Big Gay Soccer Thread

[The Gipper]

Yep, Come On You Irons! For my sins I'm a season ticket holder at West Ham and have been for many years. It's an East London/Essex team with good support in Kent too. Also the subject of a number of hooligan films.

Doesn't Kent have its own team?

[DeputyDawg]

Gillingham? Small fry mate and with a new train link from Stratford to Kent coming up expect a lot more Hammers fans in Kent very shortly.

[The Gipper]

Gillingham? Small fry mate and with a new train link from Stratford to Kent coming up expect a lot more Hammers fans in Kent very shortly.

Two very important people in history came from Gillingham: My mother and the real life person that became an English Samurai that Shogun was based on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Adams_(sailor)

[DeputyDawg]

I raise the glass of Laphroaig I'm drinking right now to them. Cheers!

[The Gipper]

I raise the glass of Laphroaig I'm drinking right now to them. Cheers!

Where's mine?

[DeputyDawg]

I have loads of whisky/ey. You're ever in Billericay you're invited to partake mate! I'm currently drinking a Scotch Malt Whisky Society Ardmore. Had a glass of quality bourbon before that.

[The Gipper]

I have loads of whisky/ey. You're ever in Billericay you're invited to partake mate! I'm currently drinking a Scotch Malt Whisky Society Ardmore. Had a glass of quality bourbon before that.

Not sure just where that is. Is that East Anglia?

[DeputyDawg]

It's in Essex mate, 35 minutes from Liverpool Street station, not far off the A12 by car.

[The Gipper]

OK, a few of things about the MLS Championship game that happened yesterday:

A. Notice that this is the first time anywhere that anyone here has mentioned it. Columbus played Portland. Portland won. Should we here in Northeast Ohio....Browns fans, have been behind an MLS team from Columbus?

B. The NBC guys stated: "This is Portland's first Championship in a major sport since the Trailblazers won the 1977 NBA title:

SHUT THE FUCK UP, assholes. Soccer is NOT a major sport yet. NBC just wanted to claim it is because they showed the broadcast.

(on that note....should we here in NEOhio be behind a real major league team: the hockey team from Columbus)

C. That said, the Portland team was coached by Caleb Porter. He is the former HC...manager...wtfever they call them.....that coached the Akron U Soccer team to a National championship a few years back. His wife and mine used to work together.

D. Also....Akron U is back in the National Championship race. They are now in the Soccer Final Four. Friday they will play Stanford for the right to play the Syracuse/Clemson winner.

(Interesting...Clemson is in the Final Four in Football and in Futbol.)

[Browns149]

Having been a fan of the English Premier League (Liverpool) for many years, the MLS is like watching AA baseball compared to MLB.

 

It is the same game but nowhere near the talent level.

 

I also don't root for the Blue Jackets as I am a New York Rangers fan.

[gftChris]

Lol, MLS.

[The Gipper]

Lol, MLS.

So, WTF is up with that?

 

Most reasoning for not recognizing the MLS as a "major league" is that it is:

A. the sport itself is still not taken as seriously here as the other sports...

B. Tradition.....the MLS still doesn't have it much.

C. Size. Until it reaches the kinds of numbers of teams approaching the other major leagues....and is located in most of the major markets, it won't get major league status.

D. Age. The league is just too young as yet. It has only been a league since 1996.

E. Continuity. Other than mergers of other leagues that have occurred (e.g. the ABA and the WHL) no team in the other 4 major sports have gone defunct outright since the 1950s. Having that continuity and stability is a Hallmark of a major league sport. The MLS has a team go belly up just last year: Chivas FC. In this regard, perhaps this could have been overlooked had the NASL formed in the 60s still been operating....the league of the NY Cosmos and Pele.

 

But, even though it is not a major league sport here yet......it is still THE top league in America......and that means something. And what it means is that it is not something to laugh at. No, I am not a soccer defender......but this MLS, as I said, is a very young league....only 20 years. Compare its progress to the English football leagues. Most of those teams have been around since the 1800s, fair to say? Though the league has gone through permutations, the teams have all been around in one form or another for 100+ years. All MLS teams only around since 1996.

So...I wouldn't be laughing too hard......for before you know it, the MLS may in fact be THE premier league....if not the Premier League of that sport.

[The Gipper]

On the question of "Should Clevelanders, people from Northeast Ohio support the teams from Columbus in which Cleveland does not have a sport? I guess you could ask: Why?

