This clip says a fair bit about the perspective of other cultures of American sport and in a lot of ways of American culture in general. Though to be honest, Stephen Fry was trying to create a positive image of America on this show, so he sugarcoats a bit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cl-f8NABMM
Maybe this is what really matters. When the Jets flew over, all I could think was "God, America is awesome."
Whereas I find almost everything about this clip unspeakably revolting. Footage like this makes it possible for me to understand how there are people in the world who would commit terrorist acts in the hope that American influence in their own parts of the world might be adversely affected. If this is the culture that surrounds the sport, I wouldn't want to come within a thousand miles of it. And that's before you even look at the game itself.
Normally, I feel like I'm insane when I argue these things. But in this case, I know I'm not. It's not like Football is some marginally popular thing, and I'm explaining why the play stoppages are only theoretically part of the appeal. I've watched Football with other human beings, and I know for a fact that the play stoppages are crucial to the viewing experience. During parts of the game where there are fewer stoppages of play (no huddle comeback drives at the end of games for example), the game becomes a completely emotional and primal experience. But the human brain can't watch a sporting event this way for 3 hours. The play stoppages are chances to breathe and digest during the game. And to socialize. It's totally gotten a bit out of hand because of the commercials, but the natural stops in the game are good for it.
Other sports have stoppages. They're just too common, too long, and too jarring to the flow of the game in AF. I mean, the fact that it's even possible to put commercial breaks within the game without severely interrupting it and delaying live footage is absurd.
the game offers them very little opportunity to display talent, and at the end of the day, watching athletes display talent is what makes sport entertaining, to me, at least.
Mmmm? Every play inevitably features at least one borderline super human act.
This is why I've never understood the argument that American football is more of a "coach's sport" than most other sports and less of a "player's sport", and that that's somehow a good thing. I don't watch sports to see two coaches match wits while a bunch of players stand around doing fuck all. I watch sports to see two coaches match wits within a game system in which athletes can actually perform. If a sport is written in a way that I can't turn on the TV and rely on seeing players doing that, on a minute for minute, or even second for second basis, why would I watch it?
- I can't think of a sport where the coaches have a bigger role than in Football.
- It's a good thing because it means that every play, no matter how interesting, has a level of overall strategic depth to it that no other sport has. The beauty of Football is the way 11 different players are acting in concert to achieve a result, and seeing if the play succeeds or fails. This is actually impossible in other sports because of the level of improvisation. There's a reason stars matter in Hockey, Basketball, and Soccer moreso than they do in Football, because the team aspect of those games is less important. The regimentation of Football means that every member of the team, from the quarterback to the right guard, is crucial. In Basketball, you can have a bad player on the court to simply absorb a defender while your star player makes things happen. In Football, a bad player potentially ruins everything.
- I don't feel like you're appreciating the level of split-second decision making that goes on in the game. Partially this is because they don't really show the defensive backfield on TV, which is the NFL's fault. But I don't see how you can't appreciate how hard it is to be an NFL QB. I can't think of a more difficult job in any professional sport.
All I know is when I watched AF, I was sitting waiting for the players to do something that would interest me, and it never happened. If that's what happens in a coach's sport of extreme strategic depth, then no thanks.
The way you describe AF just gives the impression you think there is practically no internal strategy to other team sports, that it's just a bunch of guys running around doing whatever the fuck they want with absolutely no regard of the players around them, let alone an overall team strategy. Strategy doesn't have to mean every single play needs to be planned down to which blades of grass each player's foot is going to fall on, and that you have to stop every single time to talk about it and work it out.
And in fact, I would argue that the sheer degree of planning that goes into every play in AF severely detracts from the team aspect of the sport. In most team sports, that group of people have to be so well-practiced together, working together as a unit so cohesively, that they can create those moments spontaneously, out of thin air, in the midst of play that's already been going on for several minutes, if they even sniff the opportunity. You don't have time to stand around and talk about it, you may not even have time to communicate to each other what move or play you're going to try. A team that is well-honed enough will see the chance, and be able to just do it. I can't even imagine an AF team being able to do that, because they struggle to put together ten seconds of play if they haven't laboriously discussed it in advance. They have only the most basic sense of intuitive team psyche or spontaneous ability. They're a bunch of individuals who briefly perform a pre-planned function in coordination with other individuals to meet a temporary objective, over and over and over again.
And in any professional team sport I know of, every player in every position is crucial, and has to be excellent at what they do. The moment there's a weaker player in the chain, the opposition will exploit it. That's not something unique to AF.