oh canada
GOLD
Now that we have sports agents and invested companies picking "the ones" at middle school ages, I started to think whether any other sport is more subjective about choosing the "haves" and the "have nots", easily opening itself up to accusations of favoritism, bias and/or preference. At the top, (Ronaldo, et al) it is easy to judge the creme of the creme. But in the middle professionals and in the top-level youth leagues, soccer has the least, if any, objective criteria to judge talent.
Individual sports make it easy -- the fastest time, the best score, the winner in a head-to-head match -- all of these results simplify the ranking process in sports like tennis, golf, running, swimming, and even gymnastics and ice skating where certain moves are given points if accomplished (or fractions thereof).
Well, what about other team sports. Baseball has batting averages, strikes/balls, mph and many other statistics to judge. Football does too -- many metrics at the combine (40yrd dash, shuttle runs) and in games we have tackles, yards gained, interceptions, etc. Basketball is easy too because there is so much scoring--points, rebounds, assists etc.-- and most all defense is played 1v1. Even my beloved hockey can use goals scored, assists and the like because there's only 6 players on the ice and almost all are involved in both scoring and assisting. Even the enforcing defenders can be judged by how hard they hit the other players and take guys out of the game. Nothing easier to judge a winner and a loser than a boxing match on ice--who goes down first.
So what do we use to judge one soccer player from another? Ok, maybe the striker position can count goals, but with 1 or 2 in a game on average, that's not very many. And who's to say that Chicharito would have scored that ball when Harry Kane didn't? Passes completed is sometimes discussed but its such an inaccurate metric with so many variables. Soccer evaluation ends up sounding like, "oh yeah that player has some good skills; he's creative; makes good runs off the ball; she makes quick decisions; etc." It's impossible to compare really. Some may say, "oh, you just know." I don't buy it. I think with every player evaluation and comparison, soccer, more than any other sport, requires a decision based on intangibles. And why it can be frustrating for players competing for the same spot/team, and those that watch from afar.
If we are now at a point where sports agents and Nike are heavily influencing the choices of players that we watch on TV, I'm afraid we will be watching the continued decline of US mens and womens soccer, as players are chosen by their most important criteria...how many shoes they can sell.
Individual sports make it easy -- the fastest time, the best score, the winner in a head-to-head match -- all of these results simplify the ranking process in sports like tennis, golf, running, swimming, and even gymnastics and ice skating where certain moves are given points if accomplished (or fractions thereof).
Well, what about other team sports. Baseball has batting averages, strikes/balls, mph and many other statistics to judge. Football does too -- many metrics at the combine (40yrd dash, shuttle runs) and in games we have tackles, yards gained, interceptions, etc. Basketball is easy too because there is so much scoring--points, rebounds, assists etc.-- and most all defense is played 1v1. Even my beloved hockey can use goals scored, assists and the like because there's only 6 players on the ice and almost all are involved in both scoring and assisting. Even the enforcing defenders can be judged by how hard they hit the other players and take guys out of the game. Nothing easier to judge a winner and a loser than a boxing match on ice--who goes down first.
So what do we use to judge one soccer player from another? Ok, maybe the striker position can count goals, but with 1 or 2 in a game on average, that's not very many. And who's to say that Chicharito would have scored that ball when Harry Kane didn't? Passes completed is sometimes discussed but its such an inaccurate metric with so many variables. Soccer evaluation ends up sounding like, "oh yeah that player has some good skills; he's creative; makes good runs off the ball; she makes quick decisions; etc." It's impossible to compare really. Some may say, "oh, you just know." I don't buy it. I think with every player evaluation and comparison, soccer, more than any other sport, requires a decision based on intangibles. And why it can be frustrating for players competing for the same spot/team, and those that watch from afar.
If we are now at a point where sports agents and Nike are heavily influencing the choices of players that we watch on TV, I'm afraid we will be watching the continued decline of US mens and womens soccer, as players are chosen by their most important criteria...how many shoes they can sell.