Operation Sports Logo Header
Home
Operation Sports Logo Header
News Post

Sound Off: Is Football (Finally) on the Rise in America?

  04:03 PM - June 23, 2014 by RaychelSnr


The World Cup is setting ratings records left and right, the US Men's National Team seems poised to possibly move onto the elimination round of the World Cup, and football (soccer) is on the minds of more people in America today than ever before.

Of course, this isn't the first time Americans have been excited about football. In fact, it's not even the first time we've heard that the sport is on the rise here. But perhaps, just maybe, the grand old sport of football is finally catching a break here in America.

The English Premiere league is on NBC, the MLS is drawing once thought impossible crowds, and more people are watching.

Sound off: Is this it? Is football finally on the rise in America? Will there be any maintenance at all of the momentum the sport has generated with a (thus far) fabulous World Cup?

Game: SoccerReader Score: 5.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: SportsVotes for game: 2 - View All
Member Comments
# 61 KG @ 06/26/14 09:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeamg0dly
I don't see that ever happening. Our football is more than just a cult like following, it is part of our culture like soccer is to most of the world. The NFL is designed not to tank because of how it shares its profits among all the teams. the only way the NFL can go on the decline is if America itself stops existing.
It will be interesting to see what happens to the NFL as safety issues continue to arise in awareness. I feel as though more parents will be willing to let their kids play football when they're young.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
That's to encourage parity in leagues that are dependent upon television revenues. If the Pittsburgh Penguins didn't get three straight top two picks, the team would have moved, as there are other teams in Pittsburgh (the Steelers, Pirates) that people can watch. In the rest of the world, that's not an option. You have your soccer team and that's it. Conversely, if a crappy EPL team in a bad city drafted the next superstar, he'd just go play in Germany or Italy. If Aaron Ekblad or Sam Bennett (top NHL draft prospects) gets drafted first overall by Florida, they're not taking their talents to Russia for less money and a lower quality of life. American sports leagues feature all of the premier players in a given sport, unlike soccer where there are several leagues who compete for players.

As for the draw thing, I'm really glad to see people talking about the "win at all costs" perspective of the US. Sure, I'm just an ignorant biased American, but I truly believe that we do sports better than anywhere else in the world. Not because of the specific sports we play, but because with all of these different sports we play, we have had more opportunities to figure out what does and doesn't work in sports. There are some rules in soccer that make no sense -- why are there only three subs allowed in the World Cup with no re-entry? It doesn't make you "tough" to play a full 90 minutes, particularly because it just leads to players taking plays off and playing at less than 100%. Sure, there are breaks every 10 seconds in American football, but you also don't see Calvin Johnson taking a break to stretch out his hamstring on the line of scrimmage while the Detroit Lions are snapping the ball.

The diving is also absurd. My friend told me that it's not tolerated in the MLS, so I'll take his word for it, but I don't understand how people are willing to watch the mockery of injuries that these players put on.

Finally, the willingness to tie a game and the lack of drive to win shows itself in the way the players and teams play. I watched a player on Australia sit on an open opportunity to hit one of his players in stride entering the box, essentially giving him a perfect chance at a shot on goal. Soccer players seem content on making these very low-percentage plays such as crossing the ball to one forward in a sea of defenders, while an attempt at a much more creative play isn't even more inherently risky.

The pageantry of the World Cup is great and I love supporting my team. But the on field product is worse than my high school team's. To be fair, my school is a college player factory and a perennial powerhouse, but they played a very "Americanized" version of the sport which, honestly, is way more entertaining to watch and seems much more successful. Because soccer is far and away the only globally important sport in the rest of the world, people are too afraid to change rules or traditions, which then prevents the sport from improving.
Rules are being changed all the time just like any other major sport. Goal-line technology was being called-upon for years and it was implemented this year. The diving in soccer is bad but every sport over-exaggerates contact. Hell, after almost every incomplete pass now in the NFL WR's are calling for a flag. I don't blame the players, I blame the respective leagues for not punishing that kind of behavior. Players are going to do whatever they can to create advantageous situations. In regards to low % plays, it's no different than in hoops when someone takes a deep mid-range jumper knowing they could step back a foot and take a 3. Low IQ players do low IQ things, that isn't sport dependent. I would love to see what this "Americanized" version of soccer is that your team plays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
That was part of the bigger argument I was making in the entire paragraph. There is no relegation in American sports leagues (something that is pretty cool, but probably wouldn't work in the US because of the aforementioned singularity of leagues and concentration of talent). I won't pretend to know the individual instances of each European city, but I would be willing to guess there's less inter-sport competition than in US cities (most of the major ones, at least).



