DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: ReaPsTA on August 25, 2012, 04:56:48 PM
-
First thing: I know that Canada has the CFL and that the NFL is going to start playing games in London. It's not like the game has no international appeal.
But still, I literally can't understand why the NFL isn't the most popular sport in the world. Obviously, the fact it's super popular in America doesn't mean that it will be popular everywhere else. That's easy to intutively understand.
Here's what isn't the reason: I have a feeling that the average NFL fan is stereotyped as a guy who goes to church on Sunday morning, then rushes home in his truck to turn on the game and start throwing down cold ones with his buddies.
The obvious reason this isn't true is that it's a gross over-simplifcation. Even NASCAR fans can't be fit into a stereotype this narrow.
But here's what's truly mindblowing about the NFL's popularity. Both the fact that it's true and the fact that no one realizes it's true:
There is no cultural group within the United States that doesn't like Football.
Football fandom has nothing to do whatsoever with your job, political ideology, other hobbies, style of dress, social group, or whatever else you can think of. Not only is there no type of person that is a football fan, there's no type of person that isn't.
And yet, it's still not popular outside America. How?
-
We call it Rugby and you don't wear body armour.
:biggrin:
-
For most of the world I think cause they find it to be a violent mindless sport that doesn't require skills or brains, only physical fitness and sometimes just natural body hugeness.
Personally I hate it cause it -second only to basketball- bores the living fuck out of my brain cells, I do recognize it as the main sport here in the U.S though and try not to express my views around it's hardcore fans so I wouldn't be a party pooper :lol
-
I think a lot of people see how sloppy the majority of the 10 guys lined up as O-linemen/D-linemen look and then use it as a shitty excuse to generalize that all football players are out of shape and can't possibly rival the athleticism of their hotpants-wearing 170-lb. soccer/rugby heroes.
They also like to hide behind the weak-ass no padding/safety equipment thing even though >90% of the dudes that are delivering the hits in the NFL weigh more than 200 lbs. and, aside from the D-linemen, the remaining 6 players range from as quick as just about any soccer/rugby players to being fast enough to smoke the shit out of them in a foot race. Furthermore, the non-linemen defenders are, at smallest, the same size as soccer/rugby players and often times much larger and still made of rock solid muscle. Bottom line: in the NFL you're likely to take MUCH harder hits so I seriously doubt many of these rugby/soccer dudes would last very long without padding in the NFL. Let 'em come see if they wish.
Another way they try to slag American football is because of there not being continuous action yet that doesn't seem to affect their love for cricket.
-
Football and Cricket bore the arse off me.
Cricket seems to be 90% standing around doing bugger all.
I really enjoy snooker since the amount of tactical play and actual skill involved is amazing.
Ronnie O Sullivan FTW.
-
Because of two things:
- Rugby
- Football (the real thing, with an actual round ball)
-
Well, I'm American and I don't like it. I used to as a teenager but I just lost all interest in it. To be honest, almost all sports bore the hell out of me now, with soccer being the worst. Ironically, the only sport I really enjoy watching is baseball, which is widely considered one of the most boring of all. :P
-
For most of the world I think cause they find it to be a violent mindless sport that doesn't require skills or brains, only physical fitness and sometimes just natural body hugeness.
I'm emotionally torn about this answer.
My visceral reaction is that it's a verifiably wrong opinion. The sport might be relatively simple for the individual player, but from the standpoint of coaching it and understanding it as a fan I'm pretty sure it's the most complicated popular sport in the world. It's so complicated that they're releasing new camera angles this year because the old ones aren't sufficient.
On the other hand, this means the solution to its lack of popularity is pretty easy to figure out. Put more effort into emphasizing the complexity of the sport.
What confuses me: Americans almost always are able to intutively understand the complexity of the sport. Even if they don't understand what makes a good or bad player, the understand that coordinating the movements of 11 guys effectively is tough work. Assuming it's true that foreigners perceive the sport as stupid, why don't they make the same leap?
One interesting note: Football video games are great for the sport because they let you actually call plays and understand what goes into making a Football team work. I'm pretty sure that the Football video games I played as a kid are still the foundation for my ability to understand the game today. I don't know this, but I'm pretty sure the popularity of Football in London can be correlated with the popularity of Madden.
Well, I'm American and I don't like it. I used to as a teenager but I just lost all interest in it. To be honest, almost all sports bore the hell out of me now, with soccer being the worst. Ironically, the only sport I really enjoy watching is baseball, which is widely considered one of the most boring of all. :P
I don't like baseball one bit but both times I've seen it live it was great. I recommend trying the experience.
-
Another way they try to slag American football is because of there not being continuous action yet that doesn't seem to affect their love for cricket.
To be fair, cricket is not nearly as popular in the UK as it's made out to be, at least among younger people. I don't think I knew anyone there who was actually a cricket fan, and many of my friends had only a rough idea of how the game was even played.
-
Mmm, My thoughts on it:
1. The game doesn't flow. It is stopped and restarted after each play which makes it a little boring in my opinion because you spend half the game watching them plan the next play and getting into position.
2. Again in my non expert view on the game I feel like it depends a lot on 1 guy, the quarter back. I don't know much but it seems to me that if you have a lousy one your team is kinda screwed. I know that you can have a couple of good runners that can make up for it but in the end a good QB makes a real difference.
3. It's called football which is completely wrong in every sense. You have only one guy in the team that actually uses his feet to kick the ball and on the other hand that's not a ball they are using, balls are round :rant:
4. You have rugby which doesn't have any of the things stated above, it is stopped sometimes but it's in very specific scenarios, otherwise the game has a very nice flow. You don't have 1 guy that's more important than the rest but you really need to play as a team in every sense.
Another way they try to slag American football is because of there not being continuous action yet that doesn't seem to affect their love for cricket.
Cricket is boring as hell. I think only 40 countries in the world play it and most of those used to be English territory.
-
Well, I'm American and I don't like it. I used to as a teenager but I just lost all interest in it. To be honest, almost all sports bore the hell out of me now, with soccer being the worst. Ironically, the only sport I really enjoy watching is baseball, which is widely considered one of the most boring of all. :P
I don't like baseball one bit but both times I've seen it live it was great. I recommend trying the experience.
I went to a bunch of high school football games when I was 13-15, so I was really into it for a while. I've only been to one NFL game though, but I don't live anywhere near an NFL team now. And forget about college. For some reason I just disconnected from sports in general. I think all the steroids scandals had a lot to do with it.
-
I just find it to be exceedingly boring to watch, myself. If someone makes a really impressive play and returns a punt for a touchdown or something like that, I can get into it, but most of the time, it just seems like large guys just repeatedly running into each other in order to move the ball very slowly down the field three or four yards at a time, with play being stopped every few seconds so they can get set up to run into each other again.
-
From my own experience, I just think there's way too many interruptions in American Football for people here to get excited. It's really 15-20 seconds of game, then just as many seconds (if not more) of pause. I enjoy American Football myself and watch it casually, but generally I think that's part of the reason.
On the other hand, Baseball is another sport that is huge in America but not as big in other countries.
We could turn the reasoning around, and ask why normal football (aka soccer) isn't popular in America? it's pretty much popular in all parts of the world, except for USA.
-
They also like to hide behind the weak-ass no padding/safety equipment thing
That's one of the worst arguments against football. If the game were played without pads, at least one person would literally die every weekend. The first football safety equipment was invented specifically because people were killed playing the game. There's nothing pansy about it whatsoever.
Another way they try to slag American football is because of there not being continuous action yet that doesn't seem to affect their love for cricket
Is cricket really that popular?
Because of two things:
- Rugby
Perhaps ironically, this is a compelling argument. Maybe, in the rest of the world, rugby already fills the same needs that Football does in America. In the rest of the world, it might be theoretically possible that Football can't become popular on its own accord unless it displaces the popularity of rugby. Very abstract and maybe false, but worth considering.
- Football (the real thing, with an actual round ball)
I really doubt this. Football and soccer are different games that are popular for different reasons. The intensity of the fandom surrounding soccer seems similar to the fandom surrounding football on the surface, but I don't believe it's ultimately the same.
-
@ Reap: Regarding the difficulty of the game, I think that's another reason for it not to be so popular. What makes other sports interesting is that while the teams have a defined way of playing there is a lot of room for improvisation which in my opinion tends to bring out the best plays. In basketball for example teams run plays and move the ball around the way they practice it but a lot of times that doesn't go well so the teams end up improvising and in many cases you get those sweet last second shots every fan loves. If your play doesn't go well in AM most likely the game will stop and you will need to start all over.
-
They also like to hide behind the weak-ass no padding/safety equipment thing
That's one of the worst arguments against football. If the game were played without pads, at least one person would literally die every weekend. The first football safety equipment was invented specifically because people were killed playing the game. There's nothing pansy about it whatsoever.
Yeah, I'll defend football here and agree that's always one of the worst arguments. Trying to prevent death or serious injury doesn't make them sissies.
-
On the other hand, Baseball is another sport that is huge in America but not as big in other countries.
Eh, baseball definitely has an international appeal that american football lacks. Not so much in Europe, but it has established fanbases in South America, S. Korea, and Japan.
-
I'm going to prefix this by saying I actually know a. bugger all about sports, and b. a fair few American football fans here in the UK. As in, proper fans. A good friend of mine played American football locally for a few years - might still do, not heard from him as much lately.
So, with the preface that not only am I completely ignorant to this entire subculture but I'm trying to argue a rule that I've met living exceptions to - I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
Real football, as people in every other country consider it, is one of the most beloved sports worldwide. Calling your sport American football sets it up as a direct opposition. A counter-argument. "Here's what we're going to do instead." The two sports needn't be mutually exclusive, but by insisting on calling it football, it feels like someone's looked at soccer and gone, "You can keep that bullshit with the sphere - we're going to don some armor and carry an egg."
On top of that, the word American is in itself a big sign that says "This isn't yours." When people follow a sport, they like to feel involved. They like to support their local team, feel like they're on the journey with their heroes. Very few people are going to feel personally involved with a sport that has a foreign country's name in front of it. Who's heard of the "English American Football Team?" I presume it does exist, and I presume it's got fans, but even just as a phrase, English American Football Team is, semantically speaking, nonsense. Giving a sport a particular geography limits its breadth innately. It's a psychological barrier. A big mental wall that, again, implies "The rest of you are not part of this."
If you started calling soccer football, and came up with a new name for American football, I think a lot of people would feel a lot more like it was a game they could be involved in. Because while there are fans worldwide, it's not really a global sport, and with a name like that I don't know if it ever can be. Hell of an image problem if you ask me. Which you didn't.
-
On the other hand, Baseball is another sport that is huge in America but not as big in other countries.
Eh, baseball definitely has an international appeal that american football lacks. Not so much in Europe, but it has established fanbases in South America.
Not really, only in Venezuela
-
Another way they try to slag American football is because of there not being continuous action yet that doesn't seem to affect their love for cricket.
Yea, because there are soooo many people who love cricket :lol.
-
I ate lunch a a few old British guys a while back, and I mentioned that I couldn't understand cricket to save my life. They said that's OK because they can't figure out American football, either. To appreciate the game, you really have to understand some of the subtlety. If you don't understand all that, then it's just a sequence of individual plays with no flow, as others have suggested. To me, a coach opting to go for it on fourth and 3 in his opponent's territory is just as thrilling as a great catch or kick return. We can appreciate that because we grew up watching and playing the game. Foreigners grew up playing soccer, so they never got immersed in the game.
-
1. The game doesn't flow. It is stopped and restarted after each play which makes it a little boring in my opinion because you spend half the game watching them plan the next play and getting into position.
Ah that hit the spot, one of the main reasons it's utterly boring for me.
On some level it's the same deal with Basketball, this last season I had to watch a game with some people at a cafe and I sincerely was throwing around looks of genuine shock at how often the fuckers would stop due to the short length of quarters, are we really watching this? the fucking thing lasted two and half hours and the only images I could recall from it the next day are the players going to their seats or the players getting up from their seats and the commercials.
-
I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
The second part, I can agree with, but I'm not sure about the first. As far as I'm aware, we don't actually call it American football in America. We just call it football. The league is the NFL - National Football League - not the NAFL. I believe it is only referred to as American football by people who aren't actually from America, and then only to distinguish it from 'proper' football, or what we call soccer.
I could be wrong (I'm sure someone will correct me if I am), but I'm not aware of any Americans calling it American football.
I do agree that it would be smart to call it something other than football.
-
We call it American football because football is the main sport here and soccer is a stupid name for a sport where you kick a ball with your feet.
-
Robwebster brings up a GREAT point. You're identifying it by a term that says "this is ours" and creating the opposite of something that that term is known by everywhere else in the world.
That being said...let's go back in time to when the sport was invented.
I'll admit that the name "football" is really something that doesn't make much sense. So you're sitting around trying to come up with a name for this game.
What do *YOU* call it?
-
We call it American football because football is the main sport here and soccer is a stupid name for a sport where you kick a ball with your feet.
I understand that. I'm just saying that I don't think the people who invented the sport actually decided to call it 'American football'. But again, I could be completely wrong about that.
What do *YOU* call it?
Soccer?
-
I find this post captivating.
I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
I think this is totally true in and of itself. But nothing exists in and of itself. The popularity of the NFL shows the level of desire to see this sport. I'd personally think that the name thing would cease to be an issue of the game were more effectively promoted. And yet, I might be wrong.
The next few years of Football in London will be an interesting test case for this. The NFL definitely wants to expand internationally, and is making their first serious effort to do so. If it works, then this thread will be sort of dumb, and the answer will simply be bad marketing. If it doesn't work, then who knows...
Real football, as people in every other country consider it, is one of the most beloved sports worldwide. Calling your sport American football sets it up as a direct opposition. A counter-argument. "Here's what we're going to do instead." The two sports needn't be mutually exclusive, but by insisting on calling it football, it feels like someone's looked at soccer and gone, "You can keep that bullshit with the sphere - we're going to don some armor and carry an egg."
I know you're not trying to be inflammatory - you're just summing up an argument, but I hate the notion that we're wrong to call American Football Football. It makes the implicit assumption that we did this as a country purely to have it our own way as an act of defiance. I don't know much more about the history of the game than what I've read on Wikipedia, but it seems the process was very organic.
On top of that, the word American is in itself a big sign that says "This isn't yours." When people follow a sport, they like to feel involved. They like to support their local team, feel like they're on the journey with their heroes. Very few people are going to feel personally involved with a sport that has a foreign country's name in front of it. Who's heard of the "English American Football Team?" I presume it does exist, and I presume it's got fans, but even just as a phrase, English American Football Team is, semantically speaking, nonsense. Giving a sport a particular geography limits its breadth innately. It's a psychological barrier. A big mental wall that, again, implies "The rest of you are not part of this."
I can't really argue against this.
I'd actually bet that a lot of Americans like the fact that the sport is such an "American" thing.
If you started calling soccer football, and came up with a new name for American football, I think a lot of people would feel a lot more like it was a game they could be involved in. Because while there are fans worldwide, it's not really a global sport, and with a name like that I don't know if it ever can be. Hell of an image problem if you ask me. Which you didn't.
Well, I didn't not ask you, so it's all good.
I actually know... a fair few American football fans here in the UK. As in, proper fans.
Would you say there's anything different about these people from your other fellow countrymen?
-
I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
The second part, I can agree with, but I'm not sure about the first. As far as I'm aware, we don't actually call it American football in America. We just call it football. The league is the NFL - National Football League - not the NAFL. I believe it is only referred to as American football by people who aren't actually from America, and then only to distinguish it from 'proper' football, or what we call soccer.
I could be wrong (I'm sure someone will correct me if I am), but I'm not aware of any Americans calling it American football.
I do agree that it would be smart to call it something other than football.
That probably is true but for the rest of the world football is soccer so when we need to refer to the one you guys play there is a necessity of adding American in front of it to be able to distinguish them.
1. The game doesn't flow. It is stopped and restarted after each play which makes it a little boring in my opinion because you spend half the game watching them plan the next play and getting into position.
Ah that hit the spot, one of the main reasons it's utterly boring for me.
On some level it's the same deal with Basketball, this last season I had to watch a game with some people at a cafe and I sincerely was throwing around looks of genuine shock at how often the fuckers would stop due to the short length of quarters, are we really watching this? the fucking thing lasted two and half hours and the only images I could recall from it the next day are the players going to their seats or the players getting up from their seats and the commercials.
That's a problem with the NBA. They use every single timeout they have because they need to cut the game for publicity. Watch basketball outside the US and you'll see the games end up much more quickly because a) Coaches don't use every single timeout b) timeouts are shorter because publicity doesn't really matter, only the game c) Each quarter is 2 minutes shorter
-
We call it American football because football is the main sport here and soccer is a stupid name for a sport where you kick a ball with your feet.
I understand that. I'm just saying that I don't think the people who invented the sport actually decided to call it 'American football'.
Ah, but it was decided to call the sport the exact same term as an already existing and widely popular sport. And the name doesn't even make sense.
-
What do *YOU* call it?
Soccer?
:rollin
-
Again, not trying to defend our calling it football. I already said it would be smart to call it something else. I'm just saying don't blame us for the 'American' tag when we don't refer to it that way.
-
Real football, as people in every other country consider it, is one of the most beloved sports worldwide. Calling your sport American football sets it up as a direct opposition. A counter-argument. "Here's what we're going to do instead." The two sports needn't be mutually exclusive, but by insisting on calling it football, it feels like someone's looked at soccer and gone, "You can keep that bullshit with the sphere - we're going to don some armor and carry an egg."
I know you're not trying to be inflammatory - you're just summing up an argument, but I hate the notion that we're wrong to call American Football Football. It makes the implicit assumption that we did this as a country purely to have it our own way as an act of defiance. I don't know much more about the history of the game than what I've read on Wikipedia, but it seems the process was very organic.
