Yahoo story: Why the world's game is a white game in the U.S.

[Anonymous]

The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has to be our system. Is it that the players are too spread out? Are they not being identified? I don't know.

Personally I think it's the culture. How many of the kids on the top teams in the area are playing every lunch time and after school. In most of the world kids from age 5 or 6 onwards erupt out of schools onto playgrounds and parks and streets with a soccer ball several times a day. Ours attend three or four organized pratices per week. No matter how good the coaching, there's no comparison.

All we need is 20. Twenty frickin soccer freaks..out of how many kids in this county. All we need is 20!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:US is mainly white. Did you know polo in China is dominated by Chinese people, and it can be further separated by economics and weather.

I hear soccer in South America is dominated by Latinos. Go figure.

In the US, all players are Americans.

No, no, no! You're supposed to divide "Americans" into different socio-economic and racial groups and then pit them against each other! Did you not get that memo from the media?!?

How are we supposed to distract people from the fact that a handful of billionaires own most of the wealth in the country of we can't constantly distract people by manipulating them into hating each other!

+1

Yeah, that explains all of our problems, along with a lack of education, historical perspective, or independent thought among the people voting every two years. Inequality is a major problem. But our illness is far worse than that. It is mass stupidity and the cultural sewer that the majority of Americans create and support every hour of every day. You think somebody else is making people hate each other? You really ought to get to know your fellow citizens a little better than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has to be our system. Is it that the players are too spread out? Are they not being identified? I don't know.

Personally I think it's the culture. How many of the kids on the top teams in the area are playing every lunch time and after school. In most of the world kids from age 5 or 6 onwards erupt out of schools onto playgrounds and parks and streets with a soccer ball several times a day. Ours attend three or four organized pratices per week. No matter how good the coaching, there's no comparison.

All we need is 20. Twenty frickin soccer freaks..out of how many kids in this county. All we need is 20!

You need many more great players than that to support an elite national team. The depth is just as important in developing the IQ of athletic freaks. Having one freak in the middle of Oklahoma or even this area playing soccer is not going to be very productive long term for the development of that kid. There need to be numerous near-freaks in every major metro in the country. We're a long way from that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Again, all the US men’s teams for the last couple decades have had far more athletic talent than most of their competitors. What we lack are the coaches And training necessary to teach get our top players to be able to win at the highest levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Assuming that you're not being intentionally obtuse, this is worth a listen:
https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger?language=en

Your argument is badly flawed. Lebron James is good at basketball not only because of his athleticism, but also because of his physical characteristics--which I doubt would translate well to soccer. Why not go with, "If only Michael Phelps had played soccer?" Simone Biles? Justin Gatlin?

Our player pool is big enough--much bigger than Belgium's or Croatia's. So what, then, really is the problem? Some thoughts...

1) Maybe there really is no problem--we go to the World Cup most of the time and we've been to the round of 16 several times. Maybe it's just not as easy to win an actual world championship in a sport that lots of other countries do as it is to win a "World Championship" in a sport that we've created (like basketball and baseball).

2) Our structures are not effective at finding and creating world-class players. I could go on for a while about the differences between US youth soccer structure and Europe, but the bottom line is that the discrimination that exists in US youth soccer isn't just about ability to pay--it's more about ability level. In the US, a U9 who is big, fast, and aggressive will be identified as a top-tier player and have much greater access to quality coaching and facilities. In Europe, they also like big, fast, and aggressive U9s. But the kids who aren't there yet WILL STILL have professional coaches, high-level training, sports psychologists, camps, uniforms, and access to progress in the form of pro-rel league structures. Simply not the case in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Assuming that you're not being intentionally obtuse, this is worth a listen:
https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger?language=en

Your argument is badly flawed. Lebron James is good at basketball not only because of his athleticism, but also because of his physical characteristics--which I doubt would translate well to soccer. Why not go with, "If only Michael Phelps had played soccer?" Simone Biles? Justin Gatlin?

