I don't really care that much about soccer, but after our showing at the Olympics, I heard one commentator say "It's baffling that a country of 330 million people can't field a competitive soccer team" and that led me to look up who we lost to. We got skunked 4-0 by Morocco, a country of 37 million, roughly equivalent to the combined populations of Texas and Tennessee. Likewise skunked by France, a nation of 67 million. Our only 2 wins came over New Zealand and Guinea, with a combined population of 18 million.
It does seem rather improbable that, from a population of 333 million, we can't find 18 players to be competitive. It's not for lack of effort. I'm always hearing how soccer is growing in popularity, and have been hearing this for quite some time now. But we're no better than we ever have been. Soccer was invented in 1848 (estimated with the formal drawing up of rules at Cambridge) and the first recorded match here was in 1876, so it's not like we're that much farther behind the world in terms of playing the game. The French joined FIFA in 1904 and we were granted admission in 1913. So, again, we've been in the mix more or less since the beginning.
It just never caught on. This in spite of constant efforts to re-tool and reinvigorate interest in the sport. Even so, you would think with 333 million people, even without intensive efforts, we could find at least 11 players to make us more respectable. Germany and Italy are dominant in the sport, winning 4 World Cup titles each, though only boasting populations of 59 and 84 million, respectively.
(We did get ahead of the curve in women's soccer, which is decidedly less important than men's soccer in other countries.)
Contrast this with basketball. A uniquely American sport which we thoroughly dominated (once the playing field was leveled and our pros were allowed to compete with other nations pros). European nations, though decidedly late to the game, have drastically closed the gap (and in some years eliminated it) with America in basketball.
It does seem rather improbable that, from a population of 333 million, we can't find 18 players to be competitive. It's not for lack of effort. I'm always hearing how soccer is growing in popularity, and have been hearing this for quite some time now. But we're no better than we ever have been. Soccer was invented in 1848 (estimated with the formal drawing up of rules at Cambridge) and the first recorded match here was in 1876, so it's not like we're that much farther behind the world in terms of playing the game. The French joined FIFA in 1904 and we were granted admission in 1913. So, again, we've been in the mix more or less since the beginning.
It just never caught on. This in spite of constant efforts to re-tool and reinvigorate interest in the sport. Even so, you would think with 333 million people, even without intensive efforts, we could find at least 11 players to make us more respectable. Germany and Italy are dominant in the sport, winning 4 World Cup titles each, though only boasting populations of 59 and 84 million, respectively.
(We did get ahead of the curve in women's soccer, which is decidedly less important than men's soccer in other countries.)
Contrast this with basketball. A uniquely American sport which we thoroughly dominated (once the playing field was leveled and our pros were allowed to compete with other nations pros). European nations, though decidedly late to the game, have drastically closed the gap (and in some years eliminated it) with America in basketball.
