Up With the Cup

I've been following the World Cup, and seeing as many games as I can, and I've been impressed with a lot of the games, such as Italy's dominance over England, along with how the Netherlands completely destroyed Spain, 5-1 - like, how do you get scores like that in soccer?  Alas, I missed the United States' 2-0 victory over Ghana, having had to cover a public meeting for a local news site I labor for, though a couple of people involved in the meeting kept everyone informed with the progress with the game. I'm making it a point to catch the U.S. game with Portugal tomorrow.  

Part of the reason the United States is improving in international play is because more Americans are taking the beautiful game seriously . . . and fewer American men are embarrassed in associating themselves with any sport thought of as beautiful.  The national men's team may not win the Cup this year, but they might make a strong showing - maybe even stronger than eighth place in 2002.  (My gut tells me Costa Rica will win this year.)  

As for why soccer hasn't been popular in the U.S. in the past, I've heard all the explanations - there's not enough scoring, there are no timeouts, you can't broadcast any game without timeouts because there's no room for commercials during the game and not enough commercial breaks during halftime - but I still think it's because the NFL took all the cool team names at the expense of professional soccer.  That's still a problem.  How do you root for the Philadelphia Union (who actually play in Chester, Pennsylvania) when you have the Philadelphia Eagles?  Or the San Jose Earthquakes (who actually play in nearby Santa Clara) when you've got the San Francisco 49ers and the Oakland Raiders?  But then again, I'd either root for D.C. United (who actually play in D.C.) than the Washington Redskins (who don't).