Part 3 of my series ranking the five worst first round draft picks in each NFL Draft since 2000. The top 6 picks of the 2002 draft includes five legitimate busts and one player that has looked dominant at times but has also gone through major bouts of inconsistency. While #2 overall pick Julius Peppers may be the best player selected in the top 10, it's hard to decide who deserves the title of worst. Let's grind this one out.
5. Wendall Bryant, Defensive Tackle, #12 Overall Pick, Arizona Cardinals - Bryant led a short NFL career, playing just 3 years and starting only 9 games for the Cardinals. Bryant played just 3 games in his final season and finished his brief career with 1.5 sacks, certainly not the production a team is seeking with the #12 overall pick. Players selected later: WR Donte Stallworth (#13), TE Jeremy Shockey (#14), DT Albert Haynesworth (#15).
4. William Green, Running Back, #16 Overall Pick, Cleveland Browns - The Browns really should have seen the writing on the wall before drafting Green, but his potential and physical tools overshadowed his multiple suspensions for marijuana in college. After a decent rookie campaign, Green had a tumultuous second season that was cut short by a four game suspension for a drunk driving and marijuana arrest. While suspended, Green was stabbed in the back (yes, literally) by his fiancee and suspended for the remainder of the season "for treatment purposes." He would return and have an ineffective year in 2004, including getting ejected before a game against the Steelers for fighting with Pittsburgh linebacker Joey Porter. He finally had an injury-riddled final season in 2005 and was released prior to the 2006 season. Players selected later: WR Javon Walker (#20), S Ed Reed (#24), CB Lito Sheppard (#26).
3. Patrick Ramsey, Quarterback, #32 Overall Pick, Washington Redskins - The first selection of the Steve Spurrier era in Washington, Ramsey was a record-setting college QB expected to light up the NFL. Unfortunately, Spurrier's system simply didn't translate into the NFL and Ramsey was the poster child for its failure, nearly leading the league in sacks in his only full year as starter in 2003. When Joe Gibbs returned to the team as head coach in 2004, Ramsey was moved in and out of the lineup due to injuries and ineffectiveness of Mark Brunell, whom Gibbs traded for upon his return. Ramsey was finally dealt to the New York Jets prior to 2006, and spent that season backing up Chad Pennington before moving on to backup Jay Cutler in Denver in 2007. Players selected later: C LeCharles Bentley (#44), RB Clinton Portis (#51), QB David Garrard (#108).
2. Joey Harrington, Quarterback, #3 Overall Pick, Detroit Lions - In a first round, and really a draft altogether, that saw poor quality at the quarterback position, Harrington earns the #2 spot. Named the starter prior to his rookie season, Harrington would start every game of his first two years in the league and post NFL record lows of yards per attempt each season, the two lowest totals since 1960. Harrington's ineffectiveness would eventually lead to his benching in the 2005 season for veteran journeyman Jeff Garcia. Later in the year, with the team still struggling offensively, Harrington would return to the starting role and play decently enough, although it wouldn't be enough to keep him in Detroit. He was traded to Miami following the 2005 season and spent the year as a backup/replacement for Dolphins starter Daunte Culpepper who spent much of the year injured. A roller-coaster 2006 season, including a game where he compiled a rating of 107.4 and a game with a rating of 0.0, Harrington was released and eventually signed with the Atlanta Falcons to back up Michael Vick. When Vick was suspended and imprisoned, Harrington was thrust into the starting role but was too inconsistent and ended up splitting time with former Jaguar QB Byron Leftwich. Harrington has signed to return to Atlanta in 2008. Players selected later: OT Bryant McKinnie (#7), S Roy Williams (#8), DT John Henderson (#9).
1. David Carr, Quarterback, #1 Overall Pick, Houston Texans - David Carr's failure to be the franchise quarterback for the expansion Texans helped the team become the least successful expansion team in NFL history, although the blame is certainly not entirely his. Carr was seemingly doomed to fail from the beginning as the franchise never built an adequate offensive line (starting with their #1 expansion draft pick, left tackle Tony Bosselli, who never played a down for the team) and made numerous questionable personnel moves in its first few years. Carr's struggles on the field were compounded with a confidence and cockiness that consistently rubbed the fans the wrong way, earning him little respect among the fan base despite the praise his "talent" received from NFL insiders. When The Texans replaced their first coach Dom Capers in 2006 following a 2-14 2005 season, new coach Gary Kubiak agreed to an option in Carr's contract worth an additional two years, a big mistake. Carr would go on to struggle again in 2006 and lead the Texans to another 6-10 record while further alienating fans, prompting the team to cut him after the season and trade for a new QB. Carr would sign on with Panthers as a backup in 2007, but he would again find the fans' bad graces and even lose the backup job to undrafted rookie Matt Moore. Carr also gained the not-so-flattering nickname "Mr. Mittens" for wearing alternating white and black gloves on both hands during home and away games. Carr was signed to be a backup for the New York Giants in 2008. Players selected later: DE Julius Peppers (#2), OT Bryant McKinnie (#7), S Roy Williams (#8).
