Exile on Waveland

Soccer in this country is like Rap in that old people, ignorant people or to be more kind, "traditionalists" either can't or don't want to understand it's influence and importance. They'd rather listen to the Beatles, Miles Davis or whatever and snobbishly dismiss Jay Z as a thug who just talks over obnoxious beats. My attitude is the same towards both attitudes. You're missing out and you sound stupid. That's on you. While I agree with your thesis, the bolded is some pretty damn good ish. It doesn't take snobbishness to like either; just taste. Right. No one is saying to abandon baseball because soccer exists. And Sulley is half right. The fact that 1) The best soccer isn't played in America and 2) The best soccer is spread over several leagues is a definite barrier to the all-out superfandom you see in places like, well, here for other sports. The problem is that isn't a fundamental flaw with the sport, or some proof that soccer is boring or for foreigners or whatever cliched comparisons people like to make. Soccer's popularity and background in America is much different than that of any other sport. So the fact that soccer is accepted on different terms than sports that were INVENTED here is not something worthy of mocking derision, but merely acceptance of what it is. It's not going to be the NFL, but it's more than the Olympics. 1) I just get a little itchy when the Beatles are dissed in any way (though I don't believe that was wolf's intent). 2) You absolutely right. The fact that we don't have the best league -- and the fact that their isn't one unquestionable "best" league -- will always be a drag on popularity here.

Then you're ignoring what's right in front of you.

Soccer in this country is like Rap in that old people, ignorant people or to be more kind, "traditionalists" either can't or don't want to understand it's influence and importance. They'd rather listen to the Beatles, Miles Davis or whatever and snobbishly dismiss Jay Z as a thug who just talks over obnoxious beats. My attitude is the same towards both attitudes. You're missing out and you sound stupid. That's on you. While I agree with your thesis, the bolded is some pretty damn good ish. It doesn't take snobbishness to like either; just taste.

I will be stunned if Donovan and Bradley aren't series transfer targets and I think Howard is soon to be (back) on a top-10 club.

I'm not an expert, but seems like a good trade/value. I hate to lose Buff, but something had to be done and he was a sell-high possibility. I don't know much/anything about the players coming back, but the picks are nice. I do want to know if another move is compelled by the cap or not.

Assuming Germany takes care of business -- and from what I've seen of Germany and Ghana, I have no reason to suspect they won't -- this is the exact scenario I hoped for since the draw in December. Draw England, win the group on goals/goal differential, avoid Germany, and get Serbia/Ghana/Australia then (what is now) Uruguay/South Korea. The US would be underdogs against Serbia and Uruguay obviously, but it would be feasible and I'll take the chances. Galaxies better than Germany then Argentina staring down at you. Howard was solid, and his service will be the unsung part of the goal. Demerit was excellent after the beginning. Bocanegra played his best game of the tournament so far. Altidore dominated Algeria's backline in my opinion, this is exactly what I want/expect from him. Outstanding performance. Dempsey stood out to me as well, he was unlucky not to net two goals. Bradley was Bradley -- that's a compliment. Donovan made the perfect run at the perfect time and was rewarded (and slotted unlike Yakubu).

I ordered the package and the schwag has been arriving individually for me. Kind of strange. I have the hat and shirt so far.

Rooney's in South Africa? Wasn't really sure.

They also lost Tijan Jobe. OH MY GOD HOW WILL THEY EVER RECOVER

I still can't believe that call. Game of the tournament so far, but not the correct result. Howard--Looked healthy as shnsajax and was solid in the air. Got caught in no man's land on the first goal -- though the fault resided with the defense. Gooch--I was optimistic about his play/health the past couple of games, but thought he was pretty poor today (especially the first half). He was, at minimum, indirectly responsible for both goals. Torres--I've been calling for him to play more but he was poor. As US said, Clark would've closed the space on Slovenia's first goal. Edu earned this spot for next game, in my opinion. Donovan--great job on the goal, was calm and looking to pass but when he had nothing looked to score. Shooting upwards was the correct shot too. Also should have had an assist. Bradley--great run, huge goal. Dempsey--not entirely his fault, but wasn't involved much. Probably should have had an assist though. Altidore--I feel disappointed by his play overall -- maybe I expect too much too soon -- but excellent target play to knock the ball down for Bradley.

Even with the tie, the US advances outright with a win Wednesday. They completely control their own destiny. They also can advance with a tie depending, and can even win the group depending. But a win and they advance -- Algeria scoring or not didn't change that paradigm.

Does Chatham Tap count?

