|
Post by Apricots And A Pear Tree on May 31, 2010 18:36:10 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? I thought Cricket was? It's at least the mot depressing one.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on May 31, 2010 18:39:52 GMT -5
American Football has the most complicated rulebook in the world, but its not that difficult to follow. Cricket was always difficult for me to follow.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 17,012
Member is Online
|
Post by BRV on May 31, 2010 18:46:43 GMT -5
People complain that soccer is boring, but you could argue that there is more action in a soccer match than a football game or basketball game.
The Wall Street Journal recently published an article that said that Super Bowl XLIV had only 11 minutes of actual football action. The other time was devoted to calling signals, commercials, timeouts and everything else. Think about that for a moment. In a game that has 60 minutes on the clock and lasts roughly three hours, there were only 11 minutes of action.
Conversely, soccer is 90 minutes, and they play for probably 75 of those 90 minutes. There are breaks for throw-ins, corner kicks, goal kicks, substitutions, goals, etc., but those breaks last mere seconds. The rest of the time is devoted to the game itself.
Also, soccer has a running clock, so you know the game will last 90 minutes. If you're watching a match and there is five minutes of regulation and three minutes of stoppage time, you know the game will be over in eight minutes. If there's five minutes left in a football game or a basketball game, you could be sitting there for almost 30 minutes.
|
|
EvilMasterBetty, Esq.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bird...Birdie...birdie......Tiger...Tiger Tiger.....
R2C2 Reporting for duty
Posts: 17,355
|
Post by EvilMasterBetty, Esq. on May 31, 2010 18:51:16 GMT -5
People complain that soccer is boring, but you could argue that there is more action in a soccer match than a football game or basketball game. The Wall Street Journal recently published an article that said that Super Bowl XLIV had only 11 minutes of actual football action. The other time was devoted to calling signals, commercials, timeouts and everything else. Think about that for a moment. In a game that has 60 minutes on the clock and lasts roughly three hours, there were only 11 minutes of action. Conversely, soccer is 90 minutes, and they play for probably 75 of those 90 minutes. There are breaks for throw-ins, corner kicks, goal kicks, substitutions, goals, etc., but those breaks last mere seconds. The rest of the time is devoted to the game itself. Also, soccer has a running clock, so you know the game will last 90 minutes. If you're watching a match and there is five minutes of regulation and three minutes of stoppage time, you know the game will be over in eight minutes. If there's five minutes left in a football game or a basketball game, you could be sitting there for almost 30 minutes. By that logic marathon running should be the most exciting sport in the world, since it's non-stop "action" for hours. Action does not equal exciting.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on May 31, 2010 18:56:12 GMT -5
Its fair to say that there are dull points in both football and soccer. Football: endless stop and start, lots of commercials, idiotic announcer banter (almost all the US sportscasters now are terrible) Soccer: long stretches of no scoring, repetitive nature of game (only so many manuvers you can do in soccer), US soccer not as good as leagues in other countries.
Which game is more exciting is a matter of opinion but most football games aren't "nonstop action". (especially if you happen to be watching the Redskins)
|
|
Jay Peas 42
El Dandy
Totally flips out ALL the time.
Is looking forward to a Nation of Domination Kwannza Special.
Posts: 8,329
|
Post by Jay Peas 42 on May 31, 2010 18:59:21 GMT -5
Look, it's American English. We call it Soccer. If you are using British English, it's Football. Is it correct, well, what the heck are you going Football then? It's a tradition. Language is inherantly irrational.
As for if it is a major sport? Most of the points have been covered, but here's mine. When you compare the popularity of Soccer in the US compared with the popularity it has in the rest of the world? Nolo contendo! It's an enjoyable enough little game. But, it doesn't have the impact that the major sports enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on May 31, 2010 19:01:00 GMT -5
People complain that soccer is boring, but you could argue that there is more action in a soccer match than a football game or basketball game. The Wall Street Journal recently published an article that said that Super Bowl XLIV had only 11 minutes of actual football action. The other time was devoted to calling signals, commercials, timeouts and everything else. Think about that for a moment. In a game that has 60 minutes on the clock and lasts roughly three hours, there were only 11 minutes of action. Conversely, soccer is 90 minutes, and they play for probably 75 of those 90 minutes. There are breaks for throw-ins, corner kicks, goal kicks, substitutions, goals, etc., but those breaks last mere seconds. The rest of the time is devoted to the game itself. Also, soccer has a running clock, so you know the game will last 90 minutes. If you're watching a match and there is five minutes of regulation and three minutes of stoppage time, you know the game will be over in eight minutes. If there's five minutes left in a football game or a basketball game, you could be sitting there for almost 30 minutes. Soccer is slow-paced and low scoring, which I think plays into it not being a major sport in America. The audience that would enjoy it would also be the audience that would enjoy watching baseball, so that niche is already being filled for the most part. Basketball is fast paced and high scoring, so it does appeal to a slightly different audience. All four major American sports fit slightly different niches depending on scoring preferences and pace preferences, so new sports are invariably going to compete with those niches. I don't agree about there being more action in soccer than in basketball. The thing about that 75 minutes or so of action, most of it is about the equivalent of dribbling the ball down the court in basketball. I have no problem with soccer as a sport, I just don't think it's about to become the fifth major sport in the US.
