Off-Day Query: English Premier League

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 10:40 AM PDT Comment 56 comments

After the World Cup I got the hankering to watch some more quality soccer on a regular basis, so I spent a few weeks choosing an EPL team to support. I ended up choosing Reading primarily because of Seattle native Marcus Hahnemann.

I was curious if any of you follow the EPL or went through a similar process this summer. If so how did you end up choosing your team?

I actually found choosing one to be pretty tough. Being an M's/Seahawks/Sonics and a Senators fan pretty much turned me off of the big name teams (Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal). Granted I'm sure I'll be wishing I'd chosen a better team if Reading gets relegated (as a friend of mine that's a Liverpool supporter loves reminding me), but I'm pretty happy with finding the next best thing to a "home team" as a guy from Seattle can get over there.

Oh, are there any good places in the Seattle area to catch the games?

0 recs | Comment 56 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Don't really have an EPL team

I just got into following Euro soccer a while ago but started with La Liga in Spain and following FC Barcelona because I happened to be in Barcelona, lvoed it there and hated Madrid. To my (somewhat) chagrin, I happened to pick a huge bandwagon team. And my team in the Bundesliga, Bayern Muenchen, also happened to win their league. So, instead of jumping into the EPL, I need to do a Simmons style breakdown of the teams to avoid the equivalent of rooting for the Yankees in three different European countries.

by Matthew on Aug 3, 2006 10:51 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

To avoid the Yankees of the EPL

You're pretty much ok with anybody except for Chelsea and Manchester United.

I liked Simmons piece (it kept me from choosing Newcastle - the Raiders of the EPL *shudder*), but I was disappointed that he only listed the American equivalent for his top 6 teams (plus I don't really care about his Vacation Criteria).

I also found this blog pretty useful. You'll need to scroll down to his "2006/2007 English Premier League Way Too Early Preview" sections. I especially like his one sentence description of the teams' playing styles.

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've been an Arsenal fan

since 1987. It's a long, sordid story, but here I am. Short version - I went to England in 1987, went to a few matches, and when I came back I worked with an Irish guy who was a huge Arsenal fan who loaned me a bunch of videotapes of Arsenal games, and I was hooked.

Finding a team is hard. the American connection's not a bad place to start, but also to be considered is a team's style of play - some teams attack all the time (Arsenal, Man U), some teams defend far too much (Chelsea, Newcastle) and some don't have a freaking clue what they're doing from one day to the next (Tottenham, Liverpool).

The best, really the only serious, place to watch Premier League games (don't call it the EPL. Nobody calls it that. It's either the Premiership, the Premier League, or if you're a tool of the man, the Barclaycard English Premiership) is the George & Dragon, in Fremont. it's awesome, and they have plasma HD's all over the place. And good food. And good beer.

Don't listen to most Americans. Soccer is cool. It's totally addictive and a lot of fun to watch. Reading may be this year's Wigan, and stay up...good luck...

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 11:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and....

Bill Simmons is a tool.

The best thing you can do is to watch as many Premiership games as you can in the first few weeks of the season (which starts in two weeks...), and find a team that you like based on what you see. Go to Borders and buy a copy of FourFourTwo magazine to get some perspective and background on who the players are and what they do, and go from there.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not to dominate the whole thread...

...but here are some other MLB/Premiership equivalents. It's hard to do this for the sucky MLB teams, because the Premier League relegates its Kansas Citys and Tampa Bays every year, but here's a few:

Arsenal = Red Sox. Always second fiddle until the mid-90's.
Aston Villa = Pirates. they try, they really do, but ownership always gets in the way.
Chelsea = the 1997 Marlins, over and over again.
Fulham = Padres. Sure, they're decent enough, but who really cares?
Liverpool = Toronto. A good team, always blocked by the two bigger kids (Chelsea/Man Utd).
Man Utd = Yankees. Everybody who doesn't know anything about soccer's default team, just because they've heard the name.
Man City = Mets, without the winning season. The "other" team in the big city.
Newcastle = Cardinals. Decent, but can't get over the hump and haven't won since the 50's.
Tottenham = Brewers. One good season in 40 and everybody thinks "they've turned it around", when in fact that season was a fluke.
Wigan = 2006 Tigers. Newly promoted last year, tiny little club, finished higher than anyone would have expected.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry about it

I was actually afraid that noone would respond to the post at all!

