PDA

View Full Version : Question about Sports?


carlos3652
06-11-2006, 11:11 PM
I was doing some research on World Sports because a couple friends that hate soccer told me that the US dominates in every sport other than soccer. That soccer is for pussies and it shouldnt be considered a sport.

So I checked on the major world sports to see if this was true. I looked up the top 6 group sports by number of fans worldwide and searched how the US measured up.

1. Soccer - Fifa.com (1930 - 2002)
Ranked 5th in the World (Fifa Rankings). A top 15 team in my book.
Number of Championships: 0
Best Finish: 3rd (1930)
Current Champion: Brazil (1958, 1962, 1970, 1994, 2002)
Next Championship: Now

2. Basketball - Fiba.com (1954-2002)
Ranked #1 in the World
Number of Championships: 3 (1954, 1986, 1994)
Current Champion: Yugoslavia (Serbia. Montenegro, Croatia and other countries now) (1970, 1978, 1990, 1998, 2002)
Next Championship 2006

3. Baseball -
World Baseball Classic - (2006)
Current Champ: Japan

Olympics - "Official Sport" (1992-2004)
Number of Championships: 1 (2000)
Current Champ: Cuba (1992, 1996, 2004)
Last Championship 2008 - It will not be an olympic sport after 2008

4. Volleyball - FIVB (1949-2002)
Number of Championships: 1 (1986)
Current Champ: Brazil (2002)
Next Championship 2006

5. Hockey -(1920-2006 - held every year)
Number of Championships: 2 (1933, 1960)
Current Champ: Sweden (1953, 1957. 1962, 1987, 1991, 1992, 1998, 2002)
Next Championship 2007

6. Rugby (1987 - 2003)
Number of Championships: 0
Best Finish: Never made it past 1st Round - (1987, 1991, 1999, 2003)
Current Champ: England (2003)
Next Championship 2007

Now Football is not on the list because it is strictly to US and Canada - although the "minor league" is starting to get some fans in Europe...

The other thing I dont understand, is why when a team wins the NBA or MLB they are called World Champions when in fact they really arent. I understand why they do it for the NFL, but there are many other club teams in baseball and in basketball around the world who dont have a chance to play for that title.

I understand the NBA and the MLB are the top leagues in the world, but thats like saying the Premiership in the UK is the top League in the world in soccer. But when Chelsea wins the Premiership, they are not considered world champions in England, just national champs... Or if the Chicago Fire or LA Galaxy win the MLS they are not considered world champions either...

If someone can explain this to me I would appreciate it. I am open to any opinions and I hope I dont get to many sarcastic answers... I really would like your opinions...

Im going to bed, but please discuss...

greg63
06-11-2006, 11:18 PM
You forgot about water polo. :p

Mecca
06-11-2006, 11:21 PM
It's because in soccer everyone knows the MLS isn't a premier league. Those leagues in Europe realize how many others there are so they don't blatantly call themselves "world champs". Plus they have a world cup event for that to see what country is world champ.

In the other sports it's sad to say but I feel that happens because well. Most Americans could careless about anything else being done in the world and since it's here it's what matters to the world. So the American champion must be the World champion.

grandllama
06-11-2006, 11:22 PM
You forgot about water polo. :p

and chess... damn russians...

tk13
06-11-2006, 11:22 PM
Because we're an arrogant country. Even though we've fallen behind in the two sports we're supposed to be best at, basketball and baseball.

Although I'm not sure we've really fallen that far behind, Japan definitely had an advantage at the WBC because they'd had "spring training" basically for over a month before that thing. Them and Cuba probably had the most practice time for that event, and it's probably no coincidence they both made it to the final.

Basketball, we should still win that but we can't find an idiot to put a team together. The last couple US teams, for the Olympics and World Championships... just poorly built teams. We built a team of all-stars instead of a good 'team'. With the international rules and style of play and whatnot, we didn't have a team built for that style of play at all.

Although if you're going to talk about sports, I think you should put the olympic medal counts from recent olympics up there too... not sure what those are but that's another measuring stick. Although in this last winter olympics we didn't win much except for the X-games type events that were invented in the US.

KC Jones
06-11-2006, 11:38 PM
you're friends are correct - soccer is for pussies.

As for baseball and basketball, pick any existing team from MLB or NBA and put them up against the all star teams from other countries and they'd clean house. Throwing a collection of our second rate stars into a "team" a few days before these international tournaments is a joke. Let the NBA or MLB champs take their game into these tournaments and it would be utter devastation. That is if you could get our whiny super star multi-millionaire players to care enough to participate.

NJ Chief Fan
06-12-2006, 12:15 AM
my guess is that back in the day mlb and nba were the only professional leagues for baseball and basketball, so they were called world champs and no one bothered to change it

Psyko Tek
06-12-2006, 07:05 AM
I'm thinking marketing and sales plays a role in this
wanna watch the US Championships, or

THE WORLD'S CHAMPIONSHIP

Inspector
06-12-2006, 07:40 AM
I was going to respond, but I saw your comment about hoping you don't get too many sarcastic answers and decided I'd better not.

carlos3652
06-12-2006, 08:24 AM
Heh... thanks for the comments, all of you make good points...

