Twenty/20 - its here to stay

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Well, have to consider one thing. Soccer's been before
the American public for decades now. Been a couple
of pro leagues in this country, the World Cup, and some
[washed up] superstars. Americans are well versed in
the game and have seen it at its highest level.

Pretty much true.

And still they
haven't accepted it.

That's a subjective statement. If by that you mean it isn't popular to the level of NFL, yes. But things don't have to be at the level of NFL (and will never be) to be declared "accepted". They certainly haven't rejected it. And they are certainly making progress with every little step. To say that there hasn't been astronomical progress with American soccer between 1986 to 2007 and great deal of progress between 1996 to 2007 would be lying.

Now I ask you: if all these things
had be done for cricket (or would be) what would have been
the impact on the American public? What if a
pro 20/20 cricket league were run in the USA for a couple of years with
some big name stars? If all this were in place I'm pretty confident a lot more Americans would warm up to cricket
than they do soccer.

All of this is in the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" category, which I'm not sure proves what. The fact of the matter is, cricket in USA has made absolutely no progress between 1986 to 2007. Contrast that with soccer in USA. Who's fault is that? The blame surely lies with US cricket bodies (USACA and its various incarnations).

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Of course, no offence intended in any of this, ...

None taken. If we're taking into consideration all professional soccer(MLS, MISL,etc) in the US and all professional hockey(NHL,ECHL,etc) in the US, there is no way soccer will surpass ice hockey. Professional soccer has a ton of ground to catch up to, compared to the amount of ground that is already covered in the US with regards to professional hockey. How many cities have professional soccer teams? How many have professional hockey teams? MLS may be growing but it has a lot of ground to cover to get to the level of NHL.

there is no doubt that the NHL has declined quite a bit in recent years, even before the lock-out.

Even if it has declined, its still above MLS. NBA has declined recently as well. Baseball not too long ago was at a decline and bounced back.

Soccer's been before
the American public for decades now. Been a couple
of pro leagues in this country, the World Cup, and some
[washed up] superstars. Americans are well versed in
the game and have seen it at its highest level.

timmy brings up a good point. Soccer has been thrown in our American faces time after time and failed. Cricket has never really been thrown into the US sports market as a "true" professional sport like MLS, NHL, NFL, etc with stadiums, marketing, TV exposure, etc. Yes Im sure the USACA has a lot to do with that, but the US has never been given a chance to learn what cricket is all about and learn to enjoy the sport, whereas soccer has been given many chances. Once that opportunity comes and cricket is able to become a marketable sport, it will surpass soccer. When I said "20/20 will surpass soccer" I never said "next week" or "next year" and when you look back on this debate in 2027, 20/20 will have surpassed soccer.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Soccer has been thrown in our American faces time after time and failed.

Prove it.

You say it has failed and I say it has made progress. This is a subjective statement. It's your (and timmy's) word against my word. I say, prove it. If your reasoning is that MLS is not as big as MLB or NBA, it cannot be considered acceptable as proof.

What do you think was the objective for MLS and USSF when MLS was launched in 1996? To have MLS as a league bigger than English Premiership, or USA to win World Cup by 2006? Of course not. To have MLS bigger than NBA or MLB? Again, no. Let me give you a hint. Even nations like Spain or Netherlands where soccer is the no. 1 sport have never won World Cup. So definitely US not winning World Cup cannot be considered as abject failure. A number of smaller countries like Hungary, Denmark, Sweden also have soccer as no. 1 sport. They don't even have soccer leagues considered top in the world, but they're OK for the purpose they're intended for. They also don't have competition from too many other sports, maybe ice hockey or some basketball. If you examine quality of MLS, it's pretty much on par with leagues in these smaller countries, in some cases even better.

Soccer in USA cannot be declared as outright success right now. But neither can it be arbitrarily declared as failure. There is absolutely no basis to say that. It is delicately balanced and could tip in either direction. Jury is still out to make a call one way or another.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Prove it.

Soccer, not just MLS, but soccer as a whole professional entity in the US, has failed in the past:

WUSA = failed
NPSL = failed
WISL = failed
NASL = failed

And why do you keep bringing the World Cup into the argument? We are talking about US sports. And yes, the US not winning a World Cup is a failure, but I won't bring that into the debate.

Soccer in USA cannot be declared as outright success right now. But neither can it be arbitrarily declared as failure.

Im not saying that soccer is a current failure, but soccer has failed many times in the past here in the US. History will repeat itself, and MLS will fail, thanks to good 'ol Becks!

