WSOTP pod: how many concussion symptoms am i showing?

WSOTP Podcast - How many concussion symptoms am i showing?

Though international breaks normally provide less action for us to orate about on our weekly #Pondcast, this last week of “break” was anything but. Off the pitch — but not by much — the guys touch on how the atrocity in Paris will have an impact on the professional game. Too, we also welcomed back FanDuel managing editor and sports injury specialist Will Carroll (@injuryexpert) to discuss recent US Soccer legislation aimed at reducing youth head injuries. On the pitch matters were discussed as well, with the USMNT’s return to World Cup qualifying, the NASL’s entertaining Soccer Bowl and European qualifying all in the mix.

For the first time in ages, we were blanked on the question front this week. So next week, we expect loads of questions and topic suggestions from you listeners! Got it? Good. So make sure to hit us up via the social media links at the bottom of the page, or drop an email to to send them along. And don’t forget to subscribe using the links below to automatically receive the newest podcast episode each Tuesday.

WSOTP Podcast on iTunes WSOTP Podcast on Stitcher WSOTP Podcast RSS Feed

an open letter to u.s. soccer

WSOTP - Blog - US in St Louis

Board of Governors
U.S. Soccer Federation
1801 South Prairie Avenue
Chicago, IL 60616

Greetings and good afternoon:

Running American soccer — at least I’d assume, seeing as how I have no experience in doing so — is an incredibly hard task. It’s probably a pretty thankless task at times as well. Few probably reward you for the countless hours you’ve put in, and the only feedback you receive is when people are angry or aggrieved.

I’d imagine that’s particularly true these days, considering the growing laundry list of complaints that the growing American soccer audience has for you. Opening up the pyramid, promotion and relegation, the banning of headers in the youth game, and claims of sticking with incompetent national team manager are all hot button topics in US soccer, and I’m sure there are countless others. Dealing with all of that can’t be easy, and coming up with solutions for those complains is likely even harder. In short, I respect — and even mostly approve — the work all of you do.

But not all of it.

You see tonight, the men’s national team kicks off qualification for the 2018 World Cup against St. Vincent & the Grenadines. They Caribbean minnows are ranked 129th in the world according to FIFA, pretty lowly when compared to our (admittedly disappointing) ranking of 33rd. And their record in international play isn’t exactly sterling either, so saying I’m worried about the USMNT losing to them isn’t really a concern.

So what’s my problem? In two words: the field.

Without a doubt, St. Louis is a hotbed of American soccer. Both historically and in present day. And even if it wasn’t, a city and population of its size is absolutely deserving of hosting a national team World Cup qualifier.

But — and let me make this very clear — when playing for the opportunity to qualify for a World Cup, it should be played on the absolute best surface possible. And you know what doesn’t qualify as the best playing surface possible for a professional soccer game that’s been organized for the sole purpose of reaching the most prestigious tournament your game offers?

A baseball field.

Even a well manicured baseball field like the one at St. Louis’ Busch Stadium, even one used by a Major League Baseball franchise, even one who’s had a month to meticulously prepare — none of them should be utilized as a stage for our nation’s team to qualify for a World Cup in a single game. Why? Because their playing surfaces and facilities are not freaking made for soccer!

The grass surface on those fields typically isn’t one designed for the wear and tear exerted over the course of the average game of soccer. That means increased divots and therefore a less clean playing surface. The dimensions of the playing surface aren’t arranged to allow for a full-sized international field — and a field that just exceeds the minimums really shouldn’t be counted. That leads to cramped play and potentially the need to adjust your tactics. And most glaringly, there’s the need to deal with putting a temporary surface over the dirt baseball infield. Which of course leads a less clean playing surface and the greater chance of a player getting hurt when temporary turf slides across the dirt it sits on top of.

And that’s not to mention the kind of message it sends to the international footballing community. Look, we care so little about our national team’s success that we’re willing to sacrifice it to make a few extra dollars.

Do I think it will affect the outcome of tonight’s game? Probably not, but it could. But that’s besides the point.

When you think about it, there are easily fifty stadiums in this country — between MLS, NFL and NCAA football — that would be better suited right this very moment than Busch Stadium in St. Louis would be today. And that’s even if they were still playing the game tonight.

