Why do Americans not care about Soccer?

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Even the "fat and out of shape" linemen are incredibly athletic. Those guys moving shockingly fast for their size.

Levon Kirkland ran like a 4.5 40, that's about a 10.5 100 and was 300 lbs.
 

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,656
687
126
Even the "fat and out of shape" linemen are incredibly athletic. Those guys moving shockingly fast for their size.

Exactly. These guys might say a 5.2 40 is "slow," but when you realize the guy running it is 6'6 and 350 lbs, it is very impressive.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Endurance is far more important in soccer. Football, with 2-7 second plays at a time, is all about quick bursts and sprinting.

Sprinting for 100x a game is aerobic. Go try 100m x 10 on 30 second intervals you'll see. I see soccer plays loafing or even standing around when ball in not near them or setting up a play. That period is their "end of play" so to speak. To conclude NFL guys that look just like soccer players, DBs, WRs, RBs etc , don't have the endurance of soccer players flys in the face of physiology.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
How does this even make sense? His argument is about the clock not showing the proper amount of time left in the game. The officials add the time on at the end of the game, how would it make the game longer if they stopped the clock for 3 minutes instead of adding an extra 3 minutes to the end of the game?

Of course it makes sense. Do you not watch Basketball or any other sport that is big in North America? When they actually stop the clock for all of those things, the game extends by a lot more time than 3 minutes.

You honestly believe if they stopped for every dead ball, card, etc., it would only add 2-5 minutes like they do now? No, it would add much more without a doubt.

KT
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,509
29,090
146
It appears foriegners don't care about soccer either only selling about half the seats at FIFA World Cup. NFL playoffs, NBA Finals, NHL playoffs are always sold out months ahead of time.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Africa/2010/0615/World-Cup-stadiums-What-s-with-all-the-empty-seats

USA actually sold more World Cup tickets than any other country except for South Africa. Weird.

But I wouldn't say that this means too much, as we have citizens and expats of all nations living over here, or buying through US agencies. :\
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,509
29,090
146
by the way, there was a short comment on NPR this morning, as I was walking out the door, that broadcasters are considering muting the crowd noise for the games, so we don't have to hear those goddamn vuvuzelasis.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
Of course it makes sense. Do you not watch Basketball or any other sport that is big in North America? When they actually stop the clock for all of those things, the game extends by a lot more time than 3 minutes.

You honestly believe if they stopped for every dead ball, card, etc., it would only add 2-5 minutes like they do now? No, it would add much more without a doubt.

KT

You should only stop the clock for things that they would otherwise add time onto the end of the game. BTW, people aren't complaining that soccer is slow because it has a 90 min game clock, they're complaining that it's slow because there's hardly any scoring or shots on goal.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
exactly. There's several decades of data showing the incredible popularity of soccer among youth, and every damn year (or at least every 4 during the World Cup--the only time the US can be bothered to think about soccer) the argument is made that it will soon be established as a premiere American sport....yet it just hasn't happened.

Hell, they've been saying this since the 70s, in order to increase popularity for bringing Pele over to the US to join the very short-lived circus of the US's first attempt to establish a pro soccer league.

So...what happened to all those kids that were supposed to usher in the new era of pro US soccer athletes...and all the kids that were supposed to idolize them?

They stopped playing soccer ~12 years old. Just like they do now, just as they always have done.

Yep, because the MLS can't market worth a sht. Once someone of Pele's stature comes to MLS, then you might see it surge. They need someone big and I'm not talking Beckham. Even then, they still need more marketing and sponsors. MLS is about as popular as WNBA.

Until then, /crickets.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,063
1,464
126
While I agree that baseball is a relatively slow and dull sport, it's still about 100 times more active and exciting than soccer. Soccer is a bunch of guys running around doing nothing for 90 minutes. For maybe 3-4 actual minutes per game in soccer there's people near a goal with a genuine chance to score that adds excitement. The rest of the game no one is anywhere near scoring position and little happens.

In contrast in baseball, EVERY single pitch besides intentional walks is a possibility of seeing one of the greatest things in sports, a homerun. So if the average number of pitches per game is 275 then that's potentially 275 times per game you can anticipate a homerun. There's what, less than a dozen legitimate shots on goal in a soccer game? So, I'm sorry. By my numbers baseball is only around 23 times as exciting as soccer.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
While I agree that baseball is a relatively slow and dull sport, it's still about 100 times more active and exciting than soccer. Soccer is a bunch of guys running around doing nothing for 90 minutes. For maybe 3-4 actual minutes per game in soccer there's people near a goal with a genuine chance to score that adds excitement. The rest of the game no one is anywhere near scoring position and little happens.

In contrast in baseball, EVERY single pitch besides intentional walks is a possibility of seeing one of the greatest things in sports, a homerun. So if the average number of pitches per game is 275 then that's potentially 275 times per game you can anticipate a homerun. There's what, less than a dozen legitimate shots on goal in a soccer game? So, I'm sorry. By my numbers baseball is only around 23 times as exciting as soccer.