That's not very often and only in the NFL, where injuries are so prevalent. In other sports you don't see that happen (maybe the NBA, but I'll get to that in a second).



I personally hate basketball (college or professional, I'll watch my own school but that's about it). However, players who flop even once in a major game are attacked and criticized. It just seems like there's no accountability for it in soccer.



American sports also realize that in a country with so many popular professional sports, fans are not going to watch or attend your product if there is an inconclusive result. While the overall outcome of a season is important, overtime in sports is something that usually raises the intensity and excitement of the given sport to another level.



Yeah, I understand how that was interpreted, but I meant it from the standpoint of being a more fun sport to watch. I'm not implying that the players are better, because they clearly aren't, but the level I watched was high enough that the players were actually capable of completing passes and making plays, and I just thought the team game was more exciting to watch. To be fair, I also saw the game from a much better and closer angle than I have the few times I have seen professional soccer.



No, but I played years of soccer in my life, have very close friends who have played their entire lives and still play at the Division 1 college level, and also have experience playing entire hockey games. In the NHL, an elite defender will max out at 30 minutes of ice time per game, half of the 60 minutes of gameplay. My senior year of high school, my partner and I would play 40+ minutes of an entire 45 minute game. It completely changes the way you play the game, as you intentionally sit back on certain plays including loose pucks and play a much more conservative style so you don't use up all of your energy.



The team isn't playing a man down, though. I saw van Persie stretching out his hamstring on the 18 in the game against Australia while the ball was on that half of the field. It just seems mind-boggling to me that you could have players ON THE FIELD who are occupied with something other than the game that's going on.





I don't think it should be like American football -- they are pretty obviously two extremely different sports. In my post, I mentioned ice hockey, American football AND high school soccer. The reason I brought up three different sports? Because that's what American sports are all about. People find things in different sports and apply them to their own and it makes the game better. Video replay, which originated in the NFL, is now being used in the NHL and MLB (maybe the NBA too? I have no idea) and it makes those games much better. The NHL introduced the playoff system which is now present in every American sport and some foreign competitions including the World Cup.

You complain that American fans want soccer to be more like American football. What I'm complaining about is that soccer fans refuse to believe that soccer is anything but perfect in its current form and that any changes to a sport that, honestly, is globally popular only because of its low cost and simplicity to play, will somehow destroy it.
If you played soccer for years how do you not understand the concept of a player taking a mini break to stretch, tie their shoe, adjust their equipment, etc? You must have had FIFA video game-like stamina where you could just sprint for the entire match. The reason they haven't globally introduced video-replay is because it's hard to fiscally accomplish. Sure, the EPL would be able to do it but smaller leagues around Europe/South American would struggle to be able to do it on a consistent basis. That's why goal-line technology wasn't introduced 4 years ago after the uproar that would have seen Lampard's shot vs Germany in the '10 WC be called a goal. It will eventually happen but sometimes these things take time. Also, some soccer leagues have a playoff system and they also have League Cups which are a mini/major tournament during the season that's apart from the actual Regular Season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
Playing not to win and wasting time add strategy and depth?
And I never said it was about perfection. I also never complained about the passion and fervor with which soccer fans support their teams. I was complaining about the on-field product in professional leagues and environments. I think the game of soccer is a great game which is (relatively) held back by its stubborn leaders at the professional and international level.
NFL teams and NBA teams don't time waste? NFL teams run to milk the clock, NBA/College Hoops team hold the ball to run the shot clock down. It's all strategy and yes it does add depth to a game/season. There are very few more gut-wrenching experiences in sports to me than your soccer team holding a lead while the other team is going all-out for the win and just throwing waves forward.
You seem to be a pretty intelligent person but a lot of your arguments seem to lack a deeper understanding about the sport and its striking similarities to other sports.
 
