Why Soccer will (not) succeed in America

[PikeStance]

Didn't the US participate in the first World Cups back in the 30s? Doesn't that mean that there was already professional football in the country back then? How do they still have no football culture, or any reasonable relevance in the sport?

I am going to look it up, but I am 99% sure that almost the entire squad was made up of recent immigrants. I am also fairly certain this was mostly true in 1950 as well.

edited 1930 team,... I looked up the squad there was only 6 recent immigrants (All Scots except for one Englishmen). I didn't look to see who started, but I imagine the immigrants probably did.

edited 1950 team,... there were 6 immigrants as well (English, Haitian, Croatian, Scot, Belgian, and Polish).

Also, they appeared have been some sort of league in the Northeast that folded.

<-Played soccer at the ages of 5 and 6 in the great years of 1988 and 1989.

So, how many people are going to strawman this statement?

I was a freshmen in college.

[Basil II the B.S]

The 2016 Copa America will be a combined CONCACAF-CONMEBOL tournament hosted in the USA, which judging by this World Cup should be a pretty competitive tournament if FIFA gives it full sanctioning (so that A teams can be used by all teams).

The problem with inviting CONCACAF teams to the Copa America is that usually they have to send u-23 teams (either because of FIFA or the Gold Cup is usually the month before and they don't want to use the A team players for two straight months). Both Costa Rica and Mexico had C teams in the 2011 Copa America and didn't do anything in the tournament. USA also sent a C team the last time it played in the Copa America (2007).

Both Mexico and the US would benefit a lot if CONCACAF and CONMEBOL merged tbh. The problems with the former are the huge number of uncompetitive teams and leagues, limited talent pool and tradition. South America has all of that and would definitely benefit from some fresh money. A unified Copa Libertadores/Champions League would also attract more viewers, increase the revenues and so on. Not sure if they ever thought of this.

[Acco]

Didn't the US participate in the first World Cups back in the 30s? Doesn't that mean that there was already professional football in the country back then? How do they still have no football culture, or any reasonable relevance in the sport?

The US was third place in the 1930 (inaugural) World Cup. They had a professional league called the American Soccer League which was actually quite strong, had bigger crowds than the NFL at the same time, attracted some good European players and produced some good homegrown American players too. The league dissolved around 1930 due to a variety of factors, like administrative struggles (league vs federation) and the Great Depression. Afterwards the US never had a fully national league until the NASL of the 70s, and that crashed eventually too. MLS started in 1996 and is at least permanent by now despite some initial problems. This is the first era in American history with a functioning and stable top division and the first rewards of it are just now beginning to be seen (this was the first World Cup that a homegrown MLS player made the USA team - DeAndre Yedlin, he actually looked really good in all his appearances including against Belgium today). 20 or so years from now, with more mature clubs and a league with more tradition, the US will at least have a solid pipeline for talent and if the sport continues to grow in popularity as it generally does every four years, the talent will get better and better. The US is a consistent knockout round World Cup team already, so they'll be pretty scary once the sport is more popular and mature there.

[empr guy]

There is a huge misconception here.... The US is a sports nation with sports stacked all year round. People do not lose interest, they just move on to the next sports onn the schedule. Unlike elsewhere in the world most sports fans are equally strong sports fans in several sports. If you ask an American what is there favorite sport, they will most likely give you a list.

well as was stated by pugs (i think), soccer is a sport that children play and then they try to make it in more popular sports once they get to middle/high school. I remember when I was young I did the exact same thing, and ended up dropping soccer for baseball (even though i'm 99% sure there isnt an overlap in seasons), and in high school the focus was on football, and none of the unis I looked at even had a competitive soccer team, and that wasn't exactly that long ago.

It's not that the sport isn't getting more popular, it's just not on the level of any other professional sport I can think of atm (not even hockey, and where i'm from thats saying quite a bit), and likely won't be for a long long time. I feel like every WC I hear people saying how it's going to catch on in the US any day now and become a rival to everything else, and then when the WC is over no one even talks about it

[Acco]

I am going to look it up, but I am 99% sure that almost the entire squad was made up of recent immigrants. I am also fairly certain this was mostly true in 1950 as well.

edited 1930 team,... I looked up the squad there was only 6 recent immigrants (All Scots except for one Englishmen). I didn't look to see who started, but I imagine the immigrants probably did.

Only one of those immigrants played professionally in Britain before arriving in the US. The rest were immigrants who arrived in their teenage years or earlier and their professional soccer careers began in the US.

