Why the USA Hates bloody futbol

Sudz · Post by **Sudz** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:33 pm

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/stor ... 49,00.html

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:39 pm

Never really thought of the similarities until I read that, thanks for the link.

BBReBozo · Post by **BBReBozo** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 2:42 pm

A very interesting read.

I heard one of the nameless weekend scrubs on Fox Sports Radio recently saying that the reason he hated soccer was because, in his mind, the near-religious fever spawned by soccer throughout the world is too closely akin to the kind of blind fanaticism that drives the world's terrorists. Yes, that's right, he said he hated soccer because soccer = terrorism.

What s***.

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:28 pm

That is funny. Not surprising though. Through floridation of our water supplies by the illuminati we are slowly being turned into a nation of mindless serfs. Think about it. Flouride. Florida.

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 4:43 pm

Yeah, was reading the Observer yesterday when I came across that piece. Same probably applies to Aussie Rules as well - soccer is only really popular in Australia with people who have emigrated there in the relatively recent past, particularly from Italy, Greece and the former Yugoslav states.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:19 pm

Very interesting story.

I find soccer to be much more cerebral than basketball, giving it more of a link to baseball, which also is a pretty cerebral game. Basketball and soccer both have varying strategies and tactics, but it seems that few of those tactics are employed in the NBA, whereas it seems like there are a bunch of different formations, tactics and strategies used by various teams around the world.

But no American major sport seems to have fewer strategic variations to me than the NFL. Nearly every team uses a 4-3 base defense and plays some variation of an I formation offense. Football comes down more to execution and matchups than creativity more times than not.

Yet the NFL is far and away the No. 1 sport in the U.S.

I also disagree with this line:

>>>For spectators they are, in a sense, alternatives. North Americans don't need football because they already get what it has to offer from basketball.<<<

Basketball is all about instant gratification. Shots every 24 seconds or less in the NBA, combined scores approaching 200, plenty of baskets. Soccer is about the buildup, about the great release when every goal is scored.

If hoop fans cheered with the same fervor after every basket that soccer fans do after every goal, few indoor arenas would be left standing in this country every spring.

Again, very interesting story.

Take care,
PK

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 5:37 pm

Short attention spans

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:00 pm

I think of soccer like chess.

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:02 pm

pk500 wrote:Basketball is all about instant gratification. Shots every 24 seconds or less in the NBA, combined scores approaching 200, plenty of baskets. Soccer is about the buildup, about the great release when every goal is scored.

I like this analogy. Soccer is tantric

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:16 pm

TheMightyPuck wrote:
pk500 wrote:Basketball is all about instant gratification. Shots every 24 seconds or less in the NBA, combined scores approaching 200, plenty of baskets. Soccer is about the buildup, about the great release when every goal is scored.
I like this analogy. Soccer is tantric

................shitbreak?

LAking · Post by **LAking** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:19 pm

I personally think every sport, when you really get down to it, is like chess. They all have a lot of stategy when played at a serious level. On the surface, as a purely recreational game, soccer does not have a lot of strategy. It's essentially a bunch of guys kicking a ball up and down a field until they can shoot it into the goal. Only when the skill level of the players gets fairly high does strategy really enter into it. Same with Hockey, Basketball, and Baseball. You can play a game of baseball without using strategies like sac bunts, or stealing, or pitching changes and what not. You can play basketball where each guy just guards another one and there are no set plays or matchups or subs.

Only in Football do i think there are built in stategies. You have the option at all times to run or pass. You are forced to decide which one would be best in any given situation. Not to say that in the end there is more strategy in football, just that it has a very basic element of strategy built in. When all is said and done, baseball probably involves a lot more thinking and cruicial decision making by a manager/coach/strategist than football, IMO.

Anyway, i agree with most of what the article said. Soccer's popularity in my opinion is due to its simplicity and the fact that anyone can play it, as long as they kind find something to use as a ball. It's a cheap sport. Kids in the poorest countries can play it. That's the key factor in it's massive popularity if you ask me. Basketball is similar in that all you need is a basketball and a park with a hoop. It's not quite a accessible as soccer, but close. I think the athor is correct in assuming that Americans have enough sports options to satisfy themselves without having to look to soccer.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:21 pm

Interesting read but I think hockey is much more comparable to soccer than basketball. PK hit it on the head as far as the pace and immediate gratification aspects of basketball as compared to futbol.