Rip, the thing here is, why is the sport called football when only one of the players in the game actually uses his foot while all the others play with they're hands? It doesn't make much sense
-
We can appreciate that because we grew up watching and playing the game. Foreigners grew up playing soccer, so they never got immersed in the game.
At the end of the day that's all there is to it frankly, familiarity and habit. The traditions and the practices of Americans that are built around their sports, I respect that and enjoy seeing it as it's one of the things that are really American the way foreigners saw America in the Hollywood movies. My weekend, my beer and hot dogs and my jersey of my team, BBQ later, pass out on the couch with the dog, etc. It was cool to see people like that when I came to the states cause I found it to be part of the culture I perceived America to be all my childhood and young life.
-
I could be wrong (I'm sure someone will correct me if I am), but I'm not aware of any Americans calling it American football.
You're right. It's just Football here.
Rip, the thing here is, why is the sport called football when only one of the players in the game actually uses his foot while all the others play with they're hands? It doesn't make much sense
Nope. It feels right but is logically nonsensical. But that's different than arguing against the name because it supposedly makes an ideological statement.
-
Because football is fucking stupid, and the pro players are the least intelligent, most overpaid douches in all of pro sports, save for basketball..
-
We seem to go a bit off-track here, the name probably isn't the only thing withholding it from becoming more popular :lol.
I think it has to do something with:
- it being too American
- slow pacing
- deep rooted soccer(or hockey, or whatever floats a specific country's boat) culture
-
Again, not trying to defend our calling it football. I already said it would be smart to call it something else. I'm just saying don't blame us for the 'American' tag when we don't refer to it that way.
Right...so what name would you invent?
How about.....CRUSH!!!!
-
The name doesn't make any sense, but there's plenty of things in language that make no sense. The game originated out of various football clubs trying new rules, and the name stuck around. It's really as simple as that.
-
Because football is fucking stupid, and the pro players are the least intelligent, most overpaid douches in all of pro sports, save for basketball..
Thank you for your invaluable input. We're all better off having read this.
-
Right...so what name would you invent?
Well, considering I think the sport is boring as paste to watch, I doubt it'd ever be on my shoulders to come up with a new name for it. For all I care, just call it Gridiron. Or just some word that somebody makes up on the spot. Or, how about something like Fieldball? I suppose that's probably a thing, though. Yardball. Touchball. Tackleball. Huddleball. Warball.
-
- slow pacing
It's odd that this would be an argument against Football. While I'd agree that the game on television has too many commercials, the normal stoppages of play actually make the game more entertaining for me. The moment the play ends, you and the people you're watching it with start talking and breaking down what happened. It makes the social experience of the game intrinsic to it.
-
I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
The second part, I can agree with, but I'm not sure about the first. As far as I'm aware, we don't actually call it American football in America. We just call it football. The league is the NFL - National Football League - not the NAFL. I believe it is only referred to as American football by people who aren't actually from America, and then only to distinguish it from 'proper' football, or what we call soccer.
I could be wrong (I'm sure someone will correct me if I am), but I'm not aware of any Americans calling it American football.
I do agree that it would be smart to call it something other than football.
Ah! Yes, that sounds more plausible. See, said I knew nothing about sport!
Either way, regardless of where it comes from, because the sport's got a name that puts it in direct opposition with the most popular game on the planet, it has inherited the name American football - and who wants to play someone else's game?
Cos imagine if we in Britain invented a sport, nothing like baseball, and started calling it baseball! No bases, no balls, more like tennis than anything else, and it became the UK's national pastime. And then imagine we went completely gaga for it - really proud of it, best sport on earth, spending millions of pounds on transfers, stadia, ceremonies, and all of us baseball fans were really enjoying our new sport. How many US baseball fans would seriously go, "Ooh! That sounds like fun!" And how much coverage would it get in the US, d'you reckon? How much airtime would be devoted to the gift of baseball that the UK's nobly donated to the world?
Some people would enjoy it! Perfectly fun game, nothing wrong with the game, no reason that it should have to compete. But just based on the (apparent!) sheer audacity of naming it baseball, most baseball fans (real baseball fans) would just go, "Right. On your own, then." And rightly so! It'd be called British Baseball. Even in countries that don't love the original baseball - who'd want to be on the French British Baseball team?
I know you're not trying to be inflammatory - you're just summing up an argument, but I hate the notion that we're wrong to call American Football Football. It makes the implicit assumption that we did this as a country purely to have it our own way as an act of defiance. I don't know much more about the history of the game than what I've read on Wikipedia, but it seems the process was very organic.
As I said - totally aware that I'm arguing from a position of ignorance! I'm sure there are umpteen reasons it is called football, and I think you're probably right to resent the implication. But that's how it looks! And that's what reactions are based on. Logically, and objectively, it should be a game like any other. But sharing a name does set it up in diametric opposition. It's the other football. Your own brand of it. A retort. Whether by chance or by design, they're sharing the same headspace. It makes them into rivals. Gut reaction will make much more of a difference than the long, fruitful history of each game. Logic barely gets a look-in.
I can't really argue against this.
I'd actually bet that a lot of Americans like the fact that the sport is such an "American" thing.
Yep - and that's the flipside! Your culture's been enriched by your own brand of football in a way that no other country's has. It's as American as peanut butter, space-travel, and the right to bear arms. And it's all over your exports. Particularly your comedies, weirdly. Friends, the Simpsons, Seinfeld - football sticks out of each one like a red phonebox might out of an episode of Doctor Who. It's curiously American, in a way that might be lost if it were to catch on globally in a bigger way.
Would you say there's anything different about these people from your other fellow countrymen?
Well! Everyone's different, but there's a group of them who all hung about a bit in school who've all ended up watching it. I imagine a few of my friends like American football for the same reason a few of my friends like Dream Theater. One of them probably came across it, and they'd have said "Hey! Check this out." And they did, presumably! Knowing is half the battle, etc.
-
Either way, regardless of where it comes from, because the sport's got a name that puts it in direct opposition with the most popular game on the planet, it has inherited the name American football - and who wants to play someone else's game?
Oh, I do understand this. I just wanted to clarify that it wasn't us who chose to call it 'American football'. :tup
-
Being someone who is getting into both American football and football I can easily say that I understand why football is more appealing worldwide as far as number of fans is concerned. Less complex, faster paced, way more no nonsense and frankly way more fun to watch with a group of people. American football can be engaging but definitely slow paced and hard to grasp as far as rules are concerned. Maybe because I'm not that big on both quite yet but it seems silly to me to be confused as to why American football is, well, still only really an American thing. It's pretty obvious.
-
eh... metric system?
-
We could turn the reasoning around, and ask why normal football (aka soccer) isn't popular in America? it's pretty much popular in all parts of the world, except for USA.
Not sure about that. Americans don't really watch soccer, but a lot of people enjoy playing it. When I was a kid we played soccer quite a bit iirc.
-
eh... metric system?
:lol
-
We could turn the reasoning around, and ask why normal football (aka soccer) isn't popular in America? it's pretty much popular in all parts of the world, except for USA.
Not sure about that. Americans don't really watch soccer, but a lot of people enjoy playing it. When I was a kid we played soccer quite a bit iirc.
Well, I don't think it's accurate to say that soccer isn't popular at all here (it was my favorite sport to play as a kid, and probably still would be if not for foot surgery), but it definitely isn't as popular in the U.S. as it is in some places.
-
It's not a game that can be easily formed into a youth league...You need a lot of players to have a team, specialized equipment, fields, etc. and I think that has a lot to do with its failure to expand to other countries. Essentially it's not a game well suited to be easily embraced by other cultures.
And I find it funny how some people think it's a mindless sport.....sure there are plenty of positions that don't require much thinking, but playing quarterback is one of the most challenging positions in any sport. The amount of knowledge required to be a successful QB is insane, and even more so for a coach. Coaching and good strategy is more important in football then in any other game I can think of.
I'm not a huge football fan though...I never played it growing up so it doesn't engage me like baseball or basketball. The pacing and constant stoppages can be pretty dragging, though. Even still, I find soccer to be mind numbingly boring myself. Sure, play rarely stops, but I get bored to tears watching a 90 minute game end in a 0-0 draw. And I could never get into a sport where you aren't allowed to use your hands.
-
Because football is fucking stupid, and the pro players are the least intelligent, most overpaid douches in all of pro sports, save for basketball..
I'm sorry, but it takes more intelligence to play football than any other team sport.
I'm willing to bet that American football isn't popular abroad the same reason soccer wasn't popular in America 20 years ago. It just isn't understood at a deep level. When I was ignorant about the strategy and nuances of soccer, I had a rather low opinion of it. When ESPN, in one of the few things they've gotten right lately, started putting on the Euro and World Cup games with knowledgable announcers who disected the game the same way Madden did in the 80s, my appriciation of the sport went way up. Basketball isn't hard to figure out, which is one of the reasons it's grown internationally. Football and soccer are much deeper than they seem on the surface, so it is easy to dismiss them with simple statements if you're not attached to them
-
eh... metric system?
:lol
;)
I agree with just about everything said there ^. Another aspect is costs, which are much higher for organized team football (American that is). Soccer, on the other hand, requires nothing more than a relatively round ball. It's completely understandable why kids growing up in a third world country would find soccer to be the much more appealing sport.
-
- The main reason has to do with the same reason why cricket is big in India but not in the United States, or ice hockey immensely popular in Canada but non-existent in Brazil: cultural heritage, traditions, national identity, natural conditions, etc.
However, this applies to every sport, so we need to be more specific. Being a non-American who actually can follow an American football game and discuss plays with big football fans (I'm living in Texas now, football is everything here), I can mention the following:
- The sport is extremely complex, it has too many complicated rules, and it's just not appealing to watch for an person who's not familiar with it. Imagine a 15-year old girl who watches tennis just because she's in love with Roger Federer. Even though she may not know the details about the scoring and the tie-break rules, she can still follow the game, and have a very good idea of what's going on (ball out, ball in, simple as that). The same happens with soccer: I know many people who are only interested in games that are big (World Cup finals, national team's games, etc.) and watch only 2-3 games per year, but they can still get excited and follow the game. They know what's going on.
- The slow pace and constant interruptions also detract the uninitiated from watching it.
- It's difficult to expand it to other parts of the world simply because it's an expensive sport, which requires a lot of resources accessible only to people with high income. Being an American, you may not think of this as a big factor, but if you were from almost any other country you'll see my point. Parents and schools cannot afford all the necessary equipment, not to mention the fields with all the specifications. The games need to we timed acurrately, and such systems require technology not accesible everywhere. Compare this to football: you only need a ball to feel you're playing the real thing, while playing a dumbed-down version of American football like ultimate football is not attractive at all.
- Unlike other many sports that are reasonably safe (not only tennis but even football or basketball, contact sports where almost any form of violence is against the rules), you need to significantly commit your physical well-being in order to play it. Not many people is willing to make that commitment. Small, thin guys are already discarded. Women won't play it. Seniors say guacala. 6-year olds won't get permission form their moms (I think that even in the United States many moms don't like their children playing it). If you think about it, only a small fraction of the population has the physical condition (being big enough) and mental condition (enjoying getting beat enough) to play it. On the other hand, a 4'6 kid playing football against a 6'0 guy is the most natural thing in the world, short stature is not an obstacle to being good at it. My dad is 62 and he still plays football in a competitive league for veterans. A 5-year old can get permission to play and enjoy the game. We have girl's football teams everywhere that don't require putting lingerie on.
- The sport is not that fun to watch after all (3+ hours, too many boring phases, too little action).
Heck, after writing this, I've realized the real question is why is American football popular in America. The rest of the world doesn't care about it, and it has every reason for that.
-
Because football is fucking stupid, and the pro players are the least intelligent, most overpaid douches in all of pro sports, save for basketball..
Not only does this contain a factually incorrect statement (about the intelligence of football players), but this is simply not the kind of discourse we need or want at this message board.
-
I'm going to prefix this by saying I actually know a. bugger all about sports, and b. a fair few American football fans here in the UK. As in, proper fans. A good friend of mine played American football locally for a few years - might still do, not heard from him as much lately.
So, with the preface that not only am I completely ignorant to this entire subculture but I'm trying to argue a rule that I've met living exceptions to - I think a huge part of it is the fact that it's got the word "American" in front of it. And the other huge part is that it's used the word "football" to describe something that, in the minds of a good majority of the planet's population, definitely isn't.
Real football, as people in every other country consider it, is one of the most beloved sports worldwide. Calling your sport American football sets it up as a direct opposition. A counter-argument. "Here's what we're going to do instead." The two sports needn't be mutually exclusive, but by insisting on calling it football, it feels like someone's looked at soccer and gone, "You can keep that bullshit with the sphere - we're going to don some armor and carry an egg."
On top of that, the word American is in itself a big sign that says "This isn't yours." When people follow a sport, they like to feel involved. They like to support their local team, feel like they're on the journey with their heroes. Very few people are going to feel personally involved with a sport that has a foreign country's name in front of it. Who's heard of the "English American Football Team?" I presume it does exist, and I presume it's got fans, but even just as a phrase, English American Football Team is, semantically speaking, nonsense. Giving a sport a particular geography limits its breadth innately. It's a psychological barrier. A big mental wall that, again, implies "The rest of you are not part of this."
If you started calling soccer football, and came up with a new name for American football, I think a lot of people would feel a lot more like it was a game they could be involved in. Because while there are fans worldwide, it's not really a global sport, and with a name like that I don't know if it ever can be. Hell of an image problem if you ask me. Which you didn't.
I was just about to post and then came Rob and hit the nail on everything! Well spoken!
-
What's the big deals Lucilles?
To me, I just enjoy checking out sports I've never seen or don't understand. I know that some sports don't translate overseas but why does it?
American football has grown to to overtake all sports in America (College kicks major butt too in TV ratings) so it's huge here. I still love to click on and see Australian rules football. I don't understand it all all but it's entertaining all all hell.
So again I ask, What's the big deal?
-
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
There have been two, maybe three occasions in my life where American football's on TV and I spend fifteen minutes watching and trying to make sense of things and give a shit.
Reapsta, it kind of says it all that you're trying to pass off the extreme complexity of the game and the amount of downtime during the game as a good thing. To watch, it just seems unbearably slow and convoluted and clunky. No game should be too simple, but it also has to function in a way that allows for game play to flow, a) because more stoppages and time sitting around waiting for something to happen are frustrating as an audience member, and b) because if players can only be doing anything for five to ten seconds before play stops again, 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.
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?
That's one of the worst arguments against football. If the game were played without pads, at least one person would literally die every weekend. The first football safety equipment was invented specifically because people were killed playing the game. There's nothing pansy about it whatsoever.
That doesn't make it pansy, it makes it fundamentally negligent. Why should any sport be written in a way that if you aren't wearing an insane amount of padding, your life is at threat? Especially where all you're doing is running a ball towards a line and your only obstacle is other human beings.
Not to mention that people wearing massive padding are limited in what they can do, and thus in its current form, we're seeing a diluted version of what those athletes could do were the sport written properly and they weren't wearing cushioned space suits from the waist up.
I also feel less inclined to watch a sport where I can't recognise, and thus can't really empathise with, the people underneath cushioned space suits. A fairly vital human element is gone.
-
John Cleese rants - Soccer vs Football (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sD_8prYOxo)
-
Um, football isn't clunky at all. It's completely fluid. People who say that have never seen a good play sequence. Football is like, the most strategic of the popular sports.
(https://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/983832.gif?w=300&h=177)
soccer general
-
There is no cultural group within the United States that doesn't like Football.
And that's where you're wrong. :biggrin:
-
There is no cultural group within the United States that doesn't like Football.
And that's where you're wrong. :biggrin:
I know plenty of Jews who like football :\ (assuming that's where you were going with that)
-
Asian-Americans?
-
There is no cultural group within the United States that doesn't like Football.
And that's where you're wrong. :biggrin:
I know plenty of Jews who like football :\ (assuming that's where you were going with that)
Well, specifically Jewish nerds. No one I have ever been friends with (except one exception who's recently become a paranoid gun nut) has actually been interested enough in football to watch it on other than Superbowl Sunday.
-
Jewish nerds? Oh man, that's a...
(https://www.chud.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/stretch-armstrong-ng-1.jpg)
-
Um, football isn't clunky at all. It's completely fluid. People who say that have never seen a good play sequence. Football is like, the most strategic of the popular sports.
I beg to differ. If it has a flow it's a very strange one. The game is stopped constantly and as some people stated before, half the game is watching the teams discussing a play and getting into position. I understand that is because of how strategic it is but as I stated before, improvisation is one of the most interesting things in sports and American football doesn't seem to leave a lot of room for that
-
Jewish nerds? Oh man, that's a...
(https://www.chud.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/stretch-armstrong-ng-1.jpg)
Um, excuse me?
-
Jewish nerds are a cultural group? I mean, at least in the more commonly accepted definition of "cultural group"
-
There is no cultural group within the United States that doesn't like Football.
And that's where you're wrong. :biggrin:
I know plenty of Jews who like football :\ (assuming that's where you were going with that)
Well, specifically Jewish nerds. No one I have ever been friends with (except one exception who's recently become a paranoid gun nut) has actually been interested enough in football to watch it on other than Superbowl Sunday.
Hey, hey, hey!! Not everybody that likes football likes guns!! :lol Geeesh!
-
No I know, that's the only friend (or former friend) of mine that has actively liked football.
Jewish nerds are a cultural group? I mean, at least in the more commonly accepted definition of "cultural group"
A cultural group can mean something other than different ethnicities or nationalities.
For instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterculture
-
The issue is defining what a "nerd" is. That's why I'm shitting on it (not trying to be rude).
