chasm

I think it's fine if you like baseball and all. But, don't put down the kids who love soccer. At least they are playing some sport and not mixing chemicals in their basement or huffing spray paint. It takes just as much effort, and definitely team work to win in soccer.

Hmm ... from the person who has never coached nor even played an organized sport, I'll take your thoughts into consideration accordingly :-)

Kids.....orangutans.....what's the difference? :-)

I have to agree baseball/softball is the most mind stimulating game out there, and you do need a child with a bit of intelligence to be able to be successful at the sport. I am also tired of watching small children chase after a ball to kick it, whoopy.... take the ball away and you have a game of tag.... we can all play that, no skill needed.

I have played in organized sports, jackass. I was on the swim team for 3 years and I played softball. Mind you, these were in my heyday, but nonetheless. Besides that, you don't need to have been involved with something to have a grasp on its concept. Ass ;)

Baseball may require more strategy, and it is by far my favorite sport-- but you can be a dumbass (Jose Canseco, Chipper Jones, John Rocker etc.) or grossly out of shape (David Wells, Mo Vaughn, etc.) and still succeed at the game.

Perhaps baseball lends itself to "strategy" because it is slower paced (I mean, there is a good 30-45 seconds between pitches).

But still, baseball is the shit.

Lori, you don't have to be involved to "grasp" it but I think you do have to be involved to "appreciate" it. BTW - I'm trying very hard to avoid commenting on the fact that you sited swimming as an example of your organized sports experience.

Robb, I bet both David Wells and Mo Vaughn are in better shape than they look. I've seen guys and girls do some things athletically that just defy visual expectations. As for the intelligence factor, Chipper's not a dumbass, he just got caught up in some "relationship" things :-) But seriously, all the people you mentioned understand the game whether they're out of shape or not. They might not understand much else, but they understand the game. Now, if they'd ever learn to transfer that pursuit of knowledge outside the game, look out!

The slower pace certainly lends itself to strategy because the combatants have an opportunity to consider what has happened and to formulate future courses of action based on the past. Instincts are great and all but white-and-black-ball-go-left, white-and-black-ball-go-right doesn't require a ton of forethought to figure out that I need to chase it in either direction.

Tom, I agree with your response. I am not a fan of soccer (aside from Beckham, Adu, and Pele I couldn't even name another player). And what soccer lacks in strategy, it makes up with instincts, physicality, stamina, and team communication.

Baseball is undoubtedly the most difficult sport to play (and play well) because it is such a mental game. Nonetheless, I'm sure the kids that play soccer train very hard as well.

BTW- Have you heard Chipper talk? :-)

yeah, I agree that every sport has its necessary skills, so there is something to be said for being good at any sport. However, Baseball does seem to require something above and beyond what the other major sports require. You need a certain level of intelligence to be able to play it successfully. It requires more than just raw energy and "plays" to play. Unfortunately, America has kind of embraced Football as its primary sport, probably because we are ADHD, and also do to the disgust over the constant strikes and lockouts.

Tom,
It appears as though you are correct in your appreciation assumption. However, I believe you would fall right into it. I do not believe you have played soccer and thus, you do lack the appreciation for the sport. As for the intellectually stimulating argument, I ask, why not sit at home and play chess? Perhaps because you are, to a degree, ADHD yourself and would rather not take the time to sit and play a game. My findings on this topic is not the problem with society and intellect, for there are sports other than baseball that I would contest to be intellectually stimulating. Rather, I find that the only real reason you have a problem with this change, is because it is exactly that; a change. You are simply stuck on these ideas because you tend to be a romanticist. However, the fact is baseball as America's favorite pastime is in fact past its time. Here are a few reasons why baseball is not the number one sport in America anymore. Many players do not speak English, or at least when they first started playing in the MLB. The amount of money players make exceeds that of any other professional athlete (which far exceeds most Americans). Many other countries play baseball and are becoming much better at it than Americans. And finally, a much better sport, almost exclusive to America is available: FOOTBALL!!
P.S. I believe you wrote "pasttime" but it is correctly spelled "pastime"

Well, shall I just get down on my knees and bow to the great Berg? I think not. I don't really have a lot of time to post but I've gotta reply to at least ONE of your points.