Our player pool is big enough--much bigger than Belgium's or Croatia's. So what, then, really is the problem? Some thoughts...

1) Maybe there really is no problem--we go to the World Cup most of the time and we've been to the round of 16 several times. Maybe it's just not as easy to win an actual world championship in a sport that lots of other countries do as it is to win a "World Championship" in a sport that we've created (like basketball and baseball).

2) Our structures are not effective at finding and creating world-class players. I could go on for a while about the differences between US youth soccer structure and Europe, but the bottom line is that the discrimination that exists in US youth soccer isn't just about ability to pay--it's more about ability level. In the US, a U9 who is big, fast, and aggressive will be identified as a top-tier player and have much greater access to quality coaching and facilities. In Europe, they also like big, fast, and aggressive U9s. But the kids who aren't there yet WILL STILL have professional coaches, high-level training, sports psychologists, camps, uniforms, and access to progress in the form of pro-rel league structures. Simply not the case in the US.

Why are you using LeBron James as your example? Instead, you should have used Tyreek Hill or other extremely fast/athletic NFL players. Remember that NFL players also wear padding and other gears that can slow them down due to its weight and bulk.

You using an NBA player as your example made me think you don’t understand sports and completely ruined the rest of your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Very spot on, additionally, there are other factors that athletes have (thinking patterns, information intake, etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Assuming that you're not being intentionally obtuse, this is worth a listen:
https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger?language=en

Your argument is badly flawed. Lebron James is good at basketball not only because of his athleticism, but also because of his physical characteristics--which I doubt would translate well to soccer. Why not go with, "If only Michael Phelps had played soccer?" Simone Biles? Justin Gatlin?

Our player pool is big enough--much bigger than Belgium's or Croatia's. So what, then, really is the problem? Some thoughts...

1) Maybe there really is no problem--we go to the World Cup most of the time and we've been to the round of 16 several times. Maybe it's just not as easy to win an actual world championship in a sport that lots of other countries do as it is to win a "World Championship" in a sport that we've created (like basketball and baseball).

2) Our structures are not effective at finding and creating world-class players. I could go on for a while about the differences between US youth soccer structure and Europe, but the bottom line is that the discrimination that exists in US youth soccer isn't just about ability to pay--it's more about ability level. In the US, a U9 who is big, fast, and aggressive will be identified as a top-tier player and have much greater access to quality coaching and facilities. In Europe, they also like big, fast, and aggressive U9s. But the kids who aren't there yet WILL STILL have professional coaches, high-level training, sports psychologists, camps, uniforms, and access to progress in the form of pro-rel league structures. Simply not the case in the US.

Why are you using LeBron James as your example? Instead, you should have used Tyreek Hill or other extremely fast/athletic NFL players. Remember that NFL players also wear padding and other gears that can slow them down due to its weight and bulk.

You using an NBA player as your example made me think you don’t understand sports and completely ruined the rest of your argument.

Using a poor example doesn't completely ruin the rest of the argument. As you pointed out, Tyreek Hill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

+1. If parents have extremely athletic & talented HS age kids and a Nick Saban or a Mike Krzyzewski is recruiting your DS compared to countless unknown US college soccer coaches, it’s a very easy decision to make. When Nick Saban recently came to a local MD HS to recruit a kid (I cant remember the HS), it made the local news.

[Anonymous]

Football is dying a slow death. Educated parents don't want their kids playing football in junior leagues and high school due to the concussion/brain atrophy issues from football.

In poor AA public school districts playing high school football is still seen as a ticket to college and the NFL even though the odds of making it to the NFL are infinitesimal.

Middle class whites start their kids in soccer to keep them from playing football.

Some high schools have discontinued football due to the concussion/brain risks.

Over the next 20-30 years you will see a lot of high school football programs closing due to the concussion/brain risk.

Soccer will grow in popularity and also will get players of all skin color in the US.