Next up: 2003 and the birth of the Lions Wide Receiver fetish.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Top 5 Worst Draft Picks - 2001 NFL Draft
Part 2 of my series ranking the five worst first round draft picks in each NFL Draft since 2000. This draft looks at first glance like one of the worst overall first rounds in recent memory, with very few impact players selected. With the exception of LaDainian Tomlinson, the #5 overall pick, this draft is riddled with players that have not panned out over the long haul for various reasons.
5. Leonard Davis, Offensive Tackle, #2 Overall Pick, Arizona Cardinals/Gerrard Warren, Defensive Tackle, #3 Overall Pick, Cleveland Browns - While both players have been starters in the NFL and have had their moments of quality football, neither has lived up to his draft position. Davis simply turned out to be too big to play at tackle, and after many rough years in the desert, finally found his niche as a guard with the Dallas Cowboys, playing well enough (and benefitting from the Cowboys' popularity) to make the Pro Bowl in 2007. Warren washed out of Cleveland after just 4 seasons, and went on to an unspectacular pair of injury-riddled season with the Broncos before finally landing in Oakland where is currently plays. Both of these players find their spot on the list thanks to the man at #5. Players selected later: DE Justin Smith (#4), RB LaDainian Tomlinson (#5), DE Richard Seymour (#6).
4. David Terrell, Wide Receiver, #8 Overall Pick, Chicago Bears - Terrell had all the physical tools to be a successful wideout in the league, but never was capable of putting them all together. Despite some flashes of brilliance, Terrell lasted only 4 years with the Bears before being cut. He got looks from the Denver Broncos and New England Patriots, but didn't stick and is currently out of football. Players selected later: LB Dan Morgan (#11), DT Marcus Stroud (#13), WR Santana Moss (#16).
3. Jamal Reynolds, Defensive End, #10 Overall Pick, Green Bay Packers - Reynolds struggled to gain a foothold in Green Bay due to the emergence of teammate Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila at the defensive end position. Reynolds lasted just 3 years with the Pack recording only 3 sacks before eventually being traded to the Colts. He failed his physical prior to the trade, however, and the trade was declared void and Reynolds was released by the Packers. He would get another shot with the Browns prior to the 2004 season, but wouldn't make it to the start of the season before being cut and has been out of football since. Players selected later: LB Dan Morgan (#11), DT Marcus Stroud (#13), DT Casey Hampton (#19).
2. Willie Middlebrooks, Cornerback, #24 Overall Pick, Denver Broncos - Perhaps the reason Terrell and Warren got a chance with Denver is because the Broncos own pick from this draft was so bad. In a very unimpressive five-year career with the Broncos, Middlebrooks started just 1 game and dealt with numerous off-field issues, culminating in an arrest on New Year's Eve 2004 after an alleged fight with his girlfriend. Middlebrooks would finally be cut and spend the 2005 season with the 49ers before returning to Denver for the 2006 season. He did not make the Broncos roster in 2006 and signed with the CFL's Toronto Argonauts in 2008. Players selected later: WR Reggie Wayne (#30), TE Todd Heap (#31), WR Chad Johnson (#36).
1. Michael Vick, Quarterback, #1 Overall Pick, Atlanta Falcons - It was very difficult deciding where to slot Mr. Vick in this list, as his on-the-field accomplishments actually aren't too bad. The problem is the damage that he did to the franchise with his conviction for dog fighting in 2007. Since he was officially charged in the summer of '07, the Falcons organization went into a downward spiral. First Vick was found guilty and spent the 2007 season in prison, then head coach Bobby Petrino (in his first year with the team) abruptly resigned to take a college coaching job, and the Falcons went on to a dismal 4-12 record. In Vick's active seasons, the Falcons consistently were among the league leaders in rushing, but their passing offense always struggled. With Vick at the helm, the Falcons found success enough to make the playoffs twice, losing to the Eagles both times, including once in the NFC Championship Game. Players selected later: RB LaDainian Tomlinson (#5), DE Richard Seymour (#6), QB Drew Brees (#32).
Up next: 2002 and the expansion Texans...