The money factor. MAYBE, just maybe, baseball players make so much more because they play 162 games a year! Compared to other sports, that's a LOT more.

Perhaps you do not have much time to write a response, because there is not a solid argument to counter mine. You know what I wrote is correct.

As for the money factor, I don't believe that having a longer season is the reason players are paid more. The baseball season lasts eight months while the NHL lasts 10, the NBA 9, and football 6. Also, the only reason they do play 162 games is due to the fact there is no contact. It is not physically draining to stand in the outfield and catch a ball. I mean you could probably teach a monkey to do that. As for other sports, i.e. hockey, football, and basketball, there is a great chance of a season ending injury or even career ending injury to a player. This is why they play fewer games. However, these other sports still manage to play just as long of a season.

While I am dogging Baseball, the intellect assumption is just plain stupid. Besides the pitcher, who is really strategizing out on the field? C'mon it was a good try to convince people of your way of thought by using the ONE example of intellect in the game. I challenge you to present another REAL example of intellect presented by another position in baseball. Also, while you argue that baseball players play soooo many games, look at the one position that actually gets physically drained during a game: the pitcher. Glavine and Pedro both started 33 games, Schilling 32, and Hampton 29. They combined for only 827.4 innings played. If we converted it to complete games the number shrinks to only 91.33 games played by all four pitchers. If we then average out how many games each of the four played, it comes out to a measly 22.83 games. That is pathetic. The one position that is truly demanding on the body, and they can only play on average 23 games a year. Maybe this is why people don't care about baseball as much anymore. Maybe the American public has realized how much the players get paid in relation to the amount of work they put in and just don’t assimilate with it anymore.

Hahahaha, so sad Berg. Yes, you have a ton of free time and can ramble on and on but, once again, why is it you miss the point? For everyone else, try to follow along to Berg logic, if you will temporarily suspend your own.

Berg's first reason that baseball is no longer America's pastime is the fact that . To quote, "Many players do not speak English, or at least when they first started playing in the MLB". I hate to tell you but, while that might be a problem now, an overwhelming majority of college baseball players (read:the next crop of baseball players) playing right now are as WASPY as they come. Sure, there was an influx of foreign born players for a couple years but every sport has it (except football because no other countries like it enough to play it). Look at the NHL or the new crop of european players in the NBA. Let me try to water it down for ya, US make good product, other countries copy, seek to improve, comeback and play to win. It happened with automobile manufacturing, the technology industry and now, sports ... no giant surprise there and certainly no "reason" for why baseball has been replaced in youth sports by soccer and is no longer, in your opinion, America's pastime. ESPECIALLY since we get our ass handed to us by most countries in soccer.

Berg's second reason is that baseball players make more money than any other athlete Hmm, wouldn't this reinforce the idea that America values baseball more than any other sport? Wouldn't that mean that mommy and daddy would want junior learning baseball in hopes of seeing the BIG payoff? Hmm...

Third, "Many other countries play baseball and are becoming much better at it than Americans" ... that's also no "reason" for kids not to play it.

On his other misguided ramblings ... The whole pitcher-to-work-per-game-fuzzy-math he threw together is a fairly pointless exercise in arithmetic. Sure, they might only have 25-30 starts a year but they throw (I can only speak for the Braves staff) everyday but the day after a start and they take batting and fielding practice everyday (okay, yes, they certainly should hit better but, try to focus). Once again, this has nothing to do with soccer overtaking baseball in youth athletic leagues. As for the intellectual argument, okay Berg, tell me who covers first on a bunt situation when your team is down one run in the ninth inning and the opposing team has runners on first and second. Suprisingly, you don't know. How do I know you don't know? Because I didn't tell you how many outs there were, that's why. It's all about sitations and, to borrow a much abused phrase around here, "situational awareness". Let's see, I have a soccer ball ... I got a bunch of guys with me and against me ... I have to put it in the net over there ... ahhh, okay, I think I get it.

Because I am short on time and patience, allow me to skip to the point.

