[samIamsad]

First of all, sorry 'bout opening a new thread for this. I'm really curious.

Why the heck do you US people prefer, let's say, batters walking to the base (sexciting) over fantastic goals scored in the very last minute of one heck of an exciting match?

Or better yet: How come soccer (actually, it's called football, you know,... ) isn't as popular in the US as practically everywhere else in the World? Is it because the Brits invented it? Is it because it's a girl's thing (actually it's a game for everybody)? What is it?

Answers please! Serious ones preferred. RLacey gets permission to post a funny remark. Or two.

[Melanie68]

Being a girl, my opinion may be only slightly valid. Although in comparison to my older sister, I think I was more of the 'boy' in the family (I liked my dolls but I also grew to like some SciFi and Doctor Who and some sports).

Anyway, I never really watch basketball. On occasion I will watch the last bits of a championship game or some of the March madness but it's been a while since I did that.

I used to watch baseball and like it. But it's gotten boring to me. I also used to watch American football with my dad but I lost interest in that a long time ago. The games are incredibly slow moving (it takes them 3 hours to show a game with four 15 minute quarters on TV). The only time it gets interesting is when you have a really good pass or a good running game that shows off a running back's skill.

I never really got into soccer either but about a year and a half ago I played some indoor soccer (and was remarkebly bad). It's a much faster moving game and it has it's boring parts when there isn't much happening on the field but it's still a fun game to watch. And I'm having fun watching these World Cup matches.

Here's an article that I recently read on Slate.com:

http://www.slate.com/id/2142554/ (It talks about the relatively low popularity of soccerfootball in the US)

I'll paste the article I read in Salon.com in the next post (if I link to it, you'll need to watch a commercial).

[Melanie68]

From Salon.com

Are you ready for some futbol?

The World Cup is the Godzilla of sporting events -- it wreaks more havoc on more people around the world than anything else.

By Andrew O'Hehir

June 9, 2006 | First things first: The United States team will not win the 2006 World Cup. It won't win the 2010 World Cup. It won't win the 2014 World Cup. Beyond that, my crystal ball gets hazy. "Never" is a long time, but I don't expect to see the lads in red, white and blue hoisting the planet's most coveted sports trophy in my lifetime. Do my son and daughter (who are 2) have a chance to see it, if the ice caps don't melt completely and if Dick Cheney isn't rendered into an immortal, child-eating cyborg? I imagine they do.

Don't get me wrong, soccer has arrived in the United States, or at least as much as it ever will under prevailing late-capitalist market conditions. If this year's World Cup tournament in Germany (which begins today at noon Eastern time, with a laughably bad matchup between the hosts and Costa Rica) is not the massive, business-halting, schedule-rearranging event in the United States that it is in most of the world, it's still a big deal. Millions of Americans will watch the games, and every sports section in every newspaper in every town and city will cover them. The U.S. team's wins, losses and draws will be front-page news.

Sure, the sports-talk troglodytes who bash soccer haven't gone away, and some fans of the big four North American sports, especially if they're over 35 or so, still feel mysteriously emasculated by soccer's rising profile on the media landscape. But for younger sports fans who can see top-flight European soccer every day on digital cable, who've watched the U.S. women's team dominate international competition and thrilled to the American men's surprising run in the 2002 World Cup, that kind of xenophobia is irrelevant. Soccer superstars like Brazil's Ronaldinho -- who plays professionally for Barcelona in Spain -- and England's David Beckham -- who plays for Barcelona's arch-rivals, Real Madrid -- are fixtures on the global media landscape, at least as big as (and more universal than) Allen Iverson or Alex Rodriguez or Michael Vick. Being a soccer fan in no way precludes loving the Red Sox, the Redskins and the Red Raiders of Texas Tech.

Many American soccer fans, especially those who can remember the Kohoutek-like rise and fall of the North American Soccer League in the 1970s, dreamed of a different sort of arrival. Their holy grail was a U.S. professional league that would pack stadiums and play a world-class but distinctively American brand of soccer, that would sweep past Major League Baseball, the NBA, the NFL and NASCAR and dominate the sports landscape. To put it mildly, that ain't happening. Ever.

Major League Soccer has plugged along through 11 seasons, gradually raising its level of play, giving young Americans a low-stakes arena to learn the game and becoming incrementally more respectable. It's probably found a niche where it can survive, above the level of arena football and pro lacrosse, but a full step below the National Hockey League, weakest of the big four sports leagues. MLS games draw decently in good weather, and the league has slowly improved its minuscule TV ratings, but it has almost no hardcore fan base. There are not thousands of people who live and die with every shot and save in every Houston Dynamo or Kansas City Wizards game. (I know there are a few dozen of you out there, and you are, in an admirable way, completely out of your minds.)