But I disagree with this PK
"But no American major sport seems to have fewer strategic variations to me than the NFL. Nearly every team uses a 4-3 base defense and plays some variation of an I formation offense. Football comes down more to execution and matchups than creativity more times than not.

Yet the NFL is far and away the No. 1 sport in the U.S. "

There are thousands of different schemes that can be run from one base formation not including the variations of the formation itself. This is on both sides of the ball. I would have to say that basketball probably has the fewest strategic variations in American sports and possibly hockey.

I think the biggest problem with soccer in America is the fact that it's underexposed. The only reason I like soccer is the fact that I played it as a kid. I likely would have never even had an opportunity to learn about soccer growing up if I hadn't played it. Baseball, football, basketball are all easily accessible to the American public on tv or radio. Hockey has been lagging behind lately but it gained a lot of it's popularity as a result of ESPN. Soccer is barely showed on tv in this country unless your talking about Spanish speaking networks which most Americans (English speaking at least) don't watch or cable networks such as Fox Sports World which many Americans don't have.

It doesn't help when the sports media around the country treats soccer like a syphallitic red-headed step-child. Many Americans blindly follow what they do hear in the media and unfortunately the media hates soccer.

Soccer, I implore you to expose yourself.

Blublub · Post by **Blublub** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 6:26 pm

What a load of utter crap. He bundles up all the conventional wisdom arguments and offers the little gem that basketball is blocking football's space since they are both games where you put a ball in a target. Moron.

And then goes on to state that the problem is with the lack of scoring. Bold assertion there, Einstein. He is right that any attempt to do so renders the game so far removed from that played everywhere else so as to make it pointless. Hmmm, anyone remember indoor soccer or the early years of the MLS? Loads of rule changes to make scoring easier, and neither really caught on, did they? Ultimately they came to their senses and moved closer to the international game or simply gave up.

Unfortunately football is probably destined to remain a niche sport here due to its place in our cultural history. However, with all the major sports but American football having succeeded in alienataing large numbers of fans, there are inroads that could be made. MLS is on the right track, IMHO, but the continuing financial woes and sale of promising young talent to Europe is going to make it a tough road to hoe, certainly.

I usually expect more from Guardian football coverage than this bunch of garbage.

K_Mosley · Post by **K_Mosley** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:02 pm

Just my two cents...

Soccer is not an "American" game, hence its lack of popularity...

And, there are PLENTY of X's and O's in basketball and football. Playbooks in football routinely have hundreds of pages, and I've played and coached enough basketball to know that there are enough entries, sets, and plays (both offensively and defensively) to make your head hurt. I'm a soccer novice, but I don't doubt that it's just as complicated. However, the typical American non-soccer fan probably thinks that there's no strategy to soccer ("it's kickball with goals" or something).

Kevin

TheMightyPuck · Post by **TheMightyPuck** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 7:04 pm

Blublub wrote:...tough road to hoe, certainly....

Metaphor police ALERT!! Please step away from the keyboard.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:54 pm

Anyone hear of that book, "How Soccer Explains the World"?

It's about how soccer demonstrates the process of globalization.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:36 pm

Here's a slightly weightier analysis of the issue:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... s&n=507846

LAking · Post by **LAking** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:49 pm

What a load of utter crap. He bundles up all the conventional wisdom arguments and offers the little gem that basketball is blocking football's space since they are both games where you put a ball in a target. Moron

No he didn't. The ball in goal thing was just to point out their very basic similarities. The overall point he made in the article is mostly that americans already have enough choices in sports and don't feel the need/urge to look for MORE alternatives. He simply made a point that Basketball and Soccer, at their most basic level, are very similar in terms of the goal of the game and ease to get a quick "street" game going. THAT is why he believes basketball is blocking soccer's space. Basketball is the "street" game of choice for most Americans. It's a very valid point. You are skewing his argument and then calling him a moron. Every heard of the straw man fallacy?

Blublub · Post by **Blublub** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 10:19 pm

TheMightyPuck wrote:
Blublub wrote:...tough road to hoe, certainly....
Metaphor police ALERT!! Please step away from the keyboard.

Good Lord, I can't believe I wrote that. Step away indeed...

