• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

USA crushes Australia 61-0 in Football World Cup opening.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm a pretty big (American) football fan, but I must admit the name of the sport should probably be changed. Ie, even as an American - er, United Statesian - I think soccer when I hear the word football.

I'm also largely in favor of the NFL expanding to international markets: get a team in London, Mexico City, one in Toronto or Vancouver, one in Sydney, etc. They only play one game a week; it's do-able.
 
Salazar said:
Uhhhh, Garrincha.

lol at you thinking the success of a perfectly adequate physical specimen is some kind of picturesque inspiration.

Well, I'm not laughing.

I'm pitying you for not understanding an inspirational story when one hits you in the face, because you are too much of a soccer diva to understand it.

Wes Welker is almost always the smallest guy on any field he's ever stepped on save for maybe a kicker. In a heavy contact sport. Where he's going to get smashed every time he touches the ball. And he consistently outperforms almost everybody.

That's exactly the kind of thing the poster I was responding to was talking about.
 

vanty

Member
NEOPARADIGM said:
I'm a pretty big (American) football fan, but I must admit the name of the sport should probably be changed. Ie, even as an American - er, United Statesian - I think soccer when I hear the word football.

I'm also largely in favor of the NFL expanding to international markets: get a team in London, Mexico City, one in Toronto or Vancouver, one in Sydney, etc. They only play one game a week; it's do-able.
Even Australian sports in Sydney get hardly anyone going to games.
 

WARCOCK

Banned
Pristine_Condition said:
blah blah blah

Are you seriously comparing the flexibility of physical requirements (mainly in terms of height/weight) of the NFL to that of most top association football leagues? So by citing Wes Walker, who is a pretty big guy comparatively to the average guy( 5'8 180 pounds is pretty bulky) , suddenly any kid could pick up a football and hope to get into the NFL no matter what their genetics are(without roids at least lulz)? Get the fuck out of here. Wait a minute now you are going to tell me because Chris Paul is one of the best point guards in the nba, height is a factor that can easily be circumvented if you try hard enough!
 
NEOPARADIGM said:
I'm a pretty big (American) football fan, but I must admit the name of the sport should probably be changed. Ie, even as an American - er, United Statesian - I think soccer when I hear the word football.

You shouldn't. Historically, the first organized game to be called "football" with rules and organization was "rugby football" which resembles our football rules (and the ball itself) much much closer than the completely different game of soccer.

They are the ones encroaching on the name with a completely different sport. They should call their sport soccer or kickball or something.


NEOPARADIGM said:
I'm also largely in favor of the NFL expanding to international markets: get a team in London, Mexico City, one in Toronto or Vancouver, one in Sydney, etc. They only play one game a week; it's do-able.

That would be tough. Mexico City could work, as when the Dallas Cowboys play there once a year they draw 100,000 fans. But Mexico City is full of "Los Vaqueros de Dallas" fans, so you'd have to first somehow convince Jerry Jones to give that fanbase up. Mexican fans buy a LOT of Dallas Cowboy merchandise.

Expanding to Canada should have been done a long time ago. But the CFL is it's own thing, and the Canadians seem to like it just fine as not a part of the NFL. Plus, salaries would instantly skyrocket for the teams that switch. They'd have to make sure they had the revenue to handle it.

London and Sydney just doesn't have the numbers or the football culture. There are some hardcore fans, there, but if you notice, many of the people here on GAF who say the most ignorant and insulting shit about the NFL game are from the UK. Australia/Sydney is far more open-minded about sports, but could they really field a competitive team? They have no background in the sport at a high level, and would have to import all the coaching, scouting, training, and front-office talent as well as the vast majority of the players for a long time, until they were established. At which point, it starts to look like an American team that just happens to be located in Australia.



You didn't even google Garrincha.

Why would I google him? I know who he was. I'm a soccer fan too, silly person.

I'm not going to pretend I know about him as anything but a theoretical "one of the best players" because he was way past his prime and way in the bottle before I was even born. I did get to see Pele play in person though as my family used to go to NASL games when I was very young.

