just can be made better and more fun but for the stubborness of people who claim "beautiful game" or some sort of superiorty of the sport which is dumb.
Four years ago, I became a soccer fan thanks to the World Cup. I used to think that soccer needed more scoring, too. But there’s something magical about scoring in soccer that other sports can’t replicate. There’s something exhilarating about last-ditch defending or a diving save. There’s a sense of anticipation when you watch a team build through the midfield as they search for an equalizer. You can never know when the next goal will come. I agree that some games can be boring, but that can be said about any sport.
I also disagree that soccer plays “sixth fiddle” in the US. Yes, its TV viewership has a ways to go to match football, basketball, etc. but attendance and youth participation are way up. For example, Atlanta United drew 72,000+ to their game yesterday.
Yes. The lack of action in soccer IS the action. You can't look away because you might miss everything. I love it.
PS : NFL is the most boring sport to watch in person. The only reason it is even palatable at home on your tv is because they chop it up with so many commercials... Something soccer doesn't have which I appreciate.
Soccer being low scoring may be something that a very casual fan finds frustrating, but why change a game so drastically for those people when for millions (billions?) of people already find it exciting. As a person comes to follow and understand the game better, they find all the other elements that are worth watching.
I will say that the predominance of ties in soccer, and the less than ideal method of resolving those ties, does present some downsides in a tournament format, but not enough so to upend things drastically.
This comment tells me you don't actually watch soccer.
Also, if you're going the CFB vs soccer on TV route, you're saying you'd rather watch Indiana play Northwestern for 4 hours with a commercial every 5 minutes vs soccer where you get to consume the sport, uninterrupted for 45 minutes (plus), with the whole thing over in 2 hours?
To each his own.
I dont watch much soccer, was it not clear already? Here I'll say it. I don't watch much soccer.
But hey clearly you watch it.
Not arguing better or not or intricacies, but guess what, PLENTY of people like me in USA. Argument is to bring soccer into the main foray. But how can you convince ME and younger kids its actually exciting when mostly its a snooze fest? Change that first. Hence my suggestion to make it a bit high scoring.
YES I will watch Indiana vs Northwestern. Why not? There'd be some touchdowns. Sorry but other than THIS world cup - where there was plenty of intrigue and actually 4+ goal score combined games - its mostly a 0-0 borehack.
The scoring is fine, that's part of soccer culture. I do think there are things that can be done to improve the game
- Sub as much as you like. I don't understand why you can only sub three players
- Do we need to play 11 players? That seems to cause a lot of congestion. I'm sure this isn't going to change but just going to 10 players would make it a little easier to show some 'beauty' of the game, I would think.
- Eliminate the free kick and take the penalized player out for a set period of time. Or maybe remove the goalie for a set period of time. Re-install if the other team scores.
- Create a 'penalty box' for a hard yellow and take that guy out for a spell, or something like that.
1) Substitutions take time. One of the best things about soccer is that play does not stop (except for fake injuries which are really about getting a breather), and allowing unlimited substitutions would be horrible for the pace of the game.
2) Like baseball, it adds a level of strategy to the game that is interesting. You have to make smart substitutions because if you take a guy out, that's it for him.
3) It makes fitness a key component of the competition.
Besides, why would we want to see more of the second string if your best players can be in good enough shape to play the whole game anyway?
There isn't enough density in the US for the sport at the moment. If American kids want to become heavily invested in soccer, they (and their parents) will need to do a LOT of traveling just to be able to play against high enough level competition. This is very costly and a huge time drain, a lot of families decide that it's not worth it, and encourage their kids to do other sports like football or basketball. High school football in places like Texas is so exceptional because there is no lack of high quality teams/players.
A tiny country like Croatia is actually a great place to field a soccer team since the most exceptional youth in that country will be able to play against other exceptional youth without a huge burden of travel.
If football falls off a cliff in popularity (perhaps due to CTE concerns), then soccer might be able to have that sort of density of good homegrown talent. I don't think this will happen any time soon, if at all.
If you really US soccer to compete on an international level, some well funded organization will need to hire top international youth coaches. Then the organization needs to scout out all across the US for exceptionally talented kids (elementary school age), then pretty much concentrate them into some soccer boarding camp full time to be taught by these coaches. Room/board/tutoring/coaching will all be provided. Then maybe when those kids turn 18+ they can be good enough to compete on an international level. After that you need to ensure that the coaching of the USMNT is up to par as well.
Secondary option: Scout the very best Latin/South american youth players and give them US citizenship.