It's not about money, it's not about being "America's pastime", it's not about what language the participants speak, it's not about other countries beating our college players in international competitions ... it's about the shortening of attention spans in the youth of America and the way that soccer, as a replacement for little league baseball, only enables more ADHD behavior. If you chose to refute THAT fact, please, go right ahead. If you chose to ramble off topic in hopes of escalating the general public's perception of your intelligence ... yeah, that might be well-intentioned but, ultimately, futile :-)

Hmmmm.... seems like ADHD can be used as an excuse for EVERYTHING! I honestly do not believe that soccer is catching on in the U.S. because this generation of youngsters is ADHD. Why has soccer been the World's pastime for the past 100 years? Is it because all other countries were ADHD? I think not.

Baseball is the greatest sport ever-- but I may have a biased opinion because I am from America... If I were from England, I'd be a cricket enthusiast!!!

Look, no one hates ADHD as an excuse more than me. I'm not making any excuses for baseball's decline in popularity. I'm simply pointing to a strong correlation between the short attention spans of today's American youth and the increased popularity in activities that never stop such as soccer, basketball, lacrosse, etc.

As for the rest of the world's love of soccer ... well, let's be honest ... MOST of the rest of the world consists of thrid-world countries, doesn't it? We get our ass handed to us by countries that don't produce a fraction of our GDP.

The simple truth is that soccer is much easier to play, compared to baseball, without the funding and organization of the youth associations we have in America. We've always had the land to build fields and the money to fund organizations to field teams. Many other countries, specifically some of the countries that kick our ass in soccer, simply do not have the excess income to spend on "liesure" activities and soccer is REALLY cheap and requires very little organization. It is a very flexible game, I'll give it that. It's certainly much easier to play soccer with six people and one ball than it is to play baseball under the same circumstances.

Also, Robb, it's easy to say what you have so far. Please complete the comment by adding the hard part, ANSWERING any of those questions you posed :-)

"Why has soccer been the World's pastime for the past 100 years? Is it because all other countries were ADHD? I think not."

That's not a very strong position.

Fine then. "Why has soccer been the World's pastime for the past 100 years? Is it because all other countries were ADHD?"

Yes. Yes it is. I will make a blanket statement-- all other countries have been ADHD for hundreds of years. Stupid countries! Perhaps that is why the Romans sought to conquer foreign lands-- because they were so bored with their own soil that they had to go out and find brand new ones to play with. Stupid ADHD empires!

If only they could have been diagnosed earlier-- they may have been able to learn an intellectual game like baseball. :-) Now doesn't that logic sound ridiculous?

Once again, it's easy to find fault in other ideas. It's not so easy to suggest alternatives. You've now taken TWO opportunities to take the easy way out. In light of that fact, I'll take your last comment to mean "I have no idea why the rest of the world likes soccer so much. It could very well be an ADHD issues because I have no other reasons to propose."

So be it.

Tom-- you are the one that made the hasty statement in your original post. It is not MY job to come up with reasons why the world likes soccer so much; all I have to do is show some flaw in your logic.

I chose to refute your statement through an indirect approach (e.g. by creating an equally ridiculous statement that has little merit-- much like your original rant.).

Go back and re-read your post, and tell me how much you researched your statements. Tell me what health journals you read that suggested that youth soccer leagues are filled with kids diagnosed with ADHD. Or show me articles that detail the numbers-- that Little League enrollment is down because of this apparent outbreak of ADHD.

BTW-- I'm guessing that soccer is so popular throughout the world primarily because it was invented in 2500 B.C.!!!! That is nearly 5000 years of development! Baseball has only been around since the 1845 (that would be about 160 years for you math geniuses out there).

Once again, as is evidenced by the "guilty pleasure" post and now this one, a Fillman has chosen to argue for argument's sake. There was no "hasty" statement in my post ... in fact, it specifically says "Maybe that's because" ... MAYBE, which implies there is a maybe NOT as well. The maybe NOT was certainly up for debate, however, simply saying that the original notion was WRONG does not facilitate debate. It's a cop out.

My post was OBVIOUSLY speculative although it is, indeed, based on things I have read and discussed with other people involved in youth organizations regarding athletics. Sure, this is going to sound convenient but I don't happen to have specific citations on hand. (I can't honestly say that I EVER considered that I'd have to cite those facts one day.) However, If you'd REALLY like, I can go digging around for them.

