It's shouldn't be officiated anything like a PIAA game, if for no other reason than the competence level of a lot of those guys leaves a lot to be desired. In fact I would argue that the PIAA system of having three refs on the field instead of one on the field with two linesmen leads to more screwed up offsides calls because the ref on that end of the field gets caught way out of position. If you are going to do it all you need to do is add one official to the field like the NHL did. Leave the two guys on the lines where they are with the same responsibilities that they currently have.
World Cup Pool
- Thread starter ScrantonicityIII
- Start date
It's shouldn't be officiated anything like a PIAA game, if for no other reason than the competence level of a lot of those guys leaves a lot to be desired. In fact I would argue that the PIAA system of having three refs on the field instead of one on the field with two linesmen leads to more screwed up offsides calls because the ref on that end of the field gets caught way out of position. If you are going to do it all you need to do is add one official to the field like the NHL did. Leave the two guys on the lines where they are with the same responsibilities that they currently have.
There isn't a worse reffing situation then what the PIAA and WPIAL use with 3 refs on the field.
I do not want center official(s) responsible for offside. I would definitely include ARs on the sidelines for throw-ins and offside.
It has problems that are very fixable. The biggest issue with it is that it is not used consistently. Give officials more practice with the system, ARs to handle offside, and I have no complaints.
I'm in 2nd place. Thanks Joe panther fan!
p.s., stupid Poland is keeping me out of first. Switzerland is the top pick in that tier so far. Most people had Poland or Peru though.
Uruguay has been the best team for me so far. Germany losing hurt.
Top 4 pay out, so far so good.
p.s., stupid Poland is keeping me out of first. Switzerland is the top pick in that tier so far. Most people had Poland or Peru though.
Uruguay has been the best team for me so far. Germany losing hurt.
Top 4 pay out, so far so good.
These teams have me in second place with the consolation game and final game to go. First place guy is way out ahead, but 2-6 is very close. I have Croatia left, nobody else in the top 6 had them. 4 guys have Belgium left, them losing and being shut out jumped me from 5th to 2nd when Croatia won. A guy at work told me the consolation game is typically high scoring, so if Belgium beats England 5-4 and Croatia loses 1-0, I could drop out of the top 4 again. Still, rather be 2nd than 5th right now,
Germany hurt, I saw no team has ever won back to back WCs, so I would not take the champ next time. Poland came up flat, but otherwise, you left me in a good spot.
Here is the closest Croatia clip I could think of. Hopefully England-Belgium is "low flow" and Croatia reigns victorious.
This is where I can't relate to you guys? You need a "world class league" to get into it? This summer I've been to 4 NPSL games, FC Baltimore, they play in a community college stadium, average about 1000 fans, They are considered 3rd Division, and it's great FUN, they are 9-3-1, and this Saturday night I'm going to see the Mid Atlantic Championship game against Northern Virginia United. The players are actually pretty skilled, a lot of D1 college players. You can't even get into MLS because the quality is too poor, but actually, myself and the people following this team, are getting out in the open air watching some decent live soccer instead of watching a game in an English city on TV at 7 am, but to each his own? More than anything, I want something to go to in person, RIGHT NOW-I don't want to wait for this world class league that might not happen in my lifetime, so I'll take the relative low quality and have fun, besides game tickets are only $10. They're talking about Baltimore getting a USL team, I'm dying for that! That would be a lot of fun! You guys have the Riverhounds with their great little stadium and can't enjoy it because the players aren't the quality of Liverpool or Barcelona.
You are not like most people. Other than going to a random game occasionally, most people need something to root for to become a true fan. Its part of the reason, that Pitt football struggles in attendance. If they go 8-4 or even 9-3, it just doesn't matter to most Pittsburghers. They arent in contention to win anything.
The Riverhounds are having a great season and could win USL but so what. Who cares if they win USL? They don't get promoted to MLS so what's the point? Them lifting a USL trophy would mean absolutely nothing to me
Why? You go to the games, you watch the games, you HAVE FUN, you get to know the team, I've been a fan of the Baltimore Blast, MASL Champions, the Baltimore Mariners, AIFA Champions (Indoor Football), Baltimore Stallions, CFL Champions, now FC Baltimore, possibly NPSL Mid Atlantic Champions this Saturday, myself, I easily value these championships along with the Steelers, Pirates and Penguins championships I've enjoyed as a fan, because I've followed these teams through these seasons and been rewarded with entertainment! Why is winning the MLS more "valuable" to you than winning the USL? You personally don't get anything other than having some fun and entertainment when you attend the game. Having a favorite EPL team win, some team in some city in England that you never see in person? Who cares? How can that be more satisfying than something you where really close too, in the stadium being entertained? The point is just having fun and the team wins A CHAMPIONSHIP of some kind.