Your argument falls flat when you talk about scouting kids (elementary school age). Pay to play has already weeded them out by that age. Club soccer starts around kindergarten.
Pay to play is where this whole thing starts to get fixed.
Other sports are more fun to play.
Again, this is very subjective. I find football, baseball, and basketball infuriating to play. Football and baseball are mostly just standing around. Basketball requires height.
At the very young levels (ages 4-8) soccer is ideal because kids can just run and run. Push, shove, kick, pull, fall over, etc. Go watch kids build sand castles in the in-field of a baseball little-league game and goof-off with their mitt in the out-field. Also, if you want kids that young to play football, it's mostly going to resemble rugby for the constant action. Structured sports and activities like football, baseball, golf, gynmastics, dance etc are boring as hell to most kids.
Agree with Crash, this is subjective.
And one thing about soccer is that it doesn't require you to be a physical freak to excel. The best player in the world, Lionel Messi, is 5'7" tall. This makes soccer a viable option for all those incredibly athletic boys and girls who are too small and light to play football or basketball.
As the father of two kids who played soccer at all levels (including college soccer), I'll add the following:
1) Appreciating soccer is sort of like appreciating baseball--you have to grow up with it. It's hard for someone to learn the game as an adult and understand why scoring isn't the only important part of the game, like it is for basketball for example. It's hard to understand tactics. And it's extremely hard to understand the incredible skill needed to play the game at a high level until you've actually tried to strike a moving ball, or bring a 30-yard pass down under immediate and complete control. My grandchildren (should I have them!) will appreciate these things because they will grow up in a household full of soccer.
2) US youth soccer is ruined by coaches who value winning more than development, and this is true at nearly all levels. A highly skilled midget like young Messi would probably flounder in the US system because it's all about pace and strength. The "best" youth players are often the biggest and fastest, and these are precisely the kids who have other options like basketball or football.
On No. 2. That's all youth sports in the US. Development is less important and winning is everything. Other countries are better at developing youth players. Basketball is a good example. We have better athlete, but sometimes they get in tight games with far superior skilled teams. It's the same with US women's soccer. They have the best athletes out there, but not the best skills. With how youth sports are set up in the US, the focus isn't about skill development. It's all about winning.
No's 1 and 2 apply to all sports.
In fact, as it relates to number 1, football and baseball are by far the most complex, convoluted, espteric sports (out of the "big 5"). Those are the two that are most difficult to pick up, let alone appreciate as someone who wasn't raised around the sport. If you think scoring is the only important part of the game in basketball (or that it's more important in basketball than it is in soccer) than you don't understand basketball, and it's understandable why you are mistaken that soccer is somehow more difficult to appreciate, all things equal, than basketball or football or hockey.
What is far more important about fandom of a sport is CARING about it (or a team that plays it). People in America care about football and basketball and to an extent baseball because their friends and parents did/do and caring about a sport is social. That is soccer in most other countries. It is cricket in India. Any sport can be appreciated at the highest levels, but caring about a sport is a cultural thing and that's what makes a fan a fan - caring about the sport or a team that plays it.
As it relates to number 2, I assume your kids only played soccer because hoooo boy this could not be more true about basketball. I don't know about football because I didn't experience it first hand but youth basketball is ridiculous. The tallest players in 5th grade get put down low because they can post up smaller kids and get rebounds even though 99% of them aren't going to be taller than 6'4 and will never play the post above a high school level. I could go on and on about how bad youth basketball is, but tall kids learn to dribble and shoot on the playground because there, there are no positions and no coaches and kids just get to play. If kids played soccer on the playground in the US, they'd get ridiculously good at handling the ball, controlling it out the air, and developing the balls skills that are the foundation of soccer. The tactics can be coached into them easily if they have the skills. US kids don't play enough to get the skills necessary to play at the highest levels though.
Fun topic to bloviate on, so here is my take.
I think we just need to have more moms and dads who have played the game. This is related to the "lack of development" argument that comes up a lot, but I think it is important to start that development even earlier. Like learning a language, the younger you learn, the more natural it is.
When a parent has played the game, they are more likely to put a ball at their young child's feet, and better equipped to show them the intricacies of the game and foster skill building. Since parents are usually the volunteer coaches for our youngest players, having more of them with familiarity with the game will further help development. Parents are also the first line of scouting: if they know the game, they are better able to identify their child or their child's teammate as exceptionally talented, increasing the chance that those type of players filter into the higher level development stream.
Agreed -- too many parents are teaching hockey on grass.