# 62 TimLawNYC @ 06/26/14 10:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugazi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_L...cer_attendance

MLS attendance vs. other US major sports

League Sport # Teams Season Average
attendance		 Average vs.
prior season		 Total Attendance Source
National Football League American football 32 2011 64,698 –280 17,124,389 [2]
Major League Baseball Baseball 30 2012 30,895 +533 74,859,268 [3]
Major League Soccer Soccer 19 2012 18,807 +935 6,074,729 [4]
National Hockey League Ice hockey 30 2011-12 17,455 +323 21,470,155
National Basketball Association Basketball 30 2013-14 17,407 +59 21,411,543 [5]
MLS attendance vs. other soccer leagues worldwide

League Country Season Teams Games Total
attendance		 Average
attendance		 Source(s)
Bundesliga Germany 2011–12 18 306 13,811,075 45,179 [6]
Premier League England 2012–13 20 380 13,643,273 [b] 35,903 [7]
La Liga Spain 2012–13 20 380 11,504,567 29,430 [8]
Liga MX Mexico 2011–12 18 334 8,495,000 25,434 [9]
Serie A Italy 2011–12 20 380 8,914,420 23,459 [10]
Eredivisie Netherlands 2011–12 18 306 5,978,689 19,538 [11]
Ligue 1 France 2012–13 20 380 7,299,737 19,261 [12]
Major League Soccer USA / Canada 2012 19 323 6,074,729 18,807 [13]
Chinese Super League China 2012 16 240 4,497,578 18,740 [14] 1
Primera División Argentina Argentina 2011–12 20 380 6,902,798 18,165 [15][16]
Football League Championship England 2012–13 24 552 9,791,690 17,331 [17]
Bundesliga 2 Germany 2012–13 18 306 5,283,396 17,240 [6]
J. League 1 Japan 2013 18 306 5,271,047 17,226 [18]
Campeonato Brasileiro Série A Brazil 2012 20 380 4,941,520 13,004 [19]
These attendance numbers don't show what you think they show. Average attendance isn't a reliable indicator because that can vary so much based on arena/stadium size (i.e., NBA arenas generally hold 17,000-20,000 fans, while football stadiums can hold around 70,000), relative ticket prices, and number of games per season.

To really evaluate a sport's popularity you need to look at TOTAL attendance--and by that measure, soccer's tiny 6,000,000 number is a drop in the bucket compared to the major sports in the USA. By contrast, over 41,000,000 attended MINOR LEAGUE baseball games in 2013 (see http://www.milb.com/news/article.jspymd=20130917&content_id=60843450&fext=.jsp&vkey=pr_milb&sid=milb). I realize that there are many more minor league baseball clubs in the U.S. than there are MLS teams, but it's difficult for you to make a case that soccer is somehow super popular here when nearly SEVEN TIMES more people annually attend minor league baseball.

Sure, soccer is "growing" in popularity here, because it has a relatively new league and it really has nowhere to go but up. But even the attendance numbers you cite show only a 935 person increase in attendance per game year to year, which I wouldn't exactly call explosive growth.

Bottom line, everybody always gets excited about the World Cup (because it is a legitimately great sporting event), but as soon as it's over (or if the U.S. doesn't advance out of the group stage), everybody will forget about it like they always do and soccer will go back to its rightful place in the U.S. as a third-tier sport.

Nobody cares about competitive bobsledding except during the Winter Olympics, either.
 
# 63 KG @ 06/26/14 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimLawNYC
These attendance numbers don't show what you think they show. Average attendance isn't a reliable indicator because that can vary so much based on arena/stadium size (i.e., NBA arenas generally hold 17,000-20,000 fans, while football stadiums can hold around 70,000), relative ticket prices, and number of games per season.

To really evaluate a sport's popularity you need to look at TOTAL attendance--and by that measure, soccer's tiny 6,000,000 number is a drop in the bucket compared to the major sports in the USA. By contrast, over 41,000,000 attended MINOR LEAGUE baseball games in 2013 (see http://www.milb.com/news/article.jsp..._milb&sid=milb). I realize that there are many more minor league baseball clubs in the U.S. than there are MLS teams, but it's difficult for you to make a case that soccer is somehow super popular here when nearly SEVEN TIMES more people annually attend minor league baseball.