And what if you want something LIVE, that you can attend in person, RIGHT NOW and your city has no MLS team? Baltimore likely will never get MLS, since DC United is so close. But I hate driving into DC, so I'd rather go to a minor league game that takes less effort to get to.
Which is why I go to 1 Riverhounds game per year. Its a family night out. I could care less if they win or lose because as I said, winning USL means 0 to me. If they were in MLS, I'd be an enormous fan from Day 1. Because, even though MLS is not a top league, it still might be, arguably a Top 10 league and there are world-class players sprinkled throughout the league and it does have somewhat of a niche national following with nationally televised games. So, to me, MLS is kinda "big-time" and I do watch MLS on TV occasionally.
You can create an emotional connection to your local minor league soccer teams. That's great. I cant and its the same reason people cant create an emotional connection to Pittsburgh minor league football (aka Pitt). There are a million things we do for fun in Western PA, so there is simply not enough room for more than 1 Riverhounds game per year......unless I had an emotional connection which I dont.
You'll be happy to know that I do plan on attending most Pitt soccer games from now on since they are going to be really good. ACC is roughly the same level as USL so although the level of soccer isnt great, I have an emotional connection to Pitt and I will care if they win or lose.
Pitt averages over 40K fans per game, I think a lot of fans are emotionally connected.
Let me ask you this, are you emotionally connected to any EPL team, or La Liga or Bundesliga team? That's why I can't get into those leagues, I can't build an emotional connection to some team in a foreign country I have no connection to, I honestly can't! And seeing the greatest quality games doesn't attract me and hold my attention if I don't care who wins.
You'll be surprised I think, NPSL is semi-pro, some players are pro and others are college players who play there in the summer, lots of ACC players are in the league and they are pretty damn good IMO.
No I am not which is why I dont clear my schedule to watch the EPL, Bundesliga, etc. If Im home and its on and I got nothing going on, I watch. I could care less if Man U beats Man City. Its part of the reason I don't watch the NBA. No emotional connection. It has to be a major event for me to watch. LeBron vs Steph on the Finals? OK, I'll watch that. LeBron vs Steph regular season? Could care less.
IDK where you live but I think that's why Piper's is such a great bar. EPL fans build a real bond going there to drink and eat and watch games in their jerseys together. Some Americans, some Brits, some continental Euros, etc.
If anyone is ever in Las Vegas and wants to watch some European football with similar minded people the 2 Crown and Anchor locations are the place to be. Many Euros and Brit’s in attendance and plenty of drink and food specials as well.
I used to get off work around 3AM and stop in for a few drinks and there would already be a decent crowd waiting for the early games.
With the world cup coming to the US, Mexico, and Canada, I can see some investors trying to get into some more markets. I know Nashville is most likely getting a MLS team, but I can see other cities getting in on this. The excitement of the World Cup, the landing spot for former top level players coming to MLS (Rooney, Ibrahimovic), and the fact in 8 years, the US will possibly be good enough to compete again to at least get out of group stage and maybe get the right draw to get to the quarterfinals. The US was so far behind in 94 when we hosted the cup, but look how far we have come in terms of a pro league, developmental leagues for youth, and financial backing from big investors. Beckham and many other very rich former athletes will continue to trickle into MLS.
The key is to really build on the young kids who are 10-15. These are the future world cup players in 8 years. The US needs to make soccer more accessible and go out of their way to find every solid potential, invest in that kid, and make them pro players, not college players.
I'm in Houston next week for work and will be a few blocks from Dynamo. They play Philly on Wednesday.
The key is to really build on the young kids who are 10-15. These are the future world cup players in 8 years. The US needs to make soccer more accessible and go out of their way to find every solid potential, invest in that kid, and make them pro players, not college players.
I'm in Houston next week for work and will be a few blocks from Dynamo. They play Philly on Wednesday.
The youth football setup in the US is problematic. Its pay to play model is extremely expensive and makes it so that the overwhelming majority of talented athletes in America simply can't afford to play. We're talking upwards of $3000 per month for the highest level youth clubs. Quite a few current US internationals literally could not afford those fees and were fortunate enough to find private benefactors. Obviously, that's not an option for most.
Here's the problem - it's not exactly a scam, youth football is simply very expensive. European countries have solved this problem by subsidizing the costs of training so that the best players will never be denied for being unable to afford it. That's not the only problem, of course - the entire USSF is poorly run, the standard of coaching in America is pitiful, MLS still isn't a proper league, etc, etc, etc.
I don't think America will ever be anything special at football, but if there's a chance of it happening, then the pay to play model needs to change.
The better coaches are concentrated at the higher age levels where we need them more developing skills at younger ages.
And yes, the high level competition is expensive and generally private school kid-oriented.
We actually spend a decent amount of money on soccer as a nation but it's not directed intelligently.