-
You know, I don't think it's a cultural thing at all. I think it's the style of game.
There is baseball in other countries and yet it's not as big as it is in America and Japan ect.... because of the down time between pitches and the speed of the game. I've heard that a lot from my Euro friends before.
I can equate it to Nascar racing in the states. I am no fan Nascar but there is strategy to it that appeals to some and I think that applies to American football. And yes I do understand that there is strategy in all sports but to some, it's a personal interest is certain styles.
-
You know, I don't think it's a cultural thing at all. I think it's the style of game.
There is baseball in other countries and yet it's not as big as it is in America and Japan ect.... because of the down time between pitches and the speed of the game. I've heard that a lot from my Euro friends before.
I can equate it to Nascar racing in the states. I am no fan Nascar but there is strategy to it that appeals to some and I think that applies to American football. And yes I do understand that there is strategy in all sports but to some, it's a personal interest is certain styles.
Whereas many others would say of Nascar:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVdFJIEk5wY
-
:lol
I can do that watching football too! :lol
And I do!
-
Um, football isn't clunky at all. It's completely fluid. People who say that have never seen a good play sequence.
Just because there is occasionally a good play sequence doesn't mean it isn't clunky the rest of the time.
-
Um, football isn't clunky at all. It's completely fluid. People who say that have never seen a good play sequence.
Just because there is occasionally a good play sequence doesn't mean it isn't clunky the rest of the time.
"occasionally".
Watch a good team.
-
I've been watching football all my life. My dad is a huge fan who tried very hard to get me and my brother into the sport. Also two of my best friends growing up both played the sport, so I watched their games and they constantly wanted me to watch it with them on TV. Don't assume I've never seen it just because I disagree with you. :lol
-
The only time I watch football during the year is the Superbowl.
-
I've been watching football all my life. My dad is a huge fan who tried very hard to get me and my brother into the sport. Also two of my best friends growing up both played the sport, so I watched their games and they constantly wanted me to watch it with them on TV. Don't assume I've never seen it just because I disagree with you. :lol
Stop it. All sports have these moments. The are clunky games in all sports.
-
I agree, but it's my honest opinion that football has more than its fair share, and that even at its best it still isn't 'completely fluid.'
Sorry, I know I'm being a buzzkill, but I've often asked myself why the sport is so popular in America, not why it isn't more popular elsewhere. *shrug*
-
Right...so what name would you invent?
Well, considering I think the sport is boring as paste to watch, I doubt it'd ever be on my shoulders to come up with a new name for it. For all I care, just call it Gridiron.
I maintain this is what it should be called.
I agree, but it's my honest opinion that football has more than its fair share, and that even at its best it still isn't 'completely fluid.'
Sorry, I know I'm being a buzzkill, but I've often asked myself why the sport is so popular in America, not why it isn't more popular elsewhere. *shrug*
Not the only reason, and American football trying to expand in other countries is a bit like spreading yet more American imperialism IMO. But the sport as others have said need A LOT of people for pick-up games. That, and it is expensive to play (number two to ice hockey?) Soccer, or real football is extremely easy to organize and cheap to play (a ball only is needed). This is why I maintain real football will always be a huge global game, because so many various backgrounded individuals can participate.
-
Because football is fucking stupid, and the pro players are the least intelligent, most overpaid douches in all of pro sports
Are they less intelligent than this post?
-
John Cleese rants - Soccer vs Football (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sD_8prYOxo)
Love that one.
-
Then it's more of a personal thing and I get that 100%
To each his/her own. It's just like music. It's all subjective. One person see a chess game and other see no worth to it.
-
Then it's more of a personal thing and I get that 100%
To each his/her own. It's just like music. It's all subjective. One person see a chess game and other see no worth to it.
This is the only way I see it, a matter personal and cultural taste. I never enjoyed soccer until I worked with Mexicans every day, if I wanted to be part of the conversation, I had to learn the talk. Now we teach each other our respective sports.
Arriba los Xolos de Tiujana!!!!!
-
- The sport is extremely complex, it has too many complicated rules, and it's just not appealing to watch for an person who's not familiar with it. Imagine a 15-year old girl who watches tennis just because she's in love with Roger Federer. Even though she may not know the details about the scoring and the tie-break rules, she can still follow the game, and have a very good idea of what's going on (ball out, ball in, simple as that). The same happens with soccer: I know many people who are only interested in games that are big (World Cup finals, national team's games, etc.) and watch only 2-3 games per year, but they can still get excited and follow the game. They know what's going on.
I feel like this matters more than I originally realized. I think back and realize that I was basically raised on Football. I have a friend who got into Football in his late teens, and the reason he was able to do this is because he used Madden to teach himself the game.
- The slow pace and constant interruptions also detract the uninitiated from watching it.
I still don't get this. For me, the stops between plays were opportunities to ask my parents what just happened so I could understand next time.
- It's difficult to expand it to other parts of the world simply because it's an expensive sport, which requires a lot of resources accessible only to people with high income. Being an American, you may not think of this as a big factor, but if you were from almost any other country you'll see my point. Parents and schools cannot afford all the necessary equipment, not to mention the fields with all the specifications. The games need to we timed acurrately, and such systems require technology not accesible everywhere. Compare this to football: you only need a ball to feel you're playing the real thing, while playing a dumbed-down version of American football like ultimate football is not attractive at all.
Good point.
- Unlike other many sports that are reasonably safe (not only tennis but even football or basketball, contact sports where almost any form of violence is against the rules), you need to significantly commit your physical well-being in order to play it. Not many people is willing to make that commitment. Small, thin guys are already discarded. Women won't play it. Seniors say guacala. 6-year olds won't get permission form their moms (I think that even in the United States many moms don't like their children playing it). If you think about it, only a small fraction of the population has the physical condition (being big enough) and mental condition (enjoying getting beat enough) to play it. On the other hand, a 4'6 kid playing football against a 6'0 guy is the most natural thing in the world, short stature is not an obstacle to being good at it. My dad is 62 and he still plays football in a competitive league for veterans. A 5-year old can get permission to play and enjoy the game. We have girl's football teams everywhere that don't require putting lingerie on.
The part about the physical risk of the game is important. In elementary schools in this country, flag football instead of tackle football is apparently becoming more common.
The part where you talk about the equal opportunity nature of Soccer is interesting though. I feel like there's an implied undercurrent to your argument that says "In Football, you have to be able to meet certain standards. In soccer you don't. Everyone can play!" If your mindset is more collectivist, this is probably more innately appealing, as opposed to America which is at least ostensibly more individualistic. (Not judging either for the sake of this thread, just pointing out how mentalities influence other things).
Heck, after writing this, I've realized the real question is why is American football popular in America. The rest of the world doesn't care about it, and it has every reason for that.
Football is intellectually and viscerally entertaining. There is no part of your brain that isn't engaged while watching Football.
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."
There have been two, maybe three occasions in my life where American football's on TV and I spend fifteen minutes watching and trying to make sense of things and give a shit.
Well......
Reapsta, it kind of says it all that you're trying to pass off the extreme complexity of the game and the amount of downtime during the game as a good thing.
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.
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.
That doesn't make it pansy, it makes it fundamentally negligent. Why should any sport be written in a way that if you aren't wearing an insane amount of padding, your life is at threat? Especially where all you're doing is running a ball towards a line and your only obstacle is other human beings.
Not-so-coincidentally, safety in Football is becoming a huge deal in this country. I expect/hope this will pay off in better protection for the players.
But also, people make choices. No one is forced to play Football. I think it's a good thing that people are now better understanding the neurological effects of the game. Uninformed choices aren't really choices. But if you know the risks and still decide to play, that's on you.
Not to mention that people wearing massive padding are limited in what they can do, and thus in its current form, we're seeing a diluted version of what those athletes could do were the sport written properly and they weren't wearing cushioned space suits from the waist up.
I also feel less inclined to watch a sport where I can't recognise, and thus can't really empathise with, the people underneath cushioned space suits. A fairly vital human element is gone.
Both of these arguments are completely valid. They're why I've started watching Basketball in addition to Football. It's a different experience.
I feel like Football is more like Gladiatorial combat in a Roman Colosseum though. It's like watching miniature armies marching up and down a battlefield. The fact the people mask up is actually part of the aesthetic. Remember - a lot of watching sports is following them outside the game. I know what Michael Vick looks like. The helmet in the game doesn't take from the experience.
-
Totally agree on being a qb as the hardest job in sports. Athleticism, speed, intelligence ate all needed. In a span of ten seconds, he must discect a defense, analyze if his offense is executing properley, track up to four receivers and as many befensive backs, so as to make the right throw,all while waiting for a 250lb freight train to fucking plaster him from the blindside at full speed.
Then get 35 seconds to get ready to do it again.
-
How is football intellectually stimulating?
-
How is football intellectually stimulating?
Let me try to contextualize what you just said.
You write a lot about big action movies on your blog. You talk about their quality as if they were serious movies and you analyze the subtext they carry with them. Now, imagine someone said to you - "How is an action movie anything more than people just punching each other?"
You'd find this question absurd, wouldn't you? You also wouldn't know how to explain it. You'd probably also feel mildly offended at the notion that you should have to. The interesting qualities of action movies seem self-evident.
-
Exactly. People have different tastes, and sports isn't any different. The reason soccer and football are popular and not in places is the perpetuation of the culture. It's been this way for years. People grow up with their respective popular sports. A majority people will continue to follow them because of that.
-
How is football intellectually stimulating?
The play book for one can has hundreds upon hundreds of variations, movement and formations (thus why playing QB in *most* systems requires a high level of intelligence). These plays can be changed based on the many different looks a defense may give an offense. Probably the second hardest intellectual position to play is an offensive lineman, which are considering the ogre grunts to many.
How many WRs do you have? Where do they line up? How do they line up? Any TE's? How many? RBs? How many, where? These factors change on virtually EVERY PLAY.
What is the defense showing? How many DBs do they have? Are they playing man or zone coverage? Are the blitzing? How many do you think will drop into coverage?
There are many situations and factors evident on every play, at different points of games.
An offense at its core is run or pass; but there are so many different ways and reasons to do so.
The things I mentioned are just on the offense side and perspective.
There is a reason why many american football coaches are war history buffs. There are some analogies, and a lot goes into every move in just the game. NFL head coaches notoriously work at least 100 hours per week.
Now, I have no idea how this game CANNOT be considering intellectually stimulating. The things mentioned are the exact reasons why I basically only follow pro football for my sport watching. I do not like seeing people get smashed and violence; I love the challenge of each play and everything behind it.
-
Alright, well my apologies because I didn't know. :) All I've ever seen is the stuff on TV, with the guys yelling "Hike!" and promptly clobbering each other.
-
In reality it is more that than the romanticizing in the previous two posts, but you could do that with any sport.
-
sorry if i offended, i was more blunt than i intended. just IMO, from what i've seen of football, the players tend to be less intelligent and more thug-like than in any other major sport in america. that doesnt make them all bad or worthless people, but i feel like with baseball your players are more likely to have had a good education, and speak like a normal person in an interview (again, generalizing). and considering how overpaid most athletes are, the fact with football it's people with more muscle than brain are getting paid that much, it's kind of disturbing how much our country idolizes these players like celebrities. Part of the problem is the fans too, I'm in norcal and have to deal with raider fans, the whole mentality of these over the top football fans can just be too much to handle for me.
Again, i'm sorry if my previous post was offensive or rude to anyone, i wasnt able to type much so i kinda over-generalized my point.
-
You still are generalizing that all football players are dumb and that all fans are over the top, and that all baseball players are intelligent which is so far from the truth.
-
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.
You know, I think it's worth dwelling on this point for a moment - the most exciting part of a football game is when they throw coaching and strategy out the window and just try to get the damn ball into the end zone.
They're behind and trying to come back in the last minute or so, and they try to run the ball out of bounds every play so they can stop the clock and get a chance to breathe, but if they fail, if they get tackled before they get a chance to stop the clock, well, shit, the whole team just lines up and charges right on ahead again, no pause for thought, no stoppage, just do whatever the hell you have to do in the moment to score.
That's the thing for me. You can talk about coaching and strategy all you want, and I respect that it does take skill and is an important part of the game, but my favorite part is when they give the ball to someone and he runs like a maniac, juking and dodging tackles, flying past or over blockers, and making a 50 yard touchdown.
And to me, it says something about the sport that the most exciting moments are when they break away from the regular format.
-
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.
You know, I think it's worth dwelling on this point for a moment - the most exciting part of a football game is when they throw coaching and strategy out the window and just try to get the damn ball into the end zone.
They're behind and trying to come back in the last minute or so, and they try to run the ball out of bounds every play so they can stop the clock and get a chance to breathe, but if they fail, if they get tackled before they get a chance to stop the clock, well, shit, the whole team just lines up and charges right on ahead again, no pause for thought, no stoppage, just do whatever the hell you have to do in the moment to score.
That's the thing for me. You can talk about coaching and strategy all you want, and I respect that it does take skill and is an important part of the game, but my favorite part is when they give the ball to someone and he runs like a maniac, juking and dodging tackles, flying past or over blockers, and making a 50 yard touchdown.
And to me, it says something about the sport that the most exciting moments are when they break away from the regular format.
Again your taking this from one fan. I have been a season ticket holder for the N.E. Patriots since 1986, (I was 17 at the time)and I don't believe that statement to be true at all.
It's the same old saying for the casual fan that says in any sport that, "All I really need is to watch the last 5 minutes of the game."
-
In reality it is more that than the romanticizing in the previous two posts, but you could do that with any sport.
Dude, believe me, CableX's post actually widly understates how complex Football is. I don't understand it. I was listening to a conversation between Bill Simmons and a football analyst. The Football analyst said that because of the new coach's tape, this will be the first year sportswriters will truly be able to see the defensive backfield and understand the game.
You know, I think it's worth dwelling on this point for a moment - the most exciting part of a football game is when they throw coaching and strategy out the window and just try to get the damn ball into the end zone.
That's not what happens when you are running a two minute drill. At that point, being a great strategist matters the most because you have to make decisions quickly.
They're behind and trying to come back in the last minute or so, and they try to run the ball out of bounds every play so they can stop the clock and get a chance to breathe, but if they fail, if they get tackled before they get a chance to stop the clock, well, shit, the whole team just lines up and charges right on ahead again, no pause for thought, no stoppage, just do whatever the hell you have to do in the moment to score.
This is why great quarterbacks matter. If you have someone like Peyton Manning on your team who can call his own plays and do it well, your team is at a huge advantage.
That's the thing for me. You can talk about coaching and strategy all you want, and I respect that it does take skill and is an important part of the game, but my favorite part is when they give the ball to someone and he runs like a maniac, juking and dodging tackles, flying past or over blockers, and making a 50 yard touchdown.
Which usually happens because a good play was called to get them open.
And to me, it says something about the sport that the most exciting moments are when they break away from the regular format.
The whole game can't be a 2 minute drill though. The 2 minute drill is exciting because of the context within which it exists.
You wouldn't make a movie that was all action sequences, would you? Even the Transformers movies have breaks. It's about ebb and flow, which Football has.
It's the same old saying for the casual fan that says in any sport that, "All I really need is to watch the last 5 minutes of the game."
True. Basketball for example is way more fascinating if you appreciate the emotional flow of a whole game.
-
Again your taking this from one fan. I have been a season ticket holder for the N.E. Patriots since 1986, (I was 17 at the time)and I don't believe that statement to be true at all.
It's the same old saying for the casual fan that says in any sport that, "All I really need is to watch the last 5 minutes of the game."
Well, fair enough, but all I'm really doing is offering my perspective. Watching them try to slowly and methodically drive the ball down the field to get it into touchdown range, no matter how much skill or strategy it might involve, just isn't fun to watch for me. When I watch football, I always feel like I'm just waiting for something interesting to happen.
You wouldn't make a movie that was all action sequences, would you?
First of all, if you think of sports as being comparable to movies, we will never be on the same page on this one.
Second of all, no, I wouldn't make a movie that was all action sequences, but if I'm watching a movie and the only parts exciting me are the action sequences, I consider it a poor movie.
Thirdly, I also wouldn't make a movie where there's a brief intermission after each scene to give the audience a chance to rest and socialize. I understand that the coaches need the stoppages to plan and the players need the stoppages to catch their breath, but you will never convince me that I, as a viewer, should appreciate the stoppages. Because of the breaks between plays, it really does feel to me like watching fragmented bits of excitement broken up by pauses at regular intervals.
(Just to clarify, I'm not trying to change anyone else's opinion, I'm just explaining mine.)
-
First of all, if you think of sports as being comparable to movies, we will never be on the same page on this one.
Which is fine, but virtually all sports fans view the games as reality television more so than sporting events. Football games, like movies have three acts (1st Quarter, 2nd/3rd Quarter, 4th Quarter) and the commentators go to great pains to emphasize the storylines before and during the games. The sports business is ultimately a form of entertainment.
Second of all, no, I wouldn't make a movie that was all action sequences, but if I'm watching a movie and the only parts exciting me are the action sequences, I consider it a poor movie.
True.
Thirdly, I also wouldn't make a movie where there's a brief intermission after each scene to give the audience a chance to rest and socialize. I understand that the coaches need the stoppages to plan and the players need the stoppages to catch their breath, but you will never convince me that I, as a viewer, should appreciate the stoppages. Because of the breaks between plays, it really does feel to me like watching fragmented bits of excitement broken up by pauses at regular intervals.
If you really like the continuous experience, I can't say you're wrong. I hate foul calls in Basketball because they break up the action. Especially when the refs try to "control the game" and it becomes almost torturous.
