Sport Today

: > Forty million folks in a country that supposedly doesn't give two
: > shits about soccer turned out and made the women's world cup final a
: > bigger ratings success than the New York Knicks-San Antonio Spurs NBA
: > Finals.  The game drew an overnight Nielsen rating of 13.3 and a 32
: > share...

: The game was on a sunday afternoon in which nothing else resembling a
: decent sporting event was on tv.  Also, the media had been giving the
: game a lot of undeserved hype.  I would be interested in knowing how
: many of those people actually watched the game- which was incredibly
: dull.  

the thing that's stunned me about matters is that very few of the people
who usually whine about soccer being this dull sport with a propensity for
the 0-0 draw were complaining about this match.  "edge of the seat stuff",
"a real thriller", and all that.  all the wire service reports i've
read herald the strong defensive play and say very little about soccer's
reputation being damaged by the lack of scoring.  the only guy who came
close was Grahame Jones of the LA Times - a regular soccer writer who
you'd think would appreciate such things instead of calling the game "120
not-exactly-nail-biting mintues."

myself, i thought the US was never really adventurous enough, but i was
gripped by it all anyway - whenever my attention started to waver, they'd
cut to the blimp and i'd be amazed that there were 90,000 people in the
rose bowl.  watching WOMEN.  playing SOCCER.

: game?  Just set your watch and tune in for the penalty kick.  And what a
: great way to crown a world champion- penalty kicks.  I think soccer
: needs to adress that problem.  I think they should let them play until
: someone scores.  Michael

i do too, but then again, i never played the game.  they tell me you start
to absolutely DIE after 120 mintues.  and unlike the men, the women can
very easily argue that they don't get paid enough to play all-out until
there's a winner.

the ideal way to decide this would have been for everybody to have come
back today and played again, the way they used to do it before TV ruled
everything.  of course, that has to do with competition and not with TV
ratings, and we all know what rules in today's sporting world.

chuck
--
follow your dreams.  you can reach your goals.    [thanx to eric cartman.]

Anyway, thinking I was going to enjoy a relaxing afternoon watching the
game, picking it apart, etc., I settled in about 1 pm today with a tall
Co-Cola and some leftover pizza and turned it on.

I fast-forwarded through 95% of it.  It was a dull-ass soccer game, and I
like soccer (naturally, being a Clemson fan).  The penalty kicks ending
was dramatic enough, of course, but the best part was Brandi Chastain
ripping off her jersey and running around on the field and then ten
minutes later probably offending millions of Christian families on Sunday
afternoon while describing Michelle Akers.  Hell yeah!  She ROCKS!!!  I
need to see her more.

The rest was pretty dull.  I don't even remember seeing any good CHANCES,
let alone saves or actual goals.

Still, it was good for the sport.  90,000 people, many of them kids.

Congrats, ladies!  Now see if the men can just make the second round...

Trev

 (and the rare one who knew Michelle Akers,

what the hell is with that perm?  

Dude, women donut play football, except for the Puffs.

--
Jefferson Glapski
http://home.ican.net/~jng
=======================
"Attacking player takes a shot on net and after doing so,
skates into the crease. The initial shot deflects outside the
crease. The original player, still in the crease, recovers the
puck, which is now outside the crease, and scores. Result:
Goal is disallowed. The player did not maintain control of
the puck."
-Colin Campbell, 5/25/99

Hook 'em Horns
\m/

Fred Sherman

Maybe that' s part of the reason why the Chinese coach emphasized defense
first, and why the US team didn't press on offense as they have in other games.

And we won't even get into the Stanley Cup finals ratings....

Amazing...

Paul

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Here are the three reasons why the USA fans actually cared for a
minute:

1)  It's a novelty, a fad.   Ooh, look, here's something new, women's
soccer!  The same soccer moms who sat their kids in front of the TV to
watch Mia Hamm (and the rare one who knew Michelle Akers, too.  There
were precisely three of them who knew more than 2 players names going
into the tourney) are the ones who will get their kids that one super
hot toy this Christmas, only to watch their kids get bored with it two
days alter.

2)  It was completely centered on the USA.  It was in the US, the USA
won.  What happens when this things in Pakistan 4 years from now, and
the USA gets eliminated on one lucky bounce?  And that's all it would
have taken is that for the USA to lose.  They are a good team, but no
team is destined to win, as many people assume the USA women's soccer
team was.

3)  Good marketing.  The commercials weren't screamingly
self-indulgent "Hey, look!  We're CHICKS playing soccer".  It was
"Hey, look!  We're playing SOCCER!".

This was a nice moment, but it's over and won't have any long term
implications.  It's gone the way of all fads.

        GFM

--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
Geof F. Morris <-- that's what the GFM stands for . . .
Senior, Aerospace Engineering, UAH http://www.uah.edu/
 Chief Editor, Top Of The Key -- http://www.totk.com/
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

        GFM <-- wonders what Arena can do with the men

--
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
Geof F. Morris <-- that's what the GFM stands for . . .
Senior, Aerospace Engineering, UAH http://www.uah.edu/
 Chief Editor, Top Of The Key -- http://www.totk.com/
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><

: >
: > Forty million folks in a country that supposedly doesn't give two
: > shits about soccer turned out and made the women's world cup final a
: > bigger ratings success than the New York Knicks-San Antonio Spurs NBA
: > Finals.  The game drew an overnight Nielsen rating of 13.3 and a 32
: > share.

You know, I'm so sick of hearing about how poorly the finals did on
television.  Who the hell cares?  What does a Nielsen rating have to
do with how good or bad or memorable the finals were?  I thought the
finals were great; the whole playoffs were generally entertaining and
well-matched.  If you're a basketball fan, be a basketball fan, not
a network executive.  

All of this talk about how basketball needs a new messiah is entirely
media-created.  The only people who need a telegenic figurehead are
the NBA owners, media (which is why we hear so much moaning from them)
and the shoe companies.  It's time everybody starting enjoying
basketball on its own merits and stopped worrying about revenue and
network share.

--
--

U. of S: 966-4759 TR Labs: 668-9323