5. Leonard Davis, Offensive Tackle, #2 Overall Pick, Arizona Cardinals/Gerrard Warren, Defensive Tackle, #3 Overall Pick, Cleveland Browns - While both players have been starters in the NFL and have had their moments of quality football, neither has lived up to his draft position. Davis simply turned out to be too big to play at tackle, and after many rough years in the desert, finally found his niche as a guard with the Dallas Cowboys, playing well enough (and benefitting from the Cowboys' popularity) to make the Pro Bowl in 2007. Warren washed out of Cleveland after just 4 seasons, and went on to an unspectacular pair of injury-riddled season with the Broncos before finally landing in Oakland where is currently plays. Both of these players find their spot on the list thanks to the man at #5. Players selected later: DE Justin Smith (#4), RB LaDainian Tomlinson (#5), DE Richard Seymour (#6).
4. David Terrell, Wide Receiver, #8 Overall Pick, Chicago Bears - Terrell had all the physical tools to be a successful wideout in the league, but never was capable of putting them all together. Despite some flashes of brilliance, Terrell lasted only 4 years with the Bears before being cut. He got looks from the Denver Broncos and New England Patriots, but didn't stick and is currently out of football. Players selected later: LB Dan Morgan (#11), DT Marcus Stroud (#13), WR Santana Moss (#16).
3. Jamal Reynolds, Defensive End, #10 Overall Pick, Green Bay Packers - Reynolds struggled to gain a foothold in Green Bay due to the emergence of teammate Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila at the defensive end position. Reynolds lasted just 3 years with the Pack recording only 3 sacks before eventually being traded to the Colts. He failed his physical prior to the trade, however, and the trade was declared void and Reynolds was released by the Packers. He would get another shot with the Browns prior to the 2004 season, but wouldn't make it to the start of the season before being cut and has been out of football since. Players selected later: LB Dan Morgan (#11), DT Marcus Stroud (#13), DT Casey Hampton (#19).
2. Willie Middlebrooks, Cornerback, #24 Overall Pick, Denver Broncos - Perhaps the reason Terrell and Warren got a chance with Denver is because the Broncos own pick from this draft was so bad. In a very unimpressive five-year career with the Broncos, Middlebrooks started just 1 game and dealt with numerous off-field issues, culminating in an arrest on New Year's Eve 2004 after an alleged fight with his girlfriend. Middlebrooks would finally be cut and spend the 2005 season with the 49ers before returning to Denver for the 2006 season. He did not make the Broncos roster in 2006 and signed with the CFL's Toronto Argonauts in 2008. Players selected later: WR Reggie Wayne (#30), TE Todd Heap (#31), WR Chad Johnson (#36).
1. Michael Vick, Quarterback, #1 Overall Pick, Atlanta Falcons - It was very difficult deciding where to slot Mr. Vick in this list, as his on-the-field accomplishments actually aren't too bad. The problem is the damage that he did to the franchise with his conviction for dog fighting in 2007. Since he was officially charged in the summer of '07, the Falcons organization went into a downward spiral. First Vick was found guilty and spent the 2007 season in prison, then head coach Bobby Petrino (in his first year with the team) abruptly resigned to take a college coaching job, and the Falcons went on to a dismal 4-12 record. In Vick's active seasons, the Falcons consistently were among the league leaders in rushing, but their passing offense always struggled. With Vick at the helm, the Falcons found success enough to make the playoffs twice, losing to the Eagles both times, including once in the NFC Championship Game. Players selected later: RB LaDainian Tomlinson (#5), DE Richard Seymour (#6), QB Drew Brees (#32).
Up next: 2002 and the expansion Texans...
Shoulda-been Top 5 - 2000 NFL Draft
Earlier, Chris discussed the top 5 busts from the first round of the 2000 NFL draft. With that in mind, and with the benefit of hindsight, I present my "Shoulda-been" list of the five players who should have been the top 5 picks in that draft. Note: I made my picks without consideration for which team was picking at the spot. My picks are "BOB" (best on board) selections.
Honorable Mention: Jamal Lewis - JLew has had a solid career with some very impressive numbers, but his criminal record and the fact that he's run behind a solid O-line throughout his career bumped him out of the top 5.
Honorable Mention: Plaxico Burress - Burress is arguably the best wideout to come out of the 2000 draft, but hasn't in my mind proven to be a top 5 pick. He's a guy with good height who's a big target in the red zone, but he doesn't have the speed to run away from people, making him better suited to a role as a #2 receiver. And the fact that you could get Laveranues Coles or Darrell Jackson in the third round caused Plax to slide out of the top 5.
Honorable Mention: Corey Simon - Simon was a monster in the middle of the Eagles' D-line, but his career was a short seven years. Everyone in my top 5 is still playing and, for the most part, still playing at a high level.
5. Adalius Thomas - Thomas was the second-best linebacker in the 2000 draft, behind the guy second on this list. He's a versatile player with speed, strength, and a nose for the ball, and after seven years, he still looks to have many good years ahead.