Sure, soccer is "growing" in popularity here, because it has a relatively new league and it really has nowhere to go but up. But even the attendance numbers you cite show only a 935 person increase in attendance per game year to year, which I wouldn't exactly call explosive growth.

Bottom line, everybody always gets excited about the World Cup (because it is a legitimately great sporting event), but as soon as it's over (or if the U.S. doesn't advance out of the group stage), everybody will forget about it like they always do and soccer will go back to its rightful place in the U.S. as a third-tier sport.

Nobody cares about competitive bobsledding except during the Winter Olympics, either.
Only 4 MLS clubs play in stadiums that also host NFL/CFL teams (Seattle, NE Revolution, DC United, and Vancouver) and no one plays in RFK (DC United) anymore so the stadium has reduced its overall capacity. The other 3 clubs reduce their maximum capacity as well.
 
# 64 TimLawNYC @ 06/26/14 12:27 PM
If soccer ever wants a large fanbase in the USA, major changes need to be made to make the game more exciting. Start by reducing the size of the pitch by like 40% and giving each team 6 players at a time. Then maybe something exciting could happen and you'd see more than 2 goals in 90 minutes.
 
# 65 KG @ 06/26/14 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimLawNYC
If soccer ever wants a large fanbase in the USA, major changes need to be made to make the game more exciting. Start by reducing the size of the pitch by like 40% and giving each team 6 players at a time. Then maybe something exciting could happen and you'd see more than 2 goals in 90 minutes.
I hate this line of thinking. I'm not a huge baseball fan per se but I can see the beauty in a 1-0 game. I'm not a hockey fan but I can appreciate a tight 1-0 playoff game. Goals/Scoring does not automatically equate to excitement. Watch the Brazil-Mexico replay and tell me that wasn't an exciting game. How would your ideas benefit the sport of soccer, especially in International competitions? We play by one set rules while the rest of the world plays by another? Yeah, that makes sense.
 
# 66 TimLawNYC @ 06/26/14 02:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KG
I hate this line of thinking. I'm not a huge baseball fan per se but I can see the beauty in a 1-0 game. I'm not a hockey fan but I can appreciate a tight 1-0 playoff game. Goals/Scoring does not automatically equate to excitement. Watch the Brazil-Mexico replay and tell me that wasn't an exciting game. How would your ideas benefit the sport of soccer, especially in International competitions? We play by one set rules while the rest of the world plays by another? Yeah, that makes sense.
All I'm saying is that any sport in which contests routinely end in a scoreless tie cannot be taken seriously.
 
# 67 areobee401 @ 06/26/14 02:44 PM
This old, tired debate is exactly that.
 
# 68 fugazi @ 06/26/14 03:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimLawNYC
If soccer ever wants a large fanbase in the USA, major changes need to be made to make the game more exciting. Start by reducing the size of the pitch by like 40% and giving each team 6 players at a time. Then maybe something exciting could happen and you'd see more than 2 goals in 90 minutes.
....just....wow....this guy...

40% smaller? is that a joke?

believe me...soccer fans are doing just fine by not catering to your "sensibilities", and the sport is doing just fine as is.

Thank god people like this aren't allowed to make decisions.
 
# 69 Chip Douglass @ 06/26/14 03:35 PM
Probably already mentioned, but short of a) one of the three major sports suffering a massive, terminal decline in popularity or b) the US finding itself a Michael Jordan/Leo Messi-type soccer prospect who consistently leads the US deep into the World Cup, soccer will never be a mainstream sport.

The US routinely qualifying for World Cups and making some noise in those World Cups has established a baseline for support though. And demographic change via immigration from soccer-crazy Latin American countries will only grow that baseline.
 
# 70 TimLawNYC @ 06/26/14 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KG
I hate this line of thinking. I'm not a huge baseball fan per se but I can see the beauty in a 1-0 game. I'm not a hockey fan but I can appreciate a tight 1-0 playoff game. Goals/Scoring does not automatically equate to excitement. Watch the Brazil-Mexico replay and tell me that wasn't an exciting game. How would your ideas benefit the sport of soccer, especially in International competitions? We play by one set rules while the rest of the world plays by another? Yeah, that makes sense.
Let the rest of the world play their boring old game, while we get something awesome! 'MURICA!
 