Far be it from me to propose something about youth sports organizations that Robb, in all his worldly experience in youth athletics, can refute. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know that Robb never participated as a player or a coach in a youth association, my bad. I also must have forgotten that he probably isn't privy to the literature I've received about youth organizations nationally either (although the one article was a Time article if I remember correctly). He IS, of course, entitled to his opinion and to that end, I am receptive. In fact, he FINALLY got to a justification for why soccer MIGHT be so popular with the world. Sure, sure, he took the easy "indirect" approach first but he eventually formulated an intelligent reply. I extend my kudos and thank him for his thoughts.

As for the "It is not MY job to come up with reasons " comment. If you'd really like to know about burden of proof, it depends on if you are defending your position (which you didn't formulate until the next post) or prosecuting mine. As a defender, all you need to do is create reasonable doubt but, since you didn't have a speculation on soccer's popularity until the next post, that's obviously out. SO, you must have been prosecuting in which case the burden of proof is on you and coming up with "reasons" IS your job.

As I've said many times before, showing flaws is EASY. If that's all anyone has to offer, don't bother posting. What this open forum needs is new perspectives and positive alternatives, ya know, the stuff that really makes you think.

Tom, I would like to quickly note that the reason many people take the orginal post to be hasty, is simply due to the sarcasim that follows the word MAYBE. It gives a sense of definiteness that your thought is truth. Therefore, others write to either agree, like your sister Karen, or disagree, like everyone else.

Tom, let's be serious. We are not in litigation-- we are on a BLOG, so your "burden of proof" crap as a means of discrediting me is rather comical.

I regret that I can no longer comment on this subject for the reason that the arguments are futile. Although I have access to various medical journals, I don't have an inkling of desire to research ADHD, nor do I want to theorize some correlation between ADHD and youth sports. Nor do I think YOU will ever provide conclusive evidence that ADHD is the culprit for the United States' youth movement towards soccer.

BTW, I know it is only WebMD, but chew on this for a bit:

ADHD Children: Activities to Approach With Caution
Activities that require too much divided attention. "In soccer or basketball, you're focusing on a dozen things at a time," Mahone says. That's not to say a child with ADHD should avoid soccer entirely, but a parent should approach with caution. "If you have a skilled coach or teacher who can communicate information in ways that make it interesting, and the step-by-step pieces of being organized more doable, then it may work," Mahone tells WebMD.

I know it is only a physician commenting on a website, but it's all I have access to at 2 in the morning. And it is the closest thing to a credible source posted yet.

There, I've officially retired.

So who's up for some chess?

See, there you go again Robb, taking everything so personally. I'm not "discrediting" you, I'm simply stating that if you're going to refute a point, you should really provide an alternative possibility in the process. As your brother would say, that's "standard" and the only reason I brought it up was so that you took some respobsibility for your post. "It's not MY job" is the worst defense of an idea I've ever heard. I don't blame you for this. I've heard Fillmans argue about the most ridiculous topics in circles for hours without saying anything or getting anywhere. However, your lack of desire to research or speculate in an alternative direction is simply laziness. If you really didn't have the motivation, you probably shouldn't have posted at all.

interesting enough Robb, Tom did not respond to the research you found on WebMD.

I think it is rather amusing how Tom tries to refute people's responses by attacking personally, and then his next post claims that he doesn't. i.e. "Far be it from me to propose something about youth sports organizations that Robb, in all his worldly experience in youth athletics, can refute. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know that Robb never participated as a player or a coach in a youth association, my bad." skip a few entries, "See, there you go again Robb, taking everything so personally. I'm not "discrediting" you.” If that is not attempting to discredit someone's argument then I don’t know what is.

Cute Robb, once again, PLEASE READ THE ENGLISH IN FRONT OF YOU AND DON'T TRY TO INTERPRET SOMETHING THAT ISN'T THERE. You said, "Tom, let's be serious. We are not in litigation-- we are on a BLOG, so your "burden of proof" crap as a means of discrediting me is rather comical."