But Football's different. The stoppages are part of the excitement. It's fun after every play to turn to the person next to you and say "Oh my god, he just didn't see that coming. He was so fixated on trying to find a receiver that he was just killed." Stuff like that. It puts the next play into a more defined context and actually makes it more exciting. "They have to pass on this third and 10, but he hasn't thrown the ball well at all this whole game. Maybe if they just call a short passing play and hope the receiver can run five yards afterwards." This can't really happen in the other sports because there's no time to talk about it.
-
But Football's different. The stoppages are part of the excitement. It's fun after every play to turn to the person next to you and say
Eh, difference of opinion, and I respect that, but I just don't see it that way. This seems (to me) like saying commercial breaks are exciting because they give you and your friends a chance to discuss what just happened in the story.
-
Reap, I admire the passion for football but stuff like dissecting plays mid game among fans is not really a football exclusive thing. Hell you can do that with pretty much any sport.
-
There's no flow to the game. It's constantly stopping and starting. The longest plays might last for 15 seconds.
-
I don't think anybody will change their opinions. How exciting something is and why can be very subjective.
-
You still are generalizing that all football players are dumb and that all fans are over the top, and that all baseball players are intelligent which is so far from the truth.
I never said ALL, i said that many tend to be, and most of that has to do with the fans and teams i see around where i live. and while i admit im being general, i never said every single player is a moron, because that isnt true
-
Here's an angle that hasn't been touched yet I think:
When you grow up in a soccer culture, you expect a certain "visceralness", a direct connection, from a sport. Everybody in the audience of a soccer stadium has played with a ball and a makeshift goal out of two cans in their youth, and when they watch a professional soccer game, it really isn't any different; it's just 22 guys who are really good at it, going at it with full force for 90 minutes.
In contrast, American Football, to a soccer fan, is a very "artificial" sport. It involves helmets and massive body padding, judges who confer video screens and replays, interruptions all the time, etc. etc.. There is no "men against men" aspect in AF, and I think a lot of soccer fans (including me) find that pretty unappealing.
Somewhat related, I always scratch my head when I see a group of guys playing touch football. It's clumsy, and gets nowhere near the real thing. Whereas a soccer game with 6 guys already has the same visceral appeal going that a 22-guys one has. So, I think that disconnect between low-level sport and high-level sport in AF is missing for soccer fans.
-
The NFL isn't popular outside the US, in large part, because it doesn't need to be, It is a multi billion dollar business, and is the number one sport in arguably the most desirable market in the world. The risk/reward and feasability to successfully push the sport in other markets just isnt worth the massive effort.
-
Er, I have to believe that lack of marketing isn't the reason at all. It's not like the game is hidden from the rest of the world. I'm sure most people in the world are aware of its existence, they just don't care about it. Trying to set up a league in, say, Europe would probably be a massive failure.
-
And that's the thing. Football needs to be commercially pushed because it involves an enormous support such as special uniforms, technical gadgetry etc.
Soccer needs 3 things: 2 bored kids, and a ball. Football has no chance against that kind of basic appeal.
BTW, there *was* something called NFL Europe, but it disbanded in 2005 or something.
-
For a sport to be come popular outside its native environment, it needs a grassroots push that is a massive undertaking. It needs a huge push so kids will play, so the new country/region will have local talent. A sport will not flourish if there is not a vibrant youth involvement. Infrastructure and a high initial expense for parents are also extremely prohibitive....just look at the issues faced by the NHL as it tries to expand Hockey into the South (for decades now) with limited success.
The reason the NFL doesnt do this in other countries is it would be a ridiculously massive undertaking, and as of now it is the biggest sport in the US, by fay, and is still growing. It simply has no incentive to grow the sport in other regions.
-
It will be interesting to see over the years whether soccer will make inroads in the US. AF has had quite a few negative headlines over the years, especially the concussion issue. I can definitely say I would try to get my kids to play soccer. A sprained ankle is the worst you can get from it really.
-
@Eric: I agree that nowadays it doesn't make any sense to try to popularize the sport outside the US but I would guess Reap is also interested in knowing why a sport that's been around for over 100 years now never got out of the country where it was created whereas basketball, soccer, rugby, etc actually did.
-
You still are generalizing that all football players are dumb and that all fans are over the top, and that all baseball players are intelligent which is so far from the truth.
I never said ALL, i said that many tend to be, and most of that has to do with the fans and teams i see around where i live. and while i admit im being general, i never said every single player is a moron, because that isnt true
"sorry if i offended, i was more blunt than i intended. just IMO, from what i've seen of football, the players tend to be less intelligent and more thug-like than in any other major sport in america"
Yeah, I'm not buying it. I do understand your point but I could point out that more players in football at least have some college classes under their belt while many baseball players come right out of high school. Let's be honest, most are going to college for their skills, not their GPA. And if anything people here in America verbally attack players in any sport that don't live up the the ridiculous amounts of money they make yearly.
Rumbo, I disagree with your assertion on kids playing soccer in their youth while not playing football. I played tackle football with my buddies every week in the neighborhood.
eric, I think you see that with the NFL trying to get a foothold in England with one game a year, they'd like to branch out. I think the NFL will have trouble like the American soccer leagues here. I will be the first to tell you, I love going to Revolution games in Foxboro Mass even though I'm not deft at all the rules.
-
Er, I have to believe that lack of marketing isn't the reason at all. It's not like the game is hidden from the rest of the world. I'm sure most people in the world are aware of its existence, they just don't care about it. Trying to set up a league in, say, Europe would probably be a massive failure.
It was already done orc and failed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Europe
-
When you grow up in a soccer culture, you expect a certain "visceralness", a direct connection, from a sport. Everybody in the audience of a soccer stadium has played with a ball and a makeshift goal out of two cans in their youth, and when they watch a professional soccer game, it really isn't any different; it's just 22 guys who are really good at it, going at it with full force for 90 minutes.
In contrast, American Football, to a soccer fan, is a very "artificial" sport. It involves helmets and massive body padding, judges who confer video screens and replays, interruptions all the time, etc. etc.. There is no "men against men" aspect in AF, and I think a lot of soccer fans (including me) find that pretty unappealing.
Somewhat related, I always scratch my head when I see a group of guys playing touch football. It's clumsy, and gets nowhere near the real thing. Whereas a soccer game with 6 guys already has the same visceral appeal going that a 22-guys one has. So, I think that disconnect between low-level sport and high-level sport in AF is missing for soccer fans.
I see what you're getting at, but I actually have to defend football on this one. I did play football at recess in elementary school, so I have played the simple and visceral version of it. Offense meant a quarterback (which we took turns being) giving the ball to someone who tried to get it to the end zone. Defense meant trying to catch whoever had the ball and take them down. It was that simple, and actually very fun. And it may seem very far removed from professional gridiron football, but it actually isn't; it's just that in the pros the strategies have to be a lot more complex because the simple style of play really doesn't work reliably in the professional environment. This even goes for the stoppages - it's easy enough, in a three-on-three football game with simple strategy, to set up for the next play in two seconds without a huddle. When you've got 11 very large and very skilled players trying to stop you, and you're trying to coordinate 11 people on how to deal with it, the pause is just a lot more necessary.
In some ways I think the same does apply to soccer. I was the star of some childhood soccer teams, because I had good aim and good speed, and the coach could count on me to just be wherever the ball was and try to score with it. It obviously doesn't work that way in the big leagues, where teamwork is a lot more essential and relying on one player the whole time simply cannot work.
In every sport, more professional = more structure, I think.
A sprained ankle is the worst you can get from it really.
...
I must have grown up in a really rough neighborhood for soccer.
-
In the end of course, it's not a black-or-white thing. Both soccer and AF have elements of all these things. It's really just a difference in level of those aspects. Soccer trumps AF in its simplicity and ease of entry into it. 2 boys can play soccer with each other, but they can't play anything that resembles AF. Somebody who's never heard of either sport will be able to join a soccer game within seconds of explaining; joining an AF game takes a lot longer.
That just stacks the odds against AF to ever take hold in places where it hasn't evolved originally.
-
In the end of course, it's not a black-or-white thing. Both soccer and AF have elements of all these things. It's really just a difference in level of those aspects. Soccer trumps AF in its simplicity and ease of entry into it. 2 boys can play soccer with each other, but they can't play anything that resembles AF. Somebody who's never heard of either sport will be able to join a soccer game within seconds of explaining; joining an AF game takes a lot longer.
That just stacks the odds against AF to ever take hold in places where it hasn't evolved originally.
Because you need pads to play on a team? Oh boy, someone clearly didn't grow up in the USA. ;)
-
Two guys can kick an old can around and use two stones to demarkate the goal, and they're playing soccer. The same two guys can't really play anything resembling AF.
-
Two guys can kick an old can around and use two stones to demarkate the goal. I doubt AF lets you do that.
In my neighborhood, we played baseball with sticks and a ball (because none of us had a metal bat and we didn't want to use our wooden ones to have them break) and footballs with whatever we could. As long as we could throw it in the air and catch it, regardless of shape, we played with it. And no, we didn't play "touch" as kids. We tackled each other. I broke my brother's wrist once while playing
-
How do you play baseball with 2 people? One throws, one runs ... who's catching? Everything is a home run?
-
How do you play baseball with 2 people? One throws, one runs ... who's catching? Everything is a home run?
there were like 8 kids on our block. but why does the appeal have to be down to how many people can play? and you improvise the rules.
-
Er, I have to believe that lack of marketing isn't the reason at all. It's not like the game is hidden from the rest of the world. I'm sure most people in the world are aware of its existence, they just don't care about it. Trying to set up a league in, say, Europe would probably be a massive failure.
It was already done orc and failed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Europe
NFL Europe was basically an NFL minor league. You can't expect that to succeed. It's like saying you can't have the NFL in Las Vegas because their XFL team wasn't successful.
-
How do you play baseball with 2 people? One throws, one runs ... who's catching? Everything is a home run?
there were like 8 kids on our block. but why does the appeal have to be down to how many people can play? and you improvise the rules.
Because it's just something which kinda resembles the game in some way. Whilst with 2 people and a ball you pretty much have the main aspects of soccer covered, meaning pretty much everyone/everywhere can play it.
-
The question is why is one sport more popular than the other in the world. I'm explaining that soccer pares down much better than AF and Baseball. A soccer game is still soccer whether you play it with 2 people or 22. Neither AF nor Baseball have anything to do with the real thing when played with 2 people.
And whether a sport will get played or not in some 3rd world country *does* come down to the question whether 2 kids can meet and play it.
-
The question is why is one sport more popular than the other in the world. I'm explaining that soccer pares down much better than AF and Baseball. A soccer game is still soccer whether you play it with 2 people or 22. Neither AF nor Baseball have anything to do with the real thing when played with 2 people. And good for you that you had 8 kids in your block who could all comes together and play it; but the probability of 2 people playing something is much higher than 8 people.
*looks to make sure this isn't P/R*....
::)
-
I don't know why you're getting belligerent. Soccer is way more popular than AF or Baseball; is your goal to find reasons that disprove this basic fact?
-
God, this is bringing back such fun memories for me. I apologize for being negative in this thread - this topic is making my day.
I remember playing 'football' in my back yard with my friend Kyle. 'Kickoff' was one of us throwing the ball to the other. The receiving 'team' caught it and tried to get it to the other side of the yard, while the 'kicking' 'team' tried to stop them. That was so much fun. Utterly ridiculously, of course, because he was much faster and I was much stronger, so I could never catch him and he could never tackle me, which meant we both just scored every damn time. But still a ton of fun.
Don't think I ever played baseball with just two people. Played it with three once, though. Silly game - one of us was designated pitcher, and it was basically batter vs. outfielder.
Good times. :smiley:
Listen, two kids can meet and play anything. They'll absolutely mangle the rules, but they'll have fun doing it. Where there's a will, there's a way.
-
Here's an angle that hasn't been touched yet I think:
When you grow up in a soccer culture, you expect a certain "visceralness", a direct connection, from a sport. Everybody in the audience of a soccer stadium has played with a ball and a makeshift goal out of two cans in their youth, and when they watch a professional soccer game, it really isn't any different; it's just 22 guys who are really good at it, going at it with full force for 90 minutes.
In contrast, American Football, to a soccer fan, is a very "artificial" sport. It involves helmets and massive body padding, judges who confer video screens and replays, interruptions all the time, etc. etc.. There is no "men against men" aspect in AF, and I think a lot of soccer fans (including me) find that pretty unappealing.
This...totally makes sense and answers the OP question very well. Thanks for that. I don't scratch my head often as to why AF isn't popular over there at all, but its cool to see an explanation for it that really makes perfect sense as to why soccer is more appealing in those cultures.
-
On a sidenote, that's why FIFA (the world's soccer governing body) is loathing to introduce *any* kind of technology into the game. They want to preserve the idea that it's 22 men + a referee that constitutes the game. The rest is pure athleticism and skill.
-
I don't know why you're getting belligerent. Soccer is way more popular than AF or Baseball; is your goal to find reasons that disprove this basic fact?
I find your rationale completely opinion and...well wrong. Kids in the US find ways to play baseball, football, basketball, hockey and even soccer with fewer amount of players and a lack of equipment. You can't just say "NO, SOCCER IS EASIER TO GET INTO BECAUSE I DID IT AS A KID" and pass that off as absolute fact. Fact is, I fucking hated soccer when I was a kid and never played it. But does that make it true for you? No. You grew up in Germany.
Also, look at Aqua Velva commercials. Or shit, ANY commercial where it shows dad bonding with his son. I'll bet you 9/10 times they're playing catch. It will be football or baseball (usually baseball, but they show it both ways). I understand what it is you're trying to say. But, it's one of those things where your recollection of what may actually be the case isn't the case at all.
-
Listen, two kids can meet and play anything. They'll absolutely mangle the rules, but they'll have fun doing it. Where there's a will, there's a way.
That's more or less my point and why rumborak is pretty much wrong in trying to base his opinion as fact.
-
If there is no grassroots movement to have the children of a region not only try the game, but continue it in structured leagues from 5 yrs old all the way through college, there is absolutely zero chance it will be successful as a professional sport.
If you want a reason why it isnt successful, find the reason kids are not trying the sport, and not committing to it long term.
-
@Snapple: Dude, I'm not trying to "disprove" that given the will, one can play anything. Of course you can! The question is plain and simple: Why is soccer so popular? And I think the answer is because it's the simplest sport everybody can play, and which still has great allure when played on a professional level.
-
Listen, two kids can meet and play anything. They'll absolutely mangle the rules, but they'll have fun doing it. Where there's a will, there's a way.
That's more or less my point and why rumborak is pretty much wrong in trying to base his opinion as fact.
It is not an opinion to state that soccer is easier for children to play, and for parents to afford, than Baseball, Football, Hockey, or Basketball. It really is not hard to understand that.
-
@Snapple: Dude, I'm not trying to "disprove" that given the will, one can play anything. Of course you can! The question is plain and simple: Why is soccer so popular? And I think the answer is because it's the simplest sport everybody can play, and which still has great allure when played on a professional level.
Well, I disagree. Soccer is kick the ball in the goal. baseball is hit a ball with a stick. Basketball is throw the ball into the hoop. Those are pretty simple premises.
-
Listen, two kids can meet and play anything. They'll absolutely mangle the rules, but they'll have fun doing it. Where there's a will, there's a way.
That's more or less my point and why rumborak is pretty much wrong in trying to base his opinion as fact.
It is not an opinion to state that soccer is easier for children to play, and for parents to afford, than Baseball, Football, Hockey, or Basketball. It really is not hard to understand that.
::)
soccer leagues can be just as expensive as little league (when you factor in equipment and such). and, I was saying his rationale was incorrect, not the fact that soccer is more popular
-
Are you miffed or something because your favorite sport isn't coming out on top?
-
Er, I have to believe that lack of marketing isn't the reason at all. It's not like the game is hidden from the rest of the world. I'm sure most people in the world are aware of its existence, they just don't care about it. Trying to set up a league in, say, Europe would probably be a massive failure.
It was already done orc and failed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Europe
NFL Europe was basically an NFL minor league. You can't expect that to succeed. It's like saying you can't have the NFL in Las Vegas because their XFL team wasn't successful.
Listen, it's doing well once a year because it's an event there. Not a full season. Even a pro team would struggle in Europe. Just not enough familiarity.
-
Ok then. Good thing they're all equally popular in the world.
(https://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3of639RtD1r6stod.gif)
-
what is your theory then why soccer is so vastly more popular?
-
Are you miffed or something because your favorite sport isn't coming out on top?
Can't speak for snapple, but myself I'm just defending the ingenuity of children. :lol I remember playing golf with baseball equipment, and rugby with essentially no understanding of how, actually, to play rugby. :lol
I think I do understand your point, though. It's not so much that soccer is more accessible to children, it's that the verison of soccer which is accessible to children is very close to real soccer, whereas with gridiron football there tend to be a lot more differences between kids' structure and professional structure.
-
Are you miffed or something because your favorite sport isn't coming out on top?
Can't speak for snapple, but myself I'm just defending the ingenuity of children. :lol I remember playing golf with baseball equipment, and rugby with essentially no understanding of how, actually, to play rugby. :lol
I think I do understand your point, though. It's not so much that soccer is more accessible to children, it's that the verison of soccer which is accessible to children is very close to real soccer, whereas with gridiron football there tend to be a lot more differences between kids' structure and professional structure.
That's all good. But can you say you actually played rugby? Rugby lives off the passing to others, so you need at least 4 people to do anything resembling rubgy. Same with baseball; sure you can hit an object with a stick, but is it baseball? You need at lest 5 people or so to play anything resembling the real game.
The point is, when two boys in a township in South Africa meet and play soccer, they are playing the actual game. And I think that unbroken connection to the professional level of the game somewhat explains its popularity around the world.
EDIT: Ninja'd!