Thanks for suggesting the George & Dragon. I'll definately have to stop by when I'm in town. I live down in LA right now, but I'll be up during the holidays and such. It looks like there'll be at least a few games to watch at that time (including December 26th against Chelsea!). I'll need to see if any of the big Derbys take place when I'm up there too.

As far as playing style goes, I definately prefer watching the attack heavy teams, and everything I've read says that Reading has a very offensive playing style. If nothing else they should be a lot of fun to watch. Of course who knows if that style will work in the Premiership. I guess I'll just have to wait and see.

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does anyone remember

... Tottenham when they had Juergen Klinsmann? That team was insane -- all-out attack and no one worrying about defense. Fun team to watch but not a great way to win games.

Pregnancy takes nine months, no matter how many women you put on the job.

by zagreusmd on Aug 4, 2006 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even as an Arsenal fan...

...I liked watching that team. Of course, that was probably because I knew they'd never amount to much, what with the no defending and all. But, they were still fun to watch.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

Even at the end of his career, with Ginola in the midfield, along with Darren Anderton before he was hurt all the time...

good times.

Of course, Tottenham had a slight repeat of this philosophy a few years back when they'd win/lose games 4-3 or something... just before Ledley King established himself. Sadly, and it had nothing to do with him, this time coincided with Kasey Keller's spurs career. By all accounts he was doing yeoman's work, but there's only so much you can do with 15 open/breakaway shots per half raining down on you.

by marc w on Aug 4, 2006 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tottenham!

Don't listen to pdb.

Been a fan since '97.

And don't worry too much if Reading gets relegated. There's a beauty in supporting a lost cause, as I tell myself every year when my other team, Preston North End, fall just short.... and hey, a few of the newly promoted sides have done pretty well, like Wigan and West Ham last year, and Charlton Ath. a few years ago.

In seattle, the best place to catch the games is the George and Dragon in Fremont. I'm hoping Doyle's (nice name, eh?) in Tacoma will start showing some games too, but if you're in for atmosphere, you really need to check out the G and D. Come on an Arsenal/Tottenham derby day...

by marc w on Aug 3, 2006 11:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Pretty much any derby...

...is worth watching, at least at the George, just for the people that are there to watch as well. (and it's pronounced "darby", just so's you know)

Arsenal/Spurs derbies are finally fun again - there was a couple years there where Arsenal were more concerned with losing 6-2 to Man Utd than with playing hard in the North London derby, but in the last couple years that's changed back and now I look forward to those two games more than almost any other on the calendar. Good times.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Has the George improved their food?

I used to do pub quiz with some friends there, but we stopped going because we were sick of getting things like fish'n'chips, only to get a plate full of soggy fries that were half burnt, half frozen in the middle. So I haven't been back since.

I admit though -- when there was a soccer game on the television before pub quiz, it was impossible to get a seat there. The crowds were really, really good for it.

Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Aug 3, 2006 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

How long ago did you go? It seems they overhauled things a bit a few years back. Still the same owners: one an Arsenal fan, the other supporting Hereford United.

That pub quiz is still damn fun, though I obviously don't make it more than a couple times owing to the drive.

Deanna brings up a good point though...if you're there to watch a match, get there early. Seriously.

by marc w on Aug 3, 2006 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmm...

probably the last time we went was sometime in 2004, and the food still sucked. We went a LOT in 2003 during the summer.

Yeah, I miss pub quiz.

Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Aug 3, 2006 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Best moment of 2006

winning the pub quiz at the G and D and then seeing Arab Strap at Neumos, buying merch with tons of crumpled up ones and fives.

by marc w on Aug 4, 2006 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have a soft spot for Norwich City

for unknown reasons, even though they're essentially the AAAA player of the EPL: too good for Division I (or whatever they call it now), not good enough for EPL.

DUDE YOUR WIFE IS A STONE COLD FOXXX with three exes to suggest TEH PORNOOOO!

by Gomez on Aug 3, 2006 11:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Up the canaries!

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another Arsenal fan

Simply put the similarities with me and Bill Simmons were pretty interesting. I chose a team because one of my friends was a big Man United supporter and I couldn't be one with. So I had to pick their biggest rival at the time...Arsenal! Since then I can't get enough of the team. Its replaced all my favorite sports except one, baseball.

I don't get to see a ton of Arsenal matches though, I have the Fox Soccer Channel package but that channel is great for an overall Premiership experience.

Arsenal are a great team to watch on the field as said they are very offensive but can be defensive when need be. They also compete for the title with much less transfer money than the teams that finish below them, ahem...Spurs. Thierry Henry is the best forward in the world and is just a thrill to watch.

I am so disappointed in Bill Simmons, he'll end up hating his decision. You're right he is a tool.

by Scrupio on Aug 3, 2006 1:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm not proud to say it

...but the last couple of years I've been pulling for Chelsea. Not because they're such a sympathetic team, but because the previous year I had developed such a fiery hot hatred of Manchester United that I automatically liked any team that could make Fergie blow a gasket.

In general I've found it tough to develop any real affection for one side or the other in that league. The basic problem is that only three or four teams have a chance to win the league title -- Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal, and maybe Liverpool -- and none of those teams are all that cuddly, since in every case their dominance is based on a higher payroll than the other teams can manage. So you're left with the option of rooting for a team that has an unfair advantage over the other teams, or rooting for one of the disadvantaged and knowing that they're going to lose. If they had a big playoff at the end of the season, like American teams do, there would be a chance of a Cinderella season for some small-market team, but the way the league is currently structured it's always one of the big boys that wins, and that's just not much fun.

Pregnancy takes nine months, no matter how many women you put on the job.

by zagreusmd on Aug 3, 2006 2:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and the #1 thing I like about European soccer

...is relegation. It's a fantastic concept -- at the end of the season there's as much drama at the bottom of the standings as there is at the top. Pick an American professional league -- baseball, football, basketball, hockey -- and it would be better if there was a relegation system. Imagine the Royals and Pirates struggling mightily for wins at season's end, hoping to avoid the ignominy of the entire team being sent to the minors for a season. Imagine what it must be like in Italy right now, when three of the biggest clubs have been relegated as part of a match-fixing scandal; it would be as if the Yankees were sent to AAA for one of Steinbrenner's indiscretions. Relegation would instantly make baseball more entertaining in a number of ways.

Pregnancy takes nine months, no matter how many women you put on the job.

by zagreusmd on Aug 3, 2006 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sadly

Only Juventus ended up being relegated, while the other three teams involved received point deductions that were reduced even further on an appeal. The entire system in Italy is incredibly corrupt, and that doesn't look like it's going to change anytime soon.

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

Pro sports in America would be so much cooler with a second tier of leagues, rather than just random minor leagues, where you could relegate the worst teams of each league should they fail to compete.

Send the Royals to the International League and call up, say, Round Rock, and let's see if THEY can hang in the AL Central. Or in football we'd never have to watch the Arizona Cardinals suck year after year, because they'd get relegated to the 2nd division and someone else would get their shot. And so on.

DUDE YOUR WIFE IS A STONE COLD FOXXX with three exes to suggest TEH PORNOOOO!

by Gomez on Aug 3, 2006 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

While I think relegation/promotion is cool in this context (giving more people an interest in late season games, for instance), the problem is that it tends to exacerbate the divide between the big money teams and the also-rans. Of course, you get a decent sized blob of teams in the middle who are a bit big to be relegated, but not big enough to win (Aston Villa, Bolton), but the gap in funding is so big, teams that go down have to sell off players. That means you can't really rebuild, and it's too tough to hold on to players you've developed through the youth system. You can invest all you like in kids who don't make as much as fancypants transfers, but Chelsea'll just swoop in and buy them. Yes, there are willing sellers in this model, but they're willing because their wage bill is suddenly unsustainable if they go down for a year.