The "discrediting" I referred to was about the burden of proof that YOU, somehow, thought was discrediting. Sure, AFTER that, my statements could probably be interpreted as discrediting, although, it WAS the truth.

No, I didn't respond to your WebMD comment directly, (although I DID already mention that if it was really desired, I could try to dig up the references I had), SO, I'll do so now. I think the WebMD post is very interesting although it doesn't seem to express any thoughts on baseball which, because the point of the article was comparative, doesn't tell me a whole lot. I'm guessing the person that left that post would feel similarly about baseball but there is no evidence of that.

I have no excuses for the tardiness or my response other than, well, I have a job, it cuts into my free-ranting-and-raving-comment time ... others will find out about that someday :-)

OK OK OK! This is some argument! I think everyone needs to stop insulting each other now and go back to the main points. (even though I do enjoy a total debacle now and then, hahaha) I think somewhere amidst all of this rambling there are some interesting concepts. I cannot really guess as to why Soccer is so popular throughout the rest of the world, with the exception that much like Basketball, it is a very inexpensive game to play. Even for a good game of basketball, it should really be on an indoor court. Soccer, all you really need is some grass and a goal. Now, as to why Baseball has lessened in popularity..... I do believe that at least one of the reasons is due to the concept of ADHD. Not that society is diseased, but that we are fed short snippets of information, and do not like to focus on one thing as much. You can see this everywhere, look at the half hour sitcom, the nightly news, the switch from classical music, to jazz and big band, to pop. The "Politics of Popular Culture" class I took really hit home on this subject. Somewhere, I even wrote an essay on it relating to Seinfeld, the ultimate of small snippets about nothing that you must get intellectually involved in (though I find it hillarious). While I cant say that the entire reason football seems to be our national past time now, I think it certainly is part of it. I could write more, but Im as tired of reading 10 page long posts as you are! :-)

(NOTE: It should be known that 2 comments were posted anonymously, and quickly deleted by Tom before anyone could read them. The following is in response to this matter.)

Tom, You may find this amusing-- because I certainly do... I didn't post those comments! (But I am happy that others feel the same way as me.)

Secondly, I think it is humorous that you deleted the comments in fear that others might agree with them. It's always good to control information-- you know? Have a nice forum for everyone's opinion, and then delete those you find threatening. Bravo.

And finally-- I was offered the job! That's one step closer to getting out of mommy and daddy's house.

There, now i am officially retired from posting.

PS. I urge the anonymous post-er to step forward because there may be a job for you at the new and improved PD.com if you are interested.

And one more thing-- none of this discussion angers me. I like to debate, but when things esculate into a full blown argument, it loses its original purpose... to offer up new ideas and expand the minds' of the participants.

If I have offended anyone, that was not my intention. Who turns out to be "right" doesn't really matter. There might not even be a "right" answer. The important thing is that we have all learned something.

What that is, I have no idea... this ADHD is getting to me... and I forget what I was originally posting about... Oh yeah. I'm right-- everyone else is wrong. La la la la! Just kidding :-)!!! No hard feelings.

First off, to all my loyal commentors, nothing has been deleted in months ... honest. I might have been hasty in reNAMING the anonymous posts with Robb's name but, it was my understanding that he had done that in the past in the midst of a country music argument with Jon ... it seemed logical but, nothing more than speculation. I've changed them back to anonymous.

Robb, two quick thoughts ... you retire from posting about as effectively as Jon and Mike do from HALO. You enjoy the last word as much as any Fillman I've ever met. I've watched you simply sit around and wait for the arguing to begin after a round of HALO. You enjoy it, you live for it and knowing that someone can't physically attack you makes it too tempting to resist :-)

Secondly, when am I going to see this effort on your own blog? (www.phenomenallydroll.com for those that don't know)

I'm certainly not offended (although accusing me of deleting posts when they certainly were NOT deleted did piss me off, ESPECIALLY after I intentionally left all of those other posts regardless of how far they strayed from the topic at hand).