MLS will probably never be more than an intriguing, mid-level developmental league that survives by selling its top talent to European teams. Young people who like soccer may or may not watch MLS games, but they won't be fooled by them. As the sport becomes more popular in the United States, so do the elite European teams that dominate the sport: Manchester United and Arsenal (of London), Real Madrid and Barcelona, Bayern Munich, A.C. Milan, and Juventus (of Turin). If I left my New York apartment right now and started walking the streets, I'd probably encounter people wearing all of those teams' jerseys before I could find a single person sporting a shirt from the New York Red Bulls of MLS.

This is the nature of soccer, and all professional sports, all over the world. Small, local phenomena may survive, but they find themselves in the deepening shadow of the vast and global ones. Manchester United has a huge following in Asia; the big Spanish teams have ardent fans thousands of miles away in Latin America. How many basketball fans in Greece or Italy or Serbia pay attention to their pretty good local teams when Shaquille O'Neal and Dirk Nowitzki are squaring off on TV, with the NBA title on the line? Japanese baseball has lost some of its quasi-religious status now that its best players, like Ichiro Suzuki and Hideki Matsui, ply their trade in North America.

Global info-fueled capitalism, the system that would-be French revolutionary Guy Debord once dubbed "the society of the spectacle," thrives on the Really Big Event. If the biggest European soccer leagues, the NBA, NFL and Major League Baseball have turned their championships into global events, the World Cup is like all those things, plus the Olympics and a world war (without all the killing), rolled into one. Nobody seems to know how big the cumulative television audience for the Cup will be; I've read estimates ranging from 5 billion to 30 billion to roughly a googolplex (that is, a number greater than the number of elementary particles in the known universe). Let's use a more precise scientific term: It's a buttload.

If there's one thing this troubled world can agree on, it is this: With those kazillions of butts sitting in yurts and dachas and chateaux and tract houses and dusty alleyways watching guys in shorts kick a ball around, it's a good time to sell beer and cars and cellphones. Germany 2006 is a marketing and advertising event of unprecedented scale, representing globalization at both its most endearing and its most loathsome. About 1.1 billion people, close to 20 percent of the world's population, watched the championship game live in 2002, and with the inexorable spread of communications technology, viewership for this year's final (on July 9, at the Olympic Stadium in Berlin) ought to be significantly higher.

What will we see, in between the lovingly crafted commercials for Budweiser (the tournament's official brew, to the chagrin of all Germans), Adidas, Yahoo and MasterCard? We'll see a 32-team tournament with one overwhelming favorite, surrounded by a modest constellation of hopefuls, also-rans, runners-up and just-glad-to-be-heres. I didn't follow the African qualification process, so I don't quite know what sequence of fluke events got Angola here, but God love 'em. Each World Cup tournament has to include one team from way off the radar screen of world soccer, and this year the Black Antelopes (yes! that's their nickname), representing a desperately poor country that's been beset by civil war for 20 years, are it. Never mind winning a game; if the Angolans score a goal while they're in Germany, the whole world will cheer.

If you've even heard of this sport before, you know that the favored team is Brazil, a showboating ensemble of superstars in those Zoloft-like canary-yellow uniforms. The Brazilians have won two of the last three Cups, and five of the 17 tournaments overall, yet hardly anyone hates or fears them with the kind of vitriol baseball fans reserve for the Yankees (or British soccer fans reserve for Manchester United). The Canarinhos play a wide-open, attacking, improvisational style that other nations lack the sheer skill to emulate. In international tournaments, so often characterized by hacking and diving, relentless defensive play and calculated 0-0 draws, this makes Brazil tough to root against.

This year's Brazilian squad has been acclaimed as among the best ever, perhaps second only to the legendary 1970 team featuring such demigods as Pelé, Carlos Alberto, Jairzinho, Rivelino, et al. But therein lies a trap. I'm only riding a hunch here, along with some potentially bogus psychologizing, but Brazilian teams have often struggled when playing tough, tactical European teams in Europe, and also have not thrived in the favorite's role. (In 2002, they were widely seen as a struggling team in generational transition -- and they cruised through the tournament.)