I like watching that system, but I think the existing system works OK for baseball, wherein Detroit/Cleveland can knowingly go into a rebuild without fear that their revenues will be gutted after they have a bad year. KC is the problematic case here, but there are 3 problematic cases per year in the EPL.

by marc w on Aug 3, 2006 5:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

A real strength

of relegation/promotion is that any team has a chance of making a country's top league: all you have to do is be registered with the national association and go win some games. In England, you could start a team tomorrow and in theory be just 7 (IIRC) years away from the Premier League. OK, so most teams will never even come close but fans can always chase that dream with their team.

Out of interest, is this a similar reason as to why college sports are so popular in the US? America may be a massive country but MLB (for example) has just 30 franchises which rarely move around, meaning that less than 30 cities possess teams with a shot at becoming national champions. My supposition would be that as almost everywhere has a college, NCAA gives folk a proper chance to support a local team that has a chance of becoming national champions. Is this correct? I'm guessing here as college sport (as you know it) is non-existent in Europe and to be honest I still find the whole "sports factory" system a bit bizarre.

by Alex B on Aug 4, 2006 1:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

America may be massive in size

but we are really tiny in terms of population. There's not many metro areas that can support national league teams

by Matthew on Aug 4, 2006 5:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Many English teams have very small followings

As in playing on tattered fields with bleachers that seat 500 people, even in the 3rd division, conference play and on down. Many of those teams will never see 2nd division (oh, they call it 1st division now. Whatever) play, let alone EPL.

Under a similar system, you could (theoretically, I know) field dozens of teams in smaller mid-size cities in America. Now, will any of those teams be competitive? Not very likely. Maybe there's one who pulls a Green Bay Packers, rises through and has such incredible civic support that they can hang with the big boys year in and year out, but more likely you'll have teams scrapping in the lower divisions.

At least, in a tiered state, there is at least the idea that you could play your way to a higher level, rather than being forever doomed to the minors. That's probably why minor leagues in all sports not named baseball struggle to survive in the US.

DUDE YOUR WIFE IS A STONE COLD FOXXX with three exes to suggest TEH PORNOOOO!

by Gomez on Aug 4, 2006 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe in baseball

You couldn't do in in American football. It's just simply too dangerous for lesser athletes to take on NFL-caliber athletes. The same reason they had to drop the NFL vs. college all-stars exhibition.

When Man U plays Podunk Town F.C. in the FA cup, you get an entertaining spectacle of scrappy little guys trying not to get blown out. If the Steelers play some collection of glorified amateurs, you're looking at death and dismemberment.

by Billy Everyteen on Aug 4, 2006 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not so sure.

In most cases, those "scrappy amateurs" you're imagining would still be professional athletes, they just wouldn't be rich and famous like the guys in the NFL. As a better comparison, imagine if the Steelers found themselves playing a team from the Arena League. Sure, they'd win 19 times out of twenty, but the Arena guys would still know how to take a hit.

Pregnancy takes nine months, no matter how many women you put on the job.

by zagreusmd on Aug 4, 2006 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, and yes.

I love the Wigan story from last year -- that a team most people (including me) didn't know existed could rise into the Premiership and actually succeed there. There's always an enjoyable Schadenfreude aspect to relegation -- I smile in amusement every time I'm reminded that Leeds still hasn't made it back -- but just as great is the possibility that a small team that manages to combine enough luck and talent could actually find themselves playing on the biggest stage in the world. It's the American dream, just with different accents.

I also think you're onto something with the college sports point. That right now is my biggest problem getting behind MLS. I don't need them to be playing world-class soccer; after all, even Little League baseball is fun to watch if you have someone to root for. When I lived in Chicago I followed the Fire, but since moving here there's no team I identify with and so I've slowly lost interest in the league. Unless Seattle (or possibly Portland) gets a team, I can't see going back.