Relevant article: http://www.rsssf.com/usadave/usawc30.html

[PikeStance]

well as was stated by pugs (i think), soccer is a sport that children play and then they try to make it in more popular sports once they get to middle/high school. I remember when I was young I did the exact same thing, and ended up dropping soccer for baseball (even though i'm 99% sure there isnt an overlap in seasons), and in high school the focus was on football, and none of the unis I looked at even had a competitive soccer team, and that wasn't exactly that long ago.

Actually we all said this including myself.
Soccer season varies from state to state. In Louisiana, Soccer is played from November to January. In Illinois, Boys play in fall at the same time as Football and Girls play in the Spring. In Illinois there was a rule prohibiting players from participating in two separate leagues.

Anyway, I know in Louisiana, the sport of soccer was gradually being added... this was from 1995- 2001 when I moved to Illinois. Most of the growth was in the public sector. There was also a growth in the number of select/ premier league level teams in Louisiana as well during this time period. In the late 90s the level of play was not that high, but by the early 2000s it was much better. There was also a general rise in USSF level games. Most of the playground leagues had "recreational players" only. The opposite was true in the 80s and early 90s.

It's not that the sport isn't getting more popular, it's just not on the level of any other professional sport I can think of atm (not even hockey, and where i'm from thats saying quite a bit), and likely won't be for a long long time. I feel like every WC I hear people saying how it's going to catch on in the US any day now and become a rival to everything else, and then when the WC is over no one even talks about it

As I already stated in the 90s, 90% of the parents have not played the game of soccer at all. Many would tell me they have no clue about the game. Many also said they never watch any games and have no interest in watching any games except when their kid is playing. Those kids are the parents now.

I have no idea what you mean by catch on. When I think how things were in the late 70s, the 80s, the 90s, and compare it to now, it has caught on. Is it like the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, NO! Does it have to be in order for it to "catch on." AS it is right now, more and more HS programs have soccer, there are more advertising money in soccer, greater participation in sports and more spectators than ever before. But for some reason, soccer has to draw 80,000 people like NFL in order for it to "catch on?" That's a load of bull,... sorry.

I have been apart of this sport for over 35 years. I have seen the growth,... bemoan if you must, but tell me it isn't growing..... for me that is all was can ask.


I found this on a soccer/ football forum regarding the status of soccer/ football in the US

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Unlike our European friends think, soccer is indeed fairly popular in the United States, according to the latest stats and polls.

12.7 million people play soccer in the United States

28% of Americans identify themselves as soccer fans (10% of Americans qualify it as "big fans"). Given the country's large population, this is huge and much larger than the population of many traditional soccer countries.

This is from a sample of all Americans, but when the poll screens for those who play or have played soccer, the rate increases to 59%.

The sport is more accessible than ever, both at the stadium and on TV. For example, all 380 matches of the English Premier League were broadcast to American TV channels this past season, and 31.5 million Americans tuned in at some point.

The MLS with 19 franchises is getting to solid grounds, with several soccer-specific stadiums with up to 27,000 seats (the more common number is 20.000 seats)
MLS players now earn solid six-figure salaries, some of them topping $1 million.
The leagues' average attendance is currently 18,608 spectators per game, which tops the NBA and the NHL

Still, 49% of Americans continue to think the sport is either on the dull side or frankly boring. However, 46% think the sport will grow in popularity in the next decade. It is encouraging that the game remains popular among growing demographics such as young Americans and Hispanics, and also scores well with upscale, educated consumers.

Even though 49% among us continue to feel that soccer is boring, 19% of us define it as exciting and 28% as interesting. That's 47%; we are almost at the point when a majority of Americans will no longer think that soccer is boring. Among those who played youth soccer, already 86% say that soccer is either exciting or interesting, and only 14% call it on the dull side or boring.

ESPN will air 290 hours of soccer programming in the next 5 weeks for the WC.
No country outside of Brazil bought more tickets for the tournament than the United States.
Sales of USMNT jerseys are three times higher as they were four years ago for the 2010 Cup.

28% of all Americans plan to watch the World Cup. Among soccer fans it goes up to 74% (I'd assume that it's not 100% because the self-defined soccer fans were divided in two categories, "big fans" which is 10% of the population, and "not-so-big fans" which is 18% of all Americans - I'd expect that 100% of the "big fans" will watch; maybe a bit less than that to account for injury, work-related travel, or other impediments).

For reference, the current population of the United States stands at approximately 318,184,000 people.