And yes, I knew that's who the poster was referring to, and not Pele. If you go back and read my response, there's a little "wink" emote that I used. This commonly indicates you are joking around. You don't understand that I guess.
 

Salazar

Member
Pristine_Condition said:
And yes, I knew that's who the poster was referring to, and not Pele. If you go back and read my response, there's a little "wink" emote that I used. This commonly indicates you are joking around. You don't understand that I guess.

I just figured that this redounds to the credit of the nature of football as a game, albeit much less than to Garrincha himself, in a way that no supplied example from NFL has done.

His father was an alcoholic, drinking cachaça heavily, a problem which Garrincha would inherit. He had several birth defects: his spine was deformed, his right leg bent inwards and his left leg six centimeters shorter and curved outwards, none of which impeded his ability to play football at the top level.

But the argument is so nebulous as to defy resolution. I merely find it hilarious to argue that such a first world sport, populated (with exceptions) by physical caricatures, as NFL has egalitarian credentials.
 
Darkman M said:
a 150lb man knocking with a hard hit on another 150lb man, where as the other sport you have a 250lb 6% body fat running 40 in like 4.4 seconds.... yeah.
lol no one gives a dayum. There's probably less than 4.4 seconds of game time where he's involved.
 

hamchan

Member
Lol. I thought, "There's a FIFA world cup this year?".

It's grid iron, no one cares about it here in Australia. I don't even know how it's played and the most exposure to the sport I have is watching Friday Night Lights. Now if the USA beat us in Cricket, that would be megaton worthy.
 

Kastrioti

Persecution Complex
WARCOCK said:
( 5'8 180 pounds is pretty bulky)

LOL. This right here sums up a soccer fan.

Superior athletes play the superior sport. If 5'8, 180 is bulky, what is 6'4 230 lbs, running a 4.3 second 40 yard dash like Calvin Johnson?

I like soccer as my 3rd or 4th sport option behind football and basketball but let's not cut corners here. The best athletes in the world are in the NFL regardless of size. Indisputable fact.
 

Dead Man

Member
Kastrioti said:
LOL. This right here sums up a soccer fan.

Superior athletes play the superior sport. If 5'8, 180 is bulky, what is 6'4 230 lbs, running a 4.3 second 40 yard dash like Calvin Johnson?

I like soccer as my 3rd or 4th sport option behind football and basketball but let's not cut corners here. The best athletes in the world are in the NFL regardless of size. Indisputable fact.
I love my NFL, but that is just not the case. Sorry.
 
WARCOCK said:
Are you seriously comparing the flexibility of physical requirements (mainly in terms of height/weight) of the NFL to that of most top association football leagues?

Sure. Let's compare. In the NFL, you can play at 160 lbs. or 360 lbs. There are players like 5'6" Darren Sproles and 6'10" Demar Dotson.

Do you have that flexibility of physical requirements in FIFA?

WARCOCK said:
So by citing Wes Walker,

It's Welker, not Walker.

WARCOCK said:
who is a pretty big guy comparatively to the average guy( 5'8 180 pounds is pretty bulky)

It's really not, if you lift any weights at all. And Welker, like everyone at the highest level of competition in the NFL, has.


WARCOCK said:
suddenly any kid could pick up a football and hope to get into the NFL no matter what their genetics are(without roids at least lulz)? Get the fuck out of here.

Oh, I'm sorry I thought I was responding to you when you said "it's not how you were born, it's what you have it in you to become."

Oh yeah. That IS what I was responding to.

And Wes Welker is absolutely proof of that. Read any scouting report on him. Read any bio of him. It's easy to do. He's really famous now.


WARCOCK said:
Wait a minute now you are going to tell me because Chris Paul is one of the best point guards in the nba, height is a factor that can easily be circumvented if you try hard enough!

No, that's a straw man you just concocted for no logical reason. And frankly, it makes you sound silly, not me.

Congrats.
 
Salazar said:
I just figured that this redounds to the credit of the nature of football as a game, albeit much less than to Garrincha himself, in a way that no supplied example from NFL has done.

But the argument is so nebulous as to defy resolution. I merely find it hilarious to argue that such a first world sport, populated (with exceptions) by physical caricatures, as NFL has egalitarian credentials.