Pregnancy takes nine months, no matter how many women you put on the job.

by zagreusmd on Aug 4, 2006 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It is tough

and it sucked as a fan of european football and the Sounders that when Seattle won an actual championship, they still couldn't gain entry into MLS. Not the biggest deal in the world, but there you go.

The real reason promotion/relegation won't be instituted here, ESPECIALLY in soccer, is that the league ownership is still really trying to grow interest in the game. They believe, and I think they may be right, that having a team get relegated would utterly and totally destroy its following/tv rights, etc. In England, where these teams grew organically over the period of 100 years+, it's not as big a deal. The sport is clearly #1, and even if a team goes down, the locals don't ditch 'em and support someone new. Here, if, say, the Fire got relegated, a lot of people would start checking out the Blackhawks again, or women's basketball, or something else.

by marc w on Aug 4, 2006 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's...

...Plucky Little Wigan. I really hoped they'd get a European place but they just couldn't quite hold on, but still, I hope they do it again this year.

Leeds can rot in the Third Division forever as far as I'm concerned. David O'Leary made that team one of the dirtiest in football, all they wanted to do was kick the crap out of other teams.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Last year...

...when Chelsea were playing Man U in November, I was actively rooting for Man U. When United scored, I jumped up and was celebrating as if it were Arsenal winning. My fiancee chose that moment to walk into the living room, saw me celebrating a Man United goal, looked at me, and said "have you lost your freaking MIND? Look who you're cheering for!"

She had a point, but I didn't care - my dislike of ManUre is only eclipsed by my hatred of Chelsea. At least United's glory years were (how nice is it that that's a past tense sentence now?) powered by homegrown players (Beckham, Giggs, the Nevilles, etc) with the occasional purchase, rather than doing it the Chelsea way...

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Homegrown Players?

G'day,

Longtime reader of the site but had to create an account just to defend my beloved Blues.

Before anything I'd like to clear my name as a bandwagoner because even though I'm an Aussie, I've been supporting Chelsea for as long as I can remember (Zola's heyday) and my Dad was supporting them long before that.

To start with, John Terry came through the Chelsea system the whole way, and Lampard and Cole have developed into world-class players while at Chelsea, they were nothing special beforehand (Cole was nothing but hype, only started to realise his potential in the world cup).

Now, number of decent English players in the Arsenal Squad: 1, Ashley Cole. (I can't think of any more but I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong)

Decent English players in Chelsea: 4, Terry, Lampard, Cole, Wright-Phillips.

At times I hate it when Chelsea pay ridiculus amounts of money for not-even-that-good players and I feel bad telling people I'm a supporter, and I agree that Arsenal spend less for players that have potential and wait for them to become stars, but how many have they truely developed themselves? Once again I can only think of Cole. Cole V Terry, fair match.

And I hate United, They spent more money than anyone else during they're heyday as well, so I think it's pretty much a wash between Man U then and Chelsea now.

It's just all the big teams spend like Real Madrid now days except Chelsea (and Real) spend more.

Sorry if I sounded argumentative, but its hard to be a Chelsea supporter, after all the years of not getting over the hump, we are finally one of the best teams in the world and yet at times I'd rather be back with Zola and Desially and Wise. And even Bates :-).

Ah what am I saying, Chelsea for 4 cups this year!

by Tilt on Aug 3, 2006 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't get me wrong...

...I'm under no illusions. Arsenal are pretty much about to lose their only homegrown player (you're correct, Ashley is it, pretty much) to Chelsea (and good riddance as well....), so I don't think that no team but Chelsea buys players.

I just think Chelsea crossed that line between buying to fill a need and buying to spite other teams, just because they have the money - did they NEED to buy Ballack? Weren't Cole, Lampard, Essien, Makelele, Robben, Mikel, and Wright-Phillips enough for one midfield?

