Author Topic: Soccer 2017/18  (Read 8083 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 1983
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #75: October 11, 2017, 03:07:02 PM »
Let this be a wake up call.  France didn't qualify in 1994 before they won in 1998.  Sometimes you need to know you aren't at contender level to move up.  I'm sorry for Clint and Clint alone.  Best US field player in my lifetime.

I'd add one more:  Cameron.  Good, versatile player who'll be too old next cycle and who was injured and replaced by the bottomless gift to the opposition that is Omar Gonzalez. 

It'll be very interesting now.  They have 2, maybe 3 players right now who are both young enough and good enough to be starters next time around (perhaps add Brooks on the off chance that he might be healthy one day).  The rest of that squad needs to be junked.   There were guys starting last night who shouldn't even be in a national team squad, much less out there playing in a meaningful game.

Offline GuyFromCO

  • Posts: 611
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #76: October 11, 2017, 03:25:33 PM »
No GK in sight, have used 65 YO DeMarcus Beasley for years (why not keep going?!) because finding a LB is apparently the hardest thing in soccer, bumass misplay (Bradley is crap. Jermaine is meh), crap forward play from most (why the freak Wondo and Zusi ever get looks is beyond me). That doesn't even mention firing the best thing to come to US Soccer in years, only to keep the bumass Prez and bring in a retread coach. It's no wonder we suck ass...

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #77: October 11, 2017, 03:27:50 PM »
No GK in sight, have used 65 YO DeMarcus Beasley for years (why not keep going?!) because finding a LB is apparently the hardest thing in soccer, bumass misplay (Bradley is crap. Jermaine is meh), crap forward play from most (why the freak Wondo and Zusi ever get looks is beyond me). That doesn't even mention firing the best thing to come to US Soccer in years, only to keep the bumass Prez and bring in a retreated coach. It's no wonder we suck ass...

don't forget the symbiotic relationship with a league for guys who either can't make it in Europe or who retired from Europe

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 54265
  • We had 'em all the way.
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #78: October 11, 2017, 03:28:02 PM »
I hope Bradley's contract expires (however they do it).

Offline GuyFromCO

  • Posts: 611
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #79: October 11, 2017, 03:30:13 PM »
don't forget the symbiotic relationship with a league for guys who either can't make it in Europe or who retired from Europe

The "Federation" needs to get boned

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 1983
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #80: October 11, 2017, 03:49:10 PM »
I hope Bradley's contract expires (however they do it).

Bradley's 30.  He's a non-factor for next cycle.  34 year old center mids might as well be 80 in most cases. 

Offline GuyFromCO

  • Posts: 611
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #81: October 11, 2017, 03:50:48 PM »
Bradley's 30.  He's a non-factor for next cycle.  34 year old center mids might as well be 80 in most cases.

See above about Beasley. With as long as him and Howard have been trotted out, I'd say safe money is on Bradley and Demps being back

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #82: October 11, 2017, 03:50:57 PM »
Bradley's 30.  He's a non-factor for next cycle.  34 year old center mids might as well be 80 in most cases. 

the question is whether the powers that be care more about being competitive in the next year or two in meaningless games or in gearing for the next world cup

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 1983
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #83: October 11, 2017, 05:02:32 PM »
See above about Beasley. With as long as him and Howard have been trotted out, I'd say safe money is on Bradley and Demps being back

Left back and (especially) keeper aren't comparable to what Bradley does.  And Beasley has played what, 3 games in this qualifying cycle?  Dempsey's a good example of what 34 year old players look like - he is credible as a sub now on the international level, but can't play 90 anymore against decent teams.  And there's no way in the world that he'd be useful in 4 years.  He probably will have retired by then.

Offline OldChelsea

  • Posts: 7425
  • From the best seat in the house at Nationals Park
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #84: October 12, 2017, 07:42:38 AM »
I'm just hoping that this US crash-out doesn't mean they're going to cut back coverage of the matches (particularly on whatever Spanish network gets the telecast rights).

