Jen Chang leaving SI

I agree with that last point. As for SI.com, I just think that if you're trying to build a comprehensive sports site, you try to provide content on the stuff people are most interested in. And it's not like Fox Soccer's site (or cast of contributors) is so full of unique perspectives that SI.com couldn't compete if it tried.

 

Have you been to SI.com's soccer section? They've got pieces from pretty much the best English-language soccer writers on the continent and have for some time. I can't imagine they're getting poor numbers if they keep springing for those guys' fees.

I have a hard time understanding what Soccernet or Fox 'has' that SI.com does not...except perhaps for more easily fooled editors in the case of the former.

 

Fox Soccer and Soccernet have comprehensive coverage but not necessarily coverage it has cultivated. A lot of it is wire stuff, tables, standings, stats, etc. It wouldn't take much -- from a writing standpoint -- to elevate above them in terms of soccer analysis and commentary, but it would obviously take money invested in producing analysis and commentary from the best soccer writers.

 

Congrats to Jen.

As for the other topic. When I want to read soccer news...I go to the BBC. Why would I care what an American writer has to say about English soccer? Can't say I have ever hit up any of the American sites for English sports.

 

BBC is good for English-related soccer content, but Soccernet and Fox Soccer provide coverage for the entire globe, not just the EPL. If you love soccer -- and those that do love soccer REALLY love soccer -- you are interested much more than the EPL and what the BBC typically offers. Player transfers, international teams, Champions League, Serie A, Bundesliga, La Liga, South America, Mexico, MLS, you're not going to get in-depth coverage at BBC on those aspects like you can on the other two sites, despite those sites' limitations from a writing perspective.

 

Oh sure -- they have some good writers.

But like the person said above -- if I want to know about English soccer, I can go to an English site. Why is a U.S. site spending that much to compete?

 

Because it's the Internet. Who cares if it's an "English site" or "Spanish site" or "U.S. site" or whatever? It's a site. It's a site with quality content.

Sid Lowe is a British guy living in Spain who sometimes writes for an American site. Raphael Honigstein is a German guy who writes about English football in German and German football in English...sometimes for an American site.

That's not even getting in to the sites and blogs based in one country dedicated to covering the sport in another country.

Again, I fail to see what SI.com is lacking that other sites (Soccernet, FOX Soccer) have in your estimation. I've got no stake in the matter, but I think it's odd to say SI.com shouldn't bother with foreign soccer coverage simply because the parent publication originates in the U.S.

 

Si.com has probably the highest average quality of soccer writing on the web. I certainly check other sites more frequently (usually the Guardian, which has a big crossover with si.com), but from an analysis perspective, for me si.com's soccer coverage is far superior to Fox Soccer or soccernet.

 

SI.com is a great site but does not offer the breadth of information as Soccernet or Foxsoccer. If you could combine the two, now you'd be talking.

 

Sure, but I can get the news from other sites. I am not impressed by the vast majority of the writers on either Fox Soccer or Soccernet.