|
Post by kingoftheindies on May 31, 2010 14:13:12 GMT -5
Not yet, but the MLS is growing in popularity. A majority of the cities that have MLS teams do support the teams. Maybe not as well as you'd like to see, but the teams draw decently (though a lot of teams play in bigger stadiums than they should).
Thing is, MLS is not high quality soccer. There are some good players in the MLS, but it's a very sloppy brand of soccer. The US team (even before the send off series) gets good crowds, Euro teams when they come over get good crowds. It's just MLS is still a growing product that is slowly improving.
I dunno if they'll ever take over the NBA in popularity, but I think they're doing better financially (NBA is projected to lose $400 million as a league this year)
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on May 31, 2010 14:14:10 GMT -5
Soccer is not now, has never been, and never will be, a major sport in the United States. You'll see a lot of people becoming major soccer fans with the World Cup coming up, but, just like with swimming in the Olympics, it will be fogrotten about as soon as it's over. Personally, I find soccer to be one of the most boring sports out there, and want to punch someone whenever I hear them call it football. It's acceptable in other parts of the world, but not here. But it IS football. You move the ball with your feet. It has more of a right to call itself football than American Football does....seriously, the only positions in American Football that even kicks the ball, the Kickoff Kicker, the Punter, and the Placekicker, are the LEAST APPRECIATED positions in the sport. Though technically we(as a world) have solved this "problem" long ago, as soccer is officially Association Football. It's called soccer because it was known as Association Football. The term association football was created in England and, over time, it became known colloquially as soccer. When the sport was brought to the US, we already had our game called Football, so we took soccer. Soccer was used for it way back in the 1800's. It's not really known as association football, just football in most countries, as opposed to rugby.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on May 31, 2010 14:24:06 GMT -5
But it IS football. You move the ball with your feet. It has more of a right to call itself football than American Football does....seriously, the only positions in American Football that even kicks the ball, the Kickoff Kicker, the Punter, and the Placekicker, are the LEAST APPRECIATED positions in the sport. Though technically we(as a world) have solved this "problem" long ago, as soccer is officially Association Football. It's called soccer because it was known as Association Football. The term association football was created in England and, over time, it became known colloquially as soccer. When the sport was brought to the US, we already had our game called Football, so we took soccer. Soccer was used for it way back in the 1800's. It's not really known as association football, just football in most countries, as opposed to rugby. The first football game in America was actually before the first American football game in America.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on May 31, 2010 14:44:39 GMT -5
It's called soccer because it was known as Association Football. The term association football was created in England and, over time, it became known colloquially as soccer. When the sport was brought to the US, we already had our game called Football, so we took soccer. Soccer was used for it way back in the 1800's. It's not really known as association football, just football in most countries, as opposed to rugby. The first football game in America was actually before the first American football game in America. Makes sense since American Football didn't come around till the ass end of the 1800s and that was just the sport in its most primal form. American Football as we know it today, didn't even come around till like the 50s or 60s. Before the increased safety equipment and new rules, the sport was more of less Rugby with minimal pads(I know it wasn't exactly like Rugby, but it was very close).