I hate Michigan. Therefore, Michigan will never be good again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01018/fat-maradona_1018141i.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/12/10/article-1093424-0195B0810000044D-971_468x559.jpg

Seriously. God Americans are insufferable. This thread really doesn't need irrelevant personal opinions as to why soccer isn't popular in America -- especially considering the growth in popularity is palpable (and empirical) for anyone without blinders on. You don't like soccer. Fine, we get it. We just don't care. Now let us enjoy the World Cup. Now that's an insufferable answer. Sure. I'm an American too. I'm almost certainly often insufferable too. However, you won't see me in a golf thread talking about how boring it is, in a tennis thread talking about how it's boring and why it's losing popularity, or in a NASCAR thread talking about how it's for rednecks. Now, I'm not the master of this thread, or a mod at all, but I'm by no means the only poster that has complained about this. I want to read and discuss Slovenia's likely tactics against the US, how Switzerland won/was fortunate -- and even why the tournament has been a bit dull and lacking scoring.

Seriously. God Americans are insufferable. This thread really doesn't need irrelevant personal opinions as to why soccer isn't popular in America -- especially considering the growth in popularity is palpable (and empirical) for anyone without blinders on. You don't like soccer. Fine, we get it. We just don't care. Now let us enjoy the World Cup.

It's pretty understandable for Bulls fans given some of the antics he pulled in last year's playoffs against the Bulls. Ah, OK. I honestly don't remember antics, but that's not a series I really cared about much. I'll defer on that.

I guess so. But if they tie the standings are still England 4 (assuming they beat Algeria), Slovenia 4, USA 2. With the USA playing Algeria and Slovenia playing England. I guess their best chance is to tie the USA and hope Algeria can tie or better against the USA. A tie Friday puts Slovenia in position to advance. If they play to win, sure, they could beat the US, but that's not likely. And a loss would all but end their campaign. Never mind that I think bunker-and-counter is likely Slovenia's best path to win anyway. If I'm Slovenia, I'm playing 10-11 men behind the ball, hoping for one counter goal leading to one victory, or two ties.

Rondo went to Kentucky -- Kentucky -- yet I can't hate him. Don't really understand the hate there.

I'm nearly certain Slovenia will be thrilled to tie. I'm less certain it will actually be discernible whether they're playing for the tie or playing to win.

I'm going to disagree on Ole Miss. They have a pretty strong tradition (two Mannings doesn't hurt) and have had some pretty good teams recently. I'd say they're clearly above Iowa State and really K-State too. They may not be Florida/Alabama/Georgia/LSU, but no conference can entirely be elite teams. Teams like Iowa State actually detract, in my opinion. Ole Miss is a positive. If Iowa State or Kansas State or someone was the prime time game on Saturday I would groan, not so if it was Ole Miss (my fabricated subjective test). South Carolina strikes me as pretty much a zero, though better than ISU/KSU.* *Turns out Forbes likes them too. Oh well, didn't realize. Apologies Gamecocks.

I'm curious of Slovenia's mentality in the US game. Knowing they have England waiting for them, are they going to be really pushing for a win? I hope so, that plays to the US's counter attack and I think that's a huge advantage. I really hope so. I'm more afraid of a bunker-and-counter Slovenia team than a Slovenia team pushing the issue, or at least playing straight up. I really like the US's chances in such a game. I'm worried if Slovenia bunkers, the US won't bust it and Slovenia will snipe a counter goal. Again, the US has to try and WIN this group. They need to win both games, with a solid goal differential. Advancing out of the group is always a great goal for the US; but that changed when they drew (i) this group and (ii) England. Now they need to try and win it. Winning the group is the difference between an almost certain second round loss, and a legitimate chance at the semis.

1) Forbes is lying? 2) Nebraska is 19-8 the last two years and 20-8 under Pelini (3-0 in bowls). So, as far as them not winning more than eight games for the next forever, they have actually won more than eight games the past two seasons. I'm sure they didn't use imaginary numbers or something, I'm saying that their conclusion is wrong. I was talking regular season wins, and after last year's confluence of fortune that got them to 9 wins, they'll be back to okaydom (or worse if they lose a game they should win) this year. So Forbes is wrong? OK. Well, I think they're wrong the other way. Nebraska is the most valuable football program in the nation. HUGE coup for the Big 10. Prove me wrong. I was totally expecting the regular season wins argument. Still, they won nine last year so it's not exactly unprecedented. Regardless, who cares? Winning a bowl game is pretty important. I do agree, however, that playing in the Big 10 figures to be more taxing than the Big 12 for Nebraska.

x eleventy billion.

Ohhh . . . excellent transition from "hockey is more popular than soccer" to "the NHL is more popular than the MLS." Those aren't the same arguments. At all. Note: You cannot "still contend" something different from your original contention.