Also, I do understand that the best NBA team could probably kill any other team, but now, with more and more international players starting in the NBA, they could challenge any team to a good game... the dream team era is over.... they will not win by 40-50 points every game...

Nocioni, Delfino, Ginobili, Oberto, Scola, Kammerichs (players of the Argentina Squad) play for NBA teams...

Well known internationals that played in the playoffs that scored at least 6 points per game:

Nowitzki, Dirk (DAL)
Duncan, Tim (SAS)
Nocioni, Andres (CHI)
Parker, Tony (SAS)
Nash, Steve (PHX)
Gasol, Pau (MEM)
Diaw, Boris (PHX)
Ginobili, Manu (SAS)
Krstic, Nenad (NJN)
Barbosa, Leandro (PHX)
Bell, Raja (PHX)
Stojakovic, Peja (IND)
Ilgauskas, Zydrunas (CLE)
Deng, Luol (CHI)
Magloire, Jamaal (MIL)
Bogut, Andrew (MIL)
Radmanovic, Vladimir (LAC)
Kukoc, Toni

Rain Man
06-12-2006, 08:25 AM
I would question whether the international tournaments in many of these sports draws the top American athletes. Our structure is quite different than those of nations that don't have sports leagues outisde of soccer.

morphius
06-12-2006, 08:38 AM
my guess is that back in the day mlb and nba were the only professional leagues for baseball and basketball, so they were called world champs and no one bothered to change it
Yup, that is my thought as well.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-12-2006, 09:08 AM
A well-constructed American basketball team would slaughter, and i mean slaughter, any other country's team. If you had people who clearly knew their roles and had a set 8 man rotation, they'd be unstoppable.

PG-Chris Paul, Jason Kidd
SG- D-Wade, Michael Redd, Ray Allen
SF- Ron Artest, LeBron James, Josh Howard
PF-Elton Brand, Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor
C-Chris Bosh, Brad Miller, Tim Duncan.

This would give you excellent playmaking ability from Paul and Kidd, great permiter defense from Artest and J. Howard. D. Howard and Bosh are both long and lean enough to play the international style, and Duncan and Brand are excellent shooters who don't need an offense to run through them to be productive. Redd and Allen are absolute assassins from outside, and no one could handle Wade or LeBron off the dribble.

KCTitus
06-12-2006, 09:41 AM
As for baseball and basketball, pick any existing team from MLB or NBA and put them up against the all star teams from other countries and they'd clean house...

Dunno...I dont think the Royals could do anything on the world stage. Im pretty sure the Japanese or Cubans could rock pretty much most teams with few exceptions.

greg63
06-12-2006, 04:26 PM
and chess... damn russians...


ROFLROFLROFL

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure we rule in the Checkers and Rock Paper Scissors arenas.

noa
06-12-2006, 04:40 PM
A well-constructed American basketball team would slaughter, and i mean slaughter, any other country's team. If you had people who clearly knew their roles and had a set 8 man rotation, they'd be unstoppable.

PG-Chris Paul, Jason Kidd
SG- D-Wade, Michael Redd, Ray Allen
SF- Ron Artest, LeBron James, Josh Howard
PF-Elton Brand, Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor
C-Chris Bosh, Brad Miller, Tim Duncan.

This would give you excellent playmaking ability from Paul and Kidd, great permiter defense from Artest and J. Howard. D. Howard and Bosh are both long and lean enough to play the international style, and Duncan and Brand are excellent shooters who don't need an offense to run through them to be productive. Redd and Allen are absolute assassins from outside, and no one could handle Wade or LeBron off the dribble.

No Kobe? I know he's a ball hog, but he's a phenomenal defender. Assuming you "had people who clearly knew their roles" and told him not to shoot every time, he would be a valuable piece of the puzzle.

Mecca
06-12-2006, 04:42 PM
Kobe get's a bad rap if you ask me. He shoots all the damn time because the Lakers would win 2 games without him.

Donger
06-12-2006, 04:44 PM
you're friends are correct - soccer is for pussies.

Assuming you're not being sarcastic, what exactly is it about soccer that led you to that conclusion?

Clint in Wichita
06-12-2006, 05:25 PM
Assuming you're not being sarcastic, what exactly is it about soccer that led you to that conclusion?


It's not for pussies...it's for peasants.

It's the most popular sport in the rest of the world because of its simplicity. Two rocks per goal and an inflated goat bladder are all that is required for a game of soccer.

That, and acting lessons for the phony shin injuries.

Valiant
06-12-2006, 05:40 PM
I would question whether the international tournaments in many of these sports draws the top American athletes. Our structure is quite different than those of nations that don't have sports leagues outisde of soccer.


Yeah imagine how much we would own soccer if our athletes did not have: boxing, football, baseball, basketball, track, wrestling, hockey and american beer...

Valiant
06-12-2006, 05:41 PM
No Kobe? I know he's a ball hog, but he's a phenomenal defender. Assuming you "had people who clearly knew their roles" and told him not to shoot every time, he would be a valuable piece of the puzzle.



He built a TEAM that would know how to adapt and win, not showboat and cry...