So, 10% of "big" soccer fans accounts for 31.8 million people, and 28% of big fans added to not-so-big fans (but still fans) account for 89 million people. That's very respectable!!!

Some stats don't look so good in the fact that they are worse than 1994 stats, but the latter must have been influenced by the fact that the WC was in the United States. I'm pretty content with the above numbers.

All of the above is from an article that appeared recently on the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...579306-ecea-11e3-b10e-5090cf3b5958_story.html

[Gallus]

Basically Soccer is to the US what American Football is to Europe. Yes some people play it, but its a minor sport.

Nobody plays american football in Europe. Some people play rugby, but even rugby is on the level of water polo. For those of you who don't know what that is, it's handball in a pool.

[Keyser]

Nobody plays american football in Europe. Some people play rugby, but even rugby is on the level of water polo. For those of you who don't know what that is, it's handball in a pool.

Depend of the specific country though.

In France (wich is the european country i know best being french and all), there are a few american football clubs and a competition, however barely anyone in the public is aware of that (even I, i know it only because i know someone who played in a club), on the other hand Rugby is huge, not as mainstream and popular as football/soccer but certainly the second most popular team sport there and even the first one in some parts of France.
The difference is that soccer is popular in every regions and within almost all social classes, while Rugby is popular mainly in the south and in Paris and apart of those specific geographical areas, where it is as popular as a sport can be, it's more something of the middle and upper classes rather than the working classes.

You also have basketball who enjoy some popularity, it grew enormously in the 90's but it has kind of stagnated since then. It is way less popular than soccer and Rugby and only occasionally attract the public on TV (during the olympic games, or the finals of the french league)
Handball has it's niche public too, like basket, i couldn't say wich one of the two is actually the most popular though, it can get some occasional public coverage thanks to the good performances of the french national team.

Handball and basket are taught and played a lot at school because the infrastructures needed are small enough to be found in any schoolyard or gymnasium (and they often combine the features of both playgrounds into one), however outside of physical education courses, handball's grounds are mostly used by children and teens to play soccer instead.

Rugby could be even more popular, but it's not as easy to play spontaneously by kids despite the ability to be played without any equipment outside of an open ground because rules are a bit on the complex side and without a referee it can easily degenerate into a brawl.
Whereas kids playing soccer ignore almost all rules save the most evident fouls and focus on scoring goals.

Volleyball is known as some kind exotic team sport played by nobody knows who and mostly thanks to a japanese anime from the 80's.

Water Polo is known as some exotic sport unheard of apart from those who actually plays it.

[mrmouth]

As long as its not competing with football, because it will lose. It can compete with Baseball, Basketball and Hockey but not with Football.

Most MLS owners are smart, super-rich guys. If they ever get their act together and poach some executives from the NFL and bench college kids in favor of more European pros not on their last legs, they absolutely have a chance to become the number two sport in the USA. Yes, number two. They have a great, unspoiled foundation to build on.

Baseballs future is really grim when you look at TV ratings and Basketball and Hockey still have fundamental league makeup/revenue issues they need to deal with. Even the NFL is going to have to figure out how to stop making the game so lovely to watch on TV and keep people paying for tickets.

Most soccer stadiums are new (or shared with NFL teams) and they only need to typically draw 1/3 of what an NFL team does to remain plenty profitable. And with the demographic shift, they will be adding seats in the future. A lot of seats.



When I saw how the US was lining up I cringed. But overall Im glad Klinsmann signed that contract and married an American because otherwise someone would poach him to coach their national team, even after 2018. I guess he is plenty happy living in S. California flying helicopters as a hobby.

That was the best bit of extra time I've ever seen.

[the_mango55]

Most MLS owners are smart, super-rich guys. If they ever get their act together and poach some executives from the NFL and bench college kids in favor of more European pros not on their last legs, they absolutely have a chance to become the number two sport in the USA. Yes, number two. They have a great, unspoiled foundation to build on.

Baseballs future is really grim when you look at TV ratings and Basketball and Hockey still have fundamental league makeup/revenue issues they need to deal with. Even the NFL is going to have to figure out how to stop making the game so lovely to watch on TV and keep people paying for tickets.

Most soccer stadiums are new (or shared with NFL teams) and they only need to typically draw 1/3 of what an NFL team does to remain plenty profitable. And with the demographic shift, they will be adding seats in the future. A lot of seats.



When I saw how the US was lining up I cringed. But overall Im glad Klinsmann signed that contract and married an American because otherwise someone would poach him to coach their national team, even after 2018. I guess he is plenty happy living in S. California flying helicopters as a hobby.

