Why Soccer will (not) succeed in America

[PikeStance]

The possibility of relegation, or secondary objectives like qualifications to EL or UCL also make soccer way more competitive than American sports. I shake my head every time I hear someone saying we should make our leagues or even the UCL more similar to the NBA or so. We have a model that works great, why change it?

^ Agreed completely. I do the same when people back here promote the changing of the brazilian league closer whatever happens in the NBA... We should be aiming for the bundesliga and the premier league damnit.

The idea of promotion/ relegation (e.g. MLS/ MLS 2) has been tossed around. However, the American sports environment is not conducive to such a system. If you examine the oldest league in the US, Baseball, you will see that the league develop naturally a farm system. Most clubs in Europe developed naturally as well,... just like Baseball in the US. The clubs with the most money and the most successful clubs started to form leagues. Later, other teams were invited as part of a franchise to join the league. Soon, other professional leagues developed in other sports.

The problem with a franchise is someone is paying big time money to be in the top league. The last thing the owner wants to be "relegated." There is a steep decline in attendance and advertisement dollars for team just below the top division. A look at AAA baseball and you will see what I mean. No potential business owner would invest in a club that can potentially be relegated into a lesser league. In current popular leagues, even bad teams would often draw bigger attendance when a a successful team with popular players come to play. This is yet another way you can potentially lose revenue. It is far better to be bad in the top league than great in a lower league.

Americans don't like or understand the promotion relegation system. I work with a guy who mentioned to me that the local team, Changchun Yatai, nearly got "kicked out of the league" last year. The American public will never get nor would they like it. Americans do love playoffs- they are full of drama and twists. A lot of drama much like the World Cup.

[Petrucci]

Happy National day Mericans! Your volleyball players set an example with their unofficial game in elementary school.

[Halie Satanus]

'Soccer' generates huge amounts of wealth, eventually 'soccer' will be massive in America. It's really that simple.

It could take years yet, maybe another generation or maybe the presence of money will accelerate a grass roots culture, who knows, but it'll get there.

[I WUB PUGS]

No, actually, it means . Try to make up some better arguments than "oh we are 'merica, so when we get on a sport, we win". Because, honestly, that is EXACTLY what you are transmiting.

You seem to transmit the exact same thing about Brazil when it comes to soccer which is why I don't take you seriously.

Your England example has already been hammered through about a dozen times that I've read in these threads by actual British people. Maybe, again, you should ask or re-read them.

May want to look at all the medals the Chinese are winning in the Summer Games. It does wonders for your medal count when you can lobby to get a sport included that will routinely have 3 of the 4 semifinalists from your country.

Pikestance, the Olympics are won by money. I did this over for the Winter Olympics for a response to Conon. Something like 17 countries are top 20 in both winter and summer games in medal counts. Most of them are European countries. As an example, Ukraine which has only been to 5 Olympics has more medals than Brazil does in the summer games and Brazil has been to like 20 something. Its sporting tradition and culture regardless of season. The Bahamas and Jamaica get a lot of puff in the Summer Games but they aren't at all dominant. Outside of a few sprinting events they aren't even on the radar. Its a specialty and the US, Canada and Great Britain have very strong sprinting histories. The US especially.

Also if you look at the medal totals all time for both winter and summer, Norway is apparently the King of Sport.

Jamaica and Bahamas have small populations but they can funnel all monies into one set of events (sprinting). Focus on what you're good at/can afford.

Uruguay has like 5 million people and they have 2 World Cups and are always competitive. I wasn't ever saying it was a population = success. But if anyone knows anything about statistics, they know about sample sizes and the larger your sample size, the higher the chance of "events" popping up. Events being "stars" or at least quality when we're talking about sporting base.

The advantage of the US having a large population is that it can maintain player pools in multiple sports. You have to have the money and organization though too. No one, especially not me, said that "oh we have a lot of people so we must become successful". Its merely a factor. Which is a big one for Brazil since they have 200 something million people and EVERYONE plays soccer. We don't even have 200 million people in this country that are dedicated to one game. Basically, soccer is to Brazil as Olympic Ping Pong is to the PRC. But Brazil doesn't win every World Cup. There's at least some parity in the sport. And parity means there's more than one way of doing things.

Also about Bobsled, its a terrible example and while I enjoy watching it, it should probably be thrown out of the Games. There are only something like 16 bobsled tracks in the entire world. The Brazilians and Jamaicans that qualify are part of a "hey lets try it" campaign where they're sent to Europe or the US to train. I think the US has like 2 tracks and Canada has one. Most of them are in Germany, Switzerland and Austria......................guess who's really good at Bobsled.