Don’t give me the “Well, New York City FC play on a baseball stadium and they did just fine” nonsense. The postage stamp they play on at Yankee Stadium looked like a U-10 field, and I’ve heard from several MLS players that surface there was far from ideal. If you want to turn to the grass-on-top-of-turf example (Ex: Dallas’s AT&T Stadium/Seattle’s CenturyLink Field) to mute me, don’t. Those games were mostly for friendlies, and even then you’d see coaches from Mexico to MLS clubs complaining that it was an unsafe surface too.

Long story short, when the national team is playing in games of importance, there’s really no reason at all that we should ever short change our players with a handicap of a substandard pitch. It’s embarrassing that we should be forced into such a situation just so we can make a few extra bucks.

And let’s just pray nobody gets hurt.


D.J. Switzer
Wrong Side of the Pond

pic of the week 4/13-4/19


Awful Alamodome Soccer Pitch

I don’t know what it is about North American soccer, but for the most part, we seem to really struggle with the field of play. The most common complaint levied against American/Canadian pitches is our over-reliance on synthetic, “turf” surfaces that are tough on players muscles and joints. They’re often lined for other sports, reinforcing the stereo type that the teams playing there are second class citizens. They can be tough to play on too, from inconsistent bouncing to increasing the speed of play. And some of the biggest names in MLS — particularly those of the elder, European star persuasion — have opted to just bypass games played on the fake playing surfaces altogether. The turf monster also caused a fuss ahead of this summers Women’s World Cup, where all six host stadiums will feature artificial fields, prompting a lawsuit from players led by American Abby Wambach.

But over the last year or so, ingenious groundsmen around the country have turned to an alternative solution to hosting matches in stadiums that feature turf — laying actual grass on top of the fake stuff, kind of like a turf toupée.

We saw it last summer with friendlies and international fixtures played in stadiums like Dallas gargantuan Cowboy Stadium and Indianapolis Lucas Oil Stadium, and even during World Cup qualifying when the national team took to Seattle’s Century Link Field. We saw it once again last week when the US hosted Mexico in San Antonio’s Alamodome. And in theory, it allows high-capacity NFL and collegiate football stadiums the chance to capitalize on the increasingly recognized cash cows that are international soccer fixtures.

Problem is, these fields are great in theory alone. The turf itself never looks as good as promised, and is often far worse than it’s appearance. Last week, Mexico threatened to pull out of the friendly (itself nothing more than a cash grab) because the conditions were so unsafe. And really, every time US soccer sanctions this solution, they’re not doing anything more than playing a giant game of Russian Roulette. And they lost that gamble when Kyle Beckerman went down injured against El Trí — how it took this long for a US injury to finally occur on one of these pathetic excuses for a field is a little mind-blowing.

Fact of the matter is, there are probably a hundred stadiums in this country that have natural grass surfaces suitable for high level soccer. And if a city with a large stadium wants in on the action, they should be required to provide a field fit for playing before they’re even be considered. I’m not saying another temporary solution can’t be used either, but this one certainly isn’t working.

US Soccer, for whatever reason can’t look beyond the safety of its own players, just to make a buck. It’s embarrassing, and the heroes we root on deserve far more than what we’re giving them.

promotion & relegation survey: personal reflections

WSOTP - Blog - Promotion & Relegation Reflections.fw

This is the third and final article in a three part series based on the results from a survey that ran on the site in December and January that looked to gauge the actual fan and owner interest in the implementation of Promotion & Relegation in the US and Canadian professional soccer pyramids. 

Read part one: Supporter Results  |  Read part two: Owner Results

I have to admit that making the decision on whether or not to write these series of articles was not any easy one. The debate I’ve held with myself on covering the subject of promotion and relegation stretches back for the better part of a year.

Deep down, I knew that doing so would bring me a windfall of grief. My words would be twisted, my intentions distorted and my mind numbed by the incessant drumming of some of the debate’s largest figureheads. All that happened well before I’d ever written a word on the topic in this space, so it was destined to be worse once I voluntarily jumped in with the sharks.

It has been.

But if I could imagine a world in a vacuum where one could talk about pro/rel in the US and Canada without igniting a firestorm and one’s name being dragged through the mud, it’s a fascinating topic to discuss.


Set aside the incendiary nature of the debate as it currently stands. A comparison of the positives and the negatives of promotion and relegation’s implementation against the pros and cons of the current system requires so many different layers of thought. Logistics, finances, structure, migration path, legalities, desires — all of these are key elements in the conversation. And when one system appears to be beneficial for one of those factors, it could be a huge detriment to one of the others.