 

[Dannyboy]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Soccer will always have a place in each sporting cultures all around the world its just that in some nations it will be no.1 but others it will be a minor sport, in a hundred years that might have changed. What soccer has going for it is that its a globally markeatable sport. You can build on that but it takes time, not ten years.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Soccer, not just MLS, but soccer as a whole professional entity in the US, has failed in the past:

WUSA = failed
NPSL = failed
WISL = failed
NASL = failed

What exactly are you talking about and what does WUSA have to do with this argument? Are we talking about women's cricket and women's soccer here? Also, what does NASL have to do with this argument? If you're talking about ancient history (relatively speaking in the context of modern sports it sure is, it folded in 1984), then might as well start from the Big Bang. What the heck is WISL? If this is some indoor soccer thing, that's not even the same sport. You sure are confused in your argument.

If that's what you consider to be your proof, it sure is laughable.

By that argument, American Football has been a failure in USA, because USFL folded, correct?

And why do you keep bringing the World Cup into the argument? We are talking about US sports.

OK, now it's absolutely clear to me that you're confused. We're talking about international sports here, like cricket and soccer and their progress in a specific country. Not NFL. What exactly is "talking about US sports" when discussing cricket or soccer and their progress in USA? Tell me, would you not want to talk about ICC World Cup when talking about cricket and its evolution over the years? If you are not involving World Cup in a discussion of these international sports, then continuing on this conversation further with you is a no-go.

And yes, the US not winning a World Cup is a failure...

So, by that argument soccer has failed in Spain and Netherlands as well, yes?

Im not saying that soccer is a current failure, but soccer has failed many times in the past here in the US.

What is this "has failed", "current failure"? Is that some play with words?

So, you mean it has failed and then succeeded, and then failed and then succeeded? Just what exactly are you talking about? Once again, go back to my statement. "The fact of the matter is, cricket in USA has made absolutely no progress between 1986 to 2007. Contrast that with soccer in USA." And I'm choosing 1986 to be a convenient starting point. Why? It's easy. In 1986 the FIFA World Cup was held in neighboring Mexico and the last World Cup in which USA didn't participate. Also, 1987 had ICC World Cup. But there is really no reference point for USA with that World Cup or the sport of cricket in general anyway.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Soccer, not just MLS, but soccer as a whole professional entity in the US, has failed in the past:

WUSA = failed
NPSL = failed
WISL = failed
NASL = failed

What exactly are you talking about and what does WUSA have to do with this argument? Are we talking about women's cricket and women's soccer here? Also, what does NASL have to do with this argument? If you're talking about ancient history (relatively speaking in the context of modern sports it sure is, it folded in 1984), then might as well start from the Big Bang. What the heck is WISL? If this is some indoor soccer thing, that's not even the same sport. You sure are confused in your argument.

If that's what you consider to be your proof, it's sure laughable.

And why do you keep bringing the World Cup into the argument? We are talking about US sports.

OK, now it's absolutely clear to me that you're confused. We're talking about international sports here, like cricket and soccer and their progress in a specific country. Not NFL. What exactly is "talking about US sports" when discussing cricket or soccer and their progress in USA? Tell me, would you not want to talk about ICC World Cup when talking about cricket and its evolution over the years? If you are not involving World Cup in a discussion of these international sports, then continuing on this conversation further with you is a no-go.

And yes, the US not winning a World Cup is a failure...

So, by that argument soccer has failed in Spain and Netherlands as well, yes?

Im not saying that soccer is a current failure, but soccer has failed many times in the past here in the US.

What is this "has failed", "current failure"? Is that some play with words?
So, you mean it has failed and then succeeded, and then failed and then succeeded? Just what exactly are you talking about? Once again, go back to my statement. "The fact of the matter is, cricket in USA has made absolutely no progress between 1986 to 2007. Contrast that with soccer in USA." And I'm choosing 1986 to be a convenient starting point. Why? It's easy. In 1986 the FIFA World Cup was held in neighboring Mexico and the last World Cup in which USA didn't participate. Also, 1987 had ICC World Cup. But there is really no reference point for USA with that World Cup or the sport of cricket in general anyway.

 

[Dannyboy]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Soccer will always have a place in each sporting cultures all around the world its just that in some nations it will be no.1 but others it will be a minor sport, in a hundred years that might have changed. What soccer has going for it is that its a globally markeatable sport. You can build on that but it takes time, not ten years.

Now substitute the name soccer for cricket 20/20, it can happen people just have to be patient. You cant build an empire overnight. This is why i love 20/20 because it introduces kids and families to cricket that probably would have never went to a game before. But as a global sport cricket is way behind soccer.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

But as a global sport cricket is way behind soccer.

Exactly. But the fact of the matter is, they're both "global" sports. They have been going back so many years, and that's what has been the allure of them for so many fans world wide. But kudu doesn't want to consider World Cups when discussing these sports, with some bizzarre isolationist "US sports" viewpoint.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

What exactly are you talking about and what does WUSA have to do with this argument?

WUSA is a part of professional soccer in the United States of America. And I repeat "Soccer, not just MLS, but soccer as a whole professional entity in the US, has failed in the past", and history will repeat itself and the MLS will fail, and you can thank Golden Balls himself.

