"Soccer is boring b/c it is low scoring" Many fans of the other major sports have bandied this phrase around. Perhaps none more vocal about throwing this anti soccer sentiment around than those fans of the NFL….and more specifically our patriot "big brothers". last night on sports radio….i once again heard ron borges (of the globe) throw this phrase around. I called over and got on with him. mostly to dispell his assertion that Lance Amstrong is not a great "athlete" and that the sport he mainly writes about "boxing" is watched live and on t.v. in the u.s. by far far fewer people than watch soccer. he again told me there is no scoring in soccer….so I countered with the fact that the revs have played 20 games this year so far and 1/3rd (I believe) have had 5 goals or more scored in them. and, the revs have been on the losing AND winning end of these results…..to which I got no answer. so, I did a bit of research to further bring the "scoring" of american football in line with its world counterpart. assumptions: 1. the inflationary nature of football scoring propogates this myth to a large extent (obvious) I grew up playing asteroids, for example. back then, I think hitting the big asteroid was 10pts….med was 25….small may have been 50. now, you'd be hard pressed to find a video game where picking up a rock gets you less than 1,000. its clearly a matter of scale that soccer has to fight in this argument 2. that field goals are nothing but door prizes for "failing". When a team gains possession of the football. Is there ever a time where they go after a field goal? Does one really ever hear anything other than "well, the patriots will settle for the field goal here. Even with the game on the line and they say "well, the pats just need to get into field goal range"……a team is always going to move the ball as close to the endzone as possible until such time that they think its too risky to keep that mentality and get prepared for the next best option…a field goal. so, given that…..(1 touchdown=1 goal) i looked up the pat's scores for the 16 regular season games and 3 post-season games and compared them to the first 19 games for the revs: revs matches: 34 goals for, 42 against….4.0 total gpg pats contests: 49 goals for, 31 against…..4.2 total gpg forget that silly "shootout" to appease the american fanbase...all we need to do is erect a couple of 30 foot high vertical bars to the top of the goalmouth and make goals worth 2pts. and, if the revs feel like "gosh, its just to hard to get past this san jose defense"... well, we'll just let 'em kick a bomb from 40 yds out, thru the uprights for the 1 pt booby prize. i think i'll call borges to see if he'll like soccer better if we can get this done.
That's a cool analysis -- I'm surprised the numbers are as close as they are. By the way, Borges is supposedly Cape Verdean; how did he miss the soccer boat?
and just think, the average football game lasts three hours, whereas a soccer game is two hours long. So, in reality, soccer has MORE scores per viewing minute than football.
I think this version of the sport is called Gaelic Football except they give more points. Ron Borges is a ************in turd. -gk-
I remember reading that an average american football game clocks in around 20 minutes of actual game time- all the rest is replays, commercials, analysis etc.
After the NE 4 TB 2 game in '97, a friend of mine got home where his NFL loving dad sarcastically asked what the score was. My friend replied '28 to 14'.
hey alex...that's a great point. i've allowed for a bit of o.t. and used 120 min as the revs avg. i think we would all feel comfortable using 180 min for football (i think it ranges from 165-195...esp high for the sun and mon night games) anyway, if you go straight td's v goals you get: revs games: 1 goal/30 min of viewing pats games: 1 td/42.8 min of viewing even if you include fg's (of which there were 64) pats game: 1td-fg/23.8 min of viewing that's not a huge gap 23.8 v 30...esp since you spend less time on the whole event. plus, i don't really get "up" for the vast majority of fg's as they are happening anyway....really, the only ones that remotely excite are the game breaking ones.
granted the revs are somewhat of an anomoly since they lead the league in goals for and against (this was mainly an argument for pats v revs) however, league wide you have: 2.98 goals/game 1 goal/40.4 min of viewing time .....still ahead the pats avg of tds per min viewing
"Ladies and Gentlemen. May I have your attention please. For his 202nd post, the referee has issued a red card to Big Soccer's Beez." Please - I'm Cape Verdean and I know Ron Borges. For the record, we're not taking credit for Mr. Borges. He's Acorean. No, he's from Madeira. No, he's from the mainland. In any case, we - Cape Verdeans - accept no responsibility for one Ron Borges. That is all. Lance Armstrong. Not an athlete. Four Tour de France wins? Overcame testicular cancer? Ron, you there? Borges would call in sick if he had a hang nail.
Perhaps I got some bad information regarding Mr. Borges, as the full wrath of Danizinho would imply And since I fear I'd only further provoke that wrath by saying, "Cape Verde, Azores, Madeira -- what's the difference? It's all part of Spain, right?" (I'm ducking for cover as I type this), I shall refrain from making such a statement. Seriously, though, my bad. (Did I mention that I've taken to watching RTP Internacional in Lowell, despite not understanding a word of Portuguese? I just like the promo music.)
come on, i don't understand the language for the most part either....but you gotta love the puppet stuff. esp when they got the bosses from benfica, sporting, and oporto going.