I love reasonable, level-headed and cordial debates like these. And it’s for that reason that I considered writing about promotion and relegation long before I ever knew of anyone named Ted — I just never got around to it, other than stringing together the occasional set of 140 character opinions on Twitter.

But it’s probably for the best that I didn’t. Because the reality is, it’s morphed into a ridiculously combustible topic here.

It’s a conversation that features extremely passionate group(s) of supporters and opponents. Both sets seem to be growing, but so too are those that have grown annoyed with the discussion and its tone. The mere mention of the phrase “pro/rel” on Twitter can literally set off a never-ending stream of notifications on your cell phone for the rest of the night. It’s hard to not get caught up in it — particularly for someone like me whose passion for the game pretty much defines their existence.

Unfortunately, in all of the mudslinging that goes down, there’s lots of hyperbole and opinion that’s tossed in alongside it like they’re undisputed facts.

That drives me bonkers.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But if you’re going to broadcast yours and attack others unsolicited for theirs, you damn well better have more than a “belief” to back it up. To be honest, soccer is too important to me as a human being to allow potentially incredibly influential popular opinion to be established without it having some solid data to lean against.

That’s the reason I ran these surveys in the first place: to establish the most comprehensive data set on the opinions and desires of two of North American soccer’s biggest constituents. I didn’t care where the numbers fell one way or another — I just want something to refer back to other than hunches and speculation.

So with all that said, what is my opinion on the topic of promotion and relegation here in the US and Canada? What are my reasons for those thoughts? And did my thoughts change after seeing the results of the surveys?

Continue reading

promotion & relegation survey: supporter results

WSOTP - Blog - Promotion & Relegation Fan Resultsfw.fw

This is the first article in a three-part series based on the results from a survey that ran on the site in December and January that looked to gauge the actual fan and owner interest in the implementation of Promotion & Relegation in the US and Canadian professional soccer pyramids.

Read part two: Owner Results  |  Read part three: Personal Reflections

Supporters — as I’ve written before — are the lifeblood of the beautiful game.

In the most basic of senses, the professional version of the game couldn’t even exist without us. Every dollar that is pumped into the machine that is modern professional soccer comes from you and I. We pour our money directly in by way of purchasing tickets, gear and other club paraphernalia. And we also indirectly fund the billions that broadcast providers are willing to pay to air games, both through the subscriptions we pay to use their services and via advertisers willing to pay ungodly amounts of money to have their names in our faces while we’re watching.

So as the primary client for football — or ultimate end product that the soccer entertainment companies sell, depending on how you want to look at it — it would be natural to assume we are entitled to have a say in how the game is run and delivered to us. You see it all the time. Fans calling for a manager’s head. Demands for new players. Cries about the limited access to watching games on television. Calls for lower ticket prices. It’s so common place that you probably don’t even notice it.

Yet most of the time, our requests and demands fall on the intentionally deaf ears of those that run the game. Even when the powers that be do decide to bow to the demands of the supporters, their concessions are often small and/or ancillary. But just because we don’t often have the desired power to make the changes we would like to see in the game, that doesn’t stop the debate from raging on amongst us.

The amount of whining and whingeing within American soccer circles right now is at an all-time high, both in diversity and in volume. Hot button topics range from how Klinsmann runs the national team to hemming and hawing over a particular team’s new kits. More fans, more opinions, more debates: growth is good right?

But if I had to single out just one topic that’s caught the most attention over the last year? That would have to be promotion and relegation in the American and Canadian professional soccer systems. Or more specifically, the lack thereof.

I don’t feel like I’m exaggerating when I say the fires fueling the “pro/rel” debate are burning out of control right now. No matter your stance on the issue, it’s practically impossible to have not yet been dragged into the mire at least once in some forum or another. Heated arguments unfold on message boards, Twitter, Facebook and occasionally even in your local soccer pub. It’s unavoidable. The rhetoric is thick, the instigators aggressive and the sides entrenched.

Should we use it or should we not use it? I’m not particularly concerned with that in this post — I’ll do my best to leave my own opinions on the debate for Part III of this series.

Instead, I want to know not only what people actually want, but also how much people actually want Promotion and Relegation. No more generalized statements, no more inferences, no more room for interpretation. Cold, hard data.