OK how's this...

One of the greatest kickers in the history of the NFL was born with no fingers on his right hand, and less than half a foot...on his KICKING foot.

20110710-pdrktf6uhw43dgpqqggiaw3iu.jpg


His record for the longest field goal in NFL history @ 63 yards still stands, 40+ years later. Only one man has tied it, but did so in high altitude.
 

Scrow

Still Tagged Accordingly
oh american football. i was expecting soccer.

not surprised america smashed them. it'd be like australia playing cricket against americans.
 

Gigglepoo

Member
Scrow said:
oh american football. i was expecting soccer.

Did you think a women's soccer team scored 61 goals in a single game? Or did you think the men's World Cup was taking place two years in a row? Neither scenario makes sense. I'm not sure why someone who cares about soccer would think this thread was about their preferred sport.
 

Salazar

Member
Gigglepoo said:
Did you think a women's soccer team scored 61 goals in a single game? Or did you think the men's World Cup was taking place two years in a row? Neither scenario makes sense. I'm not sure why someone who cares about soccer would think this thread was about their preferred sport.

Because football commonly refers, outside of the US, to what you call soccer, and because the idea of a competitively legitimate "World Cup" in gridiron makes me giggle. And should make everybody giggle.
 

Kastrioti

Persecution Complex
Regulus Tera said:
What the fuck does this even mean?

Do I need to translate it into Latin for you?

Whether it's a 6'4 230 lb wide reciever or a 6'4 320 lb left tackle the superior athletes are in the National Football League. If you'd watch a game and observe the strategy involved you wouldn't be blindy bashing the NFL.

Speed, stamina, strength is how you gauge an athlete. If I want to watch guys running around for hours I'll watch a long distance Olympic race instead of a soccer match.
 

Gigglepoo

Member
Salazar said:
Because football commonly refers, outside of the US, to what you call soccer, and because the idea of a competitively legitimate "World Cup" in gridiron makes me giggle. And should make everybody giggle.

I'm aware that football is what people outside of America call soccer. I just don't understand how someone could think, "USA crushes Australia 61-0 in Football World Cup opening" refers to soccer. 61 goals in a game? That doesn't make any sense at all.
 

AusQB

Member
Gigglepoo said:
I'm aware that football is what people outside of America call soccer. I just don't understand how someone could think, "USA crushes Australia 61-0 in Football World Cup opening" refers to soccer. 61 goals in a game? That doesn't make any sense at all.
Because Americans believe that Americans will annihilate Australians at any sport.
 

Salazar

Member
Gigglepoo said:
61 goals in a game? That doesn't make any sense at all.

Ludicrous typos in GAF thread titles are hardly uncommon.

I should start quoting some random physical dimensions to keep my side of the argument up.
 

Milchjon

Member
Kastrioti said:
Do I need to translate it into Latin for you?

Whether it's a 6'4 230 lb wide reciever or a 6'4 320 lb left tackle the superior athletes are in the National Football League. If you'd watch a game and observe the strategy involved you wouldn't be blindy bashing the NFL.

Speed, stamina, strength is how you gauge an athlete. If I want to watch guys running around for hours I'll watch a long distance Olympic race instead of a soccer match.

I looooooooove Football, but the "more powerful/bigger/faster athlete=better game" argument doesn't make much sense. There's freak athletes in sports that are terrible to watch, like boxing, swimming or even baseball, while other sports are exciting even with undersized players.
 

Salazar

Member
Milchjon said:
I looooooooove Football, but the "more powerful/bigger/faster athlete=better game" argument doesn't make much sense.

And "bigger" being a valid part of that equation is dubious, especially when the NFL boosters are trying to stage a very general (uselessly general) argument about what athleticism is.
 

Simplet

Member
This thread reminded me of how the poor americans are condemned to compete between themselves all the time. The only time I watch sports is during international competitions, those are pure awesome. I'm pretty sure I'd never watch anything if the best rivalry my sports of choice could muster was Boston against New Work or some shit like that.