 

In the negative: In terms of geographic distance, I suspect that the hockey teams in Detroit and Pittsburgh are a close a the BJs.

 

In the positive: That team does wear an emblem embodying the state flag of Ohio. and We support Ohio State thoroughly here...and that is in Columbus.

 

Overall though, I see ennui towards those Columbus teams from Cleveland/Akron/Canton people. While they are not supported like the Browns/Cavs/Indians, neither are they hated like the Steelers/Tigers/Pistons

(and here is a note Pittspuke fan.....Detroit is actually more of a rival to Cleveland than Pittsburgh.....we have more teams there to be rivals of......both Tigers/Pistons play in same divisions in those sports as Cleveland teams)

No. It is just sort of a "whatever' attitude here toward the Columbus teams.

[Browns149]

It will never rival the EPL or the top teams from Spain,Italy, Mexico, Brazil

 

The teams over there can spend 100 times more for players.

 

The top European and South American players only come to the USA for their final contract. When they are passed their prime.

 

No way any MLS team will pull a 20 year old top player from outside the USA

[Browns149]

I would NEVER EVER root for anything from pittspuke.

[One Post]

Soccer. Sock her

[gftChris]

MLS suffers from the problem of not being in Europe or South America. Most big time players from around the world want to play in Europe, and most from South America want to play in either Europe or South America.

 

MLS cannot compete financially because of america's insistence on sporting parity, and even if it could, players would not want to go their in their prime. They're more obsessed with winning the European champion's league, or one of the domestic titles from england, spain or maybe italy.

[The Gipper]

It will never rival the EPL or the top teams from Spain,Italy, Mexico, Brazil

 

The teams over there can spend 100 times more for players.

 

The top European and South American players only come to the USA for their final contract. When they are passed their prime.

 

No way any MLS team will pull a 20 year old top player from outside the USA

No....not now...but in 10-15 years.......Never say never.

[The Gipper]

MLS suffers from the problem of not being in Europe or South America. Most big time players from around the world want to play in Europe, and most from South America want to play in either Europe or South America.

Again, now sure. But like I said, in 10-15 years?

 

MLS cannot compete financially because of america's insistence on sporting parity,

OK educate me about this as I am not sure exactly what you mean.

I know that US leagues do not do the "relegation" thing. Are you also saying that because teams in American sports leagues largely share a lot of revenue.....and that there is an attempt by the American sports league (NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL) to have all their teams be profitable, that that is not the case in Europe and SA?

Is every team on its own financially in say the Premier League or the Bundesliga etc.

Do the rich get richer and all that?

(And what is the problem with parity...do the players control the league or do the owners? Lets say the EPL wanted to start a salary cap....like 3 of the 4 US leagues have....What would stop them?)

 

 

and even if it could, players would not want to go their in their prime. They're more obsessed with winning the European champion's league, or one of the domestic titles from england, spain or maybe italy.

If America started to produce top quality players (as our colleges do in every other sport) that could change. Americans would want to play in America (as long as their is not a vast gap in the $$ they could make)

[Browns149]

The "big" clubs in England have much bigger venues to play in.

 

Man United play is a stadium (Old Trafford) that holds around 76,000 fans

 

Arsenal play in a stadium (Emirates Stadium) that holds over 60,000

 

Some of the lower teams play in very small stadiums

 

Stoke City play in a stadium (Britannia Stadium) that holds only 28,000

 

Watford play in a stadium (Vicarage Road) that only holds 21,000

 

I don't think the big clubs want to share that much of a difference in revenue

[The Gipper]

The "big" clubs in England have much bigger venues to play in.

 

Man United play is a stadium (Old Trafford) that holds around 76,000 fans

 

Arsenal play in a stadium (Emirates Stadium) that holds over 60,000

 

Some of the lower teams play in very small stadiums

 

Stoke City play in a stadium (Britannia Stadium) that holds only 28,000

 

Watford play in a stadium (Vicarage Road) that only holds 21,000

 

I don't think the big clubs want to share that much of a difference in revenue

Well, it sounds to me like that the English Premier League isn't "premier" at all. It sounds like you have "minor league" like teams playing in the same league as "major league" teams.

Could you imagine the NFL(or MLB) having some stadiums seating @80 K...and some seating only 20-25K?

Yes, that sounds absurd to us.

