Landon Donovan was right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

Nobody said the best but . . . . this is easy: population numbers, the olympics, etc.

Are you trying to say that Portugal, a tiny country with one of the best soccer teams and best soccer players in the world, has better athletes and therefore they are better at soccer? Don't get all upset because somebody says the US has great athletes. There are 330 million people. They are bound to have more and better athletes. Just stick to your argument that other countries are better at soccer because of the culture. It's much stronger.

The PP is literally responding to someone who said the US had the most and best athletes.
Do you not read before responding?

Do you not see the irony in this response? The PP said "more and better athletes." Then you changed it to "best." The reply to that said "more and better," again. This time you changed it to "most and best" and then said "Do you not read before responding?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

[Anonymous]

Betterer and Bestest is next

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

Nobody said the best but . . . . this is easy: population numbers, the olympics, etc.

Are you trying to say that Portugal, a tiny country with one of the best soccer teams and best soccer players in the world, has better athletes and therefore they are better at soccer? Don't get all upset because somebody says the US has great athletes. There are 330 million people. They are bound to have more and better athletes. Just stick to your argument that other countries are better at soccer because of the culture. It's much stronger.

The PP is literally responding to someone who said the US had the most and best athletes.
Do you not read before responding?

Do you not see the irony in this response? The PP said "more and better athletes." Then you changed it to "best." The reply to that said "more and better," again. This time you changed it to "most and best" and then said "Do you not read before responding?"

Tomato Tomato`

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

More than China and Russia who else matters? Amerikkka Yuck Feah!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to data collected by STATS LLC, a professional basketball player runs around 2.55 miles on average during 48 minutes of the gaming session.

The average NFL player is physically moving for only about 11 minutes per game. Wide receivers and cornerbacks do the most running, covering about 1.25 miles per game.

These are the sports with the best athletes according to some.

Soccer players are averaging around 10K distance covered per game.

So is a half-marathon runner a better athlete than a soccer player?

The fastest ever recorded speed in world football is 23.35 mph, achieved just this year by Micky van de Ven. Prior to that, the fastest recorded speed was under 23.

DK Metcalf clocked 22.23 mph in an NFL game, carrying a ball, and wearing restrictive clothing, a helmet, and pads.

Do you know what marathon runners do?
They only run, at about the same pace continuously without need for agility or sudden change of direction.
That part of your education complete, the only athletes mentioned on this topic are NFL, NBA and MLB players.

What does a top speed clocking have to do with soccer skills?

Thank you for expressing your concern about my education and attempting to fill it in. Unfortunately, your help is nonsense and doesn't reflect the messages. The prior post listed the average distance run by athletes in different sports. I was pointing out this is NOT a good measure of whether someone is an athlete by asking the rhetorical about half marathoners. I can run a half a marathon, and am not a good athlete. The point of including top speed was not to say this replaces soccer skills, just to say there are plenty of athletes in the United States that choose to play different sports. But speed is a factor in soccer, like all sports. There are enough athletes in the United States, that if they had grown up in a soccer culture and dedicated the time and love for the game, that the US would excel. But they haven't and won't. So why are you so threatened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

Nobody said the best but . . . . this is easy: population numbers, the olympics, etc.

Are you trying to say that Portugal, a tiny country with one of the best soccer teams and best soccer players in the world, has better athletes and therefore they are better at soccer? Don't get all upset because somebody says the US has great athletes. There are 330 million people. They are bound to have more and better athletes. Just stick to your argument that other countries are better at soccer because of the culture. It's much stronger.

The PP is literally responding to someone who said the US had the most and best athletes.
Do you not read before responding?

Do you not see the irony in this response? The PP said "more and better athletes." Then you changed it to "best." The reply to that said "more and better," again. This time you changed it to "most and best" and then said "Do you not read before responding?"

Wait. If the PP PP said the US athletes are better than the rest of the world, aren't they saying they are the best?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

Correct. More and better athletes than preeminent soccer nations. We don't just "send the most athletes." We have the most athletes qualify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

Correct. More and better athletes than preeminent soccer nations. We don't just "send the most athletes." We have the most athletes qualify.

Qualify in our trials
And most athletes because of $$$$

That said, we still don't win the most medals per capita. So its quantity over quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

Correct. More and better athletes than preeminent soccer nations. We don't just "send the most athletes." We have the most athletes qualify.