-
I'm not arguing that soccer is any more or less popular than you think. I'm arguing about the simplicity of the game. And, I'm not saying it's as simple as you say. I'm arguing that other sports are JUST as simple.
-
But can you say you actually played rugby?
Actually yes, I believe I can. This was at recess at school, so there were a few of us, and the only rule we actually understood was that the ball couldn't be passed forward. And we did have scrums, too, although they were more or less just reverse games of tug of war with everyone trying to push everyone else away from the ball.
Also, even getting your point, I don't understand why it has to be just two kids. The number of people it takes determines popularity of the game? That explains why solitaire is so much more popular than poker, I guess...
EDIT: Ninja'd!
:neverusethis:
-
@Snapple: American Football and Baseball are as simple as soccer, both in terms of necessary equipment and rules? Wtf dude.
-
Also, even getting your point, I don't understand why it has to be just two kids. The number of people it takes determines popularity of the game?
Of course it does. A sport that can be played by 2, 3,4,5, etc people is more likely to be played than a sport that needs at least 5 people to become the "real game". That's just plain mathematics.
-
as far as rules go, soccer is the simplest, even idiots who play in the world stage can figure out what to do. american football has a shit ton of rules and playbooks that idiots have to remember so the media can claim it's like a chess game when it's just run forward a few steps then turn moron. soccer has a ball, pass it forward and score on the goal, nothing more to it. so even though equal levels of moron play both sports, soccer is the winner by the rules to play on a pick up game and casual fan to figure out what is happening apart from off sides, that's probably very confusing in both soccer and hockey to figure out if you are a casual on looker.
-
Of course it does. A sport that can be played by 2, 3,4,5, etc people is more likely to be played than a sport that needs at least 5 people to become the "real game". That's just plain mathematics.
All other things being equal, yes. But I don't think it alone answers a question like 'why isn't football popular elsewhere' when kids actually CAN play it without much trouble, it just takes more than two of them.
american football has a shit ton of rules and playbooks that idiots have to remember so the media can claim it's like a chess game when it's just run forward a few steps then turn moron.
... Well, if it's just run forward a few steps and then turn, then it's not really complicated at all, is it? ??? Not saying football is that simple, just saying you're contradicting yourself.
-
American Football and Baseball are as simple as soccer, both in terms of necessary equipment and rules? Wtf dude.
(https://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Ahhh-My-Face.gif)
(https://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w438/Christian_Yaple/MARTIN-HBP.gif)
-
To be fair, I think soccer (hate that word) being as simple as it is, is the main reason why it is so loved. People don't want 3000 rules they need to learn, they just want something simple and entertaining.
-
Dude, snapple, I agree with you on this, but I don't have the faintest idea what those pictures were meant to prove.
-
Of course it does. A sport that can be played by 2, 3,4,5, etc people is more likely to be played than a sport that needs at least 5 people to become the "real game". That's just plain mathematics.
All other things being equal, yes. But I don't think it alone answers a question like 'why isn't football popular elsewhere' when kids actually CAN play it without much trouble, it just takes more than two of them.
american football has a shit ton of rules and playbooks that idiots have to remember so the media can claim it's like a chess game when it's just run forward a few steps then turn moron.
... Well, if it's just run forward a few steps and then turn, then it's not really complicated at all, is it? ??? Not saying football is that simple, just saying you're contradicting yourself.
well that's just the main play, there are blocks on the offense, defense lines, people running fake routes, but individual player just has to do what he is told, which is essentially block to the right/left, run a route, or throw a ball, so the sport is confusing to watch to an outsider but individual player doesn't have to do much but run and turn in a very fast pace, which takes athleticism. blockers just have to be really big, muscular and at the same time fat so they can't be moved.
-
Dude, snapple, I agree with you on this, but I don't have the faintest idea what those pictures were meant to prove.
because he isn't going to listen either way on this. therefore, an example from each sport showing a professional getting hit in the game.
-
American Football and Baseball are as simple as soccer, both in terms of necessary equipment and rules? Wtf dude.
(https://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Ahhh-My-Face.gif)
(https://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w438/Christian_Yaple/MARTIN-HBP.gif)
in baseball you get a walk whether you get demolished or grazed. in soccer, you have to really sell it to get anything from the ref.
-
or, pretend to get injured (a.k.a. "diving")
-
... So it has nothing to do with the point about simplicity?
-
... So it has nothing to do with the point about simplicity?
Nothing at all. Well, other than men being men as opposed to men being pussies.
-
American Football and Baseball are as simple as soccer, both in terms of necessary equipment and rules? Wtf dude.
(https://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Ahhh-My-Face.gif)
(https://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w438/Christian_Yaple/MARTIN-HBP.gif)
Have you ever tried to explain baseball to someone who's never heard of it? It takes a loooong time. There's innings (bottom & top), strikes and balls, bases, different things happening whether the ball was caught or not...
The most complicated rule of soccer is offside , seriously.
-
So, soccer just caters to a bunch of idiots? *reloads with his new ammo*
-
Also, look at Aqua Velva commercials. Or shit, ANY commercial where it shows dad bonding with his son. I'll bet you 9/10 times they're playing catch. It will be football or baseball (usually baseball, but they show it both ways). I understand what it is you're trying to say. But, it's one of those things where your recollection of what may actually be the case isn't the case at all.
This actually made me realize something. In male bonding commercials, most of the time it's a football being passed around like you said. But change the commercial to one for minivans or laundry detergent, and suddenly most depictions are of women being soccer moms.
Maybe there's some sort of sexist subliminal messages going on there. Saying soccer isn't manly or something. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
-
Also, look at Aqua Velva commercials. Or shit, ANY commercial where it shows dad bonding with his son. I'll bet you 9/10 times they're playing catch. It will be football or baseball (usually baseball, but they show it both ways). I understand what it is you're trying to say. But, it's one of those things where your recollection of what may actually be the case isn't the case at all.
This actually made me realize something. In male bonding commercials, most of the time it's a football being passed around like you said. But change the commercial to one for minivans or laundry detergent, and suddenly most depictions are of women being soccer moms.
Maybe there's some sort of sexist subliminal messages going on there. Saying soccer isn't manly or something. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
Most likely something sexist and subliminal. But, my dad taught me how to throw a football and swing a bat. He also played catch with me and all that jazz. Never will forget that kind of stuff.
-
So, soccer just caters to a bunch of idiots? *reloads with his new ammo*
Sure, why not? This thread isn't about" which is the best sport" (which is what you seem to get hung up on), it's which sport is easiest to pick up or watch.
-
"Re: Why Isn't American Football More Popular Outside of America?"
That's actually what it says above my post. It appears we're both off topic.
-
Good point :lol
You still haven't told us what your theory is.
-
...
Snapple, you're on your own. You lost me saying soccer players are idiots and pussies. Have fun.
-
Good point :lol
You still haven't told us what your theory is.
It's already been said in the thread by other members: you love what you grow up with. I think, that, you have a sport like soccer that has been around for a long time and you mix that with the way Europe and the rest of the world (minus the USA) was kind of held together, it's inevitable that soccer is as popular as it is globally. Europe controlled most of the world for a long period of time. It's just natural that thing would spread. Look at the Meiji period in Japan. Now, I know the Japanese do everything to the ^n, but they went through radical changes based on their trading with Europe and the Americas.
So, what happens is what you have generations of clubs being passed down, fan bases along with them and you get the climate we have today. It's 100% the same in the USA. Different sports of different ages, but the most popular (football and baseball) have very old roots in American society. I mean, the US would ask suspected German spies who won the World Series the previous year (to see if they were truly American or not).
EDIT: Look at how nations like Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Panama and Venezuela churn out top-tier baseball talent year after year. Most of those countries were under US rule at some point.
I could probably write a dissertation on the subject, but I haven't the time. I hope the point is understood, however.
-
The US has dominated a lot of the world in the 20th century. With your theory there should be a lot of pockets in the world where American sports are played. Other than Japan I can't think of any really
-
The US has dominated a lot of the world in the 20th century. With your theory there should be a lot of pockets in the world where American sports are played. Other than Japan I can't think of any really
I just edited my post to add a few countries. and another edit: that's for baseball. The ethics behind what those countries do to get these top level players is awful and will probably exist as long as there is a payday.
-
The US has dominated a lot of the world in the 20th century. With your theory there should be a lot of pockets in the world where American sports are played. Other than Japan I can't think of any really
I was under the impression Koreans also were really into baseball? Although if not, I still have Korean StarCraft to fall back on. :p
-
The US has dominated a lot of the world in the 20th century. With your theory there should be a lot of pockets in the world where American sports are played. Other than Japan I can't think of any really
I was under the impression Koreans also were really into baseball? Although if not, I still have Korean StarCraft to fall back on. :p
Yeah. and Australian baseball is booming every year.
-
That says something about baseball but nothing about gridiron football. ???
-
That says something about baseball but nothing about gridiron football. ???
using baseball to kind of support my thesis about why soccer is so globally important and why football isnt + baseball is a bit older than football*
-
I'm btw not disagreeing with the theory that tradition has a big influence on things. But, most places have sports coexisting, so it's not as if some sports are shut out. Nonetheless soccer continues to increase its popularity, even in the presence of other sports.
-
Interesting stat: The 2010 Soccer World Cup Final was watched by 24 million Americans, up from 19 million in 2006. My theory is that once the men's US soccer team becomes internationally competitive, soccer will make massive inroads in the US.
-
That says something about baseball but nothing about gridiron football. ???
using baseball to kind of support my thesis about why soccer is so globally important and why football isnt + baseball is a bit older than football*
Baseball, Basketball, and American Football were all invented in the 1800's. I cant see how the differences in dates of origin matter if they were all invented more than 120 years ago. The time the sport has been around is not really relevant in this discussion IMO.
-
Interesting stat: The 2010 Soccer World Cup Final was watched by 24 million Americans, up from 19 million in 2006. My theory is that once the men's US soccer team becomes internationally competitive, soccer will make massive inroads in the US.
Regular Season NFL games alone get 20 million viewers.
Superbowl? 111 million.
-
Interesting stat: The 2010 Soccer World Cup Final was watched by 24 million Americans, up from 19 million in 2006. My theory is that once the men's US soccer team becomes internationally competitive, soccer will make massive inroads in the US.
most likely. At least on that level. But baseball and football will continue to reign supreme.
-
Interesting stat: The 2010 Soccer World Cup Final was watched by 24 million Americans, up from 19 million in 2006. My theory is that once the men's US soccer team becomes internationally competitive, soccer will make massive inroads in the US.
Regular Season NFL games alone get 20 million viewers.
Superbowl? 111 million.
I'm not contesting that soccer is minor as of this point in the US. My point is rather that soccer is getting more popular in the US itself, a place dominated by other sports currently.
And overall, over 1 billion people were estimated to have watched the soccer finals around the world.
rumborak
-
On a P/R-y note, i gotta say that having a good soccer team buys you a *lot* of goodwill from people around the world. I would show up in some remote corner of the world on my trip, and after hearing that I'm German they would enumerate the German soccer players they knew (Beckenbauer etc.)
-
Interesting stat: The 2010 Soccer World Cup Final was watched by 24 million Americans, up from 19 million in 2006. My theory is that once the men's US soccer team becomes internationally competitive, soccer will make massive inroads in the US.
Regular Season NFL games alone get 20 million viewers.
Superbowl? 111 million.
I'm not contesting that soccer is minor as of this point in the US. My point is rather that soccer is getting more popular in the US itself, a place dominated by other sports currently.
And overall, over 1 billion people were estimated to have watched the soccer finals around the world.
rumborak
I was just throwing out stats too...not trying to make a major point.
But soccer will never be more than a fringe sport here in the US without a serious US professional league that has some seriously marketable stars. You will need guys like Jordan/Lebron to give soccer any hope of success here. I dont see that happening.
-
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.
-
You still are generalizing that all football players are dumb and that all fans are over the top, and that all baseball players are intelligent which is so far from the truth.
I never said ALL, i said that many tend to be, and most of that has to do with the fans and teams i see around where i live. and while i admit im being general, i never said every single player is a moron, because that isnt true
This is still a generalization. Do you believe that high school or college american football is at the same level as professional? How about high school real football/soccer and baseball vs. pros or the world stage? Yes, morons play at the lower levels, and should be a lot more than the pros. Look at the plays that are called; not any near the level as the pros. I would not expect a high school baseball pitcher to have 4 different pitches and be able to throw 100 MPH either.
And many fans are stupid. That cannot be held against the sport however. I doubt many know the nuances of real football/soccer or baseball.
Yes, there are some stupid football players at any level; how is this different than any other sport? There have been some really lame baseball players. I cannot speak for real football/soccer players as it gets virtually no publicity in this country.
Some defensive lineman are morons and do not require a high level of intelligence. The same goes for WR's; typically some of the biggest morons on a team, even though it is a complex position when done well. I think what may skew opinions is the background that many football players come from. It is quite unfair to think of all football players as stupid due to a bunch of low socioeconomic status players breaking it big.
When Ryan Fitzpatrick scores near perfect on the Wonderlic (intelligence) test, and typically the most successful QBs, DB safeties, Linebackers and lineman year in, year out due very well on the test, this says something about the game.
Playbooks are hundreds of pages, and change each year, if not during the year too. Each team watches hour upon hours of film, and the best players watch it on their own time too. They have lecture hall meetings about their match-ups, and what not and what to do.
And I do believe that the stoppages allow for more strategy then a lot of other games. How can a real football/soccer team and captains, or basketball players call plays when the action is more non-stop?
This is fine that we debate the original thread topic. Insulting the intelligence of american football players is missing the mark I think.
-
How can a real football/soccer team and captains, or basketball players call plays when the action is more non-stop?
The coach is essentially out of the equation until halftime. But that's also a nice thing, because it requires the players themselves to decide what play they will do. You can't deny that AF is very scripted.
-
How can a real football/soccer team and captains, or basketball players call plays when the action is more non-stop?
The coach is essentially out of the equation until halftime. But that's also a nice thing, because it requires the players themselves to decide what play they will do. You can't deny that AF is very scripted.
No, I cannot. I just never recall ever the attention to specific movement on plays when I played american football compared to when I played soccer, baseball and basketball as a kid.
The dumb players in american football are obvious when they blow plays and coverages. Maybe the overall intelligence is higher for players in other sports, I could go with that. But to say the sport as a whole, and those involved are not as intelligent as in other sports is off.
-
On a P/R-y note, i gotta say that having a good soccer team buys you a *lot* of goodwill from people around the world. I would show up in some remote corner of the world on my trip, and after hearing that I'm German they would enumerate the German soccer players they knew (Beckenbauer etc.)
Yep, same here. When I mention the Netherlands, the first thing that comes up is soccer. Bus driver in Sweden gave me a discount because I said I preferred PSV over Ajax :lol.
-
I think that game plans are made for both AF and Soccer and yet it's the players that need to execute what the coaching staff puts in.
No doubt soccer is a faster, non stop paced game. Some Americans would say a 0-0 soccer game is boring but I think real sport fans know better. It's all about upbringing. I'm just happy to love American football and love the Soccer is gaining popularity in the USA.
-
On a P/R-y note, i gotta say that having a good soccer team buys you a *lot* of goodwill from people around the world. I would show up in some remote corner of the world on my trip, and after hearing that I'm German they would enumerate the German soccer players they knew (Beckenbauer etc.)
Yep, same here. When I mention the Netherlands, the first thing that comes up is soccer. Bus driver in Sweden gave me a discount because I said I preferred PSV over Ajax :lol.
Just hop over the border to Germany, you'll be safe from any compliments to your country's team :lol
-
How can a real football/soccer team and captains, or basketball players call plays when the action is more non-stop?
The coach is essentially out of the equation until halftime. But that's also a nice thing, because it requires the players themselves to decide what play they will do. You can't deny that AF is very scripted.
So is war.
-
baseball is only still very popular because it's the only sport in the designated time of the year. what else is there to watch in summer? no prime time shows, no sports, just baseball.
-
baseball is only still very popular because it's the only sport in the designated time of the year. what else is there to watch in summer? no prime time shows, no sports, just baseball.
I don't agree. I love Baseball. I would watch it no matter what time of year it was on. Its not for everyone I guess.
I'm a Met fan and I still love Baseball! Now that is a fan!
-
Whereas I find almost everything about this clip unspeakably revolting.
Why? I don't understand this.
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 commercial breaks are horrible for the flow of the game. I'd completely agree with you there.
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.
Personal taste dude.
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.
It's not that the other sports have no strategy. It's just that Football exists at another level. If you tried to play Football without a playbook, the sport would be a disaster.
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.
This doesn't sound like something written by someone who understands Football. There's a reason Quarterbacks and Receivers spend time practicing together in the off-season. The QB needs to understand how the receiver runs. The receiver needs to understand how the Quarterback makes reads and decisions. Linebackers are coached as a group so they know how to best maximize each other's potential of making a play when the opposing team runs the ball, as opposed to all doing the same thing and running into each other. Offensive linemen coordinate with each other like synchronized swimmers to provide coherent protection from the ball.
The players aren't incapable of performing without a playbook because Football isn't a team sport. They're incapable of performing without a playbook because Football is fucking complicated.
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.
Purely comparing Football to Basketball, I find that weaknesses are far easier to exploit in Football. I could be wrong.
-
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.
You know how often a football team has to be so well practiced together that they can create plays out of thin air?
Every snap of the football.
Every play on each side of the ball requires 11 people doing the right thing, being in the right place, and reacting in the moment to what 11 other people are doing at the same time. Just because there's a break between each play doesn't make football any less complex than a sport like hockey or soccer where the play is more wide open. It looks simple only because they spend the season AND the off season practicing.
-
ITT: American football fans don't understand why other people (US or not) don't like the sport as much as they do.
