144 replies to this topic

[TheFalcon]

Mysterio, on 02 February 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

You sure Riverdale is a relevant team to Ada? Because I was aware that anyone who loses to Ada just basically sucks according to what you said. So wouldn't you think Riverdale does then?

It doesn't matter how Ada scored their goal and I don't care if Riverdale had 3 penalty kicks and missed them all. A loss is a loss no matter how many opportunities you had. That doesn't change anything. It's so easy to say that a game could easily have been worse in ones favor. I don't listen to the talking before or after the game, it's what you do on the field that defies you. If you don't get the job done on the field, you won't get it done off the field. Just saying you calling out P-G on that and I'll say Riverdale deserves to be in that conversation then since they lost to Ada too just based on your point. I'm not saying Riverdale should cut their program, but if we are going accordance to your point then why not.

I'm just going to say it again, there is no need to cut a program because of a certain loss to another team. Thats all there needs to be said about this anymore.

Alright. Well played.

[Hagen]

TheFalcon, on 01 February 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

P-G lost to Ada this year. I think that anyone who lost to Ada last year (with the exception of Riverdale) should cut the program. I mean seriously! If you suck so bad as to lose to Ada...

Wasn't Ada beating Ottoville with 10 min to go this year? If Ottoville had lost that game, should they have had to cut their program? Man U lost to Crystal Palace this year, let's get rid of them too because that must mean they suck.
In the words of Abraham Lincoln, "Sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

[caldwell]

Imagine that, kids are choosing Football over soccer!!

[dkusma96]

Hagen, on 07 February 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Man U lost to Crystal Palace this year, let's get rid of them too because that must mean they suck.

The Red Devils essentially played their B side in that Carling Cup fixture, so it's not exactly a good example. Perhaps United's loss to Rovers is a better fit?

[Venom]

Hagen, on 07 February 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Wasn't Ada beating Ottoville with 10 min to go this year? If Ottoville had lost that game, should they have had to cut their program? Man U lost to Crystal Palace this year, let's get rid of them too because that must mean they suck.
In the words of Abraham Lincoln, "Sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

Nope sorry Hagen Ada was never beating Ottoville. It was 0-0 at one time and then Ottoville ended up winning 1 or 2 to 0. They never scored so maybe you are confusing them with another team?

[Mysterio]

Hagen, on 07 February 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Wasn't Ada beating Ottoville with 10 min to go this year? If Ottoville had lost that game, should they have had to cut their program? Man U lost to Crystal Palace this year, let's get rid of them too because that must mean they suck.
In the words of Abraham Lincoln, "Sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

Disregard Falcons comment. Just because a team loses to a bad team doesn't mean they should cut their program no matter how bad the team is. What you and Falcon said has nothing to do with P-G and why people think they should cut their program.

Edited by Mysterio, 07 February 2012 - 06:42 PM.

[TheFalcon]

I retract my statements of cutting PG just because they lost to Ada. Having said that:

Venom, on 07 February 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

Nope sorry Hagen Ada was never beating Ottoville. It was 0-0 at one time and then Ottoville ended up winning 1 or 2 to 0. They never scored so maybe you are confusing them with another team?

Ada did score. Ottoville won 2-1 with a goal to put them on top with 10 minutes left

caldwell, on 07 February 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

Imagine that, kids are choosing Football over soccer!!

Ive been noticing your posts in soccer, I kind of feel you know nothing about the game. Consider this, even though American "football" is played here in the US, the entire world plays soccer. Last I checked, the world is a little bigger than the US. American Football is a wimpy offspring of rugby. Soccer requires more athleticism, due to the fact they play longer consistently, and hit just as hard without the pads.

[dkusma96]

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Last I checked, the world is a little bigger than the US. American Football is a wimpy offspring of rugby. Soccer requires more athleticism, due to the fact they play longer consistently, and hit just as hard without the pads.

Check again unless you are trying to say that that world the population of 6.8 billion is "a little bigger" than the US population of 307 million.

As for hitting, you're delusional if you think soccer players hit as hard as football players.

[TheFalcon]

dkusma96, on 07 February 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Check again unless you are trying to say that that world the population of 6.8 billion is "a little bigger" than the US population of 307 million.

As for hitting, you're delusional if you think soccer players hit as hard as football players.

My saying "a little" was sarcastic. And, if the guys didnt flop, soccer would hit just as hard. Ive knocked a couple kids on their butts and it doesnt require pads to do so. Football is fun to play, boring to watch.