[Anonymous]

Replace all urban and rural outdoor b-ball courts with outdoor futsal courts and have Nike and Adidas market the crap out of soccer in a cool, hip way to young kids and 10-20 years later, we will win the World Cup. Market to urban types and to urban types. The problem is that soccer in the US is mainly a suburban sport and suburban shave it made, so no real motivation to put in the necessary work to become great against the best in the world. Sure, occasionally there’s a suburban gem like Pulisic, but even he, who is our best player is not playing for Real Madrid, Barca, Liverpool, Man City, PSG, or Bayern.

[Anonymous]

Correction: urban and rural types

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Replace all urban and rural outdoor b-ball courts with outdoor futsal courts and have Nike and Adidas market the crap out of soccer in a cool, hip way to young kids and 10-20 years later, we will win the World Cup. Market to urban types and to urban types. The problem is that soccer in the US is mainly a suburban sport and suburban shave it made, so no real motivation to put in the necessary work to become great against the best in the world. Sure, occasionally there’s a suburban gem like Pulisic, but even he, who is our best player is not playing for Real Madrid, Barca, Liverpool, Man City, PSG, or Bayern.

Well Pulisic is playing for Chelsea, that seems on par with the clubs you listed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best athletes in this country most certainly do not play soccer. Go to most any high school and ask who are the best athletes and see how many of them play soccer. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it's not just about speed and strength in soccer. There are tactics and game IQ. yada, yada. The same could be said about any other sport. But with enough of a player pool, they all have good game IQ and speed and strength. Basketball and football just have a larger player pool. Not at the younger ages but in high school and older.

At the highest levels, national teams and professional ranks, where all have the dedication and time to learn the tactics and skills, the differences of just a few freakishly superior athletes can make a difference. In Europe the very best freakishly good athletes are playing soccer at the professional level. Consider the top athletes in the US. People like Lebron James or Saquon Barkley or Lamar Jackson. These are athletes with 1 in 10 million physical traits. Not saying they would automatically be good at soccer, but imagine if kids with these physical gifts were playing soccer in greater numbers from a young age.

Assuming that you're not being intentionally obtuse, this is worth a listen:
https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger?language=en

Your argument is badly flawed. Lebron James is good at basketball not only because of his athleticism, but also because of his physical characteristics--which I doubt would translate well to soccer. Why not go with, "If only Michael Phelps had played soccer?" Simone Biles? Justin Gatlin?

Our player pool is big enough--much bigger than Belgium's or Croatia's. So what, then, really is the problem? Some thoughts...

1) Maybe there really is no problem--we go to the World Cup most of the time and we've been to the round of 16 several times. Maybe it's just not as easy to win an actual world championship in a sport that lots of other countries do as it is to win a "World Championship" in a sport that we've created (like basketball and baseball).

2) Our structures are not effective at finding and creating world-class players. I could go on for a while about the differences between US youth soccer structure and Europe, but the bottom line is that the discrimination that exists in US youth soccer isn't just about ability to pay--it's more about ability level. In the US, a U9 who is big, fast, and aggressive will be identified as a top-tier player and have much greater access to quality coaching and facilities. In Europe, they also like big, fast, and aggressive U9s. But the kids who aren't there yet WILL STILL have professional coaches, high-level training, sports psychologists, camps, uniforms, and access to progress in the form of pro-rel league structures. Simply not the case in the US.

Why are you using LeBron James as your example? Instead, you should have used Tyreek Hill or other extremely fast/athletic NFL players. Remember that NFL players also wear padding and other gears that can slow them down due to its weight and bulk.

You using an NBA player as your example made me think you don’t understand sports and completely ruined the rest of your argument.

Correct. LeBron as goalkeeper might be pretty solid. Odell Beckham was actually a star soccer player in high school, I think. I think speed is important, but you need balance so Mostert on the 49ers (elite speed plus youth national surfing champion) would be on my development squad. Barry Sanders might have been pretty good at soccer given balance and agility.