4. John Abraham - When healthy, Abraham has been one of the most feared pass-rushers in the league. He's consistently put up double-digit sack numbers... when he's been healthy. Were it not for that caveat, he'd be higher on the list.
3. Shaun Alexander - Alexander was once among the top 2 or 3 backs in the league, and used to reign supreme in fantasy drafts. Recently, his numbers have fallen off, but he's had about 300 more career rushing yards than Lewis on only 50 more carries, and has twice as many touchdowns. Five straight seasons of 1100+ rushing yards and a then-record 27 TD season make it hard to put Alexander this low, but the guys ahead of him are just too good.
2. Brian Urlacher - If you wanted to pick a guy to build your defense around in that draft, this is your guy. Urlacher's been one of the most consistent linebackers in the league, playing at an All-Pro caliber every year. You can pencil him in for 120 tackles, 5 sacks and a pick or two every year.
1. Tom Brady - Much as I hate to admit it, Brady is the best player to come out of the 2000 draft. Some (including myself) might argue he's not the best athlete, he doesn't have the best arm, he's a product of Belicheater's genius, but there's no arguing with the results he's had. Despite not having until last year a star wideout to throw to, Brady has put up impressive numbers every year (and we saw last year what he can do with a real receiving corps), and the most impressive number he's put up is the most important: 100 career wins (combined regular and post season), including three Super Bowls (most of them legitimate).
Honorable Mention: Jamal Lewis - JLew has had a solid career with some very impressive numbers, but his criminal record and the fact that he's run behind a solid O-line throughout his career bumped him out of the top 5.
Honorable Mention: Plaxico Burress - Burress is arguably the best wideout to come out of the 2000 draft, but hasn't in my mind proven to be a top 5 pick. He's a guy with good height who's a big target in the red zone, but he doesn't have the speed to run away from people, making him better suited to a role as a #2 receiver. And the fact that you could get Laveranues Coles or Darrell Jackson in the third round caused Plax to slide out of the top 5.
Honorable Mention: Corey Simon - Simon was a monster in the middle of the Eagles' D-line, but his career was a short seven years. Everyone in my top 5 is still playing and, for the most part, still playing at a high level.
5. Adalius Thomas - Thomas was the second-best linebacker in the 2000 draft, behind the guy second on this list. He's a versatile player with speed, strength, and a nose for the ball, and after seven years, he still looks to have many good years ahead.
4. John Abraham - When healthy, Abraham has been one of the most feared pass-rushers in the league. He's consistently put up double-digit sack numbers... when he's been healthy. Were it not for that caveat, he'd be higher on the list.
3. Shaun Alexander - Alexander was once among the top 2 or 3 backs in the league, and used to reign supreme in fantasy drafts. Recently, his numbers have fallen off, but he's had about 300 more career rushing yards than Lewis on only 50 more carries, and has twice as many touchdowns. Five straight seasons of 1100+ rushing yards and a then-record 27 TD season make it hard to put Alexander this low, but the guys ahead of him are just too good.
2. Brian Urlacher - If you wanted to pick a guy to build your defense around in that draft, this is your guy. Urlacher's been one of the most consistent linebackers in the league, playing at an All-Pro caliber every year. You can pencil him in for 120 tackles, 5 sacks and a pick or two every year.
1. Tom Brady - Much as I hate to admit it, Brady is the best player to come out of the 2000 draft. Some (including myself) might argue he's not the best athlete, he doesn't have the best arm, he's a product of Belicheater's genius, but there's no arguing with the results he's had. Despite not having until last year a star wideout to throw to, Brady has put up impressive numbers every year (and we saw last year what he can do with a real receiving corps), and the most impressive number he's put up is the most important: 100 career wins (combined regular and post season), including three Super Bowls (most of them legitimate).
Top 5 Worst Draft Picks - 2000 NFL Draft
Over the next several days I will be going through the first round of each NFL draft since the year 2000 and highlighting the five worst selections of each draft. Inevitably there will be some decent players that will find their way onto this list, and many will do so not because of how they perform but because of the players their team could have selected. Consequently, this is more of a reflection on the teams picking than the players themselves. Let's dive right in.
5. Peter Warrick, Wide Receiver, #4 Overall Pick, Cincinnati Bengals - A playmaking wideout at Florida State, Warrick's career was short (he was out of the NFL by 2006) and while he had a decent year in 2003, an injury in 2004 led to the emergence of teammate T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Warrick was released before the start of the 2005 season. He never lived up to the billing of a top 5 pick. Players selected later: RB Jamal Lewis (#5), DT Corey Simon (#6), WR Plaxico Burress (#8).
