We are #2 in the world in curling. Rugby we are ranked top 20, so about the same. I'll give you Nordic. I find it funny that 2 out of 3 of them are sports that are truly popular in half a dozen counties max
All I'm saying is it's clearly not ridiculous to question the claim made by ip that soccer will be relevant in this country in a generation.
lol. we get housed in curling every time we're in the olympics, if we're #2, their rankings are even dumber than FIFA
And then it goes on to say that he's so popular, even people in the USA show up to see him run. So by that same logic we can say swimming was popular in the USA because Michael Phelps was plastered all over the place?
Sports? There's only one sport with massive international appeal, and we certainly aren't dominating it.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1993-01-17/sports/9301040264_1_billy-olson-track-and-field-sport First sentence of article
Whoah, whoah, whoah, partner. Back the truck up. Beep! Beep! Beep! Did you mess up when you wrote the first sentence, do you not know what the word 'silly'means, or is something else going on entirely?
Which part? If you think the best athletes in the US are not going into basketball and football, trying thinking again, and maybe harder this time.
Absolutely. Athletic talent is conspicuous as can be. The best athlete in kindergarten will remain the best athlete for the entirety. It's just a question of what sport he chooses.
but the best athlete is not always the best suited for a given sport. Marvell Wynne could destroy Lionel Messi in almost every sport you could name. And in soccer, Wynne can't make his national team and Messi is dominant.
The reason A.A. participation in baseball is decreasing has nothing to do with it being "it's a rich boy sport". It's simply because they tend to like basketball better. I certainly can't blame them.