Americans don't like or understand the promotion relegation system.

You're also comparing a set of leagues that are free of CBA's and Salary Floor/Cap to leagues that do have them. Money is the major factor here. Players already have No Trade and No Movement clauses built into their contracts. Can't just turn the Phoenix Coyotes of the NHL into an AHL team since you can't even demote some of the players to the farm system even if they aren't performing. Goes without saying that the owners would block this. Probably the only thing the Owners and Players would ever agree on.

[Facupay]

I'm filing this notion that soccer requires some undefinable value in players in the same category as 'grit', 'clutch', 'heart', 'leadership', 'compete' and 'toughness'.

They all fall under the category of "bull ".

Good athletes =/= good soccer players, yet all great soccer players are good athletes.

This is a discussion about statistics, not some fanciful notion of "artistry". I know soccer fans can't see the "artistry" in any popular American games. I can't account for willful ignorance. At least Americans are willing to accept that soccer is at least as much a sport in every way as the Big 4.

My point is that the "our best athletes don't play sawker" argument isn't right because football has very distinct abilities needed than most sports. Just by getting 1.98m blacks drunk with steroids kicking a ball won't change anything, in fact it will most likely make the US even worse.

Look at Messi or Neymar, do they look like world-class athletes? Sure if you have great physique then it's a plus and if you don't have enough endurance and speed you will be crawling on the field, but that doesn't change the fact that the geniuses of football are skinny shorties.

It's not that football has mystical properties, but that you need to be playing it since childhood and have a mind for the sport ingrained in you. Just by throwing money and people at it won't change much.

[jukeness]

It's not that football has mystical properties, but that you need to be playing it since childhood and have a mind for the sport ingrained in you. Just by throwing money and people at it won't change much.

Pretty sure that's true for all sports.

[Knight of Heaven]

Oh come one. No one thinks the US are supermen in soccer.

Its like our 7th favorite sport.

4th actualy. Google it.

Pretty sure that's true for all sports.

Maybe but its easier to play soccer/football since childhood then anything else.
You can play everywhere, with bascialy anything.
When i was a child, and if there wasnt real football balls as often there wasnt, we just made them with paper and tape.
In the old days it was with cloth and stuff. You can play in the street, backward in the school hallways, we played it everywhere, even at night with no lights etc. It is also the most easly acessible sport there is to everyone. Imo.
Other sports usualy envolve means, and time and some kind of schedule, or preperation, or a coach, not football, you cant play basketball everywhere for instance, or tennis, even the materials are not laying arround etc. God i recall me and my friends playing soccer with a big orange one time, well juggling and stuff.
Like this guy

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Also where i live Beachfootball ( beachsoccer i guess) is more or less popular too in the summer, but evey kid play it in the beach since ever in teh later years has become much more popular worldwide.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Other than that Futsal is more less popular as well in my country, but in Brazil is also kinda big.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

All that is soccer in its variants. here is also Footvolley i used to play in the beach with my friends.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Football soccer on the first hand is the most accessible sport arround imo.

[I WUB PUGS]

4th actualy. Google it.

The ratings and asses in seats sure as don't say that.

If you're going by children under the age of 12, well yeah. Then they move on to something else or nothing at all.

Also just realized Wulfburk has hit us with Godwin's Law.................. awesome. Thanks TWC. You never disappoint.

Pretty sure that's true for all sports.

No, they want us to believe that soccer is special without going so far as saying its magical.

Look at Messi or Neymar, do they look like world-class athletes?

Yes, they do actually. They're just short.

[Knight of Heaven]

No, they want us to believe that soccer is special without going so far as saying its magical.

Not magical in the the stric sense obviously but with no doubt special above plenty o sports out there. And there is alot of evidence to suport that.
But mostly the reasons i already posted, and the ability to atract people worldwide to play it and watch it, and that is folowed often like a religion.
Technicaly, i would also consider Football a nearly perfect blend between mechanized athletic action and organization, with creativity, either individual, or collective. I would say that alone is the so called "magic" or what makes football special.
imo.
If this isnt "magical" i dont know what is

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It isnt a matter of being technicaly efficient, its matter of being amazingly beautyfull, and unpredictable. And that naturaly deals with peoples emotions and passions.

The ratings and asses in seats sure as don't say that.

