As 2000 comes to an end, let us recall 1990.
There was a World Cup, and it was the worst. A record goal shortage (2.21 per game) and few entertaining games. In case that wasnÆt enough for AmericaÆs soccer critics, UCLA won the NCAA Division I title without scoring a goal in 270 minutes of play in the final four, relying on two penalty-kick wins.
Those hoping that hosting the 1994 World Cup would spur enthusiasm for a U.S. pro league feared another low-scoring, defensive tournament.
College rulemakers announced that soccer was dying and proposed an array of rule changes, including a hockey-like blue line, a shootout after breakaway fouls and a limit on defenders in the penalty area on corner kicks. They stopped short, for expense concerns, of enlarged goals.
It was an overreaction to the real problem that negative tactics had brought to soccer worldwide. I even recall speculation that basketball and American football were threatening soccerÆs popularity in Europe.
But the sky did not fall. FIFA made some wise rule changes in the early 1990s: ejections for fouls that deny players clear scoring chances, even-is-onside, a ban on goalkeepersÆ handling of backpasses and a decree, albeit an ambiguous one, for harsh punishment of tackles from behind.
The 1994 World Cup succeeded: 2.71 goals per game and full stadiums charmed the U.S. mediaÆs most fervid soccer-bashers. MLS showed up two years later. And college rules moved closer to FIFAÆs.
Fast forward to 2000. Internationally, even the European Championship became thrilling again. And the sportÆs overall popularity is at an unprecedented level.
Bruce ArenaÆs team averaged 35,000 fans for 12 homes games and lost just one ù on PKs.
MLS in Year 5? Not perfect, but itÆs close to being one of the worldÆs top 10 leagues.
Who would have predicted this at the end of 1990?