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on May 31, 2010 14:59:53 GMT -5
No. It's not even top 6 or 7. It's NFL NBA MLB NCAAF NCAABB NASCAR NHL then MLS. Hell, MMA and golf might be ahead of it too. Dude if you mean that to be the order of popularity, NASCAR is WAY higher, like right after NFL. I can't stand it, but the popularity is out of this world right now. I love NASCAR but, it's popularity is fading thanks to poor racing, toned down personalities and Jr. sucking. It's still pretty popular but, no where near it's peak of 3 or 4 years ago. No it's not a major sport. MMA gets more coverage than MLS on ESPN which is the leading sports network no matter how much they suck. ESPN doesn't cover UFC/MMA last time I checked and the UFC IS a major sports league now. ESPN covers a VERY narrow chunk of the sports world. Than you do not check often as they have covered every major event of UFC's for 3 years now and every weigh in for the last year.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on May 31, 2010 15:03:26 GMT -5
Dude if you mean that to be the order of popularity, NASCAR is WAY higher, like right after NFL. I can't stand it, but the popularity is out of this world right now. I love NASCAR but, it's popularity is fading thanks to poor racing, toned down personalities and Jr. sucking. It's still pretty popular but, no where near it's peak of 3 or 4 years ago. ESPN doesn't cover UFC/MMA last time I checked and the UFC IS a major sports league now. ESPN covers a VERY narrow chunk of the sports world. Than you do not check often as they have covered every major event of UFC's for 3 years now and every weigh in for the last year.[/quote] I guess I must be watching ESPN in between the PPV events, cause I NEVER see anything about MMA on Sportscenter. Just the usual dick sucking for the Lakers, Cavs(well...LeBron), Red Sox, Yankees, Celtics, Brett Favre, etc. But never MMA. Then again, I hardly watch ESPN nowadays thanks to the constant dick sucking of the same topics over and over again.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 17,012
|
Post by BRV on May 31, 2010 15:03:35 GMT -5
Like the NHL, the MLS is a regional sport, and much like hockey, it doesn't have a huge national following, but it's fans are die-hard.
Professional hockey struggles in the Sun Belt, Florida, Texas, Arizona and California. Basically anywhere that can't naturally produce ice. The league can't create fan bases in areas that clearly don't want hockey, which is why places like Phoenix, Tampa Bay, Atlanta and Dallas struggle to establish consistent crowds.
The MLS might not be on the same tier as the NFL, NBA, MLB or even NHL, but its not a hack, minor-league program like so many of you would believe. Check out the attendance figures for Seattle, Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Salt Lake City and Washington D.C. They have huge followings with die-hard fans who follow their teams with great interest. It's a niche sport to some, but to these fans, the sport is on an equal plane as baseball or basketball.
Soccer as a sport is growing nationally. Next year, the MLS will expand into Portland, Vancouver and Montreal. The league knows what it is doing. They are finding places in North America that have rabid soccer fans and they are establishing teams in those locations. It's not like Miami was dying for a hockey team when the Panthers showed up. I don't know of many people in Atlanta who were screaming bloody murder after the Flames left. Philadelphia rallied for years to get an MLS team, and they have turned out in pretty significant numbers.
Soccer will grow significantly in the next few years, because of the other major American leagues' labor problems. The NFL and NBA are both staring at a work stoppage next summer. That's when soccer is going to become big, when there's no football, no basketball and baseball is winding down. People will need something, and soccer will grow.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on May 31, 2010 15:10:37 GMT -5
Like the NHL, the MLS is a regional sport, and much like hockey, it doesn't have a huge national following, but it's fans are die-hard. Professional hockey struggles in the Sun Belt, Florida, Texas, Arizona and California. Basically anywhere that can't naturally produce ice. The league can't create fan bases in areas that clearly don't want hockey, which is why places like Phoenix, Tampa Bay, Atlanta and Dallas struggle to establish consistent crowds. The MLS might not be on the same tier as the NFL, NBA, MLB or even NHL, but its not a hack, minor-league program like so many of you would believe. Check out the attendance figures for Seattle, Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Salt Lake City and Washington D.C. They have huge followings with die-hard fans who follow their teams with great interest. It's a niche sport to some, but to these fans, the sport is on an equal plane as baseball or basketball. Soccer as a sport is growing nationally. Next year, the MLS will expand into Portland, Vancouver and Montreal. The league knows what it is doing. They are finding places in North America that have rabid soccer fans and they are establishing teams in those locations. It's not like Miami was dying for a hockey team when the Panthers showed up. I don't know of many people in Atlanta who were screaming bloody murder after the Flames left. Philadelphia rallied for years to get an MLS team, and they have turned out in pretty significant numbers. Soccer will grow significantly in the next few years, because of the other major American leagues' labor problems. The NFL and NBA are both staring at a work stoppage next summer. That's when soccer is going to become big, when there's no football, no basketball and baseball is winding down. People will need something, and soccer will grow. The MLS REALLY needs to expand to the rest of the Southwest(New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma). Why? Cause these 3 states have built in soccer fans already! Now, this is mostly due to the rather large quantity of Latin Americans in this area, but it is a fun sport. One of the only sports I'm actually GOOD at(the other being American Football. Can't shoot for crap in basketball and not strong enough to throw or bat in baseball), so I would love a team to cheer for, rather than the tried but true, "rooting for the Dallas team cause they are the closest team to me" route I take in the NFL, NHL, and MLB(actually I cheer for the Rangers cause they own my city's minor league team).