They have a reserve team that could finish in the top 8 of the Premiership. That's not right.

Of course, I'm probaby just jealous, but once those Emirates Stadium extra seat dollars start rollin' in, Arsenal will probably do the same thing. :-)

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Totally agree with that point of view.

Chelsea (Abramovich) have definately gone too far, spending millions on players that don't even get a run.

I'd be quite happy having 11 stars (Well, not all individual guns, but 11 highly paid players that fit the team structure) and then reseves that should be reserves. Not having two world class players, that suit the Premier League, at every position like Chelsea (Mourinho) want to have. That means at least 5 world class players arn't even in the squad each week. It's ridiculus, I definately agree.

Hopefully when they see that Ballack will be a regular player they'll get rid of someone, but looking at your list (Mikel not included, he's only 18, development player) I can't see who I'd want to sell. Maybe one of Essien/Makelele, but as I said Mourinho would want two defensive midfielders (Essien/Makelele), two left wingers (Robben/Cole), two right wingers (Wright-Phillips/Geremi) and two central/attacking midfielders (Lampard/Ballack) so I don't see them selling anybody.

I don't think they really needed to buy Ballack but I'm definately not going to complain about it. (Until he sucks in the Premier League and they sell him off for half the price).

by Tilt on Aug 3, 2006 9:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sell SWP

To Arsenal. :-) He's a great player and he killed his international career by moving to Chelsea.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 7:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Homegrown Players?

I've never really understood why people are so stuck on having English players on the teams. I mean maybe thats just because I'm an American because I couldn't care less if there weren't any Americans on the Mariners. I'd rather get more player for the money than overpay for English players. My team Arsenal doesn't have 18.6 mil pounds to pay for a player like Michael Carrick or 21 mil pounds for Shaun Wright-Phillips who didn't even make the National team. Arsenal had to overpay for Theo Walcott and he was only 16 at the time. The best English players just aren't worth it when you can pay the same amount for someone better. I'd much rather put my faith in Arsene Wenger's ability to scout young players and bring them up into the squad.

by Scrupio on Aug 3, 2006 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Homegrown players...

...are important because the English national team (the one that plays in the World Cup) is drawn from English players who play at the top level - there are English players that play for other countries' leagues (Beckham, Hargreaves, etc) but by and large English national team players play for English clubs.

The preponderance of foreign players at top clubs mean that English players aren't getting the chance to develop into top talent, which ultimately hurts the national team because it makes them makes them play the likes of Peter Crouch up front.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 7:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We'll just clone 3 Shearers

And then it'll all be ok.

by Graham on Aug 3, 2006 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Until they all

shatter their knees.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Arsene Wenger

...is unparallelled when it comes to developing cheap young talent into stars. Petit, Overmars, Anelka, Henry, they all became stars under Wenger.

The man's a genius.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 3, 2006 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Slightly Disagree..

"By the time of the 1994 World Cup, Overmars was a regular in the Dutch national team.

Marc Overmars became famous with Ajax under Louis van Gaal. He was the member of the Ajax team that won the European Cup in 1995 against A.C. Milan of Italy." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Overmars)

Agree he can seriously develop some talent though (Mostly French :-) )

by Tilt on Aug 3, 2006 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

True enough.

I think the most impressive thing about Wenger, though, is that I can't really name a single player that's left Arsenal in the Wenger years that has become a better player after leaving Arsenal.

Vieira has a chance to be the exception to that rule, I'm not quite sure how his year was in Italy last year but against Arsenal in the Champions League he looked like a chump.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How about Upson and Pennant ;-)

seeing as they actually get a bit of match practice these days, hehe

by Alex B on Aug 4, 2006 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Upson and Pennant...

...for better or worse, never got a run in the first team at Arsenal, so I didn't count them in my Wenger reckoning. but Upson hasn't amounted to much up to now, so I think that's still a net win for Arsenal...

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's what makes the FA cup so much fun

Even the small teams have a chance of winning. Look at West Ham last year.

