Wynalda tell hime Rome to suck his ****!

I'm not the one parsing "some areas." Chuck brought it into the thread. I'm just turning it around on him.

 

Indeed. Just after he scored or assisted half the England team's goals in the World Cup, and before he returned to form a month ago and played himself back into national team talks, he was on the bench for a little while.

The guy can remain effective in what he does for a good while. He has never been a speedy, quick playmaker with moves. He's a good passer who hits crazy free kicks. That's all. And while the media has never done a good job letting people know just what an individual pro soccer player is realistically capable of (see Adu, Freddy), Beckham will be fine here.

And the average American female will still know a hell of a lot more about him, and have a lot more interest in him, than LeBron james or Dwyane Wade. Which of course is a measure of popularity, even if it often has little to do with what is on the field.

 

I don't understand why soccer has to be marketed to be successful. If it was any good we would watch it.

I have noticed the ESPN push has started. They seem to be working in more soccer highlights to Sports Center.

That will only hurt the sport. Players will be going for Sportscenter moments .

 

And little to do with the most important thing...getting asses in the seats for games not involving the Galaxy. Beckham in the U.S. context is like figure skating, more having to do with spectacle than sport. And I think you know that Beckham was roundly criticized for his World Cup performance; to cite the "half of" thing is disingenuous. And if he were so on top of his game, he wouldn't hafta be fighting for jack. This is another nattering thing about pro-soccer zeal: gilding the lily.

 

Gilding the lily? Don't confuse understanding with "zeal."

OK. . . the entire English team was criticized for its performance, and rightfully so. He took quite a bit of that, as the captain does and should. But that doesn't erase the stats I quoted above, considering they advanced to the quarterfinals by the skin of their teeth since most of the team played horribly. So his scoring was somewhat important.

He didn't have a great World Cup, but his forte is the free kick, which often yields the goal that helps your team win. They'll have to hide and protect him defensively, but if he hits a game-winner or five for the Galaxy due to his free kicks, then he'll have fulfilled the knowledgeable fan's on-field expectations.

As for Beckham "fighting" . . . . Teams in the EPL made overtures, and Real Madrid is not happy he's leaving. A main reason the new England coach dropped him last fall was because he wanted to start his own team, and felt Beckham was getting older, both fair points. But now it seems that coach, Steve McLaren, is looking desperately to save his job, and has opened up to the idea of recalling Beckham. And that's not because ladies find him hot.

As for getting butts in the seats for MLS games not involving Beckham, you're absolutely right. The post archive here is pretty comprehensive; I'm not sure where I said that wouldn't be an issue. MLS is probably as popular as it's going to get, barring a US World Cup Final win. Many markets (Kansas Cty, Columbus, etc.) will continue to have attendance issues, and unless the product on the field improves overall in the next couple of years, I think attendance will drop. It looks like Becks is gonna be the only Euopean guy signed under his "Rule," and the hoopla will thus die quickly.

And if he has a mediocre year or two on the field . . . . . . the whole thing returns to where it was before they signed him.

Either way, nothing you said here changes the point I made to Chuck: that Beckham is more popular in the US that Wade or LeBron. He said something, I countered it.

 

Marketing is what draws out the "average" fan. The mere fact that the sport (note I didn't specify a league), without any marketing, is watched more than most other sports in this country speaks for itself.

I don't see how players will go for SportsCenter moments. It isn't in the nature of the game.

Dooley, you are better than this. Piotr made a great post above this. I will also point out that you claimed that Beckham was buried on the bench at Real. Not only is that patently false, but disingenuous. The guy was buried because he signed a contract to play in America. It had nothing to do with his play. And you damn well know that he still has the chops to play in the EPL. He just won't be playing for the top 3 or 4 teams as they don't need him.

You can't say that the guy is done simply because he is signing with a team in the US. The guy is simply choosing to keep his star power high by playing in a more marketable area.

You should also realize that the World Cup roster in England is something that is always fought for.

Outside of the theory that signing Beckham won't increase attendance, you are just throwing shit against the wall to see if it sticks. Women aren't Beckham's only audience and you know that too.

 

I disagree with you, crasstor, and since I'll be gone for a while, I'll leave it at that. And do more men in the U.S. know who Lebron James is than Beckham? Probably. Do more women? I dunno, but I doubt much of the female interest has anything to do with how he plays soccer. And soccer's actuarial tables say that at 31, Beckham is on the downhill side. Heck, he was probably on the downhill side starting two years ago. Again, if he were as great as you say he is, he would never have to fight for a job; the new English coach would have made him a centerpiece.

Now I realize that soccer zealots don't allow for any deviation from the party line, but if you think we're getting Beckham anywhere close to his prime, you are delusional. And soccer zealots also need to condescend to people who merely like watching the sport at its highest level but don't feel the burning need to guilt us into making soccer the No. 3 sport in America.

 

Dooley, nobody has stated that we're getting Beckham in his prime. People are just disagreeing with your premise that Beckham is coming as a shell of his former self.

There is no dilusion that Beckham is coming here because his ego won't allow him to play for Fulham or Man City. However, he does have the skill to do so.

People are also contending that MLS is growing based on the evidence before them. For the first time ever every game is shown on television, either national or locally. For the first time ever the league will be paid to show their games instead of being allowed time slots.

That is growth. To go from having to rent time on a cable channel to getting paid to show your games is growth. It is slow growth, but it is still there.

That isn't the gusto or zeal that you think is spouted. That is just a realistic look.

 

Is in marketing or manipulation? All of a sudden soccer highlights start showing up on Sports Center. Stories start appearing in ESPN the Magazine. Does ESPN have vested interest in seeeing soccer succede? You bet it does.

In the end it still comes down to the consumer and I am betteing that he still will not buy the product on a grand scale.

 

ESPN has paid MLS money to broadcast games. They have also paid money to broadcast European games as well. ESPN does NOT have the investment in MLS that it has in Arena Football.

Now, when it comes down to the consumer and the product... if it is good enough people will stick around. The sport, itself, is consumed on a far greater scale than most people realize. ESPN is hoping that some people will look to tune in for the American league.

Boom, you also add in the caveat of "grand scale." What does that even mean? Would a Royals-Devil Rays game in August be consumed in "grand scale"?

 

I think you only feel like we "zealots" are condescending to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

You're digging yourself a Chuck-sized hole in this thread now. Plenty of loud statements, with little factual backup. And now you keep having to throw in the potshots at soccer fans to cover up your lack of a coherent argument.

None of us said Beckham was great. Three times now, I have noted his limitations as a player, and your response has shown that you are responding to the soccer fans here as if we said something we didn't say about his skills.

Beckham is not a great all-around soccer player. As a pitchman, he'll be much stronger than on the field. (want that in block letters? I can put it in my sig, if you wish)

But the fact you seem to think it's so easy for a guy to just become a "centerpiece" of England's national tem indicates it is wise for you to leave this thread behind. Me and Pastor (as well as the other soccer wonks here) are trying to discuss the sport in America in a realistic way, and we have no illusions about Beckham's on-field impact. Again, the post archive here is excellent; feel free to find where we said Beckham was still in his prime, and would dominate in MLS. Take your time.

But while we try to speak rationally, you're just arguing for the sake of it now.

 

'Soccer is the Canada of American sports, viewed less with contempt than with indifference"