# 71 Suntan Superman @ 06/26/14 03:41 PM
Well, according to TimLaw's logic of attendance figures, the MLB is 3x as popular as the NFL, and the NFL is the least popular of the "Major 4"

Clearly, there's no flaw in this logic.
 
# 72 yankeesgiants @ 06/26/14 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KG
How would your ideas benefit the sport of soccer, especially in International competitions? We play by one set rules while the rest of the world plays by another? Yeah, that makes sense.
It already happens. The NHL and the IIHF not only have different rules but the ice surfaces are also different sizes. THE NBA has it's own set of rules and FIBA has it's own set of rules. When the NBA plays exhibition games in europe, they play under the FIBA rules. To have amercan rules and FIFA rules might not be a bad idea. suggestions??
 
# 73 eyeamg0dly @ 06/26/14 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yankeesgiants
It already happens. The NHL and the IIHF not only have different rules but the ice surfaces are also different sizes. THE NBA has it's own set of rules and FIBA has it's own set of rules. When the NBA plays exhibition games in europe, they play under the FIBA rules. To have amercan rules and FIFA rules might not be a bad idea. suggestions??
Yeah but look how both sides are merging together to make one set of rules. FIBA changed their trapazoid key to match the NBA. NBA changed their zone defense rule to match FIBA. I wont be surprised if the assists rules change either. The NBA is also thinking of shifting to team sponsorship and putting their logos on their jerseys.
 
# 74 NYwRiter94 @ 06/26/14 05:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugazi
um....this thread posed a question.

and in this thread, a number of people offered their opinion that soccer would never be this or that or take over these 4 yadda yadda etc.

while i don't particularly care, bc the issue isn't whether the MLS will become bigger than MLB or NFL or anything...and bc I will spend most of my soccer time watching other leagues...

I can't for the life of me figure out how anyone could make such a ridiculous statement regarding a table that showed MLS had higher per-game average attendance than NBA and NHL.

Even with the caveats you mentioned, which are far from damning, the fact remains. I didn't say it suggested some kind of great change in the landscape, just posted the fact.

I don't know what is misleading about it.

The top NBA teams draw more than twice the lower ones per game...

regardless, I don't see how anyone that has paid any attention to the sports landscape in the US since the early 90s can't discern the considerable, consistent, and obvious rise in the popularity of soccer in the US.

I would say you are trolling, except you seem to take your argument way too seriously.
My original comments were partially designed to be incendiary (although I stand by them), but the ridiculous responses are just the reason that I posted them in the first place. The original thread may have been about the rise of soccer in the US, but your posting of those attendance figures came immediately after you responded to a post involved in what this thread has mostly turned into, which is a discussion about why soccer does not cater particularly well to most American sports fans.

You can make your arguments about the rising attendance figures, but those show very little. Someone mentioned the large number of people who attend minor league baseball games in a year. Does that mean minor league baseball will ever be a relevant mainstream sport in the US? Absolutely not. The reason minor league games get that attendance is because people say, "Hey, it's a nice day out. We should get out and do something. Why don't we go to the nearby ballpark and watch the local team play?" If tickets to the MLS were really that desirable, they wouldn't be so cheap.

That's not to say the sport's not on the rise here, as I think that it is and also that the MLS caters more to the American sports fan than other soccer leagues (minus the lack of talent). But the attendance figures you showed were not comparing MLS attendance now to the past; you specifically picked stats compared to a) other American sports leagues and b) other professional soccer leagues. So don't complain when we point out why those figures are misleading in regards to those two categories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KG
Rules are being changed all the time just like any other major sport. Goal-line technology was being called-upon for years and it was implemented this year. The diving in soccer is bad but every sport over-exaggerates contact. Hell, after almost every incomplete pass now in the NFL WR's are calling for a flag. I don't blame the players, I blame the respective leagues for not punishing that kind of behavior. Players are going to do whatever they can to create advantageous situations. In regards to low % plays, it's no different than in hoops when someone takes a deep mid-range jumper knowing they could step back a foot and take a 3. Low IQ players do low IQ things, that isn't sport dependent. I would love to see what this "Americanized" version of soccer is that your team plays.

