We ARE a Soccer Nation

SANDHURST, South Africa – Former President Bill Clinton liked what he saw from the U.S. World Cup team so much, he's staying for the next game.

Clinton said Thursday that he changed his schedule so he can attend the Americans' game against Ghana on Saturday in Rustenburg. The honorary chairman of the U.S. bid to host the World Cup in either 2018 or 2022, Clinton was in the stands for Wednesday's thrilling 1-0 victory against Algeria that sent the United States on to the round of 16. He then spent more than an hour in the locker room celebrating with the team.

“I lost my voice yesterday. I had to come home and drink hot tea with honey for an hour,” Clinton said. “I was very diplomatic until we scored, and then I was up there screaming and yelling with everybody.”

It seems all U.S. fans were very “diplomatic” before U.S. scored.

Awesome. That is a fantastic bit. I'm happy that he had fun and that people from all over are getting on board for supporting the team.

I wouldn't go so far as to call us a soccer nation just yet, but these numbers do prove that the sport is growing in this country. The Ghana match should attract more viewership, though, and if the US progresses every game after it should jump.

Soccer in this country still has a ways to go, but this is promising. I also expect the profile of MLS to move up exponentially by the time of the next World Cup- just look at how the league has grown and improved quality-wise from the '98 cup 'till now. Hell, it's made major strides since the last one!

Congrats!!

Oh please, Americans don't know a damn thing about the World Cup and they're fan only as long as the US wins. Of course, Americans should be happy that FIFA referees are helping them so much in the current game. There's no way Donovan deserved a penalty kick.

Yeah, sunshine Americans fans will watch as long as the team wins. If not, they'll whine. I doubt most Americans could name even one MLS team let alone two. The MLS is a joke. It's a shame the US team can't compete without some help from the referees. Whether it's unreasonable stoppage time added or an undeserving penalty kick, the US teams gets unprecedented additional chances. Furthermore, it's disgusting the way ESPN/ABC announcers are so biased; hell, the US team is a topic for them even when other teams are playing. It's unbelievable!

FINALLY, the football gods restored order to the World Cup — Ghana 2 US 1 — next question, how long can Landon Donovan and Clint Dempsey whine?

The USA should be proud about getting this far in a tournament that is still out of their league. The one thing that disappoints me most however about American soccer fans is that they only seem to exist when their team is winning. More importantly, I understand that America is made up of different nationalities but aren't we all Americans first? I can't stand Americans dropping their nationality to root for countries that their ancestors came from for freedom and a better life over a hundred years ago. It will be a hundred times worse tomorrow when Mexico plays. Why do we give these people free healthcare, schooling, and jobs when they still wave flags for Mexico and other countries in the streets? Can someone explain this to me?

You sound more biased than the ESPN/ABC commentators! And about those commentators, what do you think the World Cup is like watching in Germany? Do you think that in England they're just completely objective? What about in the Netherlands, Brazil, or Argentina- surely they just talk about the games without any sort of slant or bias toward their home country, right? The short answer to all of those questions is no.

And the USA hardly got a break from the refs- in the Algeria and especially the Slovenia game they got screwed by refs; against Ghana the penalty was clearly earned and the stoppage time clearly justified due to how much Ghana's players were flopping and staying down, and generally just wasting time. In the Algeria game, Donovan's goal was scored less than a minute into stoppage time, so the other 3.75 minutes didn't matter- deserved or not.

As for MLS, I wouldn't call it a joke anymore. It's not on par with the top European leagues, but is making strides and the quality of play has improved A LOT over the past years. In fact, since the first MLS game I attended two years ago 'till now, the league has improved. It's actually remarkable that the league has come so far and looks to improve even more in the future considering that it's not even 15 years old- we'll see what happens.