Blublub · Post by **Blublub** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 10:23 pm

LAking wrote:
What a load of utter crap. He bundles up all the conventional wisdom arguments and offers the little gem that basketball is blocking football's space since they are both games where you put a ball in a target. Moron
No he didn't. The ball in goal thing was just to point out their very basic similarities. The overall point he made in the article is mostly that americans already have enough choices in sports and don't feel the need/urge to look for MORE alternatives. He simply made a point that Basketball and Soccer, at their most basic level, are very similar in terms of the goal of the game and ease to get a quick "street" game going. THAT is why he believes basketball is blocking soccer's space. Basketball is the "street" game of choice for most Americans. It's a very valid point. You are skewing his argument and then calling him a moron. Every heard of the straw man fallacy?

Okay, maybe I misread, but even if your read is correct I'd still argue he is wrong. I'd venture to guess that there are more kids playing soccer at the youth level than basketball. Even if there aren't, I'm not sure I buy the linkage between playing a sandlot game and being a supporter of the professional version. Were there a correlation soccer would be a hell of a lot more popular given all the soccer moms and kids in the country.

LAking · Post by **LAking** » Mon Aug 02, 2004 10:55 pm

Okay, maybe I misread, but even if your read is correct I'd still argue he is wrong. I'd venture to guess that there are more kids playing soccer at the youth level than basketball. Even if there aren't, I'm not sure I buy the linkage between playing a sandlot game and being a supporter of the professional version. Were there a correlation soccer would be a hell of a lot more popular given all the soccer moms and kids in the country.

True, there are a lot of kids who play soccer, but it seems to only be organized soccer, and not much pick up games on the school yard or at the park. After a certain age (probably once they get to junior high) kids tend to lose interest in organized soccer. It might have something to do with the fact that their schools offer more organized basketball, football, and baseball programs. I think it's just that the 3 to 4 major sports are already so well established that it's impossible for soccer to make any significant strides in popularity. The MLS or any other league does not get any real media attention and the kids lose interest if they don't have star players to follow. It's hard to pinpoint any one reason why the sport is not popular in the states. Perhaps Freddy Adu will eventually change the way soccer is viewed here.

koebner69 · Post by **koebner69** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:24 am

It's tough to watch a 3-4 hour sporting event and see 1 maybe 2 goals scored.That is the main problem with soccer here.People love to watch their kids play it,but as a televised sport it is long and dull to most people.It is hockey's problem as well.Both will always be niche sports,popular in a few cities and locations and basically unwatched by the nation as a whole.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:02 am

koebner69 wrote:It's tough to watch a 3-4 hour sporting event and see 1 maybe 2 goals scored.That is the main problem with soccer here.People love to watch their kids play it,but as a televised sport it is long and dull to most people.It is hockey's problem as well.Both will always be niche sports,popular in a few cities and locations and basically unwatched by the nation as a whole.

Soccer really isn't a 3-4 hour sport. Plus, there are no commercials. Baseball is a 3-4 hour sport and it is popular.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 10:05 am

That's one of the things I LOVE about soccer: It's two hours, tops, unless there's an overtime or shootout situation in a tournament. Otherwise, every league game, friendly or international tournament round-play match takes two hours or less. Two 45-minute halves with a couple of minutes tacked on and no time outs or TV time outs, plus a 15-minute halftime.

Perfect.

Take care,
PK

Zeppo · Post by **Zeppo** » Tue Aug 03, 2004 10:29 am

pk500 wrote:That's one of the things I LOVE about soccer: It's two hours, tops, unless there's an overtime or shootout situation in a tournament. Otherwise, every league game, friendly or international tournament round-play match takes two hours or less. Two 45-minute halves with a couple of minutes tacked on and no time outs or TV time outs, plus a 15-minute halftime.

Perfect.

Take care,
PK

EXACTLY!!! In a day when the NFL has been changing the rules governing the clock, not in order to make the overall game shorter or to give the teams more plays, but rather for the SOLE AND ONLY PURPOSE of squeezing in more commercials, and in a day when the average baseball game takes up to 80 minutes longer than it did 50 years ago, soccer is acually more attractive in terms of time spent/satisfaction gained. Its 2hrs, maybe 2hrs. 5 minutes. Never shorter, only longer if there is a so-called need to determine a winner (like in a tournament game as opposed to a league game). Not to mention pro basketball, where the clock seems to be stopped more often than it is running, and free throws take FOREVER, to go along with free substitutions and countless time outs. You got to love that All-American invention, the TV Time Out!!! And don't tell me Americans like it just because it was invented in America.

I can't believe I just responded to this thread, don't get me started.