You see, one of the oft utilized arguments put forth by the supporters of promotion and relegation’s implementation is that the “majority of soccer fans in this country want promotion and relegation”. Depending on how it’s being phrased, you might also hear that “they demand it”, too. And those arguments are often issued with such an air of infallibility that many just accept it as fact.

But is it really? That’s what I intended to get to the bottom of with the WSOTP Promotion & Relegation Survey.

Did we get that? Well, read on and find out.

Continue reading

you wanna talk about progress?

Jurgen-KlinsmannThree years ago this week, the hiring of Jürgen Klinsmann as the new US men’s national team head coach was to be a watershed moment in US soccer history. The German legend was charged with taking a plucky, overachieving American side and turning us into a dominant force in world football.

In his introductory press conference, Klinsmann took the bull by the horns. He pledged not only to help take US soccer to new heights, but also promised to help define and proliferate a new style of American soccer.

“[We want to play] a more proactive style of play where you would like to impose a little bit the game on your opponent instead of sitting back and waiting for what your opponent is doing and react to it… We want to start to keep possession, we want to start to dictate the pace of the game, we want to challenge our players to improve technically in order to keep the ball”

But despite helping the US to escape a Group of Death containing the Cristiano Ronaldo-led Portagal, long-time nemesis Ghana and tournament champions Germany, not to mention pushing a Belgian side many fancied as Brazil 2014’s dark horse to the brink… those words have proven to be the noose by which many have tried to hang Klinsmann.


With Jürgen’s three year anniversary of taking charge of the national team passing this week, the US Soccer Facebook page asked fans to weigh in on the German’s progress thus far.

As of the time of publication, nearly 2600 responses had been fielded. A decent number of them were positive and supportive. But an overwhelming majority of them weren’t.

It was an echoing of the sentiments expressed by many in the wake of the elimination by Belgium in the Round of 16. Too, many of the complaints submitted actually were hollered after the original roster announcement prior to the World Cup when Landon Donovan was cast out in the cold.

“We aren’t any better or worse than when he got here.”

“What happened to the offensive game he promised?”

“He is the reason we didn’t go farther in the [World Cup].”

“There has been no progress.”

A veteran internet user, I should have known better than to go to the comments. While there will always be grains of truth among the mire, it was mostly filled with naive and baseless drivel. Those complaints would be easier to ignore if it weren’t for the fact that they were inescapable. Anti-Klinsmann tirades were voiced on my favorite podcasts, Reddit posts were littered with the same thing, and of course they were all over Twitter, too.

And while I understand everyone’s frustrations at not advancing further, believing that Klinsmann has done a poor job during his tenure in charge is just way too far off base to let go unchallenged.

Where to start? How about with the noose of a quote that everyone keeps trying to hang Klinsmann with.

Yes, he committed to attempting to bring in and define a new American style. It was to be an offensive style of play based on possession. But while everyone is willing to hem and haw over how his side at the World Cup decidedly did not play in that fashion — thus “breaking his promise” — they also outright ignore entire portions of that very same press conference. For example:

“If you play Brazil or Argentina, you might [have to] play differently than maybe a country in CONCACAF.”

What Jürgen so clearly stated here was that, depending on the opponent, it might not be possible to play the way he desires to. If you try to play possession-oriented football against Spain, they’ll likely boss you off the pitch. If you try to take it to the Italians and fail to finish, they’ll probably exploit the one mistake you make on the counter. Even the best sides adjust their standard game plans against top opponents; the Netherlands did so three times in this tournament alone.

Furthermore, adopting a new identity isn’t something that will happen overnight. In fact, doing so in the three years Klinsmann has been at the reins is pretty much implausible as well. And low and behold, he even addressed that point in that press conference as well:

“Barcelona was not born in the last couple of years. It was born, the style of play now, in the early 90’s through Johan Cruyff. It took 20 years for that moment today that we see and all admire. Expectations are always based on what was built over the last 10-15 years.”

Translating that, it would be foolish to think that Jürgen could simply declare “WE’RE PLAYING OFFENSIVE FOOTBALL STARTING NOW!” and then do so with this current crop of players. They were all brought up in the old systems that played to various different ethos and mentalities. This World Cup was evidence of that fact.

Now, I would argue that Klinsmann was attempting to make small tweaks in the direction he wants to take the national team in the lead up to this World Cup. We saw the US men playing in more of a 4-3-3 set up in the tune-up matches, a formation geared towards offensive, possession-oriented play. But as I explained in my defense of Michael Bradley immediately after they were knocked out, that entire Plan A went out the window when Altidore went down because there was no like-for-like in the US pool of players who could slot in to those shoes. Plan B had to be different because of the tools Klinsmann then had at his disposal.