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well maybe I should say "smaller"

Any team in London really isn't that small.

by ningwers on Aug 3, 2006 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Magpies, yes, and Canaries

Look, rooting for Newcastle is hard, soul-searing stuff, but that's what makes it appropriate for Mariner fans. This year things look pretty good, except that NONE of our strikers is healthy. Something like that happens EVERY year. Some of our very best players are NEVER healthy. But somethimes we have a stretch like the Mariners had in June. Go figure.

The Canaries are REALLY fun to follow. I saw them in 1968 and instantly became a fan -- the crowd hurled so much abuse at them, which, really, was coming from a very warm place. Or maybe not. An appreciation for ineptitude goes with this this territory, and again, Mariner watchers have a leg up: We are keen observers of human frailty.

rightly, in every age it is assumed we are witnessing the disappearance of the last traces of paradise... Cioran

by toonprivate on Aug 3, 2006 2:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I Heart Fulham

They seem to have a tortured mediocrity/invisibility that fans of Seattle sports should know well.

Plus McBride is the man, and if they sign Gooch, it's going to be fun watching another middle of the pack year.

Fulhamusa.com is a cool site, too.

by molemantis on Aug 3, 2006 6:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The Blues

Why? Because Gianfranco Zola is the God of Awesome Footballing.

by Graham on Aug 3, 2006 7:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ditto

Too True

by Tilt on Aug 3, 2006 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hammers

Nice thread. I have supported West Ham since visiting England in 1995. I saw two matches at Upton Park and became addicted. I also saw matches at Highbury, White Hart Lane and Vicarage Road. West Ham, however, stuck as my team. Hammers are also a good at developing English players. Carrick, Defoe, Lampard, Glenn Johnson and Rio Ferdinand all came through the West Ham system. They were fun to watch last year. If you are looking for an American angle, they signed Jonathan Spector from Man U. He had been on loan to Charlton and should play a prominent role on the US national team in the upcoming years.

by Tek Jansen on Aug 3, 2006 8:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Someone has to say it . . .

My name is Matt, and I'm a Man U fan.

My company has an office in Manchester, and on a couple of occasions I have traveled across the pond to help out with big projects. I couldn't help but get caught up in it - one of my coworkers explained the whole EPL promotion/relegation system, and I was immediately hooked.

It's more than a little disturbing to be rooting for a team that can even loosely be compared to the Yankees, but that's my story.

by Envirohawk on Aug 3, 2006 10:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

There There..

With so many Man U supporters in the world, there had to be at least one reader of this blog that was. I think it was a really impressive act to admit it and submit to the ridicule of your peers :-)

At least you have a reason to support them, unlike the horde of faceless supporters who only know a couple of teams and never watch games.. Thats the sterotypical Man U supporter, in other countries, in my eyes.

by Tilt on Aug 3, 2006 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

same with arsenal

"At least you have a reason to support them, unlike the horde of faceless supporters who only know a couple of teams and never watch games.. Thats the sterotypical Man U supporter, in other countries, in my eyes."

In my mind, thanks to Arsenal's success in the late 90s-early 00s, you've seen the same phenomenon. It's like the people who think they're so cool, because they don't support the Yankees, they support Boston. Wow, way to really go for the little guy there. Couple that in with the success of the book 'Fever Pitch' and you've had a whole generation of people who's attachment to the club has come from a novel or Henry's Nike commercials.
Not accusing anyone in this thread (pdb, et al) of that, but you all know what I'm talking about.

by marc w on Aug 4, 2006 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most every sport...

...has teams like Man U, Arsenal, and Chelsea. I'm not foolish enough to think that Arsenal are an "underdog" - they're one of the big boys, and will only be getting bigger now they've got a good sized stadium to extract cash from.

I just hope that as the years go by, Arsenal continue to operate in the second tier of the big boys - good enough to challenge for titles, but not so good or so profligate that they're held up as an example for what's wrong with modern sport.

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Aug 4, 2006 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs