Post by Pounder on Jun 22, 2006 18:41:28 GMT -5
When I have to drive into work, a 55-minute trip on the days I end up doing it, out in the Idaho Outback, my radio options are often limited. Lately, it's become a semi-fixation with how Colin Cowherd (yes, former Portland TV sports hack) manages a radio gig with all the self-promotion and always trying to pilot the "this is why I spend my time on this" dreck.
He inadvertantly came out with what "might" be an interesting discussion for us today. When the Cup started, and USA crashed to the Czechs, he pulled out the "size matters" card, lamenting how Donovan was kind of short for 5'11" and how the Czechs were generally pushing us around. Today, he elaborated with something a bit more interesting- claiming to have talked to a couple coaches back East and (last night and today) in Omaha, he's coming out with "the best players on the soccer teams are the kids also playing football and basketball." He targeted the almost full-time club structure in the youth scene, saying that this causes the "athletes" to chuck soccer and play the other sports. The comment that really gnaws at me (paraphrasing):
"We're never going to be as skilled as the Brazilians and Argentines. We should be trying to out-athlete them."
Cowherd mentioned e-mails he received from soccer supporters regarding the need for skill... hence that comment. He's not totally buying it... to the point that he referred to those supporters as "Dungeons and Dragons" fans.
I do think it's an interesting question. Would American soccer do better with the old "three-sport athlete" types rather than work through the youth structure?
I can easily go into rants about the shortcomings of that youth structure, and I can go on and on about our development options tending to skew towards privilege... easy for me to go on a tangent. What do you think of the basic question? Is there a problem with the structure?
He inadvertantly came out with what "might" be an interesting discussion for us today. When the Cup started, and USA crashed to the Czechs, he pulled out the "size matters" card, lamenting how Donovan was kind of short for 5'11" and how the Czechs were generally pushing us around. Today, he elaborated with something a bit more interesting- claiming to have talked to a couple coaches back East and (last night and today) in Omaha, he's coming out with "the best players on the soccer teams are the kids also playing football and basketball." He targeted the almost full-time club structure in the youth scene, saying that this causes the "athletes" to chuck soccer and play the other sports. The comment that really gnaws at me (paraphrasing):
"We're never going to be as skilled as the Brazilians and Argentines. We should be trying to out-athlete them."
Cowherd mentioned e-mails he received from soccer supporters regarding the need for skill... hence that comment. He's not totally buying it... to the point that he referred to those supporters as "Dungeons and Dragons" fans.
I do think it's an interesting question. Would American soccer do better with the old "three-sport athlete" types rather than work through the youth structure?
I can easily go into rants about the shortcomings of that youth structure, and I can go on and on about our development options tending to skew towards privilege... easy for me to go on a tangent. What do you think of the basic question? Is there a problem with the structure?