I TOO urge the writer of the anonymous post to step forward. Just because, well, it'd be nice if everyone that comments could pull up their big-girl panties and take responsibility their words :-)

I wrote this the other night after reading what I consider an attack on me, by Tom. Whether it was supposed to be a personal attack or not, I took it as one, and responded accordingly. I could not post that day due to Verizon Internet going down. However, I did save my response and will post it in a minute. As for the anonymous posts, they were contributed by me, from a remote location. However, I only posted anonymous because I felt like being comical, and signed them "hmmmm" and "discrediting?" accordingly. I also had unique email addresses for each name. Well, anyways, here is what I wrote in response to Tom's last response to my response to his response on my response on his original. I don't know if that was the correct amount of responses but who cares, you get the point. I will be joining Robb in retirement after I post this last response. Perhaps you will find Robb and I down in Florida with the rest of the retired community. If were not in FL you can always reach me at chrisberg23@msn.com

Tom,
First I would like to point out that in your attempt to look, clever, intelligent, and insightful, you only come out looking like an arrogant American. You make unfounded claims to ADHD and baseball. I'd point you to a stats class to realize that just because two stats inflate over time, does not mean that they are correlated. There are many other variables into which situations occur. In your futile and rather half ass attempt to look down on the rest of society and place yourself on a pedestal; you ignore other factors and make blanket assumptions. Meanwhile, you try to attempt to find fault in the people that respond as to why no one should believe them, i.e. Lori, instead of focusing on the response itself.
As for your anti Berg arguments:
Number one: I'll skip any argument to the "America make good product...ramble ramble." This is typical "ugly American". If you haven't noticed, GM is about to be over taken by Toyota as the number one manufacturer in the World, the Euro kicks the dollars ass and America can’t even donate as much money as Australia to the Tsunami relief. America isn't the best at everything.
Number two: While, Baseball players do make the most of any professional athlete, it does not necessarily mean that every mom and dad will sign their kid up. Since other sports are growing, and most parents realize that their kid won't make it to the big leagues, they don't force junior to play a certain sport. Plus, with this "great phenomena" called soccer, wouldn't it make sense for "junior" to want to play the sports his friends are. Maybe you don't know kids, but they tend to want to fit in, do what everyone else is. Perhaps this idea combined with the realization that most kids don't make the big leagues, yet can get some kind of COLLEGE scholarship for almost any sport, leads to an increase of the "typically" less played sports.
Number Three: The "fuzzy math" was to demonstrate how exaggerated you made your point with the length of games. All in all, almost everyone would agree that baseball is a fairly easy sport as far as physical endurance is concerned. The 162 games are played in accordance. I simply wanted to put into terms that the only real position that does require some physical stamina results in only a few games compared to the rest of the major sports; "the physical ones."
Number Four: The idea of intelligence or "situational awareness" between soccer players and baseball players, minus the pitcher, I would contest to be the same, if not in the favor of soccer. C'mon, even I knew that you need to know how many outs. Besides, you do have those 30-45 seconds before the pitch is even thrown, allowing the coach or teammate to tell you.
Number Five: Sure the next crop of college baseball players are WASPY. They are in college. It would be interested to see where Pedro, Beltran, El Duce, Delgado, and Sosa all went to college. The fact is, for most of these WASPY kids; college is it! Most won't make it to the big leagues.
In short, you can not seem to grasp an idea that you have never been a part of. While most people can, for some reason you can not. The main idea I am trying to make is that baseball is simply taught. You memorize almost every situation. If that implies intelligence, than "the rock" must be as intelligent as you, or more so, since he has a state championship in baseball and you do not. The fact is that on the soccer field, you need to know where every player is, kind of like basketball, but there are other rules, like offsides which add a little "flare" to the game. Unlike baseball, there are no breaks in action for the coach to help out the struggling "genius" who hasn't memorized who covers which base in this situation we practice daily.
Because, I unlike others, work full time and do not have time to post eight out of eleven days; and refuse to permit arrogant, misguided people to steal anymore of my otherwise valuable time, I must shortly conclude that while, I do not fully understand soccer, I do know that there are rules which need to become instinct. There are talents: curving a ball, juggling, and bicycle kicks, that a person must master. A soccer player needs to know where his teammates are, as well as his opponents. As you have read this, I'm sure that you noticed most of theses ideas are not present in Baseball. In fact it really does sound a lot more skilled and situational aware than anything in baseball. I would have to agree with Robb that the fast pace of soccer probably yields this. As for Tom, you may continue to construct these transparent, one-sided perversions if Romanticism into an incredibly blunt and haughty falsehood about America in order to escalate "the general public's perception of your intelligence" as you may, (though I suppose that is the purpose of YOUR Blog), but simply as a friendly notice, people aren't as dumb as you would like to believe. Translation = they usually see through it!!