-
ITT: American football fans don't understand why other people (US or not) don't like the sport as much as they do.
I disagree. We understand it's more of the pace of the game where there is stoppage after every play and the micro managing of each play.
I feel that's what's killing baseball here in America. 4 to 5 hour games ar out of control.
-
But think of the amount of food and beer you can get in 4 to 5 hours!!! When you're half way through you are already so drunk you don't care that it's up for 2 more hours :lol
-
But think of the amount of food and beer you can get in 4 to 5 hours!!! When you're half way through you are already so drunk you don't care that it's up for 2 more hours :lol
With football you get your beer and food tailgating 4 hours before!
I KNOW! :lol
-
That was a great three pages of reading. The horse is dead, you guys are just pissing on the body now, I love it. :lol
Part of the problem is the fans too, I'm in norcal and have to deal with raider fans, the whole mentality of these over the top football fans can just be too much to handle for me.
As someone who has lived in the Bay Area his whole life, don't base anything on the Raider Nation, they are a "special" type of fan unto themselves.
-
I've got absolutely no dog in this race because I don't really watch ANY sports, including Football, but man, some of the responses in this thread are extremely funny :lol
I played football in high school. It's not quite the knuckle-dragging drool-fest that some of you make it out to be. Don't think so? Memorize a 150-page playbook -and properly execute your part in those plays- then get back to me.
-
I certainly don't see how Football players are any dumber than soccer players on average. Anybody who's seen enough soccer player interviews knows that very well. They can say the dumbest things.
-
Totally agree with you there, rumbo.
"Milan or Madrid, the main thing is that it's in Italy!" is my personal favourite quote by a soccer player.
-
One interesting note: Football video games are great for the sport because they let you actually call plays and understand what goes into making a Football team work.
Agreed.
(https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y280/bosk1/DTF/Mattel-Football.jpg)
-
Totally agree with you there, rumbo.
"Milan or Madrid, the main thing is that it's in Italy!" is my personal favourite quote by a soccer player.
Jürgen Wegmann - "At first we weren't particularly lucky, but then bad luck came on top of that"
Rolf Rüßmann - "If we can't win, at least we're gonna mangle your lawn!"
Franz Beckenbauer
- "The Swedes were no Dutch, that was plain to see."
- "You know who I felt most sorry for? The ball."
-
Totally agree with you there, rumbo.
"Milan or Madrid, the main thing is that it's in Italy!" is my personal favourite quote by a soccer player.
Jürgen Wegmann - "At first we weren't particularly lucky, but then bad luck came on top of that"
Rolf Rüßmann - "If we can't win, at least we're gonna mangle your lawn!"
Franz Beckenbauer - "The Swedes were no Dutch, that was plain to see."
Well, the first two aren't really that stupid, they're just good quotes. The third one is the kind I'm talking about. :lol
Also, I just remembered another one, by Mario Basler. "Congratulations to [some guy whose name I forgot], his wife become a father for the second time today."
:rollin
-
I completely agree with Rumborak on this thread.
However, let's meet somewhere inbetween. Everyone should become an avid follower of Australian Football (aussie rules) and/or Gaelic Football. Those sports are kind of a mixture, and the sports are some of the best entertainment you'll find.
-
One interesting note: Football video games are great for the sport because they let you actually call plays and understand what goes into making a Football team work.
Agreed.
(https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y280/bosk1/DTF/Mattel-Football.jpg)
Holy crap - I saw that and heard the buzzers and whistles in my head
But really,
(https://obsoletegamer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/tb1.jpg)
-
Oh yeah? Then how about THIS bit of awesomeness? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MfAYq0DZJs
-
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.
I'm not certain, are you talking about those quick logo on the screen commercial breaks? At a game, you certainly can tell when it's televised or not, Breaks in play are extended regularly to accommodate commercials. 20 years ago you could go to a major DI college game that wasn't televised. Those games went a lot swifter, things like change of possession are much, much faster. What you're not seeing during those commercials is a field full of players, refs, and whatnot just standing and waiting.
-
Agreed.
(https://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y280/bosk1/DTF/Mattel-Football.jpg)
Oh yeah? Then how about THIS bit of awesomeness? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MfAYq0DZJs
I'm 12 all lover again. My thumbs were lighting fast. And Activision should have made a football game.
-
Btw, an interesting associated fact, and disproving Snapple's "tradition" theory, two other American sports, Basketball and Volleyball, successfully transitioned out of their home country and are played worldwide.
-
Because:
There are no local leagues.
It's complicated.
It has way to much stoppage time.
It's commercialsbowl.
It's not implemented in other cultures as much as it is on the USA.
If America wanted Football Soccer to be big, it would be big. They would beat you over the head with it on Movies, TV shows, Songs, Commercials and stuff, until it is accepted.
Case in point:
But soccer will never be more than a fringe sport here in the US without a serious US professional league that has some seriously marketable stars. You will need guys like Jordan/Lebron to give soccer any hope of success here. I dont see that happening.
If someone wants to make the NFL as big as it is in US you have to market it. That means you have to:
Make domestic leagues
Create teams
Basically form markeatable palyers and shit.
So the NFL would have to transform in some sort of FIFA-like organization. An THAT I don't see it happening any time soon.
-
Oh yeah? Then how about THIS bit of awesomeness? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MfAYq0DZJs
I'm 12 all lover again. My thumbs were lighting fast. And Activision should have made a football game.
I always played this one growing up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8yg9A3Y3q4
I still think that's the best one on the 2600, although Super Football was cool if only for having a 3D like appearance. Super Challenge Football biggest flaw as that you could run off the back of the screen and show up on the other side after awhile. Really nice for mixing in strategy and reflexes for an early sports simulation, though.
-
Look, this is all culture-based. American football will always be top dog here in the USA and misunderstood or disliked everywhere else. And soccer will always be top dog in the rest of the world, and a fringe sport here in the USA. And that's fine.
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
BTW, I can't stand soccer. Sure, it's quick-paced and non-stop action, but it bugs the shit out of me that a game like that ends up with a score of 2-1, or 1-0. Boring. But if you like that sort of thing, hey, more power to you. But I like offense, and lots of it.
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Cricket is boring as hell. I think only 40 countries in the world play it and most of those used to be English territory.
BTW, I can't stand soccer. Sure, it's quick-paced and non-stop action, but it bugs the shit out of me that a game like that ends up with a score of 2-1, or 1-0. Boring. But if you like that sort of thing, hey, more power to you. But I like offense, and lots of it.
Well, when you have teams that actually want to win you get nice games with a lot more goals. The problem is nowadays teams that know they are inferior just try to get a draw and maybe a goal counterattacking but that's it. Winning has become so important that I think players have forgotten to have fun and fans have forgotten that the game should be watched for pleasure and not just to see your team win. :sad:
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Uhm, almost no one here has any interest whatsoever in cricket.
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Uhm, almost no one here has any interest whatsoever in cricket.
That's good. But that wasn't anywhere near my point.
-
You can say what you want about the sport in terms of your interest and your preferences, but the bottom line is that the skill position players in football (Wide Receivers, Running Backs, Linebackers and Defensive Backs) are some of the most if not the most athletic people in the world. Much more so than any European sport, (not taking anything away from the sports themselves, which are great)
-
Whereas I find almost everything about this clip unspeakably revolting.
Why? I don't understand this.
- I'm very wary of group mentality or group identity. The vacuum of individualism on display in that clip approaches Triumph of the Will levels of despicable.
- I hate self-aggrandizement, spectacle for the sake of spectacle, and things being made out to be greater or more important than they actually are, especially sports. This is a college match, and there are brass bands playing and jets flying overhead. It's like they're realising a scheme to win the annual International Making A Mountain Out Of A Molehill Competition. It actually looks like a parody. And I can only assume this is completely normal.
- I'm considerably anti-nationalistic, or even the whole emphatic pride of being from this region instead of that. I wouldn't be surprised if half of the people in that stadium have the name of their town or state tattooed into their anal cavity.
The players aren't incapable of performing without a playbook because Football isn't a team sport. They're incapable of performing without a playbook because Football is fucking complicated.
Well, I guess at the end of the day, this comes down to a matter of priorities, what you're looking for when you watch a sport, but to me, that says the sport is too complicated. If it's bogged down enough that play actually cannot function for extended periods of time, and thus I cannot see the team in free-flowing action for long periods and judge their potential and their ability as a unit in that way, I can't see myself becoming interested.
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
BTW, I can't stand soccer. Sure, it's quick-paced and non-stop action, but it bugs the shit out of me that a game like that ends up with a score of 2-1, or 1-0. Boring. But if you like that sort of thing, hey, more power to you. But I like offense, and lots of it.
Cricket's terribly boring. I once watched a game with my brother, a big cricket fan, that was quite entertaining, but that was because it was apparently an extraordinary match. And it only became exciting in the last half hour of a, what, five, six, seven hour game.
I also don't like soccer. For all its continuous action, it's just dull viewing.
Everyone should become an avid follower of Australian Football (aussie rules) and/or Gaelic Football. Those sports are kind of a mixture, and the sports are some of the best entertainment you'll find.
I was actually going to mention Aussie Rules earlier in the thread. It looks like a great game, and what I've seen of Gaelic Football was good too. But they both have a country/culture's name attached to them, so the chance either game has of really branching out is virtually nil.
-
I don't understand the complexity complaint at all. As an explanation for why it's not more popular, sure. But as a complaint against the sport? Not at all. Frankly I find a professional Starcraft 2 match to be way more captivating than any athletic sport that is currently played, and it's vastly more complex than any physical spectator sport.
-
Complexity becomes a problem when the game is clearly bogged down in its own internal mechanics.
This is a game where, to strip it right down, you run with a ball to try to reach the other side of the field, and the other team is trying to stop you. The excitement is in watching that taking place. If you sat and watched AF on TV for 15 minutes, how much of that do you actually see? Two minutes? One?
Like I said earlier, a game shouldn't be too simple, but the game should be written so that, while a challenge is still being posed and the game is being regulated, you can see what is actually entertaining about the game happening, uninterrupted, as much as possible.
AF seems to have developed in a way that the game's internal logic is almost the opposite. That thing that's most exciting about the game: it should be as hard to do as humanly possible. The players will end up having to spend more time planning and thinking about how they're gonna do it than they are actually doing it. And the chance of lengthened, uninterrupted play should be nigh on nullified. If that's what's so exciting, make the game so difficult and complex, play will rarely go on for stretches of more than ten seconds.
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Uhm, almost no one here has any interest whatsoever in cricket.
That's good. But that wasn't anywhere near my point.
So we can't insult American football for it's complexity because there is a sport which is more complex/longer, which we don't watch either?
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
BTW, I can't stand soccer. Sure, it's quick-paced and non-stop action, but it bugs the shit out of me that a game like that ends up with a score of 2-1, or 1-0. Boring. But if you like that sort of thing, hey, more power to you. But I like offense, and lots of it.
I'm actually a big fan of cricket, but I think it's a losing battle to even attempt to justify it in this thread!
Your second comment displays a common misapprehension about 'soccer'. Just because a match finishes 2-1, it does not mean necessarily mean it's been one lacking an offensive nature. It's simply that the defence in soccer is arguably as important as the offence, and is strong enough to prevent the sometimes numerous attacks from being successful. One team might have 25 shots on target, thus constituting an offensive match, but if the goalkeeper or centre-back keeps them out, for example, then it might finish 1-0 to the other team, having converted their one and only chance.
Just to address an earlier point about footballers being 'pansies', it is easy to forget that in a country like England, soccer is not just the Premier League. There are many levels below it in which the sport is played in a much more honest and genuine manner.
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Uhm, almost no one here has any interest whatsoever in cricket.
That's good. But that wasn't anywhere near my point.
So we can't insult American football for it's complexity because there is a sport which is more complex/longer, which we don't watch either?
Just because you or others here don't watch it doesn't say anything about the other millions of fans it has worldwide.
-
But to all the Europeans and others who are insulting American football for its complexity and how long it takes, I give you cricket. WTF is that fucking bullshit.
Uhm, almost no one here has any interest whatsoever in cricket.
That's good. But that wasn't anywhere near my point.
So we can't insult American football for it's complexity because there is a sport which is more complex/longer, which we don't watch either?
Just because you or others here don't watch it doesn't say anything about the other millions of fans it has worldwide.
I know. But that doesn't change the fact that you are saying that we can't comment on a certain aspect of American Football because there is a sport which is worse in that aspect.
-
I didn't say you can't. I was just rebutting.
The thread is titled, "Why Isn't American Football More Popular Outside of America?" Some of the reasons given include how long it takes to play and its complexity. I think the relative international popularity of cricket demonstrates that those 2 reasons aren't really what is holding it back.
-
The thing is, cricket isn't internationally popular either. Only the UK and former colonies really practice the sport.
-
There is the whole culture thing. Just as kids are brought up with an association to a college or NFL team in the US likewise are the European kids brought up playing soccer, usually very early in the local club. All of them with a dream to sometime play in a major league European Football Club. It is the same thing.
Secondly, if you are not already a fan, NFL news in Europe are non existent. Exposure in the daily national media is close to none. The Superbowl will get a mention, but generally being more a news story because of the size and scale of the event than actual focus on the game itself. of course there is alternatives but you have to actively seek it out as a fan.
Another factor is that when the NFL games are played local time in the afternoon or midday in the US, it is late evening/night in Europe. People who happen to zap by a sports channel that shows the NFL a late Sunday evening, will most likely not stay around to watch the full game if they have work Monday morning and the game doesn't make sense to them. Too many rules, too slow at first glaze, too many stops/pauses. it looks like people just running into each other, too many commercials etc. And if the NFL games also have to compete with some major Soccer game at the same time on another channel between two big European clubs...
Having said that, I feel that NFL in Europe has been on the rise popularity wise for a long time now. More TV stations buy rights to show the games which draws a new audience, particularly among the youths. Which is very cool. it seems that those who do give it a chance and like the sport, they also stick around and become fans. I am myself a big NFL fan outside the US and I am gonna get NFL Game pass so I can follow this season!
-
@fluffy concerning spectacle and jets. In the defense of the military flyovers, these are actually training missions for precision timing. Doing them at events gives them unique situations for the pilots.
It just seems you're generalizing the fans in a very negative light. Yeah, some take it too seriously, but I think many can laugh at themselves and are just having fun. That similarly goes for your anti-regionalist sentiment, what's the problem with pride for home if it comes with an understanding that it is probably irrational? All these group connections can be very healthy to living a happy life.
-
You can say what you want about the sport in terms of your interest and your preferences, but the bottom line is that the skill position players in football (Wide Receivers, Running Backs, Linebackers and Defensive Backs) are some of the most if not the most athletic people in the world. Much more so than any European sport, (not taking anything away from the sports themselves, which are great)
I have a hard time imagining any AF player running a straight 90 minutes on a soccer field. They get a lot of rest in-between plays. They are very buff, I give you that, but in terms of endurance I think soccer players beat AF players.
-
Both different but you have to give it up for the strikers in soccer. Sprinting all the time. That's stamina.
-
Cyclists, getting on a bike and cycling 150+km every day for more than half a month.
-
You can say what you want about the sport in terms of your interest and your preferences, but the bottom line is that the skill position players in football (Wide Receivers, Running Backs, Linebackers and Defensive Backs) are some of the most if not the most athletic people in the world. Much more so than any European sport, (not taking anything away from the sports themselves, which are great)
I have a hard time imagining any AF player running a straight 90 minutes on a soccer field. They get a lot of rest in-between plays. They are very buff, I give you that, but in terms of endurance I think soccer players beat AF players.
Yes, but that doesn't mean either group is more or less athletic. Sprinters don't necessarily make good marathon runners, and marathon runners probably aren't quick enough to win a lot of sprint titles. But I would have a hard time saying that either group is somehow a lesser group of athletes than the other.
-
There was a study done quite a few years ago that was published in some medical Journal. It was to determine the most overal fit athelete. Not sure if "fit" was the actual word. Anyway, they took several measures of fitness, for example strength, flexibility, and stamina, but also differentiated them within the categories...things like intervals and explosive starts, etc.. They also looked at muscle strenth in all areas like extremities and core, etc. Obviously some atheletes dominated in specific categories, but after all the scores in all the categories, the most overal fit athelete was.......
Anyone got a guess?
-
I'd say basketball players. It requires a lot of strength both in the arms and legs and it requires lots of dexterity and athleticism.
-
I'd say basketball players. It requires a lot of strength both in the arms and legs and it requires lots of dexterity and athleticism.
No.
I am not going to disagree with anyone, and it might make for a great topic, but Basketball players were not who the study determined was the winner.
-
Swimmers?
-
Swimmers?
No. And since I dont want to take the thread too much off topic, I will reveal the answer.
Hockey Players. The study said they had the highest composite score in all the areas. Dexterity, flexibility, hand-eye coordination, stamina, explosive starts, muscle strength, etc.....cant remember them all
Hockey players also won another scientific study. The most smelly equipment.
-
Hockey as in ice hockey, or field hockey?
-
Hockey Players. The study said they had the highest composite score in all the areas. Dexterity, flexibility, hand-eye coordination, stamina, explosive starts, muscle strength, etc.....cant remember them all
Do you have a link to this? I'm not challenging, as it doesn't surprise me at all, I'm just curious.
-
I had actually heard some time back that motocross riders were the most fit.
-
@ Rumby :lol
@ Jaffa, no it was a long time ago, and I read it in a magazine article that was quoting the study.
-
I think Jaffa's referring to this (https://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills).
Boxing was determined to be the most physically demanding sport overall, with hockey coming in second (and American football third).
-
I think Jaffa's referring to this (https://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills).
Yes, the study was very similar to that.