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on May 31, 2010 17:12:07 GMT -5
It's called soccer because it was known as Association Football. The term association football was created in England and, over time, it became known colloquially as soccer. When the sport was brought to the US, we already had our game called Football, so we took soccer. Soccer was used for it way back in the 1800's. It's not really known as association football, just football in most countries, as opposed to rugby. The first football game in America was actually before the first American football game in America. Really? When was the first football game played? I know American Football was played in some form as far back as the 1830s, but it wasn't until the 1870s when it started to get rules codified. I know regular football had been around a long time before then, but was under the impression that the settlers had developed their own games before it began to grow in the US. The MLS might not be on the same tier as the NFL, NBA, MLB or even NHL, but its not a hack, minor-league program like so many of you would believe. Check out the attendance figures for Seattle, Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Los Angeles, Houston, Salt Lake City and Washington D.C. They have huge followings with die-hard fans who follow their teams with great interest. It's a niche sport to some, but to these fans, the sport is on an equal plane as baseball or basketball. I'm not going to argue that the MLS isn't well run, it is, but I don't think it's on the cusp of becoming a major American league, as I don't think there's that fanbase nationwide. They have die hard fans, but they're a long way from being among the top tier, and I think it'd take more than the NBA or the NFL having a work stoppage to get it. Even if it did rise in a work stoppage, it's just as likely that it'd be another World Cup phenomenon and, as soon as other sports came in full swing, those fans would run back. You compare it a lot to the NHL, but there is one thing the NHL has that MLS hasn't gotten, prestige. The Stanley Cup is still one of the preeminent champions, Wayne Gretzky is still a household name, and it's prestige lasts beyond the Olympics, whereas soccer fever flares up once every four years then rapidly dissipates when the US team fails to last that long. What the MLS needs to reach that level in a short amount of time is a really strong World Cup showing. That's what helped the league back in 2002 when US made the quarterfinals (and even then, the league lost a crap ton of money between founding and 2004, and many of the teams still aren't profitable). And as far as other pro leagues go, they all know just how disastrous work stoppages can be from other league work stoppages, so just because they're in tense labor debates doesn't really mean there's going to be a strike. They will do everything in their power to prevent a stoppage, because a stoppage benefits no one.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on May 31, 2010 17:19:50 GMT -5
Nope.
|
|
|
Post by Raja Lion on May 31, 2010 17:27:43 GMT -5
Soccer is a niche sport in this country. I personally love it (Celtic supporter, damn me to hell), but its never been a mainstream sport in this country professionally. Obviously, its huge with kids.
As for the MLS, until they can lure world class players into the league that aren't in the twilight of their careers, they'll always be a second rate league when compared to the European leagues.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,664
|
Post by Bo Rida on May 31, 2010 17:29:59 GMT -5
I loved the story about a group of Philadelphia fans who didn't have a MLS club but still hated their rivals and went to games just to boo them. If there are more people that passionate then it may yet become a major sport but not for a long time. www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/feb/20/sport.comment1
|
|
|
Post by Lair of the Shadow MaDaBa on May 31, 2010 17:42:47 GMT -5
Not reading any other posts in this thread, I think one of the main reasons that soccer isn't popular here is because its clock counts up and not down. Americans like simple things--if there are 90 minutes in a game, have a clock count down from 90:00 to 0:00 minutes. If the clock counts up, that means we have to do math.
