I don't disagree with you, but since the US has BOTH the money AND the large population, it seems that they should win a LOT MORE medals than, let's say, the Netherland, or Norway. . .but they don't. I believe there is one more recent event that demonstrate what the key to the US' "success" in the Olympics has always been. . .and that is the huge population, the UNION of the 50 states competing as ONE country. Now, look at the medals the former "Soviet Unions" historically amassed, and look at Russia today. . .BUT, look at the now independent countries who USED TO BE part of the Soviet Unions. . . IF the European Union competed as ONE, I believe they would have had more Olympic medals than the US or the Soviet Union almost at every Olympic games. Or, IF EACH STATE of the US competed INDVIDUALY, each state would have fewer medals than most other countries in Europe. It would be interesting to look at the Olympics medals through history to come up with a concrete answer to all this.
You mean. . .like American Football? LOL Yes, I believe ice hockey and lacrosse are widely spread among all developed countries at least. I know that even little Belgium plays both of those sports.
nope soccer attendance at games has supassed hockey and basketball, tv numbers are dependent on network contracts and dont reflect the number of fans... When you factor in the nba plays 50games per season, the nhl 82 the mls 34 games per season putting it in 3rd makes it even more impressive...and mlb 162 games not very impressive...soccer will become the biggest game in the usa it's only a matter of time now...
but both in very small number of participants...russia in hockey only has 60k hockey players at all levels, canada has nearly 700k, so it's a small sport even in russia compared to it's 5-6 million soccer players...
the usa still lacks the coaching culture, like canada it's very far behind european and south american levels, and most crtically it's absent at the youngest age groups...by age 12 the average north american is far behind the others, and by age 12 that gap can no longer be closed...
Yep! The number of "players" in every sport matters. . .this is why I am amazed that the US doesn't get 3 times more medals than everyone else! In fact, if you look at their performance again small countries like Nederland, even Switzerland and Germany. . .we are REALLY underperforming based on the "talent pool" we can draw from!
Yes, having been raised in Belgium, I totally understand how a culture that lives and breathe for soccer (football, actually!) can make a difference! In Belgium, with only just under 10 millions people, I believe that 75% of boys start playing FOOTBALL before they learn to read! And not just football, but also rugby, tennis, gymnastics, martial arts, Lacrosse. . . and NONE of it during SCHOOL time! All of it happen either after school or on weekends!
It was an argument I was pushing earlier without much success. Money is not the only part of the equation, identifying talent at a young enough age is (in my mind) is more important. Australia continues to over achieve in swimming simply because by age 8 nearly every Australian child has been taught to swim, and has been in a race of some sort. Even at that age talent can be extremely obvious
Actually you are wrong again. Based on attendence, MLS is still dwarfed by the big 3, NBA, NFL, and MLB. This also includes the NHL. I have no doubt that soccer will gain in popularity in the future, but when you take into account TV viewership, advertising dollars, sale of sports apparel, the MLS has a long way to go. Even compared to sports attendence world wide, sporting events, MLS doesn't even rank in the top 20.At this point its pure speculation on your part. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Soccer_attendance
do you have reading comprehension issues?..even your wiki link has the mls in third for average attendance...and this is for a 2nd rate league without a major television contract that would allow it to compete for top ranked players...
Its called total attendance. Average attendance means absolutely nothing. If you need me to draw you a picture I'll get a box of crayons, if that's what it takes.
identifying is important but it's useless without an early introduction to the sport...in my coaching days we identified kids as young as 4, 5 and 6 , not because of their technical ability because they have none at that age but by their personality and athletic ability...a local swim club near me that produces competitors for the national team will not accept any new members over 10 yrs old unless they are fully proficient swimmers, they'd be technically too far behind...
childishly absurd logic, you can't compare total attendance when one league plays only 32 games and the other two play 50 and 80 per season not including playoffs.. .if you're going to play childish games please go away I've no interest in discussing it further with you...
You're the one picking and choosing numbers to support that MLS is going to over take one of the big three in popularity. Sad thing is you don't even take scheduling of games into account, or even TV viewership. Does the average American have the time or money to go to every Basketball or Baseball game throughout the season? And yet because MLS has mostly Soccer games on Saturday, and has a regular attendance average, it some how is going to over take Baseball or Basketball in popularity. Talk about (*)(*)(*)(*)ing stupid.
I'm going to make a prediction like wlyl. Underwater basket weaving will overtake baseball or basketball in anytime now. It's possible.