[dkusma96]

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

And, if the guys didnt flop, soccer would hit just as hard. Ive knocked a couple kids on their butts and it doesnt require pads to do so.

Oooh, a self proclaimed tough guy. Flopping has nothing to do with hitting, and if flopping were abolished soccer would still not be nearly as violent as football. Knocking someone down is not hitting.

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

Football is fun to play, boring to watch.

Your opinion.

[Mysterio]

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

My saying "a little" was sarcastic. And, if the guys didnt flop, soccer would hit just as hard. Ive knocked a couple kids on their butts and it doesnt require pads to do so. Football is fun to play, boring to watch.

Tell that to the millions of people that watch the sport. Football is American, America is football. Without it what would this country do? I always thought soccer is the future but it will never surpass football in my opinion. Honestly, I'm more into soccer than football but I enjoy watching it and even playing the sport. Flopping is part of soccer but also in other sports. Basketball you have people who flop to draw a foul, and football players will flop to draw a penalty.

[Hagen]

Venom, on 07 February 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

Nope sorry Hagen Ada was never beating Ottoville. It was 0-0 at one time and then Ottoville ended up winning 1 or 2 to 0. They never scored so maybe you are confusing them with another team?

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Ada did score. Ottoville won 2-1 with a goal to put them on top with 10 minutes left

Venom, thank you for removing all doubt and proving Mr. Lincoln correct.

[Venom]

Hagen, on 09 February 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

Venom, thank you for removing all doubt and proving Mr. Lincoln correct.

Just exactly what doubt is there? And what proves Mr Lincoln correct? Your whole Lincoln quote kinda sounds like it should lean more towards what you said. The way I see it, your own argument is messed up because the whole thing that started this was Falcon saying anyone who loses to Ada should cut their program. Ottoville didn't lose to Ada sorry bout your luck. Maybe if they did you might have an argument, but since they didn't you bring it up as if you have a grudge against them. Then you go into professional soccer which is a completely different competitive stage than high school soccer. Sorry Man U. didn't play Ada this season. Sorry to act harsh toward your comment but I'm just not following you.

Edited by Venom, 09 February 2012 - 11:09 AM.

[Mysterio]

TheFalcon, on 07 February 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

I retract my statements of cutting PG just because they lost to Ada. Having said that:

Falcon was taken his statement back so everything is ok now, glad we got this solved.

[NW Ohio Guy]

caldwell, on 07 February 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

Imagine that, kids are choosing Football over soccer!!

No just, the man who helped pay for L-B's football stadium and his friends on the school board, with the help of current football coach/former AD & AD/ex-football coach. PG's soccer and football teams numbers have been pretty close, besides this year... thanks to their coach.

Edited by NW Ohio Guy, 10 February 2012 - 10:11 PM.

[Hagen]

Venom, on 09 February 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

Just exactly what doubt is there? And what proves Mr Lincoln correct? Your whole Lincoln quote kinda sounds like it should lean more towards what you said. The way I see it, your own argument is messed up because the whole thing that started this was Falcon saying anyone who loses to Ada should cut their program. Ottoville didn't lose to Ada sorry bout your luck. Maybe if they did you might have an argument, but since they didn't you bring it up as if you have a grudge against them. Then you go into professional soccer which is a completely different competitive stage than high school soccer. Sorry Man U. didn't play Ada this season. Sorry to act harsh toward your comment but I'm just not following you.

Lincoln reference: "get your facts straight before you open your mouth so quickly and prove your ignorance" is basically what it means. If it's too deep, I'll quit referring to notable individuals. Also, my luck was not tainted by the game, just pointing out the team that was already being discussed.
In regards to the EPL reference, we should all know England has various levels of leagues. So in other words, should Man U have been demoted because of 1 game? No. We all know one game doesn't make/break a team usually. I use various references as a point of explanation rather than only using one argument (ie: not everyone may have seen Ada this year, but pretty sure people can access Man U if they so chose). Just another perspective.
If my arguments are too proper for your "is messed up" language —which seems to be working very well by the way. Well done — just say so if you want me to dumb it down a bit. So in your language: #sorryforhavinganeducation

Edited by Hagen, 13 February 2012 - 12:32 PM.

