By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
zexen_lowe on 02 February 2009
Edit Thread
damndl0ser said:
zexen_lowe said:
damndl0ser said:

 

Even though the USA may not have "Soccer" as our # one sport we still probably have more than 15 or 20 times more players than your country (Chile) does simply by mere population.  So it would be much easier for the USA to come up with a decent enough  team to get into the WC.  

Every highschool and most elementary schools have Soccer teams now.  The sport is growing very much here in the states and having a WC here would do nothing but help improve its popularity.  So I think all of you people talking smack about "devotion" to the game are idiots.

Having the WC in the States would do nothing but help the sport grow, and that is what FIFA is all about. 

 

Please tell me that you don't follow much football, because that statement is simply ridiculous. If population was the only thing that mattered, then the best teams would be China and India. Guess what? China only participated in one WC and lost all its matches, India as far as I know never participated in one. Conclusion: Population does not matter.

It's easy, the US has a decent team, but nothing amazing, and certainly not on par with most South American nations (Chile included) and it will take a lot of time to change that. They qualify to every WC simply because there are very few CONCACAF nations that are any good.

Face it, there already was a WC there and it didn't do much, what makes you think a new one will?

I do follow the WC to some degree but I am not religious about it.  And yes we did host a WC and it was one of the most successful of all time.

 

Population is not the only mitigating factor for having the best players.  And if you re read my comment you would see where I was talking about how it is becoming more successful here in every highschool.   I can gaurantee you that if China put there "mind" to it they would probably have a very very good team (just like the olympics).   

 

Your entire comment had nothing to show me where I was wrong about growing the sport, which is where my comment was geared.  So your rebuttal is full of fail, and miss truths.  

 

You know that the reason the only reason it was very successful is because you have very big stadiums, right? Check the capacity of the stadia used in US94 and in Germany06 and you'll see why. A WC game like Brazil-Italy, to give an example, would fill a stadium in any venue it was played, be it in the US, in Germany, in Morocoo or in the Easter Island. That doesn't mean the WC was a success in terms of generating much enthusiasm for the sport, seeing the lack of strength the MLS has.

And while you might think that having the sport played in highschools will benefit enormously, in reality, while it'll help, it won't do much unless there's a radical shift in the people's minds and they start perceiving football as a very important sport. Otherwise, there's nothing the US can do against countries were it is. Why? Because if a kid is a good athlete in my country, he'll aim for sure to be a footballer in 90% of the cases, because football is the most important sport by a huge margin. If a kid is a good athlete in your country, do you think it'll aim to be a footballer so easily, given that there are more popular sports? Most kids' dreams here when they're 10 or so is playing for the national football team. Is that similar in the US? I highly doubt that.

Anyway, let's see in 10 or 15 years where are the US. I'll gladly eat my words they improve a lot and say, place themselves constantly as one of the 10 best nations in the world. As the current situation stands, I highly doubt they will anytime soon.