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10828
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #85: October 12, 2017, 09:14:44 AM »
I'm just hoping that this US crash-out doesn't mean they're going to cut back coverage of the matches (particularly on whatever Spanish network gets the telecast rights).
I don't think they can do that contractually. I am sure ratings will be down.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #86: October 12, 2017, 09:26:01 AM »
I doubt the coverage will be down- it's paid for programming, but I'd expect the production quality to be closer to an AAC game than an NFL game

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14445
  • babble on
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #87: October 12, 2017, 09:32:06 AM »
WC is a big TV event with or without the US.  Maybe not in Chez Slate, but in millions of other households.  Not everyone feels like downing pints at Lucky Bar at 7 am. 

Offline GuyFromCO

  • Posts: 611
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #88: October 12, 2017, 09:35:22 AM »
Not everyone feels like downing pints at Lucky Bar at 7 am.

Those people have issues  :lol:

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14445
  • babble on
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #89: October 12, 2017, 09:38:00 AM »
Ha - 2002 World Cup was the best; watch the early game at 3 am at the Diner and then the late game at 7 at Lucky Bar.  I somehow watched every game and missed no days of work, but was a total zombie by the end of group play.
Those people have issues  :lol:

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #90: October 12, 2017, 09:38:50 AM »
WC is a big TV event with or without the US.  Maybe not in Chez Slate, but in millions of other households.  Not everyone feels like downing pints at Lucky Bar at 7 am. 

Quote
ESPN broadcast all 64 World Cup games from Brazil in 2014, averaging 4.6 million viewers. Games not featuring the United States averaged just 3.9 million viewers. The four American games — against Ghana, Portugal, Germany and Belgium — accounted for almost 20 percent of ESPN’s total World Cup viewers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/11/sports/soccer/world-cup-soccer.html

Fox is pretty screwed - they heavily invested in an event that no longer has it's star attraction.

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14445
  • babble on
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #91: October 12, 2017, 10:13:17 AM »
Networks gamble on sports events.  NBC loses out when the NHL won't let players go to the winter Olympics, FOX/NBC bet on major TV markets being in the World Series.  ESPN did pretty well with Euro 2016 even though it doesn't get more niche than that. 

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #92: October 12, 2017, 10:19:23 AM »
When a team has made the tournament consistently since the 80s, I’m guessing the bidders assumed they would be there when they decided what it was worth

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14445
  • babble on
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #93: October 12, 2017, 11:39:06 AM »
I'm sure that's true, and no one in their right mind would have anticipated the confluence of clusterfreaks that were required to result in such an outcome on Tuesday.  But I wouldn't be dumping FOX stock because of this...the World Cup is still a huge media event even if some casual viewers decide to watch 4H piglet racing instead. 

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #94: October 12, 2017, 11:47:50 AM »
I'm sure that's true, and no one in their right mind would have anticipated the confluence of clusterfreaks that were required to result in such an outcome on Tuesday.  But I wouldn't be dumping FOX stock because of this...the World Cup is still a huge media event even if some casual viewers decide to watch 4H piglet racing instead. 

I don't know, if I was a random FS1 host, I'd be worried about some espn style cuts to make sports as profitable as anticipated. Lately americans have proven that if we don't care about sports, we no longer feel compelled to watch

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10828
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #95: October 12, 2017, 12:08:45 PM »
I'm sure Trump can work something out with Putin to get the USA team in.

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14445
  • babble on
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #96: October 12, 2017, 05:15:18 PM »

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #97: October 12, 2017, 05:22:57 PM »
:lmao:

Offline Natsinpwc

  • Posts: 10828
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #98: October 12, 2017, 06:42:52 PM »
That cracked me up Ali.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19138
Re: Soccer 2017/18
« Reply #99: October 17, 2017, 09:21:55 AM »
So one of the excuses for no relegation in the MLS is that cities invest in soccer specific stadiums and need a top tier team to justify the investment. Nice to see them looking out for municipal investments

https://deadspin.com/columbus-crew-welcome-to-the-stadium-extortion-racket-1819608903