4. Ron Dayne, Running Back, #11 Overall Pick, New York Giants - Although Dayne was a Heisman Trophy Winner in college at Wisconsin, his skill set never quite seemed to translate to the NFL. Despite his size, Dayne was never able to fill the role of a short-yardage back that the Giants were hoping for to complement Tiki Barber in their backfield. Dayne gained a reputation for dancing too much in the backfield and not taking hits, and although he managed some decent seasons in Denver and later Houston, Dayne certainly never lived up to the #11 pick he was taken at. Players selected later: DE Shaun Ellis (#12), DE John Abraham (#13), RB Shaun Alexander (#19).
3. Courtney Brown, Defensive End, #1 Overall Pick, Cleveland Browns - You know this draft was bad when Brown only comes in 3rd. Brown and college teammate LaVar Arrington of Penn State went 1-2 in this draft, and in hindsight it appears Arrington would have been a far better choice for the Browns who were in just their second draft since returning to the league. Brown did record 4.5 sacks and 70 tackles in a productive rookie campaign, but he would record that same 4.5 sacks the next season before he began dealing with injury problems that would plague him the rest of his career. He would record just 8 sacks after those first two years and, after spending 2006 on the Denver Broncos IR, he was out of football by 2007. Players selected later: LB LaVar Arrington (#2), OT Chris Samuels (#3), RB Jamal Lewis (#5).
2. Rashard Anderson, Cornerback, #23 Overall Pick, Carolina Panthers - Anderson earns this spot not just because of his lack of on-field production (1 interception in 27 career games), but because of the way his career ended. Anderson was suspended for a year prior to the 2002 season for violating the league's substance abuse policy, and failed to be reinstated after that time expired for having not met the requirements for reinstatement. He was finally reinstated following the 2003 season, and was released by the Panthers that same day. Players selected later: CB Ahmed Plummer (#24), LB Keith Bullock (#30), DE Darren Howard (#33).
1. Sebastian Janikowski, Kicker, #17 Overall Pick, Oakland Raiders - One of the first in a long list of mind-boggling personnel decisions by the Raiders, Janikowski was only the fifth kicker selected in the first round in NFL history. Janikowski entered the NFL with a reputation and arrest record that would make Pacman Jones take notice, and his first years in the league followed suit with numerous arrests, mostly alcohol-related. Despite a career that has been okay on the field, the "Polish Powderkeg" has not been nearly the performer the Raiders would have needed to justify the first round pick and the legal problems that came with him. Players selected later: RB Shaun Alexander (#19), LB Keith Bullock (#30), K Neil Rackers (#169, the next kicker taken).
Next up: 2001, the Michael Vick Draft.
5. Peter Warrick, Wide Receiver, #4 Overall Pick, Cincinnati Bengals - A playmaking wideout at Florida State, Warrick's career was short (he was out of the NFL by 2006) and while he had a decent year in 2003, an injury in 2004 led to the emergence of teammate T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Warrick was released before the start of the 2005 season. He never lived up to the billing of a top 5 pick. Players selected later: RB Jamal Lewis (#5), DT Corey Simon (#6), WR Plaxico Burress (#8).
4. Ron Dayne, Running Back, #11 Overall Pick, New York Giants - Although Dayne was a Heisman Trophy Winner in college at Wisconsin, his skill set never quite seemed to translate to the NFL. Despite his size, Dayne was never able to fill the role of a short-yardage back that the Giants were hoping for to complement Tiki Barber in their backfield. Dayne gained a reputation for dancing too much in the backfield and not taking hits, and although he managed some decent seasons in Denver and later Houston, Dayne certainly never lived up to the #11 pick he was taken at. Players selected later: DE Shaun Ellis (#12), DE John Abraham (#13), RB Shaun Alexander (#19).
3. Courtney Brown, Defensive End, #1 Overall Pick, Cleveland Browns - You know this draft was bad when Brown only comes in 3rd. Brown and college teammate LaVar Arrington of Penn State went 1-2 in this draft, and in hindsight it appears Arrington would have been a far better choice for the Browns who were in just their second draft since returning to the league. Brown did record 4.5 sacks and 70 tackles in a productive rookie campaign, but he would record that same 4.5 sacks the next season before he began dealing with injury problems that would plague him the rest of his career. He would record just 8 sacks after those first two years and, after spending 2006 on the Denver Broncos IR, he was out of football by 2007. Players selected later: LB LaVar Arrington (#2), OT Chris Samuels (#3), RB Jamal Lewis (#5).
