The appeal of living and playing in L.A., instead of playing for West Ham for instance, with the UK press watching every touch of the ball, seems fairly understandable. Good luck to him and his family.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
David Beckham agrees to LA Galaxy move
- Thread starter BoyBach
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The appeal of living and playing in L.A., instead of playing for West Ham for instance, with the UK press watching every touch of the ball, seems fairly understandable. Good luck to him and his family.
Okay, so L.A. gets Beckham, but the Revs (you've been in the goddamn final more than any other team, ****ING WIN IT ALREADY! I swear 90% of the team's revenue comes from the Patriots (same owner, same stadium)) lose Clint Dempsey to Fulham. 
I wonder who got the better deal. Although, Clint might be there just so he can fight some of his teammates right before the World Cup. Muah hahahaaa.
I wonder who got the better deal. Although, Clint might be there just so he can fight some of his teammates right before the World Cup. Muah hahahaaa.
Further to what we were saying earlier about a British TV company getting the rights to show MLS matches, Motty has just said on Football Focus that a UKish broadcaster has already approached the MLS regarding purchasing the rights. He didn't say which channel, though.
Possibly, for me it's got Five written all over it. Hardly anyone watches MLS either so they'd be perfect partners.
Mind, the Sky/Fox link suggests that it might be them.
Maybe Bravo? They already cover Serie A, so adding MLS would give something extra to fill up their schedule instead of more of their 'Binge Drinking Britain' or 'Traffic Cops' style programming.
Also, Capello has said that Beckham will train with the first team, but will not play for them after signing for the LA Galaxy. Maybe this means that he might be going to the US a little earlier than August?
And it won't become popular unless it can attract quality, high profile players which despite him being in the twilight of his career Beckham is.
As a soccer fan in the US, I think this is great. I think this will directly lead to more coverage on ESPN2 which will be great for the sport. My alma mater just won the College Cup and no one cares, but it's still a national championship, for crying out loud. The Rapids made it to the playoffs, but very few around here give a hoot. But we've got thousands of kids out on Saturday mornings playing soccer.
If we can get their parents watching MLS with those kids on ESPN and ESPN2, we can build a whole generation of fans of professional soccer. Now all we have are thousands of kids, coached by parents who never played themselves, who stop playing when they reach high school.
Beckham will help out MLS and I hope will raise the profile of the sport in the country as a result. Everyone knows we need the help if we're going to build a competitive national team.
If we can get their parents watching MLS with those kids on ESPN and ESPN2, we can build a whole generation of fans of professional soccer. Now all we have are thousands of kids, coached by parents who never played themselves, who stop playing when they reach high school.
Beckham will help out MLS and I hope will raise the profile of the sport in the country as a result. Everyone knows we need the help if we're going to build a competitive national team.
Indeed. You need to keep the kids playing football (and I don't mean the American variety) when they get older – and try to raise interest in the sport and teams among the general population. A high profile player like Beckham may well help that, but he alone is not the answer. After all, the World Cup was held in the US back in '94 with the intention of raising the profile of the game and generating interest but it didn't really do the trick. If the biggest football tournament in the world can't build interest in the game, how can one man?
One obstacle in the way is the fact that there's very little history behind football in the States. American football, baseball and all the others have long traditions stretching back into the 19th century – support for the game and the teams is ingrained in people. Young Americans go along with their families to watch their local teams, be it one of the big profession outfits or the local college side, and a love of the sport in question is passed on through generations of supporters
There's not that tradition for soccer in the States, and it's difficult for people to develop a deep affection for a new team in a new sport with no history to latch onto. It's not an impossible task to build a strong, competitive league in the States, but it's not going to happen overnight on the strength of one high profile transfer.
The problem isn't the lack of history - it's been the lack of a professional league worth following. Here we have American football, baseball, basketball and hockey is coming on strong. We have strong professional leagues in all of those sports and the collegiate competition is good too. While we have a long history with soccer, we haven't had a good pro league. Beckham will legitimize the MLS and a lot of people will begin watching just to see what he does. It's going to have a huge impact, even if it's only the first drop in a downpour.
I really think things are changing. I coach at the high school level and I'm starting to see kids wear European club jerseys (beyond Manchester United) and MLS jerseys. Part of this is because there is more soccer on cable television through the sports network packages than there has been in the past. Beckham will help get more MLS games on ESPN which is where soccer needs to be to get more fans.
The sport won't grow without television coverage and Beckham will help advertisers feel comfortable that they can buy a spot during an MLS game and not see all the viewers switch the channel as soon as the pre-game analysis starts.