On the contrary they say exactly that.

If you're going by children under the age of 12, well yeah. Then they move on to something else or nothing at all.

So?! there are more parameters that gauge popularity.

[Wulfburk]

The ratings and asses in seats sure as don't say that.

If you're going by children under the age of 12, well yeah. Then they move on to something else or nothing at all.

Also just realized Wulfburk has hit us with Godwin's Law.................. awesome. Thanks TWC. You never disappoint.

I know you can read, just try to understand the post as you do it. But anyway just cant take as serious any post from a guy who said he was SURE the US will win a WC in the next 20 years and then a bunch after when you have Netherlands' (and England) example.


US dudes think saying its only their 4th sport only counts as an "excuse" for them, you'd think when you got a bunch of other countries doing great on their "4th sport" they woudnt use that lame excuse. Go on 'mericans! Hows the adds??? I mean... the 11 minutes of american football

[I WUB PUGS]

On the contrary they say exactly that.

Umm, no it doesn't. Its squarely 5th among the professional sports leagues in revenue, total attendance and its close with indoor sports for average attendance. And it is a very very very distant 5th considering the 4th place league made 2.8 billion dollars more (nearly 7 times the revenue of MLS) and is only really popular in about 20 of the 30 cities that have a team.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_p...anada#Revenues

This also isn't taking into account the other sports that pop up in the rankings. NASCAR is a big TV draw and a huge seating draw since you can fit over 200,000 people at some of the venues.

Even Horse Racing makes the top 50. Not one Soccer game though.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013...orting-events/

So yes, tell me again where you're getting this "4th" from.

Wulfburk compared "US Sports Culture" to the Nazis. Fail.

[Wulfburk]

Wulfburk compared "US Sports Culture" to the Nazis. Fail.

Please pay attention to the bolded line

I know you can read, just try to understand the post as you do it.

Now lets go it through.


You said:

Thank you person that doesn't know anything about American Sports Culture. We field a Top 16 team with bottom of the barrel interest from our populace. That should mean something.

(like i said, it means )


ANd i replied: Pay attention to the bolded line as well.

"american sports culture" This seems too much like that talk that the germans were inherently superior in WW2 and that could take any allied soldier 10 to 1 just cause they could. Occasionaly i hear some of that, but never of this one, ROFL

Basically no, no comparissions to the nazis whatsoever.

Oh and i just noticed this one....

May want to look at all the medals the Chinese are winning in the Summer Games. It does wonders for your medal count when you can lobby to get a sport included that will routinely have 3 of the 4 semifinalists from your country.

So when the chinese dominate a sport, it isnt ok, but when the US does, its because of "american sports culture" TWC always amuses me, cant stop laughing

[I WUB PUGS]

Basically no, no comparissions to the nazis whatsoever.

"american sports culture" This seems too much like that talk that the germans were inherently superior in WW2 and that could take any allied soldier 10 to 1 just cause they could. Occasionaly i hear some of that, but never of this one, ROFL

That's a direct comparison. You quite plainly compared people using the phrase "American Sports Culture" to anyone that claims Nazi superiority in WWII.

So when the chinese dominate a sport, it isnt ok, but when the US does, its because of "american sports culture"

How did you manage to connect the two of those together? One is making fun of ping pong, the other is a psychological notion.

Do you have something to add other than "American can't do it because the Dutch and English havent" and "Brazil is the bestest ever!"?

I just see a really bad argument, no supports and a wall of smileys.

[Wulfburk]

"Brazil is the bestest ever!"?

I'd like you to quote where i have said anything even close to that. I only even mentioned brazil in some other examples a page back.

I just see a really bad argument, no supports and a wall of smileys.

The smiles do get to me lol

Do you have something to add other than "American can't do it because the Dutch and English havent"

Didnt say that, my point was if the US wants to invests and be successful in football it will face the same obstructions many other countries much more developed and much more traditional are facing. All you gotta do is slowly progress (like fifty other countries just in the same league as the US are doing) and dont get your hopes high. That is it really. What im debating is the fact that some think that if the US magically makes football their favorite sport (or just increase it in their... favorite sports list) they will dominate it (or come to the top tier for that matter, in 60 that might happen, but like i said many times, so it can for all those other countries like Japan, Belgium, Sweden, Russia... etc). Makes absolutely no sense giving the huge ammount of evidence and the difficulty of such act as demonstrated by the ups and downs of all the top nations.