2. Rashard Anderson, Cornerback, #23 Overall Pick, Carolina Panthers - Anderson earns this spot not just because of his lack of on-field production (1 interception in 27 career games), but because of the way his career ended. Anderson was suspended for a year prior to the 2002 season for violating the league's substance abuse policy, and failed to be reinstated after that time expired for having not met the requirements for reinstatement. He was finally reinstated following the 2003 season, and was released by the Panthers that same day. Players selected later: CB Ahmed Plummer (#24), LB Keith Bullock (#30), DE Darren Howard (#33).
1. Sebastian Janikowski, Kicker, #17 Overall Pick, Oakland Raiders - One of the first in a long list of mind-boggling personnel decisions by the Raiders, Janikowski was only the fifth kicker selected in the first round in NFL history. Janikowski entered the NFL with a reputation and arrest record that would make Pacman Jones take notice, and his first years in the league followed suit with numerous arrests, mostly alcohol-related. Despite a career that has been okay on the field, the "Polish Powderkeg" has not been nearly the performer the Raiders would have needed to justify the first round pick and the legal problems that came with him. Players selected later: RB Shaun Alexander (#19), LB Keith Bullock (#30), K Neil Rackers (#169, the next kicker taken).
Next up: 2001, the Michael Vick Draft.
RE: Is soccer gaining ground in America?
The short answer? No.
I think it would be a mistake for the MLS to make significant rules changes to try to increase scoring. Doing so would only alienate the fans they have, and wouldn't likely attract many new fans, at least not fans who would stick around. I think soccer is just not going to make it big in the States, unless one of the other major sports takes a huge nosedive, and the way the MLB seems to be going strong despite the steroids problem seems to indicate that it may not be possible for one of the "big three" sports to fall out of favor without some kind of extended strike. Their best hope may be to become a second tier sport like hockey or golf. (I omit NASCAR since it is probably "first tier" due to the size of its following, but mostly because it is not a sport.)
A better way to grow soccer fandom in the US would be to try to get a few star players that are identifiable to the casual sports fan. Beckham has played so little that he's not done the MLS much good, and besides, I think it's important to get some homegrown talent to stay in the US to play. Any American players who are any good go overseas to play. (As an aside, it's somewhat surprising to me that there are so few good American soccer players, since it seems like everyone, boy or girl, plays soccer as a kid. I guess most just give it up once they hit their teens.)
It'll be interesting to see if the added coverage the MLS, and soccer in general, is receiving from ESPN will boost interest. If there's more news out there about it, and if people start to learn the names of players, and even teams (I'd be hard-pressed to name more than two or three), that might get them interested in following the sport more. I would consider myself a casual soccer fan (for an American), and I only watch maybe 2-3 games a year. I think I would be inclined to watch more if soccer got more than 10 seconds of coverage on Sports Center. Learning more about the intricacies of the sport would also help. ESPN's halftime and postgame coverage was pretty good at going into some depth with the game. I'd like to see more on strategy and tactics (but please, not the way NFL Live uses old has-beens running around a quarter-sized football field in suits to explain strategy!). I hear all the time that some teams rely on athleticism, while others take a "technical approach", and I have no idea what that's supposed to mean!
I think it would also be a good idea to get rid of ties. I think the MLS should go with a single overtime, followed by a shootout. They could give partial points (say, the same as for a tie) to teams that lose in the overtime or the shootout, as opposed to losing in regulation. Shootouts are fun to watch, but it seems like a crappy way to lose since they're really based more on lucky guesses by the goalkeeper than by skill. It's kind of like deciding a baseball game with a home run derby. It'd be fun to watch, but doesn't necessarily prove which was the better team.
I don't watch a lot of soccer myself, but recently I watched several of the Euro Cup 2008 games and a couple of MLS games, and the talent difference really is noticeable. I wouldn't have expected, as someone who doesn't watch soccer regularly, that I could have told any difference, but even to me it was quite apparent. I don't know if it's field dimensions or talent level or what, but the MLS players didn't seem capable of controlling the ball the way the European teams could. Passing was poorer and the ball changed possession a lot more in the MLS game than the Euro game, making the MLS game seem like amateur hour. It was just not as entertaining to watch. And there's just something about the MLS players that makes them look less... professional. In one MLS game I caught, one team had an overweight, 40+ year old guy on their side, and the sad part was, he seemed to be one of the team's better players!
Perhaps the best way to get Americans into soccer would be this: fantasy soccer! Maybe this exists and I don't know about it, but I think it could work. You'd have to go with more stats than goals and assists, but there's a lot more statistics kept for soccer than I previously realized, including touches, distance dribbled, passing, etc. With a little bit of creativity, fantasy soccer could be a pretty fun thing to play, and would definitely help people learn who the players are.