Here, the largest NFL stadium is like 82K (Met Life....though AT&T could go to 100 K)

...and the smallest is the 52,525 the Vikings play in ....but that is a temporary stadium....to be replaced next year with a new stadium.

The Smallest is O.com stadium in Oakland: 56,057. Yes, there is some disparity....about 25K......but nothing like the over 50K disparity you note.

The disparity in MLB stadiums is: Dodger Stadium, largest at 56,000. TB Rays stadium at 31,000.

 

For the MLS here, stadium size is flexible.......several teams play in football stadia, but reduce the size for soccer: e.g, they take Gillette Stadium from 68K for the Patriots down to 20K for the New England Revolution.

The actual largest capacity MLS stadium is the 40,000 that the Seattle team plays in (reduced from 67,000 for the Seahawks)

Three MLS teams play in stadiums with about 18,000 capacity.

 

Hell, Akron U plays in a soccer only stadium that seats 5800.....but they could move over to Infocision Stad. with a 30K capacity.

 

I guess my point/question is: why do they allow for such a large disparity in stadium capacity in the EPL.....far larger than any US sport.

 

Hockey arenas in the NHL are all between about 16K at smallest and 22K at largest.

The NBA is even more uniform.....largest is 21,165 at the Palace at Auburn Hills for the Pistons. Smallest is 16,867 for the Pelicans...New Orleans.

[Browns149]

The team in first place in the EPL is Leicster City.

 

They play in a stadium (King Power Stadium) that holds 32,000

 

That is about the average for the 20 teams that compete in the EPL every year

[DeputyDawg]

Whatever happens in MLS I hope it doesn't get dominated by a few teams, which is what has happened in football elsewhere.

Leicester, Watford are teams that will be relegated in a year or two. Man City will win the EPL. Teams like Tottenham, Liverpool and possibly West Ham will put pressure on top 4 places over the next few years as they build (or are given ?) big stadiums and have big fan bases. The same teams will otherwise compete for the glory. As much as it's refreshing to see Leicester do well it won't last and neither will Chelscum 's disaster start continue unfortunately.

I hope the MLS is great, so good luck with this and I hope you produce teams that can compete on the world scale.

[gftChris]

Oh god, this is turning in to an 'educate gipper on why he's wrong' thread again. I'm out.

[The Gipper]

Oh god, this is turning in to an 'educate gipper on why he's wrong' thread again. I'm out.

I don't think I said anything that I can either be right or wrong about.

(My postulation about the MLS coming on par with EPL etc. is simply that....a postulation....a "maybe someday in the future this could happen"....nothing right or wrong about that")

 

No....I asked about the disparity in stadium sizes in the EPL.....and how it affects competition there.

Do you deny that the teams with the larger stadiums generally dominate?

 

And I asked why you think that the MLS cannot compete internationally because of America's insistence on "sporting parity". I truly have no understanding what you mean by that.

 

I mean, if you don't know your sport well enough to give a cogent answer, just say so. There is no need to be snarky.

Yes, I was looking for information......but in doing so I gave a comparison with American sports.....which are apparently run on a different basis than European or South American sports.

[DeputyDawg]

I will try to answer your questions Gipper, but this only imo. I think the clubs in the biggest cities (London, Manchester and Liverpool) are the teams that dominate and they also have the biggest stadiums with the most loyal support. That isn't coincidence. Virtually all have now been bought out by mega rich owners and in soccer that makes a big difference.

 

Let me give you an example of one obvious exception- a team I despise, Chelsea. The year they got promoted, to what became the EPL eventually, they were playing at home in their last game to Birmingham I think. They needed to win the game to be Div 2 champions. 12,000 attended. They are pathetic. That is their natural level of support. A wealthy Russian buys them and buys success and now they are a brand which everyone adores. They are the exception.

 

Man City, Manure (Man Utd), Liverpool and Arsenal are all big clubs. Tottenham ( who I don't like either, but for other reasons) are a big club in waiting and are from London. My team, West Ham (also London- Arsenal, Tottenham and West Ham are the only 3 big clubs in London), are also a big club in waiting, but to make the leap now need mega rich owners. Both Tottenham and West Ham have sizeable fan bases and are moving shortly in to big stadiums which they will both fill. West Ham dominate Essex and East London and Tottenham share North London with Arsenal, but dominate Hertfordshire.

