The '99 women's World Cup team: Why the appeal?

[Dick Whitman]

Becuase it was one of those times we see magic of sport.

That's circular.

It was magical because it was magical?

 

[Kermit McManus]

Yes. And the magic of it allow's me to use TV word like "magical."

 

[CarltonBanks]

The 1999 WC tickets were not given out for free. My gosh, this is FIFA we are talking about. It doesn't give anything away for free.

Is it really that difficult to believe people paid to attend? The US team played before a capacity crowd in the 96 Olympics. The players were great at PR. They played an attractive style of soccer. They were winning and everybody loves a winner.

You don't have to believe me...but I was told a significant number of "promotional" tickets were given out for most of the games. Did a lot of people pay to attend? Yes, did all of them? Heck no. Did more than half of them? Slightly.

There were some freebies - not half the seats - in the group stage for non-US matches. But that has zero to do with the 99 team's popularity.

You are 100% correct there...I was just trying to point out that the buzz about crowds of 100,000 is a bit overblown. And, yes, especially in the games that did not involve the USA.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Mizzou and Sam pretty much nailed it: It was a winning team, a likable team, an accessible team, lightning in a bottle, all of that. The dramatic flair of the way the title game was won was just the icing on the cake.

I was really hoping this year's team would win so they would be able to step out of the 99 team's long shadow, but they just couldn't get it done. This year's team liked to live on the edge too much, it seems, and you can only go to that well so many times before it's dry.

As for the lame "nobody gives a rat's ass about soccer" argument, try selling that tired old saw in the Northwest, where they are selling out stadiums - albeit smaller ones, for sure - for MLS games, and they even dumped baseball to convert a stadium to soccer-only. Don't have any numbers at the ready, but I would be willing to bet soccer is outdrawing baseball in some places.

The achievements in the Northwest duly noted (but that's kind of a weird sub-nation in its own right), the end of your post is just more bait for the anti-soccer crowd because you are inflating this growth so far beyond where it really is. The "baseball" they dumped was a minor league team that had serious attendance problems and stadium issues of its own before soccer ever showed up.

And according to the following two links, there is exactly one place where MLS attendance is outpacing MLB: Seattle.

http://mlsattendance.blogspot.com/2011_06_01_archive.html

http://espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

That is a complete apples-and-gummi-worms comparison, too, because MLS has a substantially lower average ticket price and, more to the point, they play one-fifth as many games.

Soccer is growing and finding its niche. There is no need to foolishly compare it to baseball.

 

[Boomer7]

You are 100% correct there...I was just trying to point out that the buzz about crowds of 100,000 is a bit overblown. And, yes, especially in the games that did not involve the USA.

Seeing as how none of the stadiums had a capacity of 100,000 at the time, I'm guessing that there wasn't a lot of "buzz about crowds of 100,000".

 

[Mizzougrad96]

most of y'all are being WAAAAY too p.c. over this. it was part 'perfect storm' of girls/women's soccer taking off for young girls in rec leagues all over the country, more folks than ever here paying any mind to women's soccer on the h.s./college level, they were exceptionally skilled/cohesive and YES, MOST IMPORTANTLY, SEVERAL OF THEIR STAR PLAYERS WERE EYE CANDY AND PREDOMINANTLY CAUCASIAN.

Y'all truly believe a homely squad made up of minorities catches the same lightning in a bottle? attention from madison avenue, etc.? ???

i know we're all eager to declare women's sports have come a long way, baby -- and they certainly have -- but not nearly as far as p.c.nation likes to think. every few years, folks pay attention if USA is getting somewhere in world cup play, but when the tournament's over, where does everyone go? no pro leagues are relevant. no college teams have developed any sort of national fan base like the men's sports have.

even if the women hadn't choked yesterday, come tomorrow, where would the state of women's soccer be overall in this country? in the same niche it occupies now. it's stuck in the mud. i truly don't see where the growth is coming from at the moment.

am i wrong? if so, i'd love to hear why.

Brianna Scurry was front and center as one of the faces of that team.

 

[hondo]

Why the appeal? Because Christine Brennan said so.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Why the appeal? Because Christine Brennan said so.

I think that is often the case, but not with the 1999 team.

 

[shockey]

Brianna Scurry was front and center as one of the faces of that team.

um, yeah? emphasis one ONE. if it was brianna and a bunch of homely but talented white chicks receive anywhere close to the same attention?

 

[Herbert Anchovy]

I didn't watch one minute of it then or now.

 

[rmanfredi]

I agree with the reasons posted, and I also think those gals were just better.

After watching yesterday's final, I ended up Googling Kristine Lilly. I couldn't believe what I was reading. She's an amazing athlete, and I hate soccer. I get the feeling you just can't replace someone like Kristine Lilly.

Side rant that's going to sound horribly un-PC and jingoistic: Can't we get an AMERICAN to coach the U.S. National Team? Would that be possible?

The men always have an American coach. Hasn't really worked all too well for them.

It's not our sport and people from other countries know a lot more. That's not to say an American doesn't exist who would be great but you have a heck of lot more options overseas.

If American football somehow created a worldwide tournament would you expect other countries to hire coaches from their own country or from the U.S. where there is a plethora of coaches who really know their stuff? It's not a perfect analogy but it's pretty close.

I wish the idiots who run the men's team would swallow their egos and pay the effing money to get a great coach. Bradley is mediocre at best. Arena was good in the beginning but is the type of coach who will rally the team for awhile but eventually start falling on deaf ears because he is an egomaniac. Sampson ... well he was horrible.

How quickly we forget about the "Miracle Worker," aka "Bora Bora"

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Brianna Scurry was front and center as one of the faces of that team.

um, yeah? emphasis one ONE. if it was brianna and a bunch of homely but talented white chicks receive anywhere close to the same attention?

Hard to say, but before the 1999 World Cup, Mia Hamm was the only player on that team that would qualify as being well-known, maybe Julie Foudy too.

With the exception of Chastain and to a lesser extent, Hamm, most of the women on that team ranged from normal-looking to cute. It's not like they all looked like Heather Mitts. They looked like normal women, they're all educated, smart and basically what all of us would be thrilled to see our daughters grow up and become.

I don't buy for a second that the only reason the 1999 team got attention is because they were all hot.