As far as “sunshine” American fans, the problem here is that America is not quite a soccer nation, so of course the fans will only really come out when the team is winning. For Americans such as myself who know and love the game, it doesn't matter much whether the team is winning- but America is not unique. Slovakia is not a soccer nation, but their fans are coming out of the woodwork now, New Zealand woke up to the game- why not criticize these countries? Probably because they're not America!

So, the bottom line: you obviously don't like America/American soccer. To each his own, but you don't need to discredit the sport in this country when it's almost entirely unwarranted.

There's no way the MLS even remotely compares with European football leagues, and I I have seen no improvement. It would be like comparing Single A baseball to the major leagues. No comparison. Furthermore, I doubt most Americans could name even one MLS team let alone two and they'd have a hard time naming one player.

The ESPN/ABC commentators were apparently hired to be biased; the U.S. was a topic even when it wasn't playing. Often, there was ZERO relevance to the game at hand, but the commentators felt obliged, probably to earn a paycheck, to mention the U.S. team. Having listened to commentators in other countries, I'd say they're much more objective than U.S. announcers who seem to be placed in a broadcasting booth to wave the flag instead of reporting the events of a match. It's embarrassing to watch American athletes whine when they're involved in international competition.

There's no way the U.S. should have been given 4 minutes of stoppage time. As for flopping, Clint Dempsey was forever flopping and should have been thrown out of the matches. The problem for football in the U.S. is that Americans want lots of scoring. That explains why Americans want baseball games with blowout scores and lots of home runs or, during American football season, lots of touchdowns. In fact, professional American football rules have been changed to make defensing wide receivers virtually impossible. Why? Because the league wants high scoring games to attract fans.

As for Ghana, the team had every right to kick the ball around to kill time. Had the U.S. done the same, you wouldn't be complaining. The bottom line is American footballers have become experts at whining. They got lucky against Spain; it was comparable to the alleged Miracle on Ice with Al Michaels doing the verbal flag waving in that instance. Today, the U.S. hockey team can't win a gold medal and, several years ago, after being booted out of the Olympics, the team trashed hotels. Talk about ugly Americans.

As for America — as though citizens of the U.S. are the only people who live in North America — I'm an American citizen, served for 8 years in the military and, therefore, no doubt have more right to criticize this country than you.

Regarding the World Cup, the bottom line is order has, at last, been restored. Dempsey and Donovan can come home, make the late night talk show circuit and whine some more. If they were paid for whining, they'd be among the richest people on the planet. Who knows, maybe President Obama will invite them to the White House where they're get national whining coverage! As much as they whine, maybe they can show up at the next teabagger rally; there's a lot of whining going on there as well.

A soccer nation? Not really. Just a nation that will come around to soccer every four years if the US team has a chance of winning a game.

There are a lot of real fans here in the US, but I don't see gaining more than we already have. We've heard this story too many times – 1999 (US WNT win), 1994 (WC in US), 1970's (NASL) – without soccer creeping into our culture.

Look, I'm not saying MLS is a top league- what I'm saying is that it has surpassed other, more established leagues (though NOT the TOP leagues) in terms of play quality. There ARE changes in the quality of the league- as evidenced by the fact that more Americans are moving from MLS to teams abroad. Watching an MLS game in 2004, you would have seen missed headers galore and just overall crappy play- the league still has some quality-of-play issues, but it's more than watchable these days.

Again, as far as commentator bias, this happens in any country in the cup. No surprise here, so who the hell cares???

Related to commentator bias is your own bias- you obviously seem to have some vendetta against American soccer. To deny the accomplishments of the sport in this country is blatantly ignorant. I'm sure you could level much criticism at the USMNT, but diving and whining is hardly a logical criticism (though it does happen, it isn't a huge problem). Watching teams like Italy, France, Mexico, and Portugal you're more likely to see more flopping and whining from one match of theirs than we saw from the U.S. during the entire cup. I am by no means saying you don't have a right to criticize the country (or at least the country's soccer), but what you're saying seems highly illogical to me.