If this year's World Cup theme is "Can anybody beat Brazil?" I'm betting someone can and someone will. Here's a quickie profile of the leading contenders, along with each team's big first-round games. We'll begin with the U.S. team, out of sheer jingoism, and then move through the favorites. (In the first round, the 32-team field is divided into eight groups for round-robin play. The two top teams in each group advance to the round of 16. Goal differential and goals scored are the key tiebreakers, so every first-round game -- win, lose or draw -- is fraught with tension.)

I've selected these teams through a complicated algorithm I'm not at liberty to discuss. No, actually, I bought an unlicensed knockoff World Cup souvenir ball from a street vendor in the south of France. These were the nations represented on the ball. If you have complaints about this process, take them up with Hamid behind the bus station in Nice. (He's rooting for Tunisia.)

[samIamsad]

Thank you Mel! Something interesting to read before going to bed. I think there's also something interesting to be found in your post. You describe you and your dad watching (American) football, when you grew up, for example.

One of my theories is that by the time football spread worldwide, America had already established a sports culture of its own (with plenty enough sports already). Enthusiasm for these sports sort of spreads from one generation to the other. Your dad likes baseball, he takes you to a baseball match, and so on. Then again, that wouldn't explain why women's football (er, soccer) is* that popular over there. Much, much more so than anywhere else....


*or was? The US professional league is no more, I think.

[Melanie68]

Obviously America was built on immigrants. Most everyone is a descendent of an immigrant. But with the diversity of America nowadays, I think soccer is becoming more popular and it could be that it does start to get handed down generation to generation. Just a theory. Also the MLS (Major League Soccer) is still around but it doesn't get the love that the NFL, the NBA or the MLB do.

Also I found this:

Us Soccer History (it's a long one).

This was an interesting blurb from it:

Many analysts saw outdoor soccer as being fundamentally an alien game to the psyches of American sports fans who wanted more action, and higher scoring. The outdoor game was seen as too strategy-driven, and not well suited to television broadcasts with the lack of natural breaks in the action for commercial breaks.

[SoccerDude28]

Like I mentioned in another thread, I believe the media has to do a lot with it.
Unlike a football, baseball or basketball game, where there are more than a dozen stops, time-outs, and oppurtunities to advertise, in soccer, the only stop you have is at half time. As an example, I asked my girlfriend who lives 10 miles away from Stanford (where some of the games of the 94 world cup took place,) what did she think of the 94 world cup in the US. She asked me sheepishly, "there was a world cup in the US in 94?" And some of the games were taking place 10 miles away from where she lived.

Another aspect could be because of the nature of the soccer games. They are low scoring affairs, and a lot of people here think that they are boring because of that. Compare that to basketball or football, where there is high scoring almost every game.

Also I've heard from several folks that they think soccer is a girl's sport, which perplexes me since it is very much a physical sport.

That is my 2 cents on the subject

[lumi]

Originally Posted by SoccerDude28

Another aspect could be because of the nature of the soccer games. They are low scoring affairs, and a lot of people here think that they are boring because of that. Compare that to basketball or football, where there is high scoring almost every game.

Hockey is low scoring and more exciting than football (either version), in my opinion.

[Maquisard]

Hockey is technically higher scoring than U.S. football, 'cause there a goal (excuse me, touchdown) is 7 points for the most part, so the two-digit scores are artificial.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by Melanie68

Us Soccer History (it's a long one).

This was an interesting blurb from it:

Interesting indeed. Apparently some people tried to establish a professional league at the end of the 19th centure already (). It's also interesting to read about the high popularity of indoor soccer, something that never made it that big over here, as far as I know. Until a couple of years ago it was mostly a pasttime during the winter break of the Bundesliga. Unlike, for example the English Premiere League, the German Bundesliga stops playing for about mid December 'til end of January. That's when official indoor tournaments had been held with participants mostly from Germany's 1. Bundesliga and 2. Bundesliga (and some amateur teams).

I also used to play football for a while, and we played indoors for fun during winter. It is fun, after all. But the "real" game had always been the outdoor thing to me.

I think there's some truth to be found in all of your posts. But take a look at this (from Mel's link):

The game was continually hampered by sociological forces-- Baseball was seen as the American past-time, and many immigrants would attempt to Americanize themselves to assimilate, often switching to baseball from soccer which was seen increasingly as a sport only played by foreigners.

Clearly the seeds of the (relatively) low popularity of football in the US were planted in the 19th century already. Unfortunately the text doesn't give any reasons why it was seen as a "sport only played by foreigners", or why it got "hampered by sociological forces"...