Qualify in our trials
And most athletes because of $$$$

That said, we still don't win the most medals per capita. So its quantity over quality.

Also check where the US team stayed while competing in recent O. Games (slept, ate…), compared to other teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every sport in USA is structured as hell, almost year-round play. There's no incentive to go out and play in the street when you have gaming inside and air conditioning. American youth is sucked up by four way more popular sports before a boy thinks of soccer after the age of 8. Girls gravitate to it because only basketball takes athletes away. Don't blame just the kids either... i see the sidelines heaving with heavy-set parents who very likey never usher their kids outside because they too sit on their phones all day.

i think everyone is trying to find fault when there is no fault. Soccer is just a fringe sport in America, it's just the way it is.

The facts are most boys would rather play basketball, baseball or football and it's likely because that's what one of their parents grew up playing or watched or whatever reason.

I agree with this. Our best athletes in the US are not choosing soccer. If we took our best athletes in the NBA and NFL and they played soccer throughout their lives, we would dominate.

That’s your problem right there…you think it’s all about just being an athlete….anyhow the USA is huge…we still dwarf other countries for kids who participate in soccer believe it or not…we lose against Panama despite having so many more soccer players to choose from…you Americans make me laugh

I know it's hard for the soccer exceptionalists to hear this, but there is nothing about your sport that would overcome the numbers. It is absolutely true that countries with an entrenched soccer culture outperform the US by a large margin per capita. They support more professional teams, there are more avenues for high quality training, there are better coaches, and there are more opportunities to just go play. It is also true that soccer relies less on height and weight and pure athleticism than basketball and football, partly because the ball is played on the ground for a lot of the game, and a low center of gravity can be an asset. That isn't to say though, that quickness, agility, speed, and coordination aren't huge factors. In all of these physical attributes the United States would have an advantage simply because we have more and better athletes. If more kids grew up in the game, specialized early, learned from great players and mentors, and had access to professional academies, the United States would absolutely compete with the top soccer nations. It's just numbers. It's also extremely unlikely. Those 3 million kids who "participate in" soccer are not all kids who live the game. Most of them will move on to other sports, or no sports. And that's great. I know it's a soccer forum, but preeminence in soccer probably isn't the most important thing to worry about. (although not getting out of the Copa America group stage is pretty embarrassing)

Where can we find the source of this alleged fact that we, America, have the best athletes?

ehhh Do you watch the Olympics?

Yes. The Olympics shows we send the most athletes and that gives us an advantage.

We don't lead in gold medals per capita.

Correct. More and better athletes than preeminent soccer nations. We don't just "send the most athletes." We have the most athletes qualify.

Qualify in our trials
And most athletes because of $$$$

That said, we still don't win the most medals per capita. So its quantity over quality.

Also check where the US team stayed while competing in recent O. Games (slept, ate…), compared to other teams.

Okay. so what? The crux of this "discussion" was why the U.S. isn't globally competitive in soccer. It's not because we don't have the athletes. And it's not because those athletes are incapable of learning to play soccer, or any sport, at a high level. It's that they don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to data collected by STATS LLC, a professional basketball player runs around 2.55 miles on average during 48 minutes of the gaming session.

The average NFL player is physically moving for only about 11 minutes per game. Wide receivers and cornerbacks do the most running, covering about 1.25 miles per game.

These are the sports with the best athletes according to some.

Soccer players are averaging around 10K distance covered per game.

So is a half-marathon runner a better athlete than a soccer player?

The fastest ever recorded speed in world football is 23.35 mph, achieved just this year by Micky van de Ven. Prior to that, the fastest recorded speed was under 23.

DK Metcalf clocked 22.23 mph in an NFL game, carrying a ball, and wearing restrictive clothing, a helmet, and pads.

Do you know what marathon runners do?
They only run, at about the same pace continuously without need for agility or sudden change of direction.
That part of your education complete, the only athletes mentioned on this topic are NFL, NBA and MLB players.

What does a top speed clocking have to do with soccer skills?