That was the best bit of extra time I've ever seen.

Look at MLB attendance figures

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...sports_leagues

Their annual attendance is over three times higher than any other sports league in the world! I don't think baseball is in trouble just yet (even though I find it boring to watch on TV, I do enjoy going to a game though).

[I WUB PUGS]

Look at MLB attendance figures

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...sports_leagues

Their annual attendance is over three times higher than any other sports league in the world! I don't think baseball is in trouble just yet (even though I find it boring to watch on TV, I do enjoy going to a game though).

Man, we really like sports here. Sort of ridiculous that 3 of the big 4 are in the top 4 with even the NHL and its dead weights in the sunbelt is just behind the Premier League.

I've never been to an MLB game. I am going to see the A's host the Blue Jays on the 4th though! Wish it was the Giants.... better location... better stadium... better food apparently.

We like the foobaww.
http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/ar...ences-and-scho

So much sportsing.

MLS needs to figure something out here.

[PikeStance]

Third place play off didn't existed in that time. So either both USA and Yugoslavia are 4th or both of them are 3rd.
However here are articles with pictures of bronoze medal Yugoslavia won
http://www.blic.rs/Vesti/Reportaza/1...-iz-Montevidea
http://www.politika.rs/rubrike/Sport...dijalu.sr.html

According to fifa.com the US finished 3rd and Yugoslavia 4th. End of story. There is no debate here!
Now back to the present World Cup!

Most MLS owners are smart, super-rich guys. If they ever get their act together and poach some executives from the NFL and bench college kids in favor of more European pros not on their last legs, they absolutely have a chance to become the number two sport in the USA. Yes, number two. They have a great, unspoiled foundation to build on.

Baseballs future is really grim when you look at TV ratings and Basketball and Hockey still have fundamental league makeup/revenue issues they need to deal with. Even the NFL is going to have to figure out how to stop making the game so lovely to watch on TV and keep people paying for tickets.
Most soccer stadiums are new (or shared with NFL teams) and they only need to typically draw 1/3 of what an NFL team does to remain plenty profitable. And with the demographic shift, they will be adding seats in the future. A lot of seats.

Look at MLB attendance figures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...sports_leagues
Their annual attendance is over three times higher than any other sports league in the world! I don't think baseball is in trouble just yet (even though I find it boring to watch on TV, I do enjoy going to a game though).

Man, we really like sports here. Sort of ridiculous that 3 of the big 4 are in the top 4 with even the NHL and its dead weights in the sunbelt is just behind the Premier League.

I've never been to an MLB game. I am going to see the A's host the Blue Jays on the 4th though! Wish it was the Giants.... better location... better stadium... better food apparently.
We like the foobaww.
http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/ar...ences-and-scho
So much sportsing.
MLS needs to figure something out here.

Seriously, Y'all.... did you read this from Ybbon.... make athread and I will join in the conversation.
Or maybe if we ask real nice Ybbon can move the post into a new thread for us

OK enough of the discussion about US sports and where soccer/football is in relation to the other US sports, there is a very good discussion to be had on that but it needs it's own thread. This is about the 2014 World Cup so let's try to keep it on about the teams left in it or anything related to that. Granted the state of English football, Italian football, Fido, soccer in the US are all tangentially related but a little bit too tangential at this point, so please keep on topic.

If anyone wants to create a new thread about US Sports vs Soccer or something like that, you can debate this matter in that thread (within ToS obviously) as much as you want.

[mrmouth]

Seriously, Y'all.... did you read this from Ybbon.... make athread and I will join in the conversation.
Or maybe if we ask real nice Ybbon can move the post into a new thread for us

And it started with Europeans (who wont visit this thread) disparaging the US or showing general ignorance towards the game in the USA. The exact reason it needed to happen in that thread.

It wasn't a big deal to have that discussion there, but whatever.



With respect to MLB TV ratings - it is about who is watching. It's old guys. The younger generations are clearly moving away from the game, like they are moving away from car ownership. It's almost unthinkable, but it's happening.

Old guys, not young guys, like baseball. Jonathan Mahler was amongst those who reported this fall that the median age of the 2012 WS TV viewer was 53.4. Perhaps more telling is the steady, long-term decline in the number of kids playing baseball.