I think this problem, to some extent, with resolve itself once the next generation comes through as Millennials and Gen Zs have kids. This group has a much better understanding of the game as we have grown up with it, unlike our parents.
Also, the more that parents prevent their kids from playing football because of health reasons the less the sport will be popular with kids which will affect future generations.
Couple this with the changing demographic in the USA and there is huge potential for soccer in the future.
fewer kids are playing soccer now though too...so the kids who aren't allowed to play football for CTE reasons, aren't necessarily playing soccer because there's a lot of stats out there about more youth soccer concussions than youth football.
I always find these threads entertaining. 90% of the people here like soccer. You're not the problem. The problem is people like me who find the sport simplistic and most importantly, foreign.
I've tried to get into soccer. I've tried attending and tracking DCFC and the local products. I've tried to pick an EPL team. I've watched MLS until my eyes bled, which took about 7 excruciating minutes. It's just not for me. I respect all sports and I understand the worldwide appeal of soccer. My problem is everything. It's the stupid clock that doesn't stop. It's the idiotic terminology that I'm expected to use. It's the diving. Good lord is it ever the diving. It's the spineless officials that get bullied right out in front of everybody. It's just a foreign game. None of that flies with American sports.
You can't drain the clock because we employ a senior citizen to push a button. It's not hard. The field is not a pitch. A team is not a side. Just like an elevator isn't a lift. It may be over there, but we're not over there. We don't call it football, but apparently US Soccer decided that's as far as we're allowed to stray. The diving would get a player black-balled in this country and if soccer players approached a baseball umpire or basketball official the way they attack soccer refs, half the team would be ejected in the first 3 minutes.
I know. These are American takes. Soccer's elite are rolling their eyes just as hard as I am watching their sport. But as long as Futbol maintains its foreign feel, guys like me aren't going to give it the time of day. Which means my son will move on to baseball or hockey as soon as he develops more mature and complicated motor skills than running and kicking and throwing a temper tantrum.
Until the sport appeals to American sports fans, it will continue to rely on hipsters and offspring of first-generation immigrants to succeed. That might work to reach CONCACAF excellence, I guess. But we'll never get soccer to the point where we can become a world power as it is presently constructed. Not in my lifetime anyway. It's just a dumb game.
Good post. Thats what I've been saying in the thread. Not bashing it, its just how can these soccer loving folks going to convince me that its actually entertaining? Goals are barely scored, dumb penalty kicks to decide the game, the diving etc etc. Lets take diving, while players complain even in football, is it EVER like Neymar bitching on the pitch or players surrounding the official to influence him on freekicks/PKs? No. Next down to get 10 yards in football. Max, Harbaugh is "bitter" about JT being short. If that were to happen in soccer there'll be street riots.
I'll take CF, for 100%, Alex.
Now its CAN be made better (I suggest loosening offside rules or allowing partial offsides I dunno...get creative or take notes from Cricket), and I can be convinced to watch it. Otherwise, forget it. May be soccer is best watched every 4 years during WC.
People aren't convincing more when they say "well may be its you and not the beautiful game". Ok. Thanks.
Completely agree...with this. The goal isn't to get the soccer fan more into soccer, it's to get the football fan or basketball fan into soccer. I played for 12 years (age 5-17) and I love soccer..and I only watch the World Cup or the Olympics. I don't care about college soccer, EPL, COPA, MLS or any of the other initaled soccer leagues out there. It's just not interesting to me...but I probably watched 20 World cup matches over the last month. And in 4 years I'll tune in again. I don't have an emotional draw to any teams or players therefore it's hard to care. It will likely take at least a generation of kids who went with their parents to games, combined with elite US-born players for them to look up to, before it really booms.
But that isnt guaranteed either because golf..and baseball both have declining viewership year over year...so maybe soccer is just destined to be a niche sport. And why does there have to be anything wrong with that?
Well, I think this says more about you than the sport. You have a very narrow definition of what it means to be an "American".
Soccer does appeal to "American sports fans" . . . they're just not Americans that look like you. Last I checked "offspring of first generation immigrants"--and immigrants themselves--are Americans too. And there are millions of others who are stereotypically "American sports fans" who enjoy it as well, and some of us aren't hipsters either.
Slow your roll.
The question asked by the OP is: "What can we do to help the popularity of the sport?"