One of the reasons of football's worldwide success is indeed because it can be played by everybody. You don't need expensive equipment, all you need is a couple of guys, and some kind of ball-like thingamob. Ever seen Brazilian or Angolan kids playing in the streets? As such, it's (in a way) the poor man's game, accessible to everyone. Saying this seems ironic, what with the better professionals in the most important European leagues earning millions of Euros a season nowadays. With the US being a rather wealthy country and all, maybe that's another reason why it never took of as spectacular as everywhere else...

I've always been fond of some US boys playing in Bundesliga, from Eric Wynalda and Joe Max Moore, who used to play for a club about 30 miles away from me, to Lalas and Meola or Tom Dooley (US soccer player of the year 1992 or 1993, or was it 1994!?), who even coached said club for a short while. Dooley was born in Germany as the son of an Army soldier, I think.

[samIamsad]

It'd also be interesting to have an opinion from someone from the States who doesn't like soccer/football. At all. Or maybe even thinks like Soccsies buddies: "Soccer? Girlish crap."

Any numbers on how many US people watched the WC opening match last Friday? Apparently 1.5 billion people saw this. Worldwide, of course. And a country as big as the US hardly cares at all? Fascinating!

I can't help it, but I'm seriously intrigued.

[Jeysie]

I detest *playing* soccer... does that count? It's my second most hated team sport to play.

I'm neutral on the matter of *watching* soccer, however. It neither interests me nor repulses me.

Peace & Luv, Liz

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by Jeysie

I detest *playing* soccer... does that count? It's my second most hated team sport to play.

Sure! It doesn't give any deeper insights about US people and their lack of interest towards soccer, BUT I admire your honesty.

[seebaruk]

It's strange, the only way to enjoy baseball is to drink lots of beer, but American beer tastes bad. So you'd think Americans would avoid it like the plague.

[Sage]

Originally Posted by seebaruk

It's strange, the only way to enjoy baseball is to drink lots of beer, but American beer tastes bad.

Correction: American beer tastes awful. It all tastes watered-down to me, as if someone took what might have been a halfway decent drink to start with and cut it by about 50% with water. I have never tried any beer but American beer and it tastes that way even to my unsophisticated palate.

Originally Posted by seebaruk

So you'd think Americans would avoid it like the plague.

You'd think.

[Litrick]

Originally Posted by samIamsad

First of all, sorry 'bout opening a new thread for this. I'm really curious.

Why the heck do you US people prefer, let's say, batters walking to the base (sexciting) over fantastic goals scored in the very last minute of one heck of an exciting match?

Or better yet: How come soccer (actually, it's called football, you know,... ) isn't as popular in the US as practically everywhere else in the World? Is it because the Brits invented it? Is it because it's a girl's thing (actually it's a game for everybody)? What is it?

Answers please! Serious ones preferred. RLacey gets permission to post a funny remark. Or two.

regardless of whether or not soccer is popular in the US, it is a matter of opinion whether or not you prefer soccer to other sports. you say "batters walking to a base" others may say "batters sprinting to the base in a matchup of time and skill vs the fielders".

you say "exciting goals scored in the last minute", others may say "boring game limited just to kicking, and often there are no goals scored in an entire game".

just different oinions, neither right or wrong...

Americans who have grown up, following their favourite baseball teams, have played when they are young, know all the rules etc. A lot of them would prefer the game to a game like soccer which is not as popular in their country.

As to why soccer is not as popular in the US. There is a number of reasons, one being that it is not a game which was invented in the US. The three biggest games in the US, were invented there; Baseball, basketball and American football. So largely it is a national pride thing, which perpetuates the popularity of the national sports.

Soccer however is becoming more popular in the US, which is a good thing. Would be cool to have a truly global sport.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by Litrick

you say "exciting goals scored in the last minute", others may say "boring game limited just to kicking, and often there are no goals scored in an entire game".

just different oinions, neither right or wrong...

Absolutely!

As to why soccer is not as popular in the US. There is a number of reasons, one being that it is not a game which was invented in the US. The three biggest games in the US, were invented there; Baseball, basketball and American football. So largely it is a national pride thing, which perpetuates the popularity of the national sports.

Yes, I kind of figured it would also a mentality thing (nothing wrong with that). Also see the quote I posted above which I took from Mel's link. Apparently football was seen as a foreign thing right from the start (well, actually it *is* a foreign thing).

[SakSquash]

What an easy question to answer. It's simply a different culture that vaules different things. That's all.