Ugh, I do not see how anyone can argue Baseball is more exciting than, well, anything. I watch the occassional game because I play fantasy, but it's boring as all hell. I read about and listen to shows on Baseball and those are one million times more interesting than actually watching a game.

KT
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,509
29,090
146
Yep, because the MLS can't market worth a sht. Once someone of Pele's stature comes to MLS, then you might see it surge. They need someone big and I'm not talking Beckham. Even then, they still need more marketing and sponsors. MLS is about as popular as WNBA.

Until then, /crickets.

like I said, they already tried with Pele and a pro league in the 70s. It flopped. If the god of soccer can't do it in the US, wtf should they think an emo pretty boy with kicking skills is going to do it over here?

yeah, I know Beckham is great and all (well, he was...) but maybe there's a "euro image" clash for the typical American sports fan? Actually, it's probably more that he plays soccer. ...and we simply don't care.

For one thing, he plays in LA--a ridiculously confounding pro sports market that can consistently make a profit off of one of the worst sports franchises in history (the Clippers), and not manage to hold an NFL team?
 

Tangerines

Senior member
Oct 20, 2005
304
0
0
The score at the half of the Brazil-North Korea game is 0-0. Brazil is the number 1 ranked team in the world, and the DPRK are 107th. The number one ranked team can't put up anything in a half against a tomato can like North Korea. Imagine the Saints not being able to score against the Rams, or the Blackhawks not being able to score on Edmonton.

And people wonder why Americans think soccer is boring.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
You should only stop the clock for things that they would otherwise add time onto the end of the game. BTW, people aren't complaining that soccer is slow because it has a 90 min game clock, they're complaining that it's slow because there's hardly any scoring or shots on goal.

If you're stopping the game, you are slowing it down and making it less exciting. Think of all the stoppages in Basketball, the NBA specifically, which can be painful. Stopping the game for things that would only add time sounds good in theory, but it would still slow it down way more than just tacking on time at the end.

I really do not understand how anyone can have an issue with the timing, so I guess we'll just have to stay apart on this one. this is the first time I have ever heard anyone complain about it.

KT
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
The score at the half of the Brazil-North Korea game is 0-0. Brazil is the number 1 ranked team in the world, and the DPRK are 107th. The number one ranked team can't put up anything in a half against a tomato can like North Korea. Imagine the Saints not being able to score against the Rams, or the Blackhawks not being able to score on Edmonton.

And people wonder why Americans think soccer is boring.

Um, you obviously do not actually watch hockey, a hot goalie can stop anyone; you see it all the time.

KT
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
They should allow fights in soccer like in hockey. See what that does to the ratings!

They always talk about removing fighting from hockey here. I tend to agree (or at least penalize it differently).. but the reason that they'd never do it is always stated as being due to Americans not watching the NHL any more....

Do folks down south really only care about the fist fights? There is no fighting in football and that is the most profitable league in the country... one which the NHL/mlb could learn a thing or two from.


Anyway.. why is it such a big deal/surprise that soccer is popular with some of us.. people like different things :D

I like playing soccer and ball hockey.. I like watching baseball, hockey and curling... others like UFC... meh.. Hell, I enjoy playing magic too which most woudln't
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
If you're stopping the game, you are slowing it down and making it less exciting. Think of all the stoppages in Basketball, the NBA specifically, which can be painful. Stopping the game for things that would only add time sounds good in theory, but it would still slow it down way more than just tacking on time at the end.

I really do not understand how anyone can have an issue with the timing, so I guess we'll just have to stay apart on this one. this is the first time I have ever heard anyone complain about it.

KT

Umm....the game is stopped regardless of the game clock, so it wouldn't change the flow of the game and it wouldn't slow it down any more than it is already slowed down during a stoppage of play, the clock would just reflect the stoppage. All I've heard from soccer fans in this thread is how much American football sucks because the game is always stopped, this must mean that soccer is hardly ever stopped so what's the most time that stopping the clock could possibly add to the game? 5 minutes? I thought soccer never stopped like the NFL? Non-stop action right?

You might not have an issue with the timing (and neither do I really because I don't even watch soccer) but it's pretty simple why some people do. If the game is supposed to be 90 minutes long then the game should be over when the clock hits 90, not some random amount of time after the clock hits 90.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
like I said, they already tried with Pele and a pro league in the 70s. It flopped. If the god of soccer can't do it in the US, wtf should they think an emo pretty boy with kicking skills is going to do it over here?

yeah, I know Beckham is great and all (well, he was...) but maybe there's a "euro image" clash for the typical American sports fan? Actually, it's probably more that he plays soccer. ...and we simply don't care.

For one thing, he plays in LA--a ridiculously confounding pro sports market that can consistently make a profit off of one of the worst sports franchises in history (the Clippers), and not manage to hold an NFL team?