I will never pretend that the United States should have won this World Cup, nor would I ever (or, at least at the present time) compare MLS to the likes of the EPL, Serie A, or the Bundesliga- but I think that MLS and the sport in this country are on the right track to do some special things in the future. They have a long way to go, but they've come a long way. Compare the national team and MLS to the years of past World Cups from 1998 to the present and there is no doubt a vast improvement. This is essentially undeniable.

“Look, I'm not saying MLS is a top league- what I'm saying is that it has surpassed other, more established leagues (though NOT the TOP leagues) in terms of play quality. There ARE changes in the quality of the league- as evidenced by the fact that more Americans are moving from MLS to teams abroad.”

The last part of your comment is why the MLS is a joke. If a player is a star in the MLS, he's most plays for a second-tier team in Europe. For example, Dempsey plays for Fullham which goes up and down from the Premier League. Another example is Tim Howard who plays for Everton. It's amusing to read that Howard plays for a team that had “A fourth place finish under manager David Moyes in the 2004/05 campaign, coupled with sixth and fifth place finishes respectively in the 2006/07 and 07/08 seasons, cemented the club's status in the upper echelons of English football. Another fifth-placed finish came in 2008/09 along with an FA Cup final appearance.”

In terms of attendance, the MLS ranks about 12th compared to world leagues with almost 30,000 less than the Bundesliga and only slightly above the 2nd tier Bundesliga teams. On average, the MLS only drew 6,000 more fans per game than the V-League in Vietnam despite having a television contract for its games. In the 2008 – 2009 season, MLS television ratings actually fell to a 0.2 rating meaning a match was watched, on average, by only 251,000 viewers weekly. It's a joke since ESPN2, during the same period, achieved higher ratings in prime time for Poker and Bowling. Since European football is now available on U.S. television on a frequent basis, why would anyone watch the MLS when they can watch the real thing? In other words, on U.S. televsion, European football has more interest than the MLS.

Frankly, the MLS is a lower tier minor league in world soccer with what Americans think are two or three big names. There's no way it even remotely compares to EPL/La Liga/Serie A, or even closer to the second tier European leagues such as (Bundesliga 2, Ligue 1). Contrary to your comment, interest in MLS isn't growing; in fact, it's diminishing.

Again, one would think that a supposedly top notch sports programming channel would have better quality in announcers. However, as I stated, it appears to be about hiring who can most verbally wave the U.S. flag. If that's the goal, hire Al Michaels; he's been a cheerleader, instead of announcer, for U.S. athletes in international competition for four decades.

By the way, the sport is called FOOTBALL, not soccer. I can deny it's accomplishments because, as I stated, it doesn't have significant viewership, it's players don't come close to being comparable to top level players in Europe.

“…but I think that MLS and the sport in this country are on the right track to do some special things in the future.”

Not true, for the reasons I stated above.

You'll need to excuse me, now. I'll watch a real football team play the game.

Rob, I don't think you are wrong at all as far as your assessment goes, except for the MLS's diminishing popularity.

As a longtime follower of the NBA I think of Europeans slowly entering the NBA. In the 80s and 90s Europe was way behind the USA as far as creating NBA quality players. When Dino Radja did well for the Celtics it was because it was a bad team, same for Peja and the Nets. People sad Toni Kukoc did well with the Bulls because the team was stacked. Now players like Dirk Nowitski (sp?) is one of the best in the league.

English Premier, La Liga, Serie A are your NBA. American's may never be the best players in the world, but after sometime some eventually will. We may never win a World Cup, but some day we may compete (read make it to the round of 16 every time). MLS will probably not keep the best footballers, just like Euroleague does not keep the best basketball players, or whatever the Japanese baseball league is does not keep the best baseball players. I'm okay with MLS being a feeder league to the top leagues in the world. Who knows what happens? Euroleague (basketball) was once a joke, but now people think it is either just below or even on par with the NBA.

