I got a late start this morning because I've been working on my PE column, which now runs every Wednesday.
I tackled the David Beckham topic, the soap opera that it is. And while I'll save the actual column until Wednesday, I did want to share a bit of it here right now.
Beckham's made it clear that he wants to stay in Italy. So too has Landon Donovan. Beckham is on loan and scheduled to return on March 9, like Donovan, but if he had his druthers Milan would be his permanent home; Munich would be Donovan's.
So, what's the difference between the two? Why is Beckham vilified while Donovan isn't?
I answered that in my column, at least what I think is the answer, but wanted to see if I'm thinking along the same lines as Galaxy/MLS fans, mostly the former.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
First off, I think there's the difference in stature between the two--Beckham, it doesn't need to be explained, is a superstar. Donovan, while big in American soccer, isn't well known globally. He isn't a megastar that came to MLS for a huge paycheck when it looked like his options were limited and decided to leave when a better team came calling.
Second, I think a lot of fans--not myself all that much--think that Donovan got a raw deal the last time he was in Europe and want to see him go back and prove himself, and thereby give American soccer more credibility.
Several differences, I'll point out just one though.
Beckham IN adds legitimacy to the league, in international eyes;
Donovan LEAVING adds legitimacy to the league, in international eyes.
Post a Comment