[torongill]

Umm, no it doesn't. Its squarely 5th among the professional sports leagues in revenue, total attendance and its close with indoor sports for average attendance. And it is a very very very distant 5th considering the 4th place league made 2.8 billion dollars more (nearly 7 times the revenue of MLS) and is only really popular in about 20 of the 30 cities that have a team.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_p...anada#Revenues

This also isn't taking into account the other sports that pop up in the rankings. NASCAR is a big TV draw and a huge seating draw since you can fit over 200,000 people at some of the venues.

Even Horse Racing makes the top 50. Not one Soccer game though.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013...orting-events/

So yes, tell me again where you're getting this "4th" from.

Wulfburk compared "US Sports Culture" to the Nazis. Fail.

Nascar is not a sport, dude. Next you´d be quoting professional wrestling income and attendance figures.

[Knight of Heaven]

So yes, tell me again where you're getting this "4th" from.

Last time i checked on the news, not that i care or folow american sports midia, regardless i dont see how is that relevant to the argument. 4th, or 5th it realy doesnt matter.
( funny you initialy said it was 7th popular sport)... you sir are a fraud.

Nascar is not a sport, dude. Next you´d be quoting professional wrestling income and attendance figures.

he even mentioned horse races....
I mean next we are comparing bull races , or theatre attendence... ridiculous.

I wasnt talking about attendency or rattings, its mostly a cultural dynamic, that revolves arround football, in most of the world anyway.

[jukeness]

Soccer may gain some popularity over here, but it will never top Baseball ,Basketball, or Football.

[S0mebody]

Well obviously American football won't work but we have rugby so any sport by picking the ball and running for it won't exactly work back here. However football in America has chances the lads you got have talent and the team presidents take a grasp upon the players then maybe it will work but the big guys back in the UK will lure them into the premier league

[PikeStance]

You seem to transmit the exact same thing about Brazil when it comes to soccer which is why I don't take you seriously.

Your England example has already been hammered through about a dozen times that I've read in these threads by actual British people. Maybe, again, you should ask or re-read them.

May want to look at all the medals the Chinese are winning in the Summer Games. It does wonders for your medal count when you can lobby to get a sport included that will routinely have 3 of the 4 semifinalists from your country.

Pikestance, the Olympics are won by money. I did this over for the Winter Olympics for a response to Conon. Something like 17 countries are top 20 in both winter and summer games in medal counts. Most of them are European countries. As an example, Ukraine which has only been to 5 Olympics has more medals than Brazil does in the summer games and Brazil has been to like 20 something. Its sporting tradition and culture regardless of season. The Bahamas and Jamaica get a lot of puff in the Summer Games but they aren't at all dominant. Outside of a few sprinting events they aren't even on the radar. Its a specialty and the US, Canada and Great Britain have very strong sprinting histories. The US especially.

Also if you look at the medal totals all time for both winter and summer, Norway is apparently the King of Sport.

Jamaica and Bahamas have small populations but they can funnel all monies into one set of events (sprinting). Focus on what you're good at/can afford.

Uruguay has like 5 million people and they have 2 World Cups and are always competitive. I wasn't ever saying it was a population = success. But if anyone knows anything about statistics, they know about sample sizes and the larger your sample size, the higher the chance of "events" popping up. Events being "stars" or at least quality when we're talking about sporting base.

The advantage of the US having a large population is that it can maintain player pools in multiple sports. You have to have the money and organization though too. No one, especially not me, said that "oh we have a lot of people so we must become successful". Its merely a factor. Which is a big one for Brazil since they have 200 something million people and EVERYONE plays soccer. We don't even have 200 million people in this country that are dedicated to one game. Basically, soccer is to Brazil as Olympic Ping Pong is to the PRC. But Brazil doesn't win every World Cup. There's at least some parity in the sport. And parity means there's more than one way of doing things.

Also about Bobsled, its a terrible example and while I enjoy watching it, it should probably be thrown out of the Games. There are only something like 16 bobsled tracks in the entire world. The Brazilians and Jamaicans that qualify are part of a "hey lets try it" campaign where they're sent to Europe or the US to train. I think the US has like 2 tracks and Canada has one. Most of them are in Germany, Switzerland and Austria......................guess who's really good at Bobsled.