|
|
|
Post by slasher911 on May 31, 2010 19:24:03 GMT -5
People complain that soccer is boring, but you could argue that there is more action in a soccer match than a football game or basketball game. The Wall Street Journal recently published an article that said that Super Bowl XLIV had only 11 minutes of actual football action. The other time was devoted to calling signals, commercials, timeouts and everything else. Think about that for a moment. In a game that has 60 minutes on the clock and lasts roughly three hours, there were only 11 minutes of action. Conversely, soccer is 90 minutes, and they play for probably 75 of those 90 minutes. There are breaks for throw-ins, corner kicks, goal kicks, substitutions, goals, etc., but those breaks last mere seconds. The rest of the time is devoted to the game itself. Also, soccer has a running clock, so you know the game will last 90 minutes. If you're watching a match and there is five minutes of regulation and three minutes of stoppage time, you know the game will be over in eight minutes. If there's five minutes left in a football game or a basketball game, you could be sitting there for almost 30 minutes. Wasn't there an article about how the average soccer player walks like 4-6 total miles in a game? In 90 minutes? Think of how slow you'd have to walk for that. Add in the low amount of shots on goal in a 90 minute period (and no, the low amount of shots does not add drama to each shot). Just because it's longer, does not mean more stuff happens.
|
|
|
Post by FrankGotch on May 31, 2010 19:30:58 GMT -5
American Football has the most complicated rulebook in the world, but its not that difficult to follow. Cricket was always difficult for me to follow. Most complicated plays. Most specialized complicated positions. Thats one of the great things about American football. Anyone can watch the game, but it takes years to fully understand everything that happens on the field in a single play.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on May 31, 2010 19:36:10 GMT -5
American Football has the most complicated rulebook in the world, but its not that difficult to follow. Cricket was always difficult for me to follow. Most complicated plays. Most specialized complicated positions. Thats one of the great things about American football. Anyone can watch the game, but it takes years to fully understand everything that happens on the field in a single play. Yeah, its the closest to a physical chess game of all the major US sports, what with its highly specialized player roles, rulebook, methods of playing, etc. The actual game is relatively easy to follow but depending on the team's style (and skill level) can be played myriad different ways. That's a big part of its appeal, at least for me. Now if we're gonna question the wisdom of American sports fans, I'd prefer to wonder why the American concept of an "exciting race" consists of driving in circles endlessly (and not just NASCAR...Indy is exactly the same structure). If we're talking about repetitious and boring physical activity, I'd easily pick that over football(soccer) or baseball.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2010 19:41:54 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. As said already, it IS football. Hell, the most accurate kicker in American football of all time, Mike Vanderjagt, is baffled why American football is even called football when you actually use your feet in soccer and not in American football except when you're the kicker or punter. He's right. Soccer is football. American "football" is more like rugby. 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 They call it soccer in Australia too. Their national team is even called the Socceroos.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,984
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on May 31, 2010 20:11:39 GMT -5
I'd even put arena football and lacrosse ahead of it. The only thing it is above is the WNBA.
|
|
|
Post by FrankGotch on May 31, 2010 20:16:23 GMT -5
I'd even put arena football and lacrosse ahead of it. The only thing it is above is the WNBA. I wouldn't go that far. I'd say the MLS is the equivalent of some f the more successful minor league baseball teams. They are above the WNBA which wouldn't even get the coverage it does without the NBA constantly pushing them.
|
|
|
Post by Lair of the Shadow MaDaBa on May 31, 2010 20:38:47 GMT -5
Yeah, there's a lot more strategy in American football than one would believe. There's the coach, offensive coordinators, defensive coordinators, special teams coaches, and let's not forget the waterboy. Yes, 11 minutes is for action, but the rest is strategy. The clock is like the ladder in a Ladder Match--it doesn't care who wins, but it's still an integral part and it can be both a friend and an enemy depending on the circumstances.