Alright, damn, do I need to implement a length limit here Berg? For someone who professes to "work full time" and does "not have time to post eight out of eleven days" ... you've posted the longest comment yet! I make no "attempt" to look "clever, intelligent, and insightful", I merely am what I am for better or worse. I make no pretense.

I also make no "claims" as Berg suggests. What part of MAYBE is so difficult to grasp anyway, Berg? This was all covered DAYS ago.

What I find truly sad is your lack of understanding ... even when I super-watered-it-down-caveman-style for you. To quote myself, "US make good product, other countries copy, seek to improve, comeback and play to win" ... all you did was reinforce my point with examples such as GM potentially losing the world's largest manufacturer title to Toyota and the Euro's value compared to the dollar. That was my point originally so I'm not sure WHERE you were going with that. Also, not sure how I get called an "ugly American" for giving props to other countries for refining our ideas and beating us at our own games.

Moving on ... as for the WASPY comment ... allow me to clarify. Not just an overwhelming majority of COLLEGE players but an overwhelming majority of DRAFTED players the last two years are as WASPY as they come. The Draft includes ALL prospects, college educated or not. I should have specified. While being drafted doesn't neccessitate making the "big leagues" there certainly is a much higher probability that the current trend will subside if not reverse.

As for the fuzzy-math , obviously, I know WHY you formulated those numbers. They're just misleading as I've shown by reinforcing the fact that while they might not start every game, they work at their craft everyday. To imply that they don't work as hard or that less is required of them than the "physical sports" is flat-out wrong. Unfortunately, this leads into semantics and the common definitions of "work" so we won't go there now. Just let it be known that small-muslce skills and superior eye-hand coordination need to be practiced just as much as running from one end of a field to the next, in fact, more so, as hitting a baseball has consistently been deemed the "most difficult task" in professional sports. Also, in terms of an intellectual / endurance pursuit, let's ponder this for a moment. As referenced in your first post, let's look at chess. How much perpetual motion is there and how quickly does the game move? Not a whole lot and not very quickly (unless it's "speed chess" which is actually pretty entertaining to watch). Is this to say that chess is less intellectual than soccer? By your account and viewing the 30-45 second "delay" as a deficiency in the game's design, I would expect you to say yes, but I'm thinking you might not.

Not because I want to but, Berg, I have to tell ya ... I also have a State Championship in baseball, sorry, there goes your terribly weak argument for "the rock" to be my intellectual superior (whew!). (btw- it's hard to believe you don't ... I've seen that picture of you in that Alton Park uniform, hot stuff!)

To quote Berg again in reference to soccer, "I do know that there are rules which need to become instinct ... most of theses ideas are not present in Baseball" Riiiiight, because when the ball is hit back at you over 100 mph and you are about ninety feet away you have all the time in the world to think about what you're gonna do about it. Instincts are just as prevalent in baseball as they are in soccer.

ANYWAY, sadly, Berg has not attempted to explain WHY soccer has become so popular with America's youth as SHOULD have been done based on the original post and this was AFTER that was all made abundantly clear through subsequent comments. Instead, he flashed moments of literary competence in an attempt to make me look or sound "arrogant, misguided" while, in actuality, all he has done is show an equal arrogance by presupposing that he somehow has all the answers. That's not what an open forum and debate is all about. I'm not going to rehash all of that now, it's been said by several people in prior comments.

On a sidenote, bully to Berg for owning up to the anonymous posts even after it was made clear to all that they were ridiculously base and more or less a waste of space.

I am already admittedly arrogant. Always have been, no surprises there. If you chose to battle my arrogance with yours, well ... good luck with that :-)