I think it would be a mistake for the MLS to make significant rules changes to try to increase scoring. Doing so would only alienate the fans they have, and wouldn't likely attract many new fans, at least not fans who would stick around. I think soccer is just not going to make it big in the States, unless one of the other major sports takes a huge nosedive, and the way the MLB seems to be going strong despite the steroids problem seems to indicate that it may not be possible for one of the "big three" sports to fall out of favor without some kind of extended strike. Their best hope may be to become a second tier sport like hockey or golf. (I omit NASCAR since it is probably "first tier" due to the size of its following, but mostly because it is not a sport.)
A better way to grow soccer fandom in the US would be to try to get a few star players that are identifiable to the casual sports fan. Beckham has played so little that he's not done the MLS much good, and besides, I think it's important to get some homegrown talent to stay in the US to play. Any American players who are any good go overseas to play. (As an aside, it's somewhat surprising to me that there are so few good American soccer players, since it seems like everyone, boy or girl, plays soccer as a kid. I guess most just give it up once they hit their teens.)
It'll be interesting to see if the added coverage the MLS, and soccer in general, is receiving from ESPN will boost interest. If there's more news out there about it, and if people start to learn the names of players, and even teams (I'd be hard-pressed to name more than two or three), that might get them interested in following the sport more. I would consider myself a casual soccer fan (for an American), and I only watch maybe 2-3 games a year. I think I would be inclined to watch more if soccer got more than 10 seconds of coverage on Sports Center. Learning more about the intricacies of the sport would also help. ESPN's halftime and postgame coverage was pretty good at going into some depth with the game. I'd like to see more on strategy and tactics (but please, not the way NFL Live uses old has-beens running around a quarter-sized football field in suits to explain strategy!). I hear all the time that some teams rely on athleticism, while others take a "technical approach", and I have no idea what that's supposed to mean!
I think it would also be a good idea to get rid of ties. I think the MLS should go with a single overtime, followed by a shootout. They could give partial points (say, the same as for a tie) to teams that lose in the overtime or the shootout, as opposed to losing in regulation. Shootouts are fun to watch, but it seems like a crappy way to lose since they're really based more on lucky guesses by the goalkeeper than by skill. It's kind of like deciding a baseball game with a home run derby. It'd be fun to watch, but doesn't necessarily prove which was the better team.
I don't watch a lot of soccer myself, but recently I watched several of the Euro Cup 2008 games and a couple of MLS games, and the talent difference really is noticeable. I wouldn't have expected, as someone who doesn't watch soccer regularly, that I could have told any difference, but even to me it was quite apparent. I don't know if it's field dimensions or talent level or what, but the MLS players didn't seem capable of controlling the ball the way the European teams could. Passing was poorer and the ball changed possession a lot more in the MLS game than the Euro game, making the MLS game seem like amateur hour. It was just not as entertaining to watch. And there's just something about the MLS players that makes them look less... professional. In one MLS game I caught, one team had an overweight, 40+ year old guy on their side, and the sad part was, he seemed to be one of the team's better players!
Perhaps the best way to get Americans into soccer would be this: fantasy soccer! Maybe this exists and I don't know about it, but I think it could work. You'd have to go with more stats than goals and assists, but there's a lot more statistics kept for soccer than I previously realized, including touches, distance dribbled, passing, etc. With a little bit of creativity, fantasy soccer could be a pretty fun thing to play, and would definitely help people learn who the players are.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Is soccer gaining ground in America?
The conclusion of the Euro 2008 soccer tournament was televised on national TV in the U.S. this weekend, broadcasting on ABC at 2:30 eastern time. With the world's largest sports network, ESPN, beginning to not only broadcast Major League Soccer (U.S.) games but many European league games and international matches, it is looking more and more like the world's most popular sport is gaining a foothold here in the United States.
Certainly your average sports fan is paying more attention than ever to the sport, but this doesn't necessarily mean much. Soccer has long been an afterthought for Americans due to its generally slow pace and low-scoring games, not to mention the dreaded ties. All of these aspects are things that American sports have been fighting to avoid for years, from the strict defensive rules imposed in the early '90s by the NBA to allow for more free-flowing, 1-on-1 basketball leading to more scoring, to the NFL's continuing rules changes this decade making it more difficult for defensive backs to hang with speedy receivers, to the NHL's numerous rules changes following the devastating lockout, all aimed at increasing scoring. These rules changes really started, one could argue, in the late 1960s in Major League Baseball when the pitchers' mound was lowered and the strike zone shrunk following a season with record-low scoring totals and the remarkable seasons of starting pitchers Denny McClain of the Tigers (31 wins) and Bob Gibson of the Cardinals (1.12 ERA).