Indeed that's kind of what I was saying, although I should really have said that 'there's very little history behind professional football in the States'. There's not been a strong professional league in the States previously, so a tradition of supporting a club hasn't developed in the same way that it has in, say, American football or baseball.
Hopefully this situation will change. I agree totally that a lack of a strong, competitive league has stymied the development of professional soccer, it's good to see though that an interest is developing. If more people get interested then more channels will want to screen games, which should generate further interest, from both the viewing public and sponsors.
It's good to hear too that the kids you coach are developing a keen interest in the game, hopefully though the ones clad in European shirts will dump them and get behind an MLS side. The league and teams need their support.
Is there such thing as a strong league that is franchised and doesn't have relegation and promotion?
At least they've got rid of shootouts to decide drawn games.
It could be argued that American Football is franchised and lacks relegation or promotion, and that game has flourished in spite of this. But as I mentioned in a previous football-related thread I was very surprised to hear how the ownership of clubs works, with some teams sharing owners. Outside of the States (in Europe certainly) there are regulations in place to prevent such things, but in the States it's accepted.
But American football has a salary cap and a draft and part of the appeal of the game is that fans know there's a chance that any team might win even if it takes a few years of rebuilding.
Soccer fails in the US because the 'good' athletes who play it give up as soon as they're old enough to play basketball/football/baseball more seriously since there's far more money and opportunity in those sports than in the MLS. You really have to love the game to play it for a living.
The other problem is that it's not particularly exciting to the casual fan. There's a heck of a lot of kicking the ball around midfield without much going on. While in soccer-oriented countries, this is seen as a careful skilled buildup (yawn) and there are subtleties involved, US fans are more likely to see the subtleties in how a baseball is pitched or how the formations line up in American football; the things that the Brits just don't get since they don't see them.
Soccer, unless played at a high level where both teams are playing to win, isn't exciting enough. It's flourished because it's cheap to play at grassroots (all you need is a ball and a couple of shirts to use as goalposts) and relatively easy for anyone to pick up and have a kickabout. The strategies and tactics don't begin to compare to the complexity that top NFL/NCAA teams have to use in order to succeed - which is both a good and bad thing. Heck, I've been watching American football for the better part of 20 years and I still don't 'see' everything when the analysts break it down.
I used to watch UK football, I still watch the odd game in the World Cup and I'm happy to appreciate the highlights of great goals or stunning footwork but there's not enough of that in the average game to make me watch all the way through. And I'd guess many American football fans would feel similarly.
Back on topic again though. I don't think Beckham going will make much of a difference to the popularity of the game although those who are current fans will enjoy it. I just hope that in the presence of real Hollywood stars, Posh gets her current sense of the Beckhams celetbrity bubble slightly deflated.
The MLS has both a salary cap and a draft in the case of the salary cap though, each club is allowed one 'star' player whose wages are unrestricted, Beckham obviously falls into this category. The Australian league has a similar system in place.
The 'any team has a chance' point is a valid one, the same can't really be said for a lot of the big soccer leagues the Premiership, for example, has been won by a very small number of clubs in recent years and it's incredibly hard for any teams outside of this elite to break it. In this country you tend to find the more competitive football outside of the Premiership, albeit without the supposed glamour.
That's bizarre, since I used to watch American Football, but got fed up with it stopping all the time. I prefer the constant flow of a football game, where the same players have to both attack the opposing goal whilst stopping the other team from doing the same.
So similarly but opposite, I can appreciate American Football, but there's simply not enough constant action and atmosphere in the game to keep me interested for the full four quarters.
Horses for courses...
Precisely... I get bored watching soccer because there's too much flow and not enough strategy in most games. I enjoy the 25 second breaks in American football because, as I've learned more about the game, I like pitching my wits against the coaches trying to second guess their strategies and the next playcalls - which includes changing the personnel on the field and seeing who they've left on/off. And time-outs make it much easier to nip to the bar or the loo...
Personally, I've tried on several occasions over the years to watch American football but I simply can't get into it. I can recognise that there is a lot of depth and complexity to the game, and the intricacy of the tactics and plays, but I prefer the ebb and flow of soccer. Each to his or her own.
I suppose you could compare attempts to start American football leagues over here to attempts to develop professional soccer leagues in the US. There was a big surge in popularity over here in the Eighties, but general interest waned.
Still, it's better than rugby.
I suppose you could compare attempts to start American football leagues over here to attempts to develop professional soccer leagues in the US. There was a big surge in popularity over here in the Eighties, but general interest waned.
Still, it's better than rugby.