One thing you can stop doing is getting your underwear in a knot because somebody dared to question the likability of soccer. It's a personal opinion. I don't like soccer. It has nothing to do with the participants and everything to do with idiotic rules and customs that are allowed to fester. I named four of them explicitly. You should re-read the post you replied to, because your galaxy soccer brain turned off as soon as I said "immigrant". None of those reasons had anything to do with the people that play and what they look like, only that immigrants and their offspring who come from soccer-first cultures are more likely to accept the game as it is.
I wasn't attempting to define what it means to be an American. I drew comparisons between the rules and customs of soccer and how they vary from the other major pro sports in the United States. Nor did I say first generation immigrants and their offspring weren't Americans. I didn't judge them in any way. That's a blatant strawman and fuck you for using it to paint me as some xenophobe.
You have a contingent of Americans who like soccer. And a much larger contingent of Americans who think the sport is an abomination. The question is "How do we help the popularity of the sport"? I say you'd have to appeal to what the majority likes about sports and dislikes about soccer. Your answer is apparently to twist words and call non-soccer fans racist. Bold strategy, Cotton.
Well, actually you did make assumptions about what it is to be an "American";
- you referred to your soccer-bashing opinion as an "American take";
- you then wrote, "Until the sport appeals to American sports fans, it will continue to rely on hipsters and offspring of first-generation immigrants to succeed." This clearly implies that you don't think that hipsters and offspring of first-generation immigrants are Americans.
And you're completely pulling things out of your ass when you write that there's a "much larger contingent of Americans who think the sport is an abomination." I get that you think that way, but I doubt that there are more people who hate soccer than who enjoy the game.
No I didn't. You just suck at reading.
- "I know. These are American takes": A turn of phrase, as in the perceived generic opinion of any soccer-hating American. Clarified in the next sentence when I contrasted it with "Soccer's elite". Never implied it was representative of all Americans. That's just piss-poor comprehension on your part and I can't help that.
- "American sports fans": Again, it helps if you read that in context as a continuation of the previous paragraph. "American sports" is used in this instance as a blanket for all non-soccer major pro sports in the U.S. American sports - like football & baseball (where soccer is more of a world sport). American sports fans. Fans of American sports. I categorized professional sports. I made no assumptions about what it is to be an American. Wrong again. You're dumb.
- Prove my third point wrong and we can talk. I don't think it is. And you now have a track record of jumping to ill-formed conclusions, so I'm going to need proof.
The bigger issue here is you read "immigrant" and flew off the handle. Then in conversation, turned your attention to the word "American" as if I said that doesn't represent you, which I never did. You are clearly looking to be offended and/or accused of something. I'm sorry. I can't help you there. I don't hate you and you're guilty of nothing as far as I'm aware. You're just stupid.
Every sport is a dumb game. EVERY sport. Totally f-ing stupid sports are to spend time watching. Strangers chasing a ball or puck around trying to outscore the other team of strangers based on arbitrary rules.
But we watch them and care about certain ones to an irrational degree because humans need things to care about and things to build community around. We become fanatics because our parents are, or kids at school are trading cards, or our heros are athletes on TV or we go to a college that is obsessed with said sport.
Which sports we care about as spectators depends on which ones our communities baptized us into. For most Americans, soccer is not one of those sports and it has nothing to do with soccer as a sport.
My 2 cents:
Maybe this is just a problem in my area (West Michigan) but I suspect not.
Elite soccer training at the youth level is cost prohibitive. Gaining access to top level coaches, camps where scouts attend held at the most competitive universities, are in many ways limited to those whose parents are wealthy enough to support players travel, hotel stays, tournament fees, club fees and more.
Until the barrier is broken, I think we continue to see a gap in participation. It's similar to hockey or other "rich kid" sports like golf and tennis.
Thoughts?
The problem is our players aren't as skilled as those top players in the world. Look at the best American players and see their touch compared to those of top players in other countries. We have enough quality athletes playing the sport now, we just can't get to the skill level of the rest of the world yet. Also our system sucks compared to other countries. MLS doesn't have the youth academies you see from top clubs to develop players. The college system holds back development. The best teenage players should be linked with top clubs by the age they are in college here. And the college season is far too short to help development. The US needs to have more academies associated with top clubs where youth players can develop and not have their parents going broke to pay for it.
College is a big detriment. Those players get 20 or so games of competitive soccer each year, then have to find places to play as an amateur in the summer. Love DCFC and that league, but it's not great soccer. It's not going to improve you much. Meanwhile, in most European countries, players 18-22 are getting 40-50 games a year against quality competition when you factor in all competitions. Over the course of 2-3 years, it makes a massive massive difference.