 

England's second biggest city Birmingham should theoretically be able to compete, but it has some major let downs which stop it doing so. 1. Their fans suck- take a look at their half empty grounds when things go wrong. 2. They don't appeal to rich buyers because they are not in London or the North West. This is also Newcastle's problem, although their fans are loyal. On my theory the only other club that could make the transition to compete is Everton as they have great fans, are planning to build a bigger stadium, are in Liverpool, but....have no money.

 

Money is making other teams in England competitive, but only those teams with good fan bases and good stadiums plus good training facilities and academies will stay at the top. At this moment in time I can only see Manure, Man City (Citeh), Arsenal, Chelscum staying at the top. Liverpool, Tottenham and West Ham will soon be kicking down the doors to be let in. What money is doing is allowing these teams to buy players who can earn the top bucks, but crucially buy very good players who don't charge the top dollar as the 'big boys' get fleeced by the top players agents. To give you examples of this type of player West Ham have bought Dimitri Payet who is superb, but players like this are only now coming to West Ham because we are moving to the Olympic Stadium and can now pay their wages.

 

In terms of the MLS I see no reason why it won't be able to compete eventually. Americans produce world class athletes and take competition very seriously. The USA has lots of money and lots of people. Americans love sport. The only reason I say eventually is because soccer I believe still needs to grow in the USA and you still need to develop training academies and experienced coaches, but all this will come in time and I hope it does. I would love to see the day when American teams beat Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventos, AC Milan, and any English club apart from West Ham. And if you're ever over during our season and West Ham are at home, let me know and I will take you to a game, as I have 2 season tickets.

[DeputyDawg]

Also comparisons between NFL teams and EPL teams are difficult because of how long English clubs have been in existence. For example take the Cleveland Browns- a very successful franchise with a very loyal blue collar fan base that has fallen on hard times. Most of the teams, if not all of the teams, that now dominate English football didn't do so until (I'm guessing now since I can't be bothered to Google it) the late 50's onwards. It was the Munich air crash that made Manure famous until then they were just another team. Liverpool only became a world force in the 70's and 80's. Everton and Tottenham have won silverware on and off-mainly Cups, but never really dominated the league. Citeh were dreadful not that long ago. Chelscum have always been scum and still are. So these teams have never started brilliant and fallen by the way side, they've done it the other way round. Manure, the Spuds (Tottenham) and West Ham all have a tradition of playing attacking football. Arsenal used to be dire, but now play pretty football and want to walk the ball in the net.

 

You can't compare on fan loyalty because all the big clubs I have mentioned (apart from Chelscum as I refuse to think of them as a big club) have loyal blue collar fan bases. Arsenal is probably the exception here as they are usually referred to as Guardian newspaper readers (white collar) and are known for the morgue of their stadium (no noise).

 

Having said all that I do of course like in my mind to compare teams. Stoolers I compare to Chelscum. Ravens I compare to Tottenham (sorry London Dawg). Arsenal, Manure, Liverpool all have got to be linked with teams like the Giants (Man U), Redskins (Arsenal), Cowboys (Liverpool), but in no particular order really. Flaky support has to go with flaky support in the NFL so Villa with the Rams for instance. Everton could be a Vikings. Citeh could be a Green Bay.

 

So I have saved my best comparison to last. The Browns and West Ham are the perfect match. West Ham have a song we sing every game some words of which are: " I'm forever blowing bubbles, pretty bubbles in the air, they fly so high, nearly reach the sky, then like my dreams they fade and die, fortunes always hiding, I've looked everywhere, I'm forever blowing bubbles, pretty bubbles in the air!" Now you tell me how we are not too dissimilar? Two proper blue collar teams, with fanatical support, desperate for success, but never getting it (recently in the Browns case although it probably appears forever for you natives), yet have hope as they both could so easily turn it around as they have wealthy owners and good stadiums. I'm telling you, if you're Browns and interested in Soccer you should be a Hammers fan (West Ham)!

[gftChris]

Deputy - I'm a browns fan and a villa fan. The suffering is mutual and perfectly symmetrical, conjoined by Randy Lerner. It may be my humble opinion but villa are the soccer brethren of the browns.

[DeputyDawg]

Sorry Chris mate, respect your suffering, but apart from your owner there is no comparison. Villa have poor fans in general and by that I mean they are fair weather supporters. Browns fans are loyal. Nope, its definitely the Hammers for any Browns fans out there wanting to follow an English club

[The Cysko Kid]

Arsenal?