-
I wonder if the complexity has something to do with it. Football may be the hardest sport to understand. The scoring makes little sense, special teams are well a very different type of game, and there's so many different types of penalties. Then there's the strategy and time between plays. I didn't like football growing up because of this. Eventually I learned the game and fell in love with it. Also, its harder to have a pick up game of football than soccer or basketball.
-
there are brass bands playing
Hey. I like marching band. :( To be fair, marching band and drum corps have grown to be popular in there own right.
Also, I don't understand why the spectacle thing is a complaint. It's like you're saying people are having too much fun. Levels of fun aren't allowed to exceed certain levels. What's the big deal?
-
Also, I don't understand why the spectacle thing is a complaint. It's like you're saying people are having too much fun. Levels of fun aren't allowed to exceed certain levels. What's the big deal?
I agree. I don't get that part of it, either.
College football games aren't just sporting events. They are social events, as well.
-
College football games aren't just sporting events. They are the most awesome spectacle there is.
fix'd
-
Also, I don't understand why the spectacle thing is a complaint. It's like you're saying people are having too much fun. Levels of fun aren't allowed to exceed certain levels. What's the big deal?
I agree. I don't get that part of it, either.
College football games aren't just sporting events. They are social events, as well.
I can relate to that. When I watch a game i want to watch the game and that's it. The rest are extras I'm not really interested in.
-
Is tailgating at a game a uniquely American thing?
-
Whereas I find almost everything about this clip unspeakably revolting.
Why? I don't understand this.
- I'm very wary of group mentality or group identity. The vacuum of individualism on display in that clip approaches Triumph of the Will levels of despicable.
You are certainly entitled to not like it, for any number of reasons. But after watching that clip, seriously, there is no basis whatsoever to find it "revolting" or "despicable." That's such a completely inappropriate reaction to have that I cannot even comprehend it.
-
I think Jaffa's referring to this (https://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills).
Obviously for studies like this one it's easy to start complaining, but I find that Football kinda unfairly benefits from their scoring scheme. So, yes, some AF players have excellent hand-eye coordination. Some Football players produce lots of strengths, and some AF players are fast. But you can't really pick-and-choose in your rating. The averaged-out AF player will do much worse in many of the fields than what they indicate there.
rumborak
-
That's an interesting point. It's hard to think of a common sport where the positions are more specialized than in football. Taking soccer as an example, sure there is specialization, and the goalie position is MUCH more specialized than any of the other positions. But in football, you have a much higher degree of specialization. Yeah, I can see how you'd get a very high degree of variance in studies based on which positions you were looking at.
-
You know, I can add to that that the specialized roles have changed over time also. I remember when offensive linemen were 250 lbs maybe 6 feet. Now!! The are in the mid 350-400 range and about 6'5".
-
You know, I can add to that that the specialized roles have changed over time also. I remember when offensive linemen were 250 lbs maybe 6 feet. Now!! The are in the mid 350-400 range and about 6'5".
Makes me think of the evolution from one-platoon football. 60-70 years ago it would have been unthinkable to players as heavy as lineman are today. I wonder if it was natural for everyone to still think in terms of one-platoon type players for a long time, before slowly getting heavier and heavier lineman.
-
You know, I can add to that that the specialized roles have changed over time also. I remember when offensive linemen were 250 lbs maybe 6 feet. Now!! The are in the mid 350-400 range and about 6'5".
The scary part is they are just as fast and athletic...sometimes more so.
-
You know, I can add to that that the specialized roles have changed over time also. I remember when offensive linemen were 250 lbs maybe 6 feet. Now!! The are in the mid 350-400 range and about 6'5".
The scary part is they are just as fast and athletic...sometimes more so.
Amen eric.
I wonder how they change their eating habits when their career is over? The only guy I can think of that look great is Mark Schlereth.
-
@fluffy concerning spectacle and jets. In the defense of the military flyovers, these are actually training missions for precision timing. Doing them at events gives them unique situations for the pilots.
It just seems you're generalizing the fans in a very negative light. Yeah, some take it too seriously, but I think many can laugh at themselves and are just having fun. That similarly goes for your anti-regionalist sentiment, what's the problem with pride for home if it comes with an understanding that it is probably irrational? All these group connections can be very healthy to living a happy life.
Okay, the jets thing makes sense.
The problem to me is if I was interested in that sport, I might want to go along, quietly have a drink (read: not jump up and down and scream myself stupid for five hours) and actually watch the game. Believe it or not, that is how some people act when they attend a sports match. I'm all for everyone having fun, but is that (i.e. enjoying the game the way I just described) even possible at a game like that? Not to mention that when you have that many people with that much of a "team army" mentality, and they're all drinking... just fuck that. I mean, a lot of peoples' response is probably the typical, "if you can't put up with an atmosphere that's that gung-ho, then don't go". And I wouldn't. Which helps to answer the question of why I, as a non-American, could never see myself getting into AF as a sport. Because I wouldn't want to inevitably have to fight my way (possibly literally) through an army of mindless drones who have been collectively thrown up on by the team's mascot. In fact, I couldn't see myself wanting to associate myself with it at all.
Also, I don't understand why the spectacle thing is a complaint. It's like you're saying people are having too much fun. Levels of fun aren't allowed to exceed certain levels. What's the big deal?
Because it's over the top and disproportionate to the event to the point of being ridiculous and almost childish. It's like the parties he throws to celebrate passing a grade in Billy Madison.
Is tailgating at a game a uniquely American thing?
Well, I had to google it just now, so...
You are certainly entitled to not like it, for any number of reasons. But after watching that clip, seriously, there is no basis whatsoever to find it "revolting" or "despicable." That's such a completely inappropriate reaction to have that I cannot even comprehend it.
Wastefulness and over-extravagance, ugly and likely dangerous levels of cultural conceitedness, complete lack of individualism, an inflated and aggressive sense of one's place and importance in the world (let me copy-paste right from the OP here: "I literally can't understand why the NFL isn't the most popular sport in the world") and how one asserts it... to me, those things are pretty revolting, and they're all either strongly suggested or on full display in that clip.
-
That's such a completely inappropriate reaction to have that I cannot even comprehend it.
-
On another note, completely aside from the sport itself, the packaging is too American at this point to be successfully marketed. Like it or not, but American values to the rest of the value look "plastic", if that makes sense. Well, and American Football is the perfect embodiment of it. I don't think it's coincidence that AF was the first to massively employ CGI in its advertisement.
-
I used to love those dancing football robots when I was a kid :lol
-
First of all, you guys need to lay off cricket ok :( yes its very stop start and yes its long, but...well yeah I'm not going to try :lol
As to the reason American Football isn't popular, from my perspective its pretty much for all of the reasons raised:
- Its stop-start, where most other international sports are not.
- Its long (which I never have a problem with, but given the above it can make watching a game seem tedious to people used to faster things).
- Its blatantly, even proudly commercial - and coming from America some people would look at is skeptically.
- Soccer is more widely played, widely watched, widely talked about and the like...makes it quite hard for other ball sports to gain a foothold.
- It has a perception (at least in Australia) that its just dudes running into eachother.
I'll throw another one into the mix that I didn't see: sport plays a significant role in defining and shaping the culture of a society. Given much of the world that you guys have been talking about (Europe/Latin America) still has very deep and historical roots to European cultures from the middle of last century (hence soccer/rugby) - whereas the US went on its own path following independence etc - that also plays somewhat of a role. Its like its what you do from birth, in a way. For example: the world powers in cricket are: India (British colony), South Africa (British colony), Australia (British colony) and England (you get the idea).
But what about Asian cultures, Riceball?
I don't know much about Asian history, but from what I know they've never been big on sport or recreation, so they are like an unformed lump of clay. Hence: Japan/Korea are big into baseball because MLB went there and sort of established it as the national sport; China and basketball are similar, or at least will be similar one day.
I dunno, I don't think you can discount that factor...
Is tailgating at a game a uniquely American thing?
Its not a common thing in Australia. We generally go round to someones house and do similar things.
Either that or the pub.
-
Is tailgating at a game a uniquely American thing?
I think so. People might go to a local pub before a football game in Europe. But there is no hanging around in the parking lot of the stadium before a game :biggrin:
-
It's funny, when I went to the Patriots Vs Colts in Indy in 2007, the stadium is downtown. They don't tailgate much but go to bars and restaurants before the game while here in N.E. The parking lots are full of tailgatrers. Me included.
-
Tailgating is awesome.
-
Yup. Nothing better than grillin', drinking some beers and getting excited with your friends for the big game.
-
Tailgating is awesome.
Yup. Nothing better than grillin', drinking some beers and getting excited with your friends for the big game.
Agreed. Gotta share this story...
It was the Cal-Stanford game, late 80s, at Stanford. There is a huge group tailgating and they are playing the radio call of the last quarter from the 82 game that had The Play with the 5 lateral TD return. As the radio call gets closer to what we all knew what was coming, everyone gathers closer together and the chatter dies. Before the kickoff, Joe Starkey, Cal's radio guy, says "Only a miracle will save the Bears now", a nervous giggle goes through the group. Then The Play happens, and the group of thirty or so peeps cheer like they had just won the pac-10 title, for a game that had happened at least five years previous.
Can't replace memories like that. That is the true heart of football, or any sport fandom for me, the memories.
-
The band is on the field!
-
The band is on the field!
I was at that game, that game made me a sports fan.
My grandfather took me, he was a die hard Stanfurd fan, and we sat in the middle of their rooting section. After the game, walking out dazed in disbelief at what I had just witnessed, my grandfather took time out from his own grief to pull me aside and tell me,"RJ, I want you to remember this forever. Twenty years from now, a million people will claim to have been at this game, but you have the memory, never forget it." God I loved that man.
-
I think tailgating isn't as common in Europe because the stadiums are usually in regular cities. American stadiums are often in the middle of nowhere, so you gotta bring your own supplies.
On festivals tailgating is pretty common though.
-
I think tailgating isn't as common in Europe because the stadiums are usually in regular cities. American stadiums are often in the middle of nowhere, so you gotta bring your own supplies.
On festivals tailgating is pretty common though.
I agree. if you see my post a ways back Rumbo I had that experience in Indy where the stadium was dead middle of the city, where as in Mass with the Patriots, it's in Foxboro not Boston. Pleanty of parking next to the stadium unlike Fenway where nobody tailgates at Sox games because there's nowhere to do so.
-
I think tailgating isn't as common in Europe because the stadiums are usually in regular cities. American stadiums are often in the middle of nowhere, so you gotta bring your own supplies.
On festivals tailgating is pretty common though.
Don't buy it.
Atlanta Falcons stadium, downtown Atlanta. Milwaukee Brewers stadium, just off downtown Milwaukee. Chicago Bears stadium, on the lakeshore near downtown Chicago, right in with multiple tourist locations. All of these have healthy tailgating scenes.
-
I'd also add the Astrodome and Reliant Stadium, both in Houston. Granted, they're not downtown like Minute Maid Park is, but it's still urban enough.
-
I think tailgating isn't as common in Europe because the stadiums are usually in regular cities. American stadiums are often in the middle of nowhere, so you gotta bring your own supplies.
On festivals tailgating is pretty common though.
Don't buy it.
Atlanta Falcons stadium, downtown Atlanta. Milwaukee Brewers stadium, just off downtown Milwaukee. Chicago Bears stadium, on the lakeshore near downtown Chicago, right in with multiple tourist locations. All of these have healthy tailgating scenes.
You only need it to be necessary at a certain number of them for the practice to catch on, though.
Go to a stadium in the middle of a desert - bring some snacks, have 'em in the car park. Go to a stadium in the middle of the city - "Tell you what was nice? Having those snacks in the car park." Mother of invention and that! Necessary at some stadiums, catches on all round. Never been necessary here, never caught on. Makes sense to me.
But what do I know? Where I come from, "tailgating" means a form of intimidation.
-
Australian stadiums are very similar; no car parks or open spaces really around them but lots of cafes, bars and restaurants. So people generally meet up there before/after games. Plus there are only about 10 registered Ford F250s in the whole country...hard to tailgate out of a hatchback.
*betanAmericancoulddoitthough*
-
I think tailgating isn't as common in Europe because the stadiums are usually in regular cities. American stadiums are often in the middle of nowhere, so you gotta bring your own supplies.
On festivals tailgating is pretty common though.
Don't buy it.
Atlanta Falcons stadium, downtown Atlanta. Milwaukee Brewers stadium, just off downtown Milwaukee. Chicago Bears stadium, on the lakeshore near downtown Chicago, right in with multiple tourist locations. All of these have healthy tailgating scenes.
You only need it to be necessary at a certain number of them for the practice to catch on, though.
But what do I know? Where I come from, "tailgating" means a form of intimidation.
On the first line, my point was I don't think it has anything to do with stadium location. Even with limited parking int he US tailgating happens. ...not sure what you were getting at, I guess.
On the last line, it also has a meaning of intimidation in the US, driving to close to the person in front of you. They're both be named from the relation to the back end of a truck.
Australian stadiums are very similar; no car parks or open spaces really around them but lots of cafes, bars and restaurants. So people generally meet up there before/after games. Plus there are only about 10 registered Ford F250s in the whole country...hard to tailgate out of a hatchback.
*betanAmericancoulddoitthough*
Yeah, most tailgating isn't done in trucks from my experience. Portable grills are easy to buy in the US, and it's often a few cars together sharing the load of supplies. It's just cooking and drinking in the parking lot, the vehicle isn't important. :lol
-
Shit, I've tailgated without a car. Just sneak a couple twelve packs and some Subway on to the local public transit, find a nice corner in the parking lot, and go at it. Soon enough, and as long as you have beer, you can work your way into other people's parties.
-
On the first line, my point was I don't think it has anything to do with stadium location. Even with limited parking int he US tailgating happens. ...not sure what you were getting at, I guess.
I think his point was that while it may not be necessary at all stadium locations, the tradition started at stadiums where it WAS necessary, and has now just become a popular tradition.
-
I don't think anybody is entirely sure where the tradition started, though. There are certainly numerous claims out there, but most are probably just myths. How could we say it arose of necessity?
-
I have no idea how tailgating started. I was just clarifying because you said you weren't sure what he was getting at. :)
-
Shit, I've tailgated without a car. Just sneak a couple twelve packs and some Subway on to the local public transit, find a nice corner in the parking lot, and go at it. Soon enough, and as long as you have beer, you can work your way into other people's parties.
I've gone to games without the intention of tailgating, and wound up being invited to join a tailgate with people I didn't know.
Of course, I was wearing my colors.
-
Shit, I've tailgated without a car. Just sneak a couple twelve packs and some Subway on to the local public transit, find a nice corner in the parking lot, and go at it. Soon enough, and as long as you have beer, you can work your way into other people's parties.
I've gone to games without the intention of tailgating, and wound up being invited to join a tailgate with people I didn't know.
Of course, I was wearing my colors.
Must.....resist......joke.....on....a......mod............
-
I always love the atmosphere of tailgating. So much fun, with the sites, the smells, the sounds, and the colors. Very cool.
Pumped for the season to start
-
Shit, I've tailgated without a car. Just sneak a couple twelve packs and some Subway on to the local public transit, find a nice corner in the parking lot, and go at it. Soon enough, and as long as you have beer, you can work your way into other people's parties.
I've gone to games without the intention of tailgating, and wound up being invited to join a tailgate with people I didn't know.
Of course, I was wearing my colors.
Must.....resist......joke.....on....a......mod............
Fuck it, don't resist, if it's funny.
-
You can say what you want about the sport in terms of your interest and your preferences, but the bottom line is that the skill position players in football (Wide Receivers, Running Backs, Linebackers and Defensive Backs) are some of the most if not the most athletic people in the world. Much more so than any European sport, (not taking anything away from the sports themselves, which are great)
I have a hard time imagining any AF player running a straight 90 minutes on a soccer field. They get a lot of rest in-between plays. They are very buff, I give you that, but in terms of endurance I think soccer players beat AF players.
Yes, but that doesn't mean either group is more or less athletic. Sprinters don't necessarily make good marathon runners, and marathon runners probably aren't quick enough to win a lot of sprint titles. But I would have a hard time saying that either group is somehow a lesser group of athletes than the other.
Yes you are right, most football players do not have the endurance. But when I talk about athleticism, I'm talking all physical attributes (Speed, Strength, Power, Agility, Endurance, Stamina) combined. Soccer players are great athletes in that they have speed, endurance, stamina, and agility. But when you look at the overall athleticism of someone like Calvin Johnson, there's just no contest in my opinion.
-
If we are talking altheticism, I think you need to consider Australian Rules players here too. They routinely travel 10-15kms (~6.5-9 miles) over the course of a game which involves tackling, jumping, kicking and hand passing. After doing some research, the record for a player to travel in a single game is 19.4 kilometres...
Plus the game is way better anyway ;D
-
Just had our first game of the season. I play in the marching band, so of course I see every home game. I don't know the ins and outs of the strategy or the metagame, yet I still find it enjoyable at times.
-
Just had our first game of the season. I play in the marching band, so of course I see every home game. I don't know the ins and outs of the strategy or the metagame, yet I still find it enjoyable at times.
Awesome! What do you play?
-
I play trumpet. And our college isn't really big on football. Usually only 100 fans show up to each game. :/
-
Sky Sports has just announced a new 3-year contract to show 60 live NFL games per season here in the UK. I'm no American football fan, but I think I'm right in thinking that's a significant increase on what had been shown before.
-
I went to see an American Football match the other day with a manager that came from the US. It was the Michigan vs Alabama game. I brought up the discussion on why that sport isn't popular outside the US and he mentioned the fact that the sport requires a lot of money for equipment and stuff as the main reason.