Well, we need someone better than Pele. We need someone who is just like MJ was to the NBA. Beckham is good but more as a passer. MLS gets a couple of MJ's, toughens up the rules (allow some fighting like hockey) and I'd actually watch it. But w/out true bonafide superstars who will watch? Look at what Crosby and Ovechkin did for the NHL, ratings for Pens/Caps is always through the roof and sold out. MLS needs to reinvent itself and its pretty boy image.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,630
2,014
126
They always talk about removing fighting from hockey here. I tend to agree (or at least penalize it differently).. but the reason that they'd never do it is always stated as being due to Americans not watching the NHL any more....

Do folks down south really only care about the fist fights? There is no fighting in football and that is the most profitable league in the country... one which the NHL/mlb could learn a thing or two from.


Anyway.. why is it such a big deal/surprise that soccer is popular with some of us.. people like different things :D

I like playing soccer and ball hockey.. I like watching baseball, hockey and curling... others like UFC... meh.. Hell, I enjoy playing magic too which most woudln't

WTF is ball hockey? Sounds gay.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,929
142
106
They always talk about removing fighting from hockey here. I tend to agree (or at least penalize it differently).. but the reason that they'd never do it is always stated as being due to Americans not watching the NHL any more....

Do folks down south really only care about the fist fights? There is no fighting in football and that is the most profitable league in the country... one which the NHL/mlb could learn a thing or two from.


Anyway.. why is it such a big deal/surprise that soccer is popular with some of us.. people like different things :D

I like playing soccer and ball hockey.. I like watching baseball, hockey and curling... others like UFC... meh.. Hell, I enjoy playing magic too which most woudln't

Football doesn't need fighting, it has the biggest/fastest/strongest men hitting each other through vicious tackling. It's already violent.

To remove fighting from hockey would really drop the ratings, you're right. They have cracked down on head hunting, however.

There's nothing wrong with liking soccer, I like it and actually think it's almost as violent as the big 4 but needs some extra kick (pun intended) to shed its nancy boy image. And the scoring is a little painful which makes it tougher to watch.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
Umm....the game is stopped regardless of the game clock, so it wouldn't change the flow of the game and it wouldn't slow it down any more than it is already slowed down during a stoppage of play, the clock would just reflect the stoppage. All I've heard from soccer fans in this thread is how much American football sucks because the game is always stopped, this must mean that soccer is hardly ever stopped so what's the most time that stopping the clock could possibly add to the game? 5 minutes? I thought soccer never stopped like the NFL? Non-stop action right?

You might not have an issue with the timing (and neither do I really because I don't even watch soccer) but it's pretty simple why some people do. If the game is supposed to be 90 minutes long then the game should be over when the clock hits 90, not some random amount of time after the clock hits 90.

It's not obvious at all and it makes no sense whatsoever; it's random only to a degree and the way this game works, the precision of having it counted to the hundredth of a second, is not as important.

I have no problem with stoppages in American Football since that is how the game works, it is about running specific plays and executing laid-out game plans. Soccer is a completely different game and if you actually watched it, you would see barely ever does stop. Even when fouls are being called, the other team is usually grabbing the ball and getting their free kicks off. Once you stop the clock for all of these things, more time will be spent arguing the calls and more time will be spent resetting the ball and setting up the kicks, therefore adding more time overall.

KT
 

meltdown75

Lifer
Nov 17, 2004
37,558
7
81
A golf course is an environmental eyesore, and frankly a disaster on par with many superfund sights.

The amount of nitrates and chemicals, much less water pumped into those fields is a fucking travesty. Honestly, it's the worst thing one can intentionally do to open space.

The fact that they are often perceived as gorgeous or some form of parkland is, well....atrocious.

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/golf/background.htm

http://www1.american.edu/TED/jpgolf.htm

I'm sure there are more eco-friendly ways to engineer a golf course to meet real environmental needs, and such practices will likely become more standard...but the truth of the matter is that large clubs will be focusing on the cheapest, most tested methods, that are pretty much the same for your typical, traditional lawn--shitloads of chemicals, non-native resource-intensive grasses, whatever.

you know what, people here have way too much time to debate this shit.

providing links, blathering on... come on man i don't care enough for that, don't waste your time on me in the future, it's really always just opinion vs. opinion / arguing on the internet bullshit 99% of the time.

i didn't even think we used chemicals up here in Canuckistan anymore, i thought it was banned. but i'm PROBABLY wrong because i'm posting it here.
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
Football doesn't need fighting, it has the biggest/fastest/strongest men hitting each other through vicious tackling. It's already violent.

To remove fighting from hockey would really drop the ratings, you're right. They have cracked down on head hunting, however.

There's nothing wrong with liking soccer, I like it and actually think it's almost as violent as the big 4 but needs some extra kick (pun intended) to shed its nancy boy image. And the scoring is a little painful which makes it tougher to watch.

Soccer is as physical as any other sport if you play it that way.. It most certainly is when played up here. Mind you enjoyment of doing something and watching something are not at all the same thing.