If you played soccer for years how do you not understand the concept of a player taking a mini break to stretch, tie their shoe, adjust their equipment, etc? You must have had FIFA video game-like stamina where you could just sprint for the entire match. The reason they haven't globally introduced video-replay is because it's hard to fiscally accomplish. Sure, the EPL would be able to do it but smaller leagues around Europe/South American would struggle to be able to do it on a consistent basis. That's why goal-line technology wasn't introduced 4 years ago after the uproar that would have seen Lampard's shot vs Germany in the '10 WC be called a goal. It will eventually happen but sometimes these things take time. Also, some soccer leagues have a playoff system and they also have League Cups which are a mini/major tournament during the season that's apart from the actual Regular Season.

NFL teams and NBA teams don't time waste? NFL teams run to milk the clock, NBA/College Hoops team hold the ball to run the shot clock down. It's all strategy and yes it does add depth to a game/season. There are very few more gut-wrenching experiences in sports to me than your soccer team holding a lead while the other team is going all-out for the win and just throwing waves forward.
You seem to be a pretty intelligent person but a lot of your arguments seem to lack a deeper understanding about the sport and its striking similarities to other sports.
That last comment is pretty insulting, especially considering I'm about to address the fact that some of your comments completely missed my point or just ignored what was said.

Receivers may call for a flag after the ball goes past them, but you don't really see them diving onto the ground as the contact is made. In fact, the fact that they immediately jump up and make the motion of pulling out the flag means they aren't rolling around on the ground acting like they've been shot. I wouldn't have a problem with soccer plays immediately running over to the ref and complaining instead of lying motionless on the field after minimal contact.

Do you even read what's being said in this thread? I'm not questioning van Persie's attitude or dedication because he sat down to stretch his hamstring. I'm saying that it doesn't seem right to me that the rules and structure of the game dictate that he should be doing so. I don't understand what the game loses by allowing him to come off of the field for two minutes while a substitute runs on so the game isn't reduced to fewer players and he can take care of what he needs to. Most of these complaints are about the system, not about the actions of the individual players (aside from the diving, although that is mostly a product of the system).

I also am not expecting players to have video game-like stamina. I understand that running around on a massive field for 90 minutes is a physically exhausting task. My point is that if there were more substitutes available, as well as re-entry, the game would be more exciting. You cannot seriously tell me that the players on the field are giving 100% the entire time they are out there. I'm not saying they are being lazy or undisciplined, just that they are obviously not giving it their all BECAUSE they know they can't tire themselves out for the rest of the game. Once again, a product of the system. You can make all of the arguments you want about the "tradition" and "spirit" of the game, but you're flat out lying to me if you say that watching a player play at 65% for 90 minutes is better than watching him play 65% of the game at 100% and then watching a substitute player play the remaining time at an equal or better level than the original player would have been playing if he were on the field the entire time.

As for the time-wasting component, there is no aspect of soccer that I know of designed to prevent that. In football, you have the play clock and in basketball you have a shot clock. The rulemakers of those sports and leagues have done their best to encourage high-quality entertainment from start to finish without compromising the integrity of the game. In addition, the original poster praised the strategy of time wasting. Do you ever see football or basketball fans talking about how great running out the clock is? It's a necessary evil of time-based sports. We should be trying to minimize it instead of encouraging it.

You two can keep mocking my statements all you want, but you keep responding. And I keep firing back with legitimate criticism. Still, you guys are like most soccer-first fans that I talk to, in that you refuse to actually look at what I'm trying to say and just defend your sport until the death.

Let me explain one last time: I ENJOY THE SPORT OF SOCCER. I HATE THE WAY IT IS PLAYED AT THE PROFESSIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.
 
# 75 KG @ 06/26/14 08:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
That last comment is pretty insulting, especially considering I'm about to address the fact that some of your comments completely missed my point or just ignored what was said.