Not to mention, there are sheets of plays, codes, strategies...do they pass the ball or run it? Touchdown or field goal? Extra point or two-point conversion? On and on and on...
What is soccer? "Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I missed the net? Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I missed the net? Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I kicked my opponent in the nuts? They kick the ball into a big-ass net. They missed the net?" FOR NINETY f***ING MINUTES.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,373
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on May 31, 2010 21:43:36 GMT -5
Freddie Ado, or whatever his name is, was the closest thing to being the superstar that MLS needed to get more popular. Wasn't enough, however. Where does he play at? If he were to play for a NYC team and the league's advertising focus was about a rivalry about the future (Ado, in the #1 market) and the present (Beckham, in the #2 market), then they might build. As it is, I don't think that they have too far to go to become more significant than the NHL, but that is more of a statement about how low the NHL has gone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2010 21:55:20 GMT -5
Freddie Ado, or whatever his name is, was the closest thing to being the superstar that MLS needed to get more popular. Wasn't enough, however. Where does he play at? In the Portuguese league. SL Benfica.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 17,012
Member is Online
|
Post by BRV on May 31, 2010 22:01:58 GMT -5
Freddie Ado, or whatever his name is, was the closest thing to being the superstar that MLS needed to get more popular. Wasn't enough, however. Where does he play at? If he were to play for a NYC team and the league's advertising focus was about a rivalry about the future (Ado, in the #1 market) and the present (Beckham, in the #2 market), then they might build. As it is, I don't think that they have too far to go to become more significant than the NHL, but that is more of a statement about how low the NHL has gone. America has soccer stars, it's just that our best players play in Europe. Tim Howard, Carlos Bocanegra, Oguchi Onyewu, DaMarcus Beasley, Clint Dempsey and Jozy Altidore are all prominent names in the international soccer community. The names may not be familiar to Americans, but that's because none of those players play in the MLS. Soccer in America is a lot like baseball in Japan. It's not the nation's biggest sport, but it has a strong following of avid supporters. But what makes the two most similar is that each nation's professional league isn't the elite league on the planet. The best Japanese players come to MLB, just as the best American soccer players play in the Premier League. When a player makes a name for themselves internationally and their skills begin to fade, they come to America. It happened with Pele in the 1970s, it happened with David Beckham a few years ago, and it will happen with Thierry Henry and Ronaldinho within the next few years. The MLS may never be one of America's "big four" leagues, but that is primarily because the "big four" are all the best leagues on the planet. The NBA is the best basketball, the NFL is the best football, the NHL is the best hockey. The MLS will never top the Premier League, but they could gain enough momentum over the next few years to the point where the MLS is clearly the fifth biggest professional league in America. What the league needs is to continue establishing franchises in cities with fans yearning for soccer, young talent to establish themselves in America and big names to come from overseas to the MLS.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on May 31, 2010 22:04:55 GMT -5
What is soccer? "Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I missed the net? Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I missed the net? Kick the ball into a big-ass net. I kicked my opponent in the nuts? They kick the ball into a big-ass net. They missed the net?" FOR NINETY f***ING MINUTES. I'd rather have that then try to get the ball into the big-ass zone, kick the ball into a big-ass target. Have some commercials, have 10 seconds of play, have a time-out, have some more commercials, have another 10 seconds of play, have someone throw a flag on the pitch meaning the previous 10 seconds was irrelevant, have yet more commercials and then have the last 30 seconds on the clock last for 20 minutes, oh yeah and more commercials. I don't really have that much of a problem with the game of American Football. I have a problem with how it's presented. In the case of football, TV revolves around the game. In American Football, the game revolves around TV. It's different history really. Europeans have grown up with sports that continuously play for longer periods, Americans have grown up with sprts that have quick bursts of play for short periods.
|
|
|
Post by slasher911 on May 31, 2010 22:23:21 GMT -5
In American Football, the game revolves around TV. You guys don't have to stop for commercials, since you wear the advertisements right on your damn jerseys
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on May 31, 2010 22:24:52 GMT -5
In American Football, the game revolves around TV. You guys don't have to stop for commercials, since you wear the advertisements right on your damn jerseys What would you rather have? One sponsor across the chest of the shirt or several breaks throughout the game?
|
|