I don't think people should mock those desperate attempts at international competition :(
 

Bleepey

Member
Milchjon said:
You know, after some years of watching football, I still occasionally get put of by the risks of it. I don't know how people can cheer a crushing hit or make fun of someone who's got signs of a concussion when you know that it's taking years off his life. Or maybe he'll just lose brain functions and kill himself or others.
All those "pussy" discussions don't make alot of sense. Rugby isn't more exciting just because they play without pads.
The only time the word pussy is justified is the constant diving in soccer. (Another reason why Football is superior: In the NFL there's incentive for staying on your feet. In soccer, you profit from falling down.)

There is a huge risk reward for diving. If you get away with it you can get a freekick, penalty or a booking for the opposite side. If you don't you are getting booked.
 

Gigglepoo

Member
Simplet said:
This thread reminded me of how the poor americans are condemned to compete between themselves all the time. The only time I watch sports is during international competitions, those are pure awesome. I'm pretty sure I'd never watch anything if the best rivalry my sports of choice could muster was Boston against New Work or some shit like that.

I don't think people should mock those desperate attempts at international competition :(

Although World Cup is the most popular soccer tournament, the best games actually take place in the Premier League. That's true for every team sport. National teams lack the cohesion that their league counterparts enjoy, so if you want to watch the highest level possible, you should avoid the international stuff.
 

Simplet

Member
Gigglepoo said:
Although World Cup is the most popular soccer tournament, the best games actually take place in the Premier League. That's true for every team sport. National teams lack the cohesion that their league counterparts enjoy, so if you want to watch the highest level possible, you should avoid the international stuff.

To be fair, I really don't care that much about the best level. I care about the excitement. Football is typically the sport I will only watch if there's international competition, and the more countries the better. I really don't care who wins a ball game between two british cities.
 

Piecake

Member
Bleepey said:
There is a huge risk reward for diving. If you get away with it you can get a freekick, penalty or a booking for the opposite side. If you don't you are getting booked.

Cute, someone's trying to justify/explain away diving
 

ItAintEasyBeinCheesy

it's 4th of July in my asshole
Well if you want to play number games

Orlando's ESPN Wide World of Sports Complex hosted the Tomahawks's test against England, for the latter's 2000 World Cup warm up game. It ended 110-0 to the away team.

Tomahawks are one of the US's Rugby League teams, Australia beat England 22-2.

But meh, there is no serious paid professional league for Rugby League in the US like there isnt a paid professional league for NFL in Australia.
 
Simplet said:
To be fair, I really don't care that much about the best level. I care about the excitement. Football is typically the sport I will only watch if there's international competition, and the more countries the better. I really don't care who wins a ball game between two british cities.


You also must love the hell out of international organizations that are absolute dung heaps of corruption.
 

Dead Man

Member
Pristine_Condition said:
You also must love the hell out of international organizations that are absolute dung heaps of corruption.
Why are you so offended that someone prefers international sports? There is just as much corruption with with the NFL, MLB, etc as there is with most international sporting bodies. FIFA is a lot worse than most.
 

Ikuu

Had his dog run over by Blizzard's CEO
American Football has to be one of the few sports that has someone run for 30 seconds and then sit on the sideline getting oxygen.
 
Dead Man said:
Why are you so offended that someone prefers international sports? There is just as much corruption with with the NFL, MLB, etc as there is with most international sporting bodies. FIFA is a lot worse than most.

I'm not. Most sports are fine. I just have problems with FIFA and the IOC. Both of which are obviously dung heaps of corruption and political intrigue. Which is not what I turn to sports for.

I still watch the World Cup and the Olympic Games, because I like the athletics, but there's always the stink of dirty dealings around which never quite goes away. It's unfortunate.
 

Dead Man

Member
Pristine_Condition said:
I'm not. Most sports are fine. I just have problems with FIFA and the IOC. Both of which are obviously dung heaps of corruption and political intrigue. Which is not what I turn to sports for.

I still watch the World Cup and the Olympic Games, because I like the athletics, but there's always the stink of dirty dealings around which never quite goes away. It's unfortunate.
So why the snarky defensive responses?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom