Why men's soccer will never be popular in the U.S.

critic 100 wrote:

In real football, cheerleaders get wiped out by two 230lb pound linebackers while tackling a 200lb running back on the sidelines, she gets up, shakes off the hit with a smile, and continues to cheer.

The soccer guy gets his foot stepped on, calls 911, gets the surgeon ready for a major operation to remove the leg.

How can any American support such a wimpy sport?

Women's soccer, different. No fake injuries. after falling down, they get up and finish the game.

Any sport that finishes in 90 minutes and the final score... 1 to 0. = let us watch paint dry.

More action in the stands. Maybe, rather than following such a boring sport, the TV crews should focus on the fans.

Great fights there.

So America have got it right, and the rest of the world have got it wrong? Sounds very dodgy to me. AND, stop calling it football, you fools!

critic 100 wrote:

Any sport that finishes in 90 minutes and the final score... 1 to 0. = let us watch paint dry.

Now that is funny.

American Football is just a clump of bodies over each other and a lot of waiting in between.

That's why soccer is no 1 and Football no 9.

I'm sure Football (popular in like 199 of 200 countries) will do just fine.

A true test of a sport is it's popularity in all continents - South America, Central America, North America, North Africa, West Africa, East Africa, South Africa, Middle East, Asian subcontinent, East Asia, South East Asia, Australasia. Football ticks every box (so does athletics, of course.)

The good thing with football and athletics being globally competitive is that the hype is justified and believable. Messi and Kipchoge have beaten billions of wannabe strikers and marathoners.

It's not a good look when you throw the same level of marketing into the Superbowl, but people deep down know the standard of sporting excellence is more comparable to Swansea vs Tranmere Rovers, due to lack of global participants - it all just seems empty and vapid. Style over actual substance.

The real question is - why aren't the big local sports like Gridiron, Rounders ("Base Ball"), or Basket Ball not more globally popular and competitive? Same question for Kabaddi in India - huge locally but irrelevant on the world stage.

Not enough commercial breaks for Americans.

Watch some Messi highlights and you will start to understand why people find soccer exciting:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OASaJVMg__I

There’s an American in the Champion’s League final who is an actual contributor. You should open your mind and watch the final two games.

Actually the "pay to play" model used in youth soccer is why soccer will never become as popular as it is all over the world. You see, in EVERY other country if you are good at soccer opportunities for you to improve and play FIND YOU. In the US, only the folks with money to pay for clubs are given access to top level coaching. So, if you are poor and can play soccer, you might as well find another sport in America.

So, with that model how can America grow it's home-based professional league so it rivals even the second tier European Leagues and how can the national team compete with the best countries in the world at The World Cup?

nord wrote:

Not enough commercial breaks for Americans.

This is a major reason why the TV networks don't want the sport. Soccer is one of the few games where the players can restart play without waiting for the ref's permission. So a free kick, throw in or corner can be taken at any time once the attacking team has the ball. They do not have to wait for the ref to restart the game. Therefore a 45 minute half is 45 minutes without the opportunity to show commercials.

Apparently, back in the 70s the TV networks tried to get Soccer to change it's rules so free kicks, throw ins etc. could not be taken until the ref blew his whistle. This would allow the TV networks to control the game as they do in Ice Hockey. In that sport there is a light above the broadcast booth, if the light is on, we are showing commercials and do not restart the game.

That’s not entirely true. A lot of clubs have scholarship programs for poorer kids. 25% of the kids on the competitive team I coach receive a scholarship. Some of the top clubs in our state are from economically disadvantaged areas. A number of teams have corporate sponsorship , etc. Soccer is not much different than football and basketball in that regard (and plenty of poor kids excel in those sports).

It's a good sport. It's popular elsewhere because the players start earning money from like age 13.

"World Champions! World F!@#$%g Champions!" I have always found that line amusing when said about an American (i.e. U.S.) team defeating another American team in a contest where the only entrants are American teams, with perhaps a few of Canadian cousins mixed in.

Based on the criteria in the article, XC tops "Futbol." In fact, almost any sport tops American Football. But the NFL tops all other sports combined in revenue! And unfortunately, that is what counts.

You cannot reply to posts

Jed Clampett wrote:

You cannot reply to posts

I wanted to include the silly soccer promotion article in my posts. But you cannot do it.

joed|rt wrote:

Watch some Messi highlights and you will start to understand why people find soccer exciting:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OASaJVMg__I

Wow, Messi is pretty good.

and another coach wrote:

Actually the "pay to play" model used in youth soccer is why soccer will never become as popular as it is all over the world. You see, in EVERY other country if you are good at soccer opportunities for you to improve and play FIND YOU.

Ever heard of Clit Dempsey?

critic 100 wrote:

In real football, cheerleaders get wiped out by two 230lb pound linebackers while tackling a 200lb running back on the sidelines, she gets up, shakes off the hit with a smile, and continues to cheer.

The soccer guy gets his foot stepped on, calls 911, gets the surgeon ready for a major operation to remove the leg.

How can any American support such a wimpy sport?

Women's soccer, different. No fake injuries. after falling down, they get up and finish the game.

Any sport that finishes in 90 minutes and the final score... 1 to 0. = let us watch paint dry.

More action in the stands. Maybe, rather than following such a boring sport, the TV crews should focus on the fans.

Great fights there.

Actually a low scoring game is much more thrilling that most high scoring games. When the score is 1-0 anytime the team is close to the goal they risk tying the game. This particularly is stressful toward the end of games. A score of 5-3 is less stressful at the end of a game.

With a low scoring game each close call is a big deal.

A little bit ironic soccer is called a wimpy sport on a running website.

I don't think running is wimpy, but many people do.

Men's soccer already is popular in the United States, so this thread is maybe 30 years late.

We in the US long ago discovered that hands and arms are actually useful when playing sports.