So really, the man’s commitment to changing the US style of play is one that is a more of a long-term goal. Klinsmann spoke at length in that press conference of the need to make vast changes in the youth game to achieve that goal — both at academies across the country and in the youth national team system. At the earliest, 2018 in Russia is where we should see the fruits of those labors start to come to fruition.

Klinsmann and Julian Green

julian green’s presence in brazil helped to lay the groundwork for what could come in the future.

Perhaps ironically, before the first ball was even kicked in Brazil this summer, people were already complaining that Klinsmann was focusing on 2018 too much.

Based on the youthful selections he made, the masses were enraged how the manager appeared to be writing off 2014. Which was a bit harsh. Given the hand we were dealt in the first round, most fans had written them off too. Few supporters or pundits actually believed we had the talent to make it out of a group that featured heavyweights like Germany, Ghana and Portugal.

And yet we did.

However, when Klinsmann “abandoned” the new philosophy of attacking and possession to make a run at actually getting out of the group — a tactic that achieved that feat and proved the doubters wrong, no less — everyone hung him out to dry. Once out and no longer just satisfied with the prospects of “just” advancing out of the Group of Death, many went and moved the goal posts on him.

Did they prefer he stick to his guns and get battered, or did they want him to play to this squad’s strengths and a chance to advance? Style over success? Aesthetics over glory? It was a damned if you do, damned if you don’t scenario for the German.

Ultimately, Klinsmann chose the later of those variables. And luckily, it worked out.

We advanced out of a group most countries wouldn’t have, we bled in youngsters who will likely feature in four and eight years time in a system likely to be more offensively-oriented, gained a larger following, and gave the sport a boost it wouldn’t have obtained otherwise.

If you ask me, that’s absolutely progress.

And that’s ignoring that Klinsmann and his staff have also instituted a massive change in our youth set up. Working with — and identifying — the 15, 16 and 17-year-old kids to imprint with the new style of thinking that is necessary to achieve a stylistic change require a total rethink of our approach. They’re the kind of changes necessary for changing the team’s style over a period of time that is far more viable. He’s pushed through a new national training center in Kansas City that heavily focuses on coaching this new style. The new training center also helps to lay the groundwork for the technical skills necessary in that system with a slew of futsal courts. He’s also helped to establish a broader and more comprehensive youth academy system that will implement them as well.

That’s progress, too.

And yet still, a sizable chunk of American fans think Klinsmann has done nothing for our national team, running him through the ringer for a partial quote. They choose to ignore the level of difficulty of the things he’s achieved. And they only care to look at a portion of the bigger picture.

So if you’re one of those throwing the man under the bus for a perceived lack of progress, make sure you open your eyes a little wider and remember that progress isn’t always a matter of wins. And just in case you’ve forgotten, there have been plenty of those, too.

south america heading north

2013 Copa America Champions Uruguay

I don’t often like to talk about my rather lengthy soccer bucket list. The reason for that is that — barring a sudden explosion in popularity of WSOTP, a major network picking me up as a pundit or me hitting lottery — being able to check off most of the items on the list is not really financially viable.

So when fate occasionally re-adjusts circumstances in a way that might allow for a slim chance to actually cross one-off, I get a rush of hopeful euphoria similar to one that most might experience when they find out that they’re expecting their first child.

And yesterday’s news “confirming” that a special 100th anniversary edition of South America’s premier international competition, the Copa América, would be coming to the United States in 2016 gave me those warm fuzzy feelings of expectation.

Alongside such lofty goals of attending a Champions League final, a Spanish Clásico, a Boca-River match and other similarly influential events, attending a Copa América match is easily one of the most important soccer-related events that I have on my bucket list. Admittedly, attending one in South America was the original goal. But given that it will be far easier — not to mention significantly cheaper — I’m willing to bend the rules.

This isn’t exactly that new of news, though. The rumor has been doing the rounds now for quite some time, with CONMEBOL even going so far as to prematurely announcing the event last year, much to the dismay of US Soccer and CONCACAF. But as with all rumors, nothing is official until it’s actually been announced as official by all of the parties involved. And while beIN Sports’ Phil Schoen seems rather confident in the tournament actually being hosted in the States, USSF President Sunil Gulati has already rebuffed the rumor as not “yet” agreed to. Key word being “yet”.