Receivers may call for a flag after the ball goes past them, but you don't really see them diving onto the ground as the contact is made. In fact, the fact that they immediately jump up and make the motion of pulling out the flag means they aren't rolling around on the ground acting like they've been shot. I wouldn't have a problem with soccer plays immediately running over to the ref and complaining instead of lying motionless on the field after minimal contact.
No argument here when it comes to the art of selling the foul in soccer. They do it because it works, just like it does in basketball the majority of the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
Do you even read what's being said in this thread? I'm not questioning van Persie's attitude or dedication because he sat down to stretch his hamstring. I'm saying that it doesn't seem right to me that the rules and structure of the game dictate that he should be doing so. I don't understand what the game loses by allowing him to come off of the field for two minutes while a substitute runs on so the game isn't reduced to fewer players and he can take care of what he needs to. Most of these complaints are about the system, not about the actions of the individual players (aside from the diving, although that is mostly a product of the system).
It loses the one thing that separates soccer from football, basketball, and baseball...an actual flow. No timeouts, no breaks in between plays/pitches. Just continual action for the better part of a game. I love basketball but it can be brutal in a close game where there's a sub every dead-ball followed up by timeouts to make sure the optimal play is called given the situation. None of that in soccer. Adjust on the fly tactically or make a sub.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
I also am not expecting players to have video game-like stamina. I understand that running around on a massive field for 90 minutes is a physically exhausting task. My point is that if there were more substitutes available, as well as re-entry, the game would be more exciting. You cannot seriously tell me that the players on the field are giving 100% the entire time they are out there. I'm not saying they are being lazy or undisciplined, just that they are obviously not giving it their all BECAUSE they know they can't tire themselves out for the rest of the game. Once again, a product of the system. You can make all of the arguments you want about the "tradition" and "spirit" of the game, but you're flat out lying to me if you say that watching a player play at 65% for 90 minutes is better than watching him play 65% of the game at 100% and then watching a substitute player play the remaining time at an equal or better level than the original player would have been playing if he were on the field the entire time.
Again, more exciting is subjective. More subs in my mind means more stoppages and that is not exciting or enticing to me. I like to see what teams still have in the tank in the 80th minute, multiple subs would take that away.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
As for the time-wasting component, there is no aspect of soccer that I know of designed to prevent that.
It's statements like this that make me question how well you know the sport. Refs 1) give out yellow cards for time-wasting and 2) add time back on the clock for stoppage time

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
In football, you have the play clock and in basketball you have a shot clock. The rulemakers of those sports and leagues have done their best to encourage high-quality entertainment from start to finish without compromising the integrity of the game. In addition, the original poster praised the strategy of time wasting. Do you ever see football or basketball fans talking about how great running out the clock is? It's a necessary evil of time-based sports. We should be trying to minimize it instead of encouraging it.
No one "likes" it in any sport but everyone realizes it's a part of the game and you do what you do to get the desired result. When the Giants are running out the clock on my Skins I'm not happy but I understand that it's a necessary evil. Just like when Man United dribbles to the corner-flag against Chelsea. It's a viable strategy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYwRiter94
You two can keep mocking my statements all you want, but you keep responding. And I keep firing back with legitimate criticism. Still, you guys are like most soccer-first fans that I talk to, in that you refuse to actually look at what I'm trying to say and just defend your sport until the death.

Let me explain one last time: I ENJOY THE SPORT OF SOCCER. I HATE THE WAY IT IS PLAYED AT THE PROFESSIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.
I'm a bball fan 1st and foremost but you're "legit criticisms" aren't very legit. I'd still like to hear how your local team plays an "Americanized" version of soccer.
 
# 76 NYBorn81 @ 06/28/14 12:37 PM
Having not read this whole thread. I'll say this, I only just got into Soccer during the last World Cup, before Donovan & Co. were knocked out by Ghana. Before that, while I never previously watched it, catching glimpses of it, I always wondered why my foreign-turned-American (some of them, a couple of them are illegal immigrants to this day) friends found it to be their main sport and I struggled to find their enjoyment in it. Well, watching the last World Cup, changed all of that for me. Watching with those same friends at a get together or something, I discovered how exciting the games are themselves in most cases. After the World Cup ended, I began to watch MLS, on DirecTV which my last cable provider, they had an awesome Soccer package, they had one channel dedicated to the English League, another channel dedicated to another league and then the Fox Soccer Channel which covered everything. But being a NY'er, MSG covered my MLS needs with the Red Bulls, I then got into watching those games, and was stoked when Thierry Henry came around. I can no longer keep up as much as I'd like to because I no longer have that awesome cable package.