From 1986 to 2007, how many opportunities, similar to the numerous opportunities soccer has had from 1986 to 2007, has cricket had to be a marketable sport in the US? 20/20 has NEVER been given an opportunity. Once that opportunity comes and blooms, bye-bye soccer.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

But kudu doesn't want to consider World Cups when discussing these sports, with some bizzarre isolationist "US sports" viewpoint.

Because we're talking about the US sports market, and comparing US soccer, to US hockey and US cricket. World Cup has no business in this discussion.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

WUSA is a part of professional soccer in the United States of America.

OK, it's clear to me that I'm not interested in carrying on this debate any further, when you keep bringing irrelevant offshoots like WUSA into discussion.

It has been proven time and time again, all over the world that women's sports are next to impossible to market as "professional sports leagues". Things like WNBA have been artificially kept alive by parent NBA, but have been effectively dead if left on their own.

Women's pro sports leagues are not viable business models, never have been. Even women don't watch women's sports. Nobody watches WNBA, pretty much nobody. Whoever few hundreds of people present at a WNBA event are all paid by the teams to sit there. I have no sexist bias when making these statements, that's just the way it is. I've heard some rumours of attempts to revive WUSA, but won't expect it last long without a benevolent parent like WNBA has.

Because we're talking about the US sports market, and comparing US soccer, to US hockey and US cricket. World Cup has no business in this discussion.

Oh, and WUSA does!?!?!?! You want to drag women's sport into this discussion, but ignore highly relevant things like World Cups?

I say, bye-bye from this argument with you.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Oh, and WUSA does!?!?!?!

Yes it does because WUSA was a US professional soccer league. World Cup is not a US professional league. If you want to bring in World Cup in the discussion, then I will bring in the Olympics. How well did the US soccer team do in the 2004 Olympics? Oh thats right, they didn't even qualify. How well did the US hockey team do in the 2002 Olympics? Took the silver. US soccer has never won an Olympic medal, which is part of why soccer has failed so many times. USA winning the gold medal in hockey in 1980 is one of the greatest moments in US sports history, and is a reason for why hockey is so popular here. So I guess I win the argument. 20/20 cricket will surpass soccer and soccer will never surpass hockey. Bye-bye.

 

[timmyj51]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

"and no way will a typical 21 yr. old american choose cricket over soccer"



Cricket: guy wingin' in balls at 90+ mph, blastin' stumps out of ground...batters smashing
balls into stands...in two and a half hours glut of runs scored.

Soccer: guys in silk shorts and knee socks running up and down field...in
two and a half hours one, maybe, two balls kicked into fish net.

No question which game my money's on.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Women's pro sports leagues are not viable business models, never have been. Even women don't watch women's sports

So the LPGA and WTA are not viable business models and women don't watch womens tennis and/or womens golf?? Interesting. Not to mention womens AVP volleyball. Oh wait, never mind, no one wants to watch scantily clad fit women jump up and down hitting a ball over a net. No way.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

No question which game my money's on.

News flash: The world doesn't consult timmyj to make their choices and spending decisions. Especially the American sports fan.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah, bunch of non sequitur....

Yes, you win. Because in your dream world $1 million prize money has already been awarded to the Olympic Gold winning USA cricket Twenty20 team!!!!

So the LPGA and WTA are not viable business models and women don't watch womens tennis and/or womens golf?? Interesting. Not to mention womens AVP volleyball. Oh wait, never mind, no one wants to watch scantily clad fit women jump up and down hitting a ball over a net. No way.

Ahem, right, like we were talking about actual "team" professional sports like cricket, soccer, ice hockey, basketball, baseball. Tennis and golf are not part of this argument.

And since AVP volleyball is such a money making monster worldwide, it keeps generating headlines in all these US sports bulletins and sports pages of newspapers, pushing down NFL, MLB, NBA stories, and even any soccer stories. Especially the women's volleyball part.

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Ahem, right, like we were talking about actual "team" professional sports like cricket, soccer, ice hockey, basketball, baseball. Tennis and golf are not part of this argument.

Sure they are. LPGA and WTA are womens professional leagues. You said nothing in your argument about womens "team" professional leagues. I never said womens AVP volleyball was a POWERHOUSE league in the US dominating everything else, like you make it out to be. It is a womens league, which draws a lot of attention to both men and women, and I don't see any headlines where they are losing money or failing. Oh and what about Formula-1, which you used in your argument on post #58? That is an individual sport! Chandu, stop now, your making a fool out of yourself.

 

[Chandu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Yeah, and you've got all the credibility by making statements like "soccer is years ahead of cricket in USA because it has failed".

 

[kudu]

Re: Twenty/20 - its here to stay

Yeah, and you've got all the credibility by making statements like "soccer is years ahead of cricket in USA because it has failed".

I never said "because", I said "and". If you're going to quote someone, do it right. Twisting it around to try and benifit your argument isnt going to work.