My guess? It’s going to happen, at least once all of the wrinkles in the planning are ironed out, even it’s not the best scenario for all parties involved.

Continue reading

the makeover that never was

USMNT Centennial Crest

the centennial u.s. soccer crest is so well liked that many want it to be worn all the time. but is that dream a reality?

Appearances, they say, are everything.

It’s a saying that’s normally applied to the world of business, but apparently it’s also one that’s recently become very important to a large segment of US soccer supporters. Well, maybe they’re not so concerned with overall appearances, but at least as it pertains to crest that adorns the national team’s shirts. And for many, they’d rate its appearance somewhere between poor and complete and utter crap.

Admittedly, the current crest isn’t a great one. There are eleven stripes on the crest and three stars: what is the significance of those numbers? Last I remember, it wasn’t the “Original Eleven Colonies”. Plus, the only correlation I can find with the United States and the number three are the three branches of government. Which seems a stupid reason to have three stars on a soccer crest, and is most definitely not the inspiration… I hope. And why aren’t the stripes red and stars set in blue, like on the flag? And the bit that seems to cause the most contention within the fan base is the remnant 90’s era US logo in the middle. Was that ball shot out of a cannon? A ball being kicked over the crossbar? Or does the ball just have eight triangular legs?

Of course, the crest we have now is little more than a dress slipped over that 90’s logo by Nike after they took over the kit responsibilities after the 1994 World Cup. The previous logo, horrid on its own, just didn’t have the marketing power that  Lipstick on a pig at best, yet it’s managed to hang around for nearly two decades.

And the slight modification of the crest ahead of this year’s World Cup — ditching the gold adornment and a fading of the color palette — has proven a huge disappointment for a vocal portion of the fan base.

Continue reading

ten words or less #86

toronto fc have officially won the MLS offseason.

Even though we’ve exited the hectic Christmas/New Year’s schedule that normally bombards us with more soccer than we can stomach, the last few days have been ridiculously busy in the world of the beautiful game.

Of course we still had a normal round of weekend fixtures around Europe to deal with. The opening of the January transfer window has also brought a cavalcade of news, ranging from complete fodder to legit breaking news. And of course today we were treated to not only the naming of FIFA’s 2013 Ballon d’Or winner — a very deserved win for Cristiano Ronaldo — but also the unveiling of two massive signings by MLS side Toronto FC in Jermain Defoe and Michael Bradley.

None the less, I’ve still managed to survive all of that and pump out a new TWOL for you. So enjoy it, minions.

The top transfers from each country in Europe… and elsewhere. –

I could live with these purported USMNT World Cup shirts. –

Ten theories for why AVB was sitting Adebayor at Spurs. – get’s called out on taking the easy route. –

Not renewing this guy’s contract seems suicidal. –

Bob Bradley’s first interview as manager of Stebæk. –

Comparing preparations for Qatar as a road to hell? Accurate. –

Um… what? –

US Soccer seems to have forgotten its history pre-1994. –

Rumor is the next Mercurials will be quite revolutionary. –

ten words or less #85

Eddie Johnson is leaving Seattle for DC United

EJ heading to DC highlights a busy off season week for Major League Soccer.

With the hectic Christmas football calendar about to kick off and the transfer window to follow shortly after, it seemed prudent to get a Ten Words or Less in so we’ll have ample room in the next one to cover the all of the upcoming commotion. But that doesn’t mean this week has been devoid of anything interesting. There’s been Spurs drama to deal with, MLS offseason player movements, and a barely even a peep out of not just me about the FIFA Club World Cup going on in Morocco.

And just in case you missed it, I’ve also opened up a competition for you to win a free, personalized retro Tottenham kit from the good folks over at Campo Retro. Just registering will net you a discount, so it’s worth a punt.

The new Nike Boca Juniors kit is the stuff of dreams. –

The latest chapter in the Book of Daniel (Levy). –

He likely isn’t the first, and won’t be the last. –

DC United letting their fans pick their beer’s can design. –

Kompany couldn’t do this again if he tried. Unlucky. –

Wahl just dropped a peg or two in my book. –

Defoe to Toronto for $10 million? SOLD! –

Players association trying to revolutionize the transfer system. –

Google the front runner for the next MLS/US soccer TV deal? –

This is David Nugent… chasing a squirrel. –