And yes, the high level competition is expensive and generally private school kid-oriented.
We actually spend a decent amount of money on soccer as a nation but it's not directed intelligently.
There is some logic to the idea that money wins games. “When you look at the sort of factors that make countries successful at things like international soccer and at the Olympics, GDP per capita actually is a really, really strong predictor of how well people do,” says Victor Matheson, a professor of economics at College of the Holy Cross (as well as a former MLS referee who says he has himself been on the receiving end of a Taylor Twellman rant, for penalties he’s called). In general, the more money a country puts into its soccer program, the better its training program, the better its team.
Of course, money didn’t do much to help the U.S. team on Tuesday night. “However they spent it, they were horrifically unsuccessful,” Matheson says, adding that he’d be “shocked” if Trinidad and Tobago’s soccer budget exceeded a 10th of the U.S.’s.
There are several possible explanations for the U.S.’s lackluster performance during World Cup qualifying games. One, which will be debated endlessly among fans and officials in the coming months, is the quality of the coaching and leadership. Another is that the current crop of players just happened to be unusually weak, as star players can come in waves.
But another explanation really does come down to money. It’s a problem those on the organizational side of soccer refer to as “pay to play”: Many, including Twellman and Matheson, argue that in the U.S., the cost for young people to play soccer is simply too high, limiting the pipeline of talent to those who can afford the fees and uniforms of their regional club teams. “The idea,” Matheson says, “is that we’ve developed a lot of highly trained but mediocre rich kids while missing out on training lots of potentially fantastic poor kids.” Perhaps the USSF could do more to seek out lower-income players—“probably disproportionately minority players, disproportionately immigrant players,” Matheson says.
Of course, money didn’t do much to help the U.S. team on Tuesday night. “However they spent it, they were horrifically unsuccessful,” Matheson says, adding that he’d be “shocked” if Trinidad and Tobago’s soccer budget exceeded a 10th of the U.S.’s.
There are several possible explanations for the U.S.’s lackluster performance during World Cup qualifying games. One, which will be debated endlessly among fans and officials in the coming months, is the quality of the coaching and leadership. Another is that the current crop of players just happened to be unusually weak, as star players can come in waves.
But another explanation really does come down to money. It’s a problem those on the organizational side of soccer refer to as “pay to play”: Many, including Twellman and Matheson, argue that in the U.S., the cost for young people to play soccer is simply too high, limiting the pipeline of talent to those who can afford the fees and uniforms of their regional club teams. “The idea,” Matheson says, “is that we’ve developed a lot of highly trained but mediocre rich kids while missing out on training lots of potentially fantastic poor kids.” Perhaps the USSF could do more to seek out lower-income players—“probably disproportionately minority players, disproportionately immigrant players,” Matheson says.
Yes, probably. To the same extent I do baseball, which is casually. It's fun to see live sporting events in general.
Youth football should not be a business. It isn't a business in Iceland and it only took them a few years once they redid their system to make it accessible to all kids that they became a presence on the world stage. When a country of ~300,000 people are vastly more successful than a country with ~300,000,000, there's clearly a problem with the way the larger country is running its program. Every single kid in Iceland who wants to play football has access to certified, high quality coaching. Rich, poor, doesn't matter. In America, only those wealthy enough to pay for it or lucky enough to find a wealthy person to sponsor them even have the opportunity.
Go ahead and try to stop the people making profit, In the USA Profit TRUMPS
everything, even health and human life, and Population means nothing, if it did the WC Final would be China vs. India.And Iceland is not vastly more successful in soccer than the USA, this particular WC and the last couple years they have been, but not continuously, and they didn't even get to the knockout stage, the USA did in 2014. Italy didn't make the WC either.
Go ahead and try to stop the people making profit, In the USA Profit TRUMPS
And Iceland is not vastly more successful in soccer than the USA, this particular WC and the last couple years they have been, but not continuously, and they didn't even get to the knockout stage, the USA did in 2014. Italy didn't make the WC either.
I'm not telling anybody to stop making profit, but you can't prioritize profit and correct the problems in the US youth football setup. Those two goals are mutually exclusive. That is a fact, not an opinion.
Population does matter because it gives you a larger player pool. Clearly, many other factors matter as well, which is why China and India don't have successful programs (although China is pumping a ton of money into trying with poor results so far). In the US, the population isn't so much of an advantage when the best athletes often don't have a chance to play.
Iceland are the smallest nation to ever make a major tournament. They were ranked 133rd in the world as recently as 2012. Obviously, they aren't more successful if you look at the entire history of each country's football program, but there's no question that they're a better team now and for the foreseeable future.
This is an entire country with a population smaller than the city of Pittsburgh and they're better, that should tell you all that you need to know about how broken youth development is in the USA.