Thank you for expressing your concern about my education and attempting to fill it in. Unfortunately, your help is nonsense and doesn't reflect the messages. The prior post listed the average distance run by athletes in different sports. I was pointing out this is NOT a good measure of whether someone is an athlete by asking the rhetorical about half marathoners. I can run a half a marathon, and am not a good athlete. The point of including top speed was not to say this replaces soccer skills, just to say there are plenty of athletes in the United States that choose to play different sports. But speed is a factor in soccer, like all sports. There are enough athletes in the United States, that if they had grown up in a soccer culture and dedicated the time and love for the game, that the US would excel. But they haven't and won't. So why are you so threatened?

There are millions of kids playing soccer in America. More than most countries.

There is a culture, it's just not conducive to good youth soccer development.

[Anonymous]

All you need to know why we can't be a stronger force in soccer with all our assets is right here.

DCUM mentality

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to data collected by STATS LLC, a professional basketball player runs around 2.55 miles on average during 48 minutes of the gaming session.

The average NFL player is physically moving for only about 11 minutes per game. Wide receivers and cornerbacks do the most running, covering about 1.25 miles per game.

These are the sports with the best athletes according to some.

Soccer players are averaging around 10K distance covered per game.

So is a half-marathon runner a better athlete than a soccer player?

The fastest ever recorded speed in world football is 23.35 mph, achieved just this year by Micky van de Ven. Prior to that, the fastest recorded speed was under 23.

DK Metcalf clocked 22.23 mph in an NFL game, carrying a ball, and wearing restrictive clothing, a helmet, and pads.

Do you know what marathon runners do?
They only run, at about the same pace continuously without need for agility or sudden change of direction.
That part of your education complete, the only athletes mentioned on this topic are NFL, NBA and MLB players.

What does a top speed clocking have to do with soccer skills?

Thank you for expressing your concern about my education and attempting to fill it in. Unfortunately, your help is nonsense and doesn't reflect the messages. The prior post listed the average distance run by athletes in different sports. I was pointing out this is NOT a good measure of whether someone is an athlete by asking the rhetorical about half marathoners. I can run a half a marathon, and am not a good athlete. The point of including top speed was not to say this replaces soccer skills, just to say there are plenty of athletes in the United States that choose to play different sports. But speed is a factor in soccer, like all sports. There are enough athletes in the United States, that if they had grown up in a soccer culture and dedicated the time and love for the game, that the US would excel. But they haven't and won't. So why are you so threatened?

There are millions of kids playing soccer in America. More than most countries.

There is a culture, it's just not conducive to good youth soccer development.

That's fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to data collected by STATS LLC, a professional basketball player runs around 2.55 miles on average during 48 minutes of the gaming session.

The average NFL player is physically moving for only about 11 minutes per game. Wide receivers and cornerbacks do the most running, covering about 1.25 miles per game.

These are the sports with the best athletes according to some.

Soccer players are averaging around 10K distance covered per game.

So is a half-marathon runner a better athlete than a soccer player?

The fastest ever recorded speed in world football is 23.35 mph, achieved just this year by Micky van de Ven. Prior to that, the fastest recorded speed was under 23.

DK Metcalf clocked 22.23 mph in an NFL game, carrying a ball, and wearing restrictive clothing, a helmet, and pads.

Do you know what marathon runners do?
They only run, at about the same pace continuously without need for agility or sudden change of direction.
That part of your education complete, the only athletes mentioned on this topic are NFL, NBA and MLB players.

What does a top speed clocking have to do with soccer skills?

Thank you for expressing your concern about my education and attempting to fill it in. Unfortunately, your help is nonsense and doesn't reflect the messages. The prior post listed the average distance run by athletes in different sports. I was pointing out this is NOT a good measure of whether someone is an athlete by asking the rhetorical about half marathoners. I can run a half a marathon, and am not a good athlete. The point of including top speed was not to say this replaces soccer skills, just to say there are plenty of athletes in the United States that choose to play different sports. But speed is a factor in soccer, like all sports. There are enough athletes in the United States, that if they had grown up in a soccer culture and dedicated the time and love for the game, that the US would excel. But they haven't and won't. So why are you so threatened?

There are millions of kids playing soccer in America. More than most countries.

There is a culture, it's just not conducive to good youth soccer development.

That's fair.

Culture is appropriate.in this discussion. People throw out the millions of kids playing soccer. Look at those kids. Half of America doesn't play organized youth soccer The next time you go to a tournament look around. Not very representative of today's America. Maybe it looks like Great Falls, McLean or Oakton or some of the other wealthy enclaves here but not most of America