Or maybe we just plain like countdowns.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on May 31, 2010 17:52:16 GMT -5
Really? When was the first football game played? I know American Football was played in some form as far back as the 1830s, but it wasn't until the 1870s when it started to get rules codified. I know regular football had been around a long time before then, but was under the impression that the settlers had developed their own games before it began to grow in the US. It was 1869 where two teams played a game with the rules of Association football. Although the teams all played with 25 men each. From what I remember (although it was on a sports show a couple of years back and I read it in a book about about the origins of rugby) this version then morphed into a game more similar to rugby and not long after was picked up by more places and became the early version of American Football. Wikipedia does have a bit about this but the source is from a different place where I read/saw it.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,664
|
Post by Bo Rida on May 31, 2010 17:53:05 GMT -5
Not reading any other posts in this thread, I think one of the main reasons that soccer isn't popular here is because its clock counts up and not down. Americans like simple things--if there are 90 minutes in a game, have a clock count down from 90:00 to 0:00 minutes. If the clock counts up, that means we have to do math. Or maybe we just plain like countdowns. When we've held charity or England under 21 matches at our stadium there's often a lot of kids there. The scoreboard used to have a clock that counted down and the kids would count out loud for the last 10 seconds but at the end of the countdown nothing happens they just keep playing*, it was unbelievably stupid. * The referee adds on time injuries and other stoppages at the end rather than stopping the clock for anyone who doesn't know.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on May 31, 2010 18:06:48 GMT -5
Really? When was the first football game played? I know American Football was played in some form as far back as the 1830s, but it wasn't until the 1870s when it started to get rules codified. I know regular football had been around a long time before then, but was under the impression that the settlers had developed their own games before it began to grow in the US. It was 1869 where two teams played a game with the rules of Association football. Although the teams all played with 25 men each. From what I remember (although it was on a sports show a couple of years back and I read it in a book about about the origins of rugby) this version then morphed into a game more similar to rugby and not long after was picked up by more places and became the early version of American Football. Wikipedia does have a bit about this but the source is from a different place where I read/saw it. Hmm, that is quite interesting. Well, I still maintain that we didn't come up with Soccer, so diehards can stop criticizing us for calling it that
|
|
|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on May 31, 2010 18:11:00 GMT -5
Well it has the word in its name so yes.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on May 31, 2010 18:15:30 GMT -5
It was 1869 where two teams played a game with the rules of Association football. Although the teams all played with 25 men each. From what I remember (although it was on a sports show a couple of years back and I read it in a book about about the origins of rugby) this version then morphed into a game more similar to rugby and not long after was picked up by more places and became the early version of American Football. Wikipedia does have a bit about this but the source is from a different place where I read/saw it. Hmm, that is quite interesting. Well, I still maintain that we didn't come up with Soccer, so diehards can stop criticizing us for calling it that I don't have a problem with the word "soccer" because it is a perfectly acceptable alternative word for football. We have shows in the UK with soccer in the title. It's more that it was around in the US before American Football, yet for some reason it got given the name soccer. But then again, the word "football" was around long before Association football anyway.
|
|
mrrotten
Don Corleone
The #1 Kaneinite
Posts: 2,066
|
Post by mrrotten on May 31, 2010 18:25:18 GMT -5
I'm going to say no. Every so often, something comes along, and whatever it is(be it start of the MLS league, the USA team doing well in 1994 in the world cup(or was it held in the US), Mia Hamm, David Beckham, etc), is suppose to be the catalyist to make soccer big in this country, and it never does.
|
|
|
Post by FrankGotch on May 31, 2010 18:34:10 GMT -5
Not reading any other posts in this thread, I think one of the main reasons that soccer isn't popular here is because its clock counts up and not down. Americans like simple things--if there are 90 minutes in a game, have a clock count down from 90:00 to 0:00 minutes. If the clock counts up, that means we have to do math. Or maybe we just plain like countdowns. Simple things? You do know that American Football is the most complicated sport in the world right?
|
|