[Common Sense]

Mysterio, on 01 February 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

It's just tough for a school like P-G to have football and soccer. Which are two of the main sports in the fall season. I'm not exactly sure what other sports P-G has during the fall, but to have both football and soccer is tough to do. I wouldn't end a program because they lose year in and year out. Nobody ever does that. Some smaller schools are just having a hard time to fill the numbers for both sports. You can basically relate this to Crestview. Had a soccer team which had a few decent years like P-G but just had hard times competing and getting the numbers due to the simple fact of competing with football and being a smaller town.

I think you have to stand back and look at two things, particpants and gate receipts. This is the problem at the school level when you add a sport. Sure, you may have a year or two where there is passion in starting a program, but what happens when those kids graduate? PG had a co-ed team this year just so they could have enough kids to play. Good for them, but is that really what you want? I saw their scores, they got pounded almost every game. On top of that, what kinds of crowds did they have for games? Did they cover the costs of the officials/ soccer balls/ other equipment/ coache's salary? Largely, people still go to football games, even when the local team is bad. Like it or not, people in this part of Ohio like football.

[Venom]

Hagen...

First off the only reason why you said that quote was because I incorrectly said the score was 2-0 instead of 2-1. I apologize I was wrong Ada did score a goal. So with that said, my facts are still correct. Ada still did not win, therefore what meaning does your argument have? The whole point was to say that whoever lost to Ada should cut their program. It wasn't about who Ada was beating at the time or if they were tied with someone at one point in the game. This was about Falcon saying anyone who loses to Ada, which let me add I'm sure he was just being sarcastic and now this got out of hand. You're telling me to get my facts straight before I open my mouth? Maybe you should get the argument right before you open your mouth. I'll maybe give you that you made a point on the EPL. But don't kid yourself though ok, I'm no idiot I know the different leagues overseas and we all speak the same language on here so don't worry. I understand you are pointing out the team discussed but at least make a better example than a team that actually did beat Ada.

Edited by Venom, 13 February 2012 - 03:58 PM.

[OSH]

Common Sense, on 13 February 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

I think you have to stand back and look at two things, particpants and gate receipts. This is the problem at the school level when you add a sport. Sure, you may have a year or two where there is passion in starting a program, but what happens when those kids graduate? PG had a co-ed team this year just so they could have enough kids to play. Good for them, but is that really what you want? I saw their scores, they got pounded almost every game. On top of that, what kinds of crowds did they have for games? Did they cover the costs of the officials/ soccer balls/ other equipment/ coache's salary? Largely, people still go to football games, even when the local team is bad. Like it or not, people in this part of Ohio like football.

I think most people get that. I would also venture to say that most people aren't trying to get rid of football.

As much as people point to "gate receipts," football isn't a cheap sport to fund. But...going along with funding athletics...districts spend 5% of their total budget on athletics. That's a drop in the bucket. To fund a high school soccer program, it is done on $5,500 in some parts of Ohio. That is absolutely NOTHING. That includes referee costs, travel costs, equipment costs, and coaches' pay. There is absolutely no reason why a district should cut any sport because of "budget issues." If that is the case, what are they doing with the other 95% of the district budget? That's where things should be looked at.

[Mysterio]

Common Sense, on 13 February 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

I think you have to stand back and look at two things, particpants and gate receipts. This is the problem at the school level when you add a sport. Sure, you may have a year or two where there is passion in starting a program, but what happens when those kids graduate? PG had a co-ed team this year just so they could have enough kids to play. Good for them, but is that really what you want? I saw their scores, they got pounded almost every game. On top of that, what kinds of crowds did they have for games? Did they cover the costs of the officials/ soccer balls/ other equipment/ coache's salary? Largely, people still go to football games, even when the local team is bad. Like it or not, people in this part of Ohio like football.

Well thats a good point. And I believe gate receipts are very important because its definitely how most sports make their money. But what about baseball? Do they even make any money? Do they even charge admission to the games? I'm not real sure thats why I'm asking. I never said anything about people not looking football or people liking soccer more. I know football is a popular sport but soccer is growing, slowly. Equipment and soccer balls are something you dont have to pay for every year. Some schools that equipment can last a long time and the soccer balls maybe every 3 years. Some schools get a big enough crowd to cover the expenses while very few may not.

But lets think about this for a minute. Football games are more conveniant for most people to go to why? Because they only play on friday nights (sometimes saturdays). So therefore people that work late will be able to go. Soccer games fall mostly on weekdays sometimes starting at 5 or 7. And some cant go because of work. But I also think some people just don't like watching soccer because they were raised as a football fan and soccer has not been around in the states for very long. Some on the other hand have drawn accustomed to it.