Scoring didn't truly reach the point of mass appeal until the 1990's and the Michael Jordan era in the NBA. In order to further promote the league, Commissioner David Stern decided to take the approach of promoting the game's stars to draw more attention to the sport. While the Larry Birds and Magic Johnsons of the previous decade had drawn significant attention to the sport, it was Jordan that drew in even the most casual of sports fans, the same way Tiger Woods draw even casual sports fans to golf, a game with a history of not connecting particularly well with the average Joe. Jordan brought both national and global attention to the league because of his high-scoring ability and flair for the dramatic, and the other leagues began to take notice.
Further evidence of the U.S.'s desire for scoring and offense came in 1998 when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa engaged in a home run duel that lasted throughout the summer with both chasing, and each surpassing, the MLB home run record previously held by Roger Maris. This summer saw what many call the rebirth of the sport that was still reeling from a player strike and the cancellation of the 1994 World Series. This event is also what many believe is the beginning of the Steriod Era in baseball, but the fans flocked to the sport, happy to ignore the signs of cheating to watch the offensive juggernauts at work.
Why am I going through all of this? It allows me to present a simple question: Will soccer ever gain a significant foothold in this country, moreso than just the niche sport that it currently is, without some change that provides for more offense? For years I've thought this sport would gain significant appeal and would increase scoring if it simply removed the offsides rule (or perhaps changed it so that players can only be offsides if they are beyond the goal box). Despite the fact that the 1-0 Spain victory on Sunday was an entertaining game, there is something to be said for the idea that a 1 goal lead is not sufficient for a team to just sit on and expect a victory, or at worst a tie. Yes there will be games where a team may overcome a 2 goal lead, but those instances are so rare, it is difficult for a fan to want to continue watching a game if either team takes a 2 or more goal lead.
So what do you think? Does soccer need to consider rules changes to gain more popularity in one of the world's largest economic markets, or should the game remain as it is and be content to be an afterthought in the U.S. while being number 1 nearly everywhere else?
Certainly your average sports fan is paying more attention than ever to the sport, but this doesn't necessarily mean much. Soccer has long been an afterthought for Americans due to its generally slow pace and low-scoring games, not to mention the dreaded ties. All of these aspects are things that American sports have been fighting to avoid for years, from the strict defensive rules imposed in the early '90s by the NBA to allow for more free-flowing, 1-on-1 basketball leading to more scoring, to the NFL's continuing rules changes this decade making it more difficult for defensive backs to hang with speedy receivers, to the NHL's numerous rules changes following the devastating lockout, all aimed at increasing scoring. These rules changes really started, one could argue, in the late 1960s in Major League Baseball when the pitchers' mound was lowered and the strike zone shrunk following a season with record-low scoring totals and the remarkable seasons of starting pitchers Denny McClain of the Tigers (31 wins) and Bob Gibson of the Cardinals (1.12 ERA).
Scoring didn't truly reach the point of mass appeal until the 1990's and the Michael Jordan era in the NBA. In order to further promote the league, Commissioner David Stern decided to take the approach of promoting the game's stars to draw more attention to the sport. While the Larry Birds and Magic Johnsons of the previous decade had drawn significant attention to the sport, it was Jordan that drew in even the most casual of sports fans, the same way Tiger Woods draw even casual sports fans to golf, a game with a history of not connecting particularly well with the average Joe. Jordan brought both national and global attention to the league because of his high-scoring ability and flair for the dramatic, and the other leagues began to take notice.
Further evidence of the U.S.'s desire for scoring and offense came in 1998 when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa engaged in a home run duel that lasted throughout the summer with both chasing, and each surpassing, the MLB home run record previously held by Roger Maris. This summer saw what many call the rebirth of the sport that was still reeling from a player strike and the cancellation of the 1994 World Series. This event is also what many believe is the beginning of the Steriod Era in baseball, but the fans flocked to the sport, happy to ignore the signs of cheating to watch the offensive juggernauts at work.
Why am I going through all of this? It allows me to present a simple question: Will soccer ever gain a significant foothold in this country, moreso than just the niche sport that it currently is, without some change that provides for more offense? For years I've thought this sport would gain significant appeal and would increase scoring if it simply removed the offsides rule (or perhaps changed it so that players can only be offsides if they are beyond the goal box). Despite the fact that the 1-0 Spain victory on Sunday was an entertaining game, there is something to be said for the idea that a 1 goal lead is not sufficient for a team to just sit on and expect a victory, or at worst a tie. Yes there will be games where a team may overcome a 2 goal lead, but those instances are so rare, it is difficult for a fan to want to continue watching a game if either team takes a 2 or more goal lead.
So what do you think? Does soccer need to consider rules changes to gain more popularity in one of the world's largest economic markets, or should the game remain as it is and be content to be an afterthought in the U.S. while being number 1 nearly everywhere else?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
