I think expanding the size of the goal and having a modified offsides rule where there is no offsides once the ball is within x meters of the goal line are the simplest and least invasive changes. Beyond that, soccer is what it is.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Fixing soccer
Collapse
X
-
-
Soccer doesn't need to change, just don't expect Americans to ever like it. As I've argued before, Americans don't like soccer because they have other sport choices and our choices speak loud and clear and soccer is accurately valued -- it's well below football and basketball, but people do at least like to watch the World Cup and the Euro Cup to a lesser extent.Originally posted by Indy Coug View PostI think expanding the size of the goal and having a modified offsides rule where there is no offsides once the ball is within x meters of the goal line are the simplest and least invasive changes. Beyond that, soccer is what it is.
With that said, Soccer should change. Instant replay should be brought in so they don't take goals away (didn't they take away a goal from England in the 2010 World Cup)? The other thing is they should create lines on both ends of the field wherein passes within the line to another player within the line is not offsides. I've seen too many soccer games where they call offsides when nearly every player on the field is within 15-20 yards of one of the goals. It's ridiculous.Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”
Comment
-
At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
-Berry Trammel, 12/3/10
Comment
-
I love to see an accounting type think like an economist in assuming that everyone always acts rationally, instantly, and in their best economic self-interest, but we all know that's very often not the case.Originally posted by TripletDaddy View PostGood question. Since you feel it is so lucrative and important for the sport to cater to this market, perhaps you can explain why soccer doesn't pay attention to Americans.
Possible reasons: Tradition, anti-American sentiment, ineptitude, preference differences, inertia.
Oh, and you know this, but I'll just point out that I never said it was "so important".At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
-Berry Trammel, 12/3/10
Comment
-
lol. do you prefer listening to a medical type that has basically zero background with numbers or finance talk like an economist?Originally posted by ERCougar View PostI love to see an accounting type think like an economist in assuming that everyone always acts rationally, instantly, and in their best economic self-interest, but we all know that's very often not the case.
Possible reasons: Tradition, anti-American sentiment, ineptitude, preference differences, inertia.
Oh, and you know this, but I'll just point out that I never said it was "so important".
Soccer clubs act in their own economic self-interest, what are you talking about? The most valuable sports franchise in the world is a soccer club. Many of the top paid athletes in the world are soccer players.
Machester United and Real Madrid dont seem to share your concerns for their pocketbooks, but just in case you are correct, I will be watching with interest to see FIFA implement some of the great ideas you are suggesting in this thread....hopefully they start with the new rule that changes the size of the keeper's gloves. lol. Americans will start flocking in droves.
Fitter. Happier. More Productive.
sigpic
Comment
-
Are you having fun with these imaginary strawmen? I think you're winning!Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Postlol. do you prefer listening to a medical type that has basically zero background with numbers or finance talk like an economist?
Soccer clubs act in their own economic self-interest, what are you talking about? The most valuable sports franchise in the world is a soccer club. Many of the top paid athletes in the world are soccer players.
Machester United and Real Madrid dont seem to share your concerns for their pocketbooks, but just in case you are correct, I will be watching with interest to see FIFA implement some of the great ideas you are suggesting in this thread....hopefully they start with the new rule that changes the size of the keeper's gloves. lol. Americans will start flocking in droves.
Things I've never said (or really anyone else):
1) "So important to fix"
2) "So lucrative to fix"
3) They should change the size of the gloves
4) I am concerned that MU and Madrid aren't making enough money.
5) Soccer clubs don't act in their best interest
Things I did say/imply:
1) MU and Madrid don't make the rules. FIFA does. And money is not its only driving factor.
2) Sometimes, other factors prevent/delay moves that would be financially profitable.
3) It would be silly to completely ignore a potential multibillion dollar market
4) I would like higher-scoring soccer games.
Since you're soundly defeating the straw man who's arguing 1-5, maybe you could shift your attention to the latter 4?At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
-Berry Trammel, 12/3/10
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post1. Allow people to pick up the ball.
2. Allow tackling players who have picked up the ball.
3. Call it Rugby.
You're welcome.
"You interns are like swallows. You shit all over my patients for six weeks and then fly off."
"Don't be sorry, it's not your fault. It's my fault for overestimating your competence."
Comment
-
FIFA is not completely ignoring the US (assuming that's who you mean by a "potential multibillion dollar market"). They just are not kowtowing to us. I'm sure FIFA would LOVE for soccer to be America's #1 sport, but they are not going to risk alienating the other 90% of the world who already love soccer the way it is just to appease the Americans.Originally posted by ERCougar View PostA
Things I did say/imply:
1) MU and Madrid don't make the rules. FIFA does. And money is not its only driving factor.
2) Sometimes, other factors prevent/delay moves that would be financially profitable.
3) It would be silly to completely ignore a potential multibillion dollar market
4) I would like higher-scoring soccer games.
Since you're soundly defeating the straw man who's arguing 1-5, maybe you could shift your attention to the latter 4?Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.
Dig your own grave, and save!
"The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American
"I know that you are one of the cool and 'edgy' BYU fans" -- Wally
GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!
Comment
-
I agree. There are plenty of reasons not to change, some even possibly financial. That doesn't mean the reasons to change are meaningless or unimportant. Right now, they don't want to change. Fine.Originally posted by falafel View PostFIFA is not completely ignoring the US (assuming that's who you mean by a "potential multibillion dollar market"). They just are not kowtowing to us. I'm sure FIFA would LOVE for soccer to be America's #1 sport, but they are not going to risk alienating the other 90% of the world who already love soccer the way it is just to appease the Americans.At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
-Berry Trammel, 12/3/10
Comment
-
1. I didn't disagree so there is nothing to address.Originally posted by ERCougar View PostAre you having fun with these imaginary strawmen? I think you're winning!
Things I've never said (or really anyone else):
1) "So important to fix"
2) "So lucrative to fix"
3) They should change the size of the gloves
4) I am concerned that MU and Madrid aren't making enough money.
5) Soccer clubs don't act in their best interest
Things I did say/imply:
1) MU and Madrid don't make the rules. FIFA does. And money is not its only driving factor.
2) Sometimes, other factors prevent/delay moves that would be financially profitable.
3) It would be silly to completely ignore a potential multibillion dollar market
4) I would like higher-scoring soccer games.
Since you're soundly defeating the straw man who's arguing 1-5, maybe you could shift your attention to the latter 4?
2. I didn't disagree, so there is nothing to address.
3. Are they completely ignoring a potential multibillion dollar market? Please expound on that one.
4. Maybe FIFA changes the size of the keeper's gloves, maybe eliminates the offsides rule just for you and other US Americans that think soccer should change.Fitter. Happier. More Productive.
sigpic
Comment
-
I guess I'm unsure of what your point was here:Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post1. I didn't disagree so there is nothing to address.
2. I didn't disagree, so there is nothing to address.
3. Are they completely ignoring a potential multibillion dollar market? Please expound on that one.
4. Maybe FIFA changes the size of the keeper's gloves, maybe eliminates the offsides rule just for you and other US Americans that think soccer should change.
I guess I gave you too much credit in assuming you were making a point beyond: 1) Soccer isn't really worried (Did anyone say they were?) and 2) Soccer isn't likely to change its rules (Did anyone say they were?).Originally posted by TripletDaddy View PostSoccer around the world is really worried and will likely change its rules to appease Americans.
Apologies. No, soccer isn't really worried about its future and no, they probably aren't changing any time soon. Thank you for your contribution to the thread.At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
-Berry Trammel, 12/3/10
Comment
Comment