No, it's called football and soccer, among other things.

I'm sure you criticize Australia, Ireland, South Africa, and New Zealand for calling it soccer, right?

As far as the MLS argument, I completely disagree with the diminshing popularity argument- TV and attendance numbers aside, more and more MLS teams are becoming profitable with each year, which proves its popularity. Despite the TV ratings going up and down, it has a TV contract which is more than can be said about the situation just a few years ago.

As far as the league being on par with a second-tier European league, I couldn't agree more. However, how long have the lower tiers of Europe been around compared to MLS? Could we have said MLS is on par with, say Ligue 2, five years ago? We couldn't have.

“No, it's called football and soccer, among other things. I'm sure you criticize Australia, Ireland, South Africa, and New Zealand for calling it soccer, right?”

Of course, I do!

“As far as the MLS argument, I completely disagree with the diminshing popularity argument- TV and attendance numbers aside, more and more MLS teams are becoming profitable with each year, which proves its popularity. Despite the TV ratings going up and down, it has a TV contract which is more than can be said about the situation just a few years ago.”

No, you can't argue with the fact that the MLS has diminishing television ratings. That's a fact! Furthermore, as I stated, televised European football matches draw more viewers than does the MLS. Despite your lame excuses, the MLS product isn't being viewed by large numbers of Americans. They'd rather watch European football and the ratings prove that point.

“Could we have said MLS is on par with, say Ligue 2, five years ago? We couldn't have.”

And, you can't say it now!

My argument, to Paul, is to counter his nonsense regarding the popularity of the MLS. If one examines television ratings, the MLS isn't that popular and, in fact, the matches of European teams, shown on American television, have higher viewership than do MLS matches.

Perhaps, the MLS, and Paul, should just admit the fact that it is a feeder league rather than espousing nonsense related to the popularity of the league. It's absurd to argue MLS popularity is surging when, in fact, the opposite is true despite a television contract.

Considering the average numbers of fans MLS games attract, it appears more Americans are interested in watching their cars rust than in watching MLS games.

What will be most interesting is how many times those extremely biased ESPN/ABC commentators can weave mention of the US team into the coming matches despite the fact the US is no longer in the competition.

I'm not arguing that MLS is up there with European leagues in either quality of play or popularity, and I wouldn't say popularity is “surging”.

What I'm saying is that the league is GROWING in popularity (most signs outside of TV ratings point to that). A few years ago, the league's attendance was weak, there was absolutely NO TV contract, and you would be lucky to find more than a footnote mentioning the league in the media. Nowadays, you see more TV coverage (through sports news and televised matches) and with higher league attendances. Contrary to your claims of low average numbers, the league's average attendance was 16,037 for 2009. That's not far behind Brazil's Serie A (where many of those teams play in large capacity stadiums), is ahead of both the Russian and Turkish leagues. It is ahead of France's Top 14 rugby league, and rugby is France's most popular sport (at least in some regions). Profitability of the teams and the fact that the league is more visible is promising. Actually, the fact that we can have this argument at all is a sign of the league's progress, as just a few years ago I think it would have been so obvious that the league sucked nobody would even bother to diss it.

As far as quality of play, yes, I agree almost unequivocally that the league is not up to speed with the top European leagues. However, it seems to be doing better in that regard and generally seems to be improving.

As far as the MLS surpassing Euro leagues, I could see that happening, but that won't be for at least another 20 years (and that estimate is assuming the US somehow gets amazing players and the league gets massive cash injections). While this could happen, it doesn't necessarily mean that it will. Even if the league stays the way it is, it doesn't look like it's going anywhere anytime soon. While, yes, the quality of play and excitement may not be up there with the Euro leagues, I enjoy watching the league to get my fix while the Euro leagues aren't playing.

Finally, the fact that it is a feeder league actually says something about some degree of increased quality. Up until a few years ago, it was rare for a U.S. player to move from MLS to a Euro league.