But this time has become my favorite time of the year, or every four years. Lol. Every game has been pure excitement, every time a team gets inside the box it sends an adrenaline rush down my spine, I may not even be a fan of the specific team playing, but I've become a fan of the game itself. Every scoring attempt makes me want to rise out of my seat in anticipation. Last weeks game between US & Portugal was literally the most exciting 90 minutes of any sport that I have ever sat through in it's entirety. Back to my point before, every attempt caused an increase in my heart beat, whether it missed or not, every time we got into the box I found myself biting my nails in the hopes that we could finally sneak one past the goalkeep. And vice versa, when they got inside of our box, I did the same thing in hopes that our goalkeep could continue to keep the ball outside of our net. When we finally scored I found myself outscreaming everyone else in the room out of pure excitement. When Dempsey scored came a relaxing period, but then I quickly found out there are no relax periods in this game, and more insanity ensued after Portugal tied things up in the literal final minute. With that said, I've come to find out why my friends love it so much, Soccer (Futbol) is a very emotional sport and game, I think it's pretty easy to get sucked into if you actually go into it with a level head and a fair idea of the game. If you go to watch with the thoughts of "Why do they call it Football, this ain't got nothing on OUR football", then sure, you may not enjoy it. But if you go into it without any pre-determined judgments of it, I guarantee you'll be surprised.


I was never a baseball fan, so this sport automatically eclipses that for me. I'm no longer into Hockey like I used to be, so this too surpasses that. I'd put Soccer (Futbol) into my top three sports, behind only the NFL & NBA. And while I think Soccer is definitely on the rise here, I don't think it'll ever exceed baseball in popularity. Baseball is losing it's popularity here in America due to the whole "Steroids" thing and their seemingly being a lack of big time hitters now that the league has clamped down on suspected HGH usage. But it'll never lose enough popularity to the point where a sport like Soccer can surpass it. Things like Baseball, Football, Basketball, and even hockey to some extent are too engrained in American culture to be moved to the side in favor of another game from another place other than America.
 
# 77 gopher_guy @ 06/28/14 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimLawNYC
All I'm saying is that any sport in which contests routinely end in a scoreless tie cannot be taken seriously.
lol.

He says this like there is a 0-0 draw every other game.
 
# 78 Twenty Four @ 06/30/14 02:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gopher_guy
lol.

He says this like there is a 0-0 draw every other game.
That is such a big reason why soccer isn't more popular. From experience, this is a big knock on the sport from people who really have no clue about it. I used to hear the "kicking a ball around for 90 minutes to end 0-0 isn't american" and for most of my childhood I believed it an never gave soccer a chance. Until the 2006 World Cup. Granted, it was an awful American showing, it got me intrigued enough to tune into the 2010 World Cup, and I was hooked after the USA vs Algeria game. Sure, there's a ton of people (like me) who really only watched because the US was playing as a country. But, if every doubter, like me, would give the game a chance, I think the sport would sky rocket.... It's not at ALL as boring as I once thought, in fact Id much rather watch a soccer game than a basketball or baseball game now. The MLS however, is a different story. I do think it's growing and expanding, but it's goin to take something big for it to really take off. Sooner or later I think it can happen though. Overall, this is a silly topic, of course it's growing, it's just a matter of at what rate.
 
# 79 Seahawk76 @ 06/30/14 02:01 PM
There is simply no doubt that interest in soccer has been growing over the past 20 years or so but its been steady growth. The sport isn't going to suddenly explode overnight into a major sport in this country. If and when it gets there it will have happened incrementally.


Personally I think its only a matter of time before soccer passes hockey as the fourth most popular sport but it is decades away from challenging football, baseball, or basketball, if it ever does. But that doesn't mean that the US couldn't eventually grow into a world power in the sport. There are too many great athletes in this country and over time more and more of them will play the sport.


Just the fact that you can now see the EPL on network and cable TV illustrates that there is a rising market in this country.
 
# 80 dickey1331 @ 07/01/14 02:28 AM
With the NFLs problem with concussions and parents worried about their kids safety. It's just a matter of time before the NFL falls. They have nowhere to go but down. It may not be in 10 years or even 30 years but in my life time soccer will be a top sport in America.

The MLS doesn't need to get rid of ties. If they want to succeed and be able to compete with Europe then we need to be more like them. Getting rid of ties will ruin the MLS.
 


Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.