You're also comparing a set of leagues that are free of CBA's and Salary Floor/Cap to leagues that do have them. Money is the major factor here. Players already have No Trade and No Movement clauses built into their contracts. Can't just turn the Phoenix Coyotes of the NHL into an AHL team since you can't even demote some of the players to the farm system even if they aren't performing. Goes without saying that the owners would block this. Probably the only thing the Owners and Players would ever agree on.

In my original reponse, I addressed the issue of population size, I did not outline all aspects that effects a country's success or lack of success in sports.

There are a number of factors that contribute. There isn't a "magic pill" that you can point to and say this.... Apart from money, there is also culture (history and tradition) and geography that are factors. For example, Ethiopians would most likely be good at long distance running even with little or no money devoted to it.

Getting back the the US and soccer. It is much the same thing,... the development of the sports has to wit until there is a shift in sports culture in the US. This shift has been happening. For people who think the shift shoulkd happen over night, they still think the sport will "never catch on." For people who look at the big picture; "we" see the gradual shift occurring. As I stated already, there are far more money devoted to sport today than in the past. However, geography (which is generally advantageous to the US) works against this development. For our size, it would probably take more interest and even ore money than currently available.

My point is that the "our best athletes don't play sawker" argument isn't right because football has very distinct abilities needed than most sports. Just by getting 1.98m blacks drunk with steroids kicking a ball won't change anything, in fact it will most likely make the US even worse.

Look at Messi or Neymar, do they look like world-class athletes? Sure if you have great physique then it's a plus and if you don't have enough endurance and speed you will be crawling on the field, but that doesn't change the fact that the geniuses of football are skinny shorties.

It's not that football has mystical properties, but that you need to be playing it since childhood and have a mind for the sport ingrained in you. Just by throwing money and people at it won't change much.

If you see Neymar or Messi play, the most definitely look like world class athletes.

It is a myth that you have to play at childhood. Well, not exactly. It isn't so much if you play at childhood, but when you are born. If you are born after the cut off date for playing, you get a a full years worth of development. You will be taller, stronger, and faster than most kids playing at your age. You would then get better coaching, better training, etc...
Further explanation
Malcolm Galdwell in his book 'Outliers' looked at the unusually large percentage of Canadian hockey players that were born in the 1st quarter of the year (Jan, Feb and Mar). His studies found that the cut off date for age groups in Canadian ice hockey is Jan 1st. Someone born on 1st January would have a years growing (height and weight) advantage over someone born on 31st December. Bigger and stronger the more they tended to get selected for school and club teams. Playing for schools and clubs they got additional training and were more likely to get selected for representative honors and got more additional training and support. This process continued right up until the national hockey league, because there are an unusually large amount of players with birthdays in Jan, Feb & March. He did a similar study with football in the UK where the cut of date for age groups is Sept 1st. As you might expect he found an unusually large amount of professional footballers with birthdays in September, October and November.

Nascar is not a sport, dude. Next you´d be quoting professional wrestling income and attendance figures.

Auto racing, whether you like it or not, is considered a sport. What I don't get is why poker is on sports channels.

Soccer may gain some popularity over here, but it will never top Baseball ,Basketball, or Football.

I once owned a book on early baseball. There was a picture of a park. One side was a large group playing Cricket, on the other side, a group playing baseball. I am sure the Cricket players though the same thing about Baseball. I don't see why soccer cannot be among the top three. Personally, I do not like Basketball and being from the South, I have little or no interest in Hockey. Baseball, is also not nearly as popular as it once was. Since soccer is played during baseball, it would be baseball that it will compete against. The key to its success in gaining greater acceptance and popularity is the increase in the quality of play on the field. Soccer will nibble for great support until it can financially compete. It doesn't hurt to have have the larges t economy and one of the top 10 per capita incomes in the world either.

[Acco]

Soccer may gain some popularity over here, but it will never top Baseball ,Basketball, or Football.

These types of comments are never realistic. Sports preferences change over time and it's ludicrous to say soccer (or any other sport) will never top a current mainstream sport in the US. Baseball was once the undisputed number one sport in the US, but now football is king and you could probably argue that basketball has also surpassed it. College football was for a long time considered superior to the NFL / professional football (which was pretty bush league until the 50s/60s). The American Soccer League of the 1920s attracted bigger crowds and was more professional than the NFL at the same time. The sports scene is fluid.

Soccer gets a fair bit of sarcasm for being called the 'sport of the future', but people are fooling themselves if they think soccer is going to become a popular sport in the US overnight, even with the help of big tournaments like the World Cup. But compare the sport in 1990 to now and try to say there hasn't been significant growth.