But it is precisely because MLB fans are old that business is booming. The huge boost in MLB TV $$ comes from us old guys who subscribe to Pay TV. We are footing the bill for the recent spate of MLB mega deals with local RSNs. We aren’t the cord-cutting, digital natives who have never paid for content. They believe that paying $100/month to watch video is stupid. Earlier in the year Joe Flint reported that, “By 2015, almost half of all television viewing will be done by folks over the age of 50…

http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.p...oms&Itemid=155

These younger generations are yearning for something different, in a lot of areas. They are more globalized. It was those people that were filling up Grant Park and Soldier Field to watch the WC (and not just the US matches), even after they banned liquor sales when things got too rowdy. Whether that equates to them filling up Toyota Park, is anyones guess.

But that is the MLS game. Demographics is going to be the biggest factor in whether the MLS takes off, like it can. That and management. Those owners are too smart not to notice the seismic shifts, and capitalize on them.


What people really have to be excited about is the national youth league. The best youth teams in the US are now 'allowed' to play the best youth leagues in the world and, they are consistently beating them. They then move into MLS development squads along the way, again playing the best development squads in the world. This is all fairly new stuff but very promising to the USMNT in particular, as the women apparently have it figured out.

So we should start seeing the first results of that soon as veteran writers and analysts see a massive influx of newly minted US talent to the European leagues over the next four years. Just in time for 2018.

And of course with the best athletes in the US still choosing other sports, that needs to change. I mean if I were European I'd be very frightened of the idea of some of these athletic freaks we see in the NBA running up and down the football pitch, instead of the basketball court.

LeBron in a shirt?

[Basil II the B.S]

Jumping and being tall won't really guarantee any dominance in football.
Messi, Maradona, Pelé...

Actually you don't really find many 200+ cm at all. Even for gk that's the max necessary. Extremely tall people wouldn't really find any employment, just like they don't in Europe.

[I WUB PUGS]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihlAvKHZYYk

Before you say "he just ran", erm, field vision.

5 foot 7 inches tall.
http://www.seminoles.com/sports/m-fo...ld_853136.html
Fastest recorded 40 yard dash time for 2013 incoming freshman...

He's also has the 3rd fastest high school 100m in US history.




If we put hoops players at back then that's scary. No one would ever win against us on corners. And basketball players do nothing but run the whole damn game. Short bursts and court length sprints.

The simple fact is that we don't have our best athletes, not even close, playing for our soccer teams because they aren't exposed to it beyond their child years and the emphasis on Basketball and Football at an even younger age is becoming more an more a factor. The USMNT has already been characterized as "incredibly athletic" and "fast", we just lack touch. Well the reality is that they could be a lot faster and lot more physically dominant if we tapped into the mainstream.






Edit: There's also no such thing as a "guarantee for dominance" in any sport no matter what formula you come up with. There are just as many highly touted flops, more so, than there are "studs" that make it through. We're talking about a numbers game here. Expanding the player base gives you a greater chance of finding those special players. This is simple statistics.

[Basil II the B.S]

Yep, that's a different story. Soccer (and I'm using it only here because is US related) would probably steal players from football or even baseball, not really that much from basketball. Someone who's 210 or more cm is rather useless even as a gk.

[I WUB PUGS]

Lebron James is 203cm.

Baseball and soccer have very few comparable skills. Running is pretty minimal even.

[Basil II the B.S]

Hmm, limit case then. With that height I recall very few players playing anywhere other than gk. Crouch, Koller and Iversen as strikers, all of whom weren't exactly famous for their technical skills.

[I WUB PUGS]

But we're talking about basketball players here. Not the big centers, but the forwards and guards that can move in any direction with tremendous power and speed with fantastic body control.

Basketball is not all about height. Sure there are definitely guys that dominate the game purely because their height though. I think generally speaking, its pretty hard to get into basketball at the pro level if you're under 6 foot 4, even at the college level.................

But there are thousands of American kids that aren't ever going to be 6 foot 4 that play basketball. Its a tremendously demanding game physically and skill wise.

Thing is, in the crummier parts of the world, people play soccer because you can just have a ball right? Essentially play what I've heard called "keep up" or "don't let it drop". In the US our urban sport for the poor is basketball. We at least build courts for them when we're building their projects. Yes, sure there is crack being sold on the court, but some good players come from there too. Basically, the courts are our sports venues in our favelas.

[Basil II the B.S]

Oh yea soccer is definitely the sport of the poor and I'm sure the US would benefit a lot from it. I can name lots of games that can be played with no goals at all, or just one improvised goal (literally made of 2 rounded up shirts in the middle of the street) and so on.

Compared to basketball it's definitely more for the average dude however; the average South American player for example is 175 cm, with that you can't get anywhere near a basket court, while it's perfectly fine for most positions in soccer.