Regarding the game itself, I still think the problem is that the game itself lasts 1 hour yet I spent more than 3 hours at the bar before it was finished. Don't get me wrong, I drank a lot of beer, ate some chicken wings and fries (all for free) and had a good time but I can do that without a game on the screen.
-
(https://www.planobeta.com/wp-content/uploads/futebol-girl.jpg)
-
I went to see an American Football match the other day with a manager that came from the US. It was the Michigan vs Alabama game. I brought up the discussion on why that sport isn't popular outside the US and he mentioned the fact that the sport requires a lot of money for equipment and stuff as the main reason.
Regarding the game itself, I still think the problem is that the game itself lasts 1 hour yet I spent more than 3 hours at the bar before it was finished. Don't get me wrong, I drank a lot of beer, ate some chicken wings and fries (all for free) and had a good time but I can do that without a game on the screen.
Yup this, the 3 hours it takes to finish a game and the fact that the networks cram commercials in whenever they can. You get a block of commercials every time there is a small stop in the game. In European football a game is 90 mins and that is 2 times 45 minutes of game and NO commercials as long as the half is on.
-
Chess can have mere minutes of action over hours, yet it is fascinating to people around the world. Strategy can hold people's attention as well as action. It may not be as immediately visible to new viewers, but it also doesn't take more than basic learning to be able to appreciate.
-
Chess can have mere minutes of action over hours, yet it is fascinating to people around the world. Strategy can hold people's attention as well as action. It may not be as immediately visible to new viewers, but it also doesn't take more than basic learning to be able to appreciate.
This, exactly.
-
Chess can have mere minutes of action over hours, yet it is fascinating to people around the world. Strategy can hold people's attention as well as action. It may not be as immediately visible to new viewers, but it also doesn't take more than basic learning to be able to appreciate.
This, exactly.
i agree, but there are no commercials in between that get you distracted every 5 minutes
-
i agree, but there are no commercials in between that get you distracted every 5 minutes
No one's defending the commercials in Football. They've become overabundant. Sports leagues are trying to figure out how to not lose the attention of their audience to smart phones. Less commercials would go a long way.
-
Chess can have mere minutes of action over hours, yet it is fascinating to people around the world. Strategy can hold people's attention as well as action. It may not be as immediately visible to new viewers, but it also doesn't take more than basic learning to be able to appreciate.
This, exactly.
i agree, but there are no commercials in between that get you distracted every 5 minutes
Try going to the games. I get to look at the bench and figure out their strategy. Thank god for binoculars. :biggrin:
-
Sure, the next time I'm in the US I'll stop by your place and you can invite me ;)
-
Not defending the commercials , but at least football usually has the best commercials.
-
i agree, but there are no commercials in between that get you distracted every 5 minutes
No one's defending the commercials in Football. They've become overabundant. Sports leagues are trying to figure out how to not lose the attention of their audience to smart phones. Less commercials would go a long way.
From my perspective (and I believe quite a few others share my perspective), it's not just that they have too many commercials, it's that there is room for so many commercials. Staring at the coach as he talks to the players to call the play wouldn't make it any more interesting for me.
-
I will say that the counterbalance for this argument (play stoppages) is that there is actually MORE riding on every single play. And in a close game, the tension builds because *EVERY PLAY* is "make or break"...
-
You know?
https://deadspin.com/5941348/they-wont-magically-turn-you-into-a-lustful-cockmonster-chris-kluwe-explains-gay-marriage-to-the-politician-who-is-offended-by-an-nfl-player-supporting-it
I might have judged American football too soon.
-
You know?
https://deadspin.com/5941348/they-wont-magically-turn-you-into-a-lustful-cockmonster-chris-kluwe-explains-gay-marriage-to-the-politician-who-is-offended-by-an-nfl-player-supporting-it
I might have judged American football too soon.
Great stuff, though it has very little to do with American football itself - the person involved simply happened to be a football player, and it therefore doesn't really change my opinion on American football.
Still, a rather refreshing read - thanks for sharing. :tup
-
Not sure how much this has been discussed thus far, but the psychology of fandom is important here. If you're not raised with a sport, you're less likely to like it. Furthermore, if the culture you live in doesn't care about a sport, you're even less likely to like it. Add in the fact that American Football is so strongly associated with America and suddenly you've got a sport that isn't so appealing to a Frenchman, or a Russian, or a Japanese dude.
-
So very true. We know what we know.
Though I do like to check out sports from other countries. it's just hard if you don't understand the rules and that is the hill to climb.
-
Well, and then there's also the fact that AF has "simmered" for long enough in one country that it has acquired a lit of American elements. Look at Kendo. It has acquired such uniquely Japanese features that it's never going to be big outside its native country.
-
I think that's even true for sports played in both continents. Look at hockey. The styles are so different in Europe to the American/Canadian style of play.
-
Social benefits are important too, I think. In America, there's a substantial social benefit to liking American Football, especially in college. No such benefit exists from liking the sport in Germany or India.
-
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only person in this country who doesn't give a shit about American Football.
Which sucks, because I live in a college town.
-
I woke up and just spent my entire day either watching Football or driving to different friends' houses to watch Football.
How can anyone not care about this again?
-
I woke up and just spent my entire day either watching Football or driving to different friends' houses to watch Football.
How can anyone not care about this again?
We Canucks are just as in love with hockey. Why don't you obsess over it and maple syrup?
-
I woke up and just spent my entire day either watching Football or driving to different friends' houses to watch Football.
How can anyone not care about this again?
Very very easily, I assure you.
-
We Canucks are just as in love with hockey. Why don't you obsess over it and maple syrup?
Hockey has a legitimate following in America. Its fans are super duper passionate.
To me, Hockey seems like it appeals to a very specific kind of person that happens to be very common in Canada. I guess you could say that American Football applies to a specifically American mentality as well. Who knows.
-
I woke up and just spent my entire day either watching Football or driving to different friends' houses to watch Football.
How can anyone not care about this again?
We Canucks are just as in love with hockey. Why don't you obsess over it and maple syrup?
Actually, some of the northern States do obsess over those things. :) Curling is big around the Great Lakes, too.
-
We Canucks are just as in love with hockey. Why don't you obsess over it and maple syrup?
Hockey has a legitimate following in America. Its fans are super duper passionate.
To me, Hockey seems like it appeals to a very specific kind of person that happens to be very common in Canada. I guess you could say that American Football applies to a specifically American mentality as well. Who knows.
I think that has been the gist of the entire thread.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19549703
Article doesn't say much that's new or that will surprise anyone, but yeah.
There's also a link in there to this article, which is a kind of reverse of the topic of this thread.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14725789
-
Those are two very interesting articles. I'm eager to see if rugby can make a way into popular sports in the US
-
Aaaaaand today, I saw this article.
https://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704281204575002852055561406-lMyQjAxMTAwMDEwNTExNDUyWj.html#articleTabs%3Darticle
"According to a Wall Street Journal study of four recent broadcasts, and similar estimates by researchers, the average amount of time the ball is in play on the field during an NFL game is about 11 minutes.
In other words, if you tally up everything that happens between the time the ball is snapped and the play is whistled dead by the officials, there's barely enough time to prepare a hard-boiled egg. In fact, the average telecast devotes 56% more time to showing replays.
So what do the networks do with the other 174 minutes in a typical broadcast? Not surprisingly, commercials take up about an hour. As many as 75 minutes, or about 60% of the total air time, excluding commercials, is spent on shots of players huddling, standing at the line of scrimmage or just generally milling about between snaps. In the four broadcasts The Journal studied, injured players got six more seconds of camera time than celebrating players. While the network announcers showed up on screen for just 30 seconds, shots of the head coaches and referees took up about 7% of the average show."
Man, I'd watch the shit out of that. Even without the ads, 75 minutes of players standing around with their thumbs up their asses. 7% of the time (about thirteen minutes, by my trusty laptop calculator) spent on shots of coaches smiling and pumping their fists/raging and ripping their nighties, and referees. That's the smallest percentage given, and it's still longer than the actual gameplay. Gotta get me some of that.
-
While I was munching on some post-Volleyball bar food today, the Denver vs. Atlanta game was on, and I noticed one more thing that doesn't exactly entice other nations: The pants. First of all they look like something a 70s porn actor would wear, and at the back they also have these things that look like they're wearing Maxi Pads up their butt. You wouldn't see me dead wearing those.
-
The entire 'play time' complaint is silly because in american football control of the clock is in itself a game mechanic.
-
One thing I thought about this weekend while watching football is that although there is tine off between play, while watching on TV you get to see a replay and football has great replays as the game really is a game of inches.
-
Another problem with that article is that it was only counting from the snap of ball to the blow of the whistle. The play doesn't start at the snap of the ball. It actually starts when both teams line up, because that is when the quarterback has time to look at the defensive set and bark out any audibles or adjustments to the offense before the ball is snapped. Also, the defenses many times change up their look before the actual snap of the ball. None of that is dead time with nothing going on. There is a lot going on.
-
American Football, Your Name It Is Strange. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4msKdfMtGY&feature=player_embedded)
:lol
-
:lol. I wish I had expressed that as funny as this guy did
-
I will flip it and say I wished european football was as lighthearted and family oriented amongst fans like american football. Not to say there aren't hardcore fans within american football but from what I can see it's alot more of a celebration and gathering for something fun instead of riots among supporter groups like we have every fucking day there is a match in town. It's always supporters vs the police every single time and it's pretty tiring to say the least. About a month ago there was a fan who got beaten to death by a supporter in my town. The night before some supporters trashed a bar and assaulted guests. All this takes the fun away from a sport that can be exciting to watch.
-
I will flip it and say I wished european football was as lighthearted and family oriented amongst fans like american football. Not to say there aren't hardcore fans within american football but from what I can see it's alot more of a celebration and gathering for something fun instead of riots among supporter groups like we have every fucking day there is a match in town. It's always supporters vs the police every single time and it's pretty tiring to say the least. About a month ago there was a fan who got beaten to death by a supporter in my town. The night before some supporters trashed a bar and assaulted guests. All this takes the fun away from a sport that can be exciting to watch.
That depends a lot on which country the games are at. Greece, Turkey, Italy tend to have more aggressive fans while Spain, France or Germany have fans that don't end up destroying anything, they just go and enjoy games.
-
I'm highlighting the bad stuff but of course the majority of fans tend to know how to be civilized human beings. The aggressive supporters will always make the headlines though. Here in Sweden alot of the violence is usually not about the sport per se they only use the sport as an excuse to live out their need for aggression. It's as you say though diffrent depending on what country you live in.
-
I'm highlighting the bad stuff but of course the majority of fans tend to know how to be civilized human beings. The aggressive supporters will always make the headlines though. Here in Sweden alot of the violence is usually not about the sport per se they only use the sport as an excuse to live out their need for aggression. It's as you say though diffrent depending on what country you live in.
That's almost entirely the case here. In fact, that's almost entirely the case with any riot at all. Championship riots happen here in a variety of sports, but it's almost always because people want to blow off some steam and be part of a mob for a while (and steal shit). The real football (American) related animosity and assholery is more about beer and misguided team loyalty. Do a search for "Eagle's fans" and you'll see one example after another of that. Still, it's not those guys that are going to destroy the city if they win a championship (a non-factor for them in any event).
-
I don't know why I didn't see this waaay back when the thread was started; and I won't go back and read through all the posts; but having played "football" through high school and college, I can tell you exactly why it's not as popular in Europe and other countries as it is here. It all boils down to what you grew up with as a kid. Kids in European countries especially haven't been exposed to the game, so when they grow up, and become adults who spend money on their team, they are not going to spend money on a sport they didn't grow up with in the first place; nor are they going to expose their own kids to the sport either. Look at Hockey in Canada and even Northern US states. Kids play hockey all the time on frozen lakes and ponds during the winter, from an awfully early age.
I recall in the early 70's a football game between Cincinnati and Pittsburgh on Monday Night Football. The game was in Cincinnati, and it started snowing very hard outside. My friends and I all put on our Ken Anderson jerseys and ran outside and played in the snow until our moms all yelled at us to put on coats; then we came inside, drank hot chocolate and watched the game until we had to go to bed. We grew up playing "Kill the Man With the Ball" in the back yard. We played Pee Wee football, pick-up games in the neighborhood, and then in High School, and some of us college. We grew up with the sport.
That is the same reason that kids play baseball so much in Latin and South America. In Europe it's primarily soccer.
(Soccer btw was a term originated by the Brits at Oxford. Short for "Association". So it's Soccer. Get over it)
I for one, find soccer more boring than watching flies fuck. When you watch flies fuck, at least you know something is scoring! How is it fun to watch a bunch of people run around for 90 minutes kicking a ball back and forth and no one scores? Ever. Yawwwwwn. That's why that one announcer screams "GOOOOOOAAAAAALLLL!!!" It's to wake everybody the fuck up.
Anyway. Football is gaining popularity. It's played in Canada (granted by kids with weak ankles but still... :) ) And look at places like American Samoa. It's become a way of life for most young men there now. Mexico City is begging the NFL for a team. Japan is starting to take notice (but baseball reigns supreme there by far); and football is gaining in popularity in Eastern European countries.
As for which is tougher, Rugby or Football...well I'm biased. But, I had a chance to meet Margus Hunt from the Bengals at a fundraiser this past winter. Margus is from Estonia. He played and excelled at a number of track and field sports, winning a ton of international accolades. He had a chance to play for (and save really) the SMU track team a few years ago, but when he got to the states, SMU dropped their track program. He was set to transfer to another school, when the SMU football coach asked him to try out for the football team.
Margus is a freak of nature. At the time he was 6'8" and weighed nearly 300 pounds. Picture "The Mountain" from GoT (okay a bit of a stretch as he's about 100 lbs lighter than that Norsk beast but you get the idea). He was an animal at SMU. The Bengals drafted him last year, and he struggled to learn the complexities and speed of the pro game. Margus and I swapped stories about college football. I played D1 football, and can tell you that the collisions we took were literally like being in a high speed auto accident every Saturday during the season. My body is beaten down now all these years later as a result. Margus agreed with me. He had played Rugby, and was not prepared for the aggressiveness and violence of the game. He swears that the majority of rugby players (even professionally) couldn't do very well playing even at the collegiate level. Another example of this is that Lindsay Crook, a pro rugby player from Australia came to Cincinnati last year to enroll at the University of Cincinnati. He turned down a spot on the Olympic team to follow his life long dream of playing "football" in America. The UC staff says it will take him at least two years to adjust to the speed, complexities, and hits of the game. Yes, football players wear pads; but if they didn't guys would get killed every week.
-
Decided to read this thread from post one, but here's my thoughts before this.
Hmmm. I think everyone else likes soccer (world football) a lot more than American football and thinks very little of American football since the foot part is not really a big aspect of the game, unless you run the ball.
It's not as high-paced action as hockey which is big in certain parts of Europe, Canada, obviously, and, at times (most likely the Olympics), the US.
Also, probably, people just does not want to spend money on football equipment for kids and rather invest it on a soccer ball for physical activity.
Another thing and this may be pointless information, but the timing of when the game goes to commercials really hurts the flow of the game badly. I mean, the way I remember how they time it. After a team gets a point (touchdown or field goal), it's commercial. After the commercial, there's the kickoff and after that's done, there's another commercial. I mean, in that sense, the league benefits it due to the ad revenue, but it hurts the timing of the game pretty badly where in the end, it hurts the excitement, imo.
-
Just to chime in on the rioting in soccer, yeah, it has essentially nothing to do with sports. Many of the people who riot don't even buy a ticket for the game; they show up in front of the venue, and then wait for the same type of guys from the other city to show up so they can start fighting. Sometimes they even coordinate, as ridiculous as that sounds.
Tempus, regarding the "soccer is boring", it *can* be of course boring, but don't tell me American Football doesn't have boring games. You as an outsider only see the final result, the goal, but for soccer fans the interesting part is the 30 seconds before that, where the winning team outwitted the defense several times.
I for one can't wait for the World Cup to start.
-
I love american football myself, but going off my own initial reactions as well as people I know, I think the main problem people have with the sport is that it's just so start-and-stop-y. There's so many pauses, both between quarters (and half-time) as well as all the pauses within the actual game. It took me quite some time to get into the sport myself, because for someone who watches mostly soccer (which for the most part has very little pauses), the pauses are hard to get used to. In many other sports you can reach a point in the game when the intensity is through the roof, and one team is dominating the other team for 10-15 minutes in a row. American football is different. With time outs, all the stops between plays and the 4 quarters, the sport just has another pace to it. Sure, some teams can completely slaughter others in american football as well (we saw that in the last super bowl), but my point is that the nature of the sport itself might be hard for some people to get into. Watching the SB for example is a 4-5 hour event, compared to a football or hockey game which are over faster, and have nowhere near as many stops/pauses in them.
-
Soccer is global and an easy sports for kids to play with no equipment. Got a field and a ball, you've got a game. Though you can do that with American football, most associate with helmets and pads so I think in other countries less affluent, soccer is an easy sport to play.
-
Soccer is global and an easy sports for kids to play with no equipment. Got a field and a ball, you've got a game. Though you can do that with American football, most associate with helmets and pads so I think in other countries less affluent, soccer is an easy sport to play.
I'm gonna go further, only thing you need is a bottle and a couple jackets, it's that easy
-
Soccer is global and an easy sports for kids to play with no equipment. Got a field and a ball, you've got a game. Though you can do that with American football, most associate with helmets and pads so I think in other countries less affluent, soccer is an easy sport to play.
This is very true. Low material needs for the sport.
I'm going to say this again. Everyone should start watching Aussie rules. It's truly a good middle ground... so why isn't it popular throughout the world? Not meaning for this question to be properly answered, it's rhetorical.
I don't quite understand all the rules yet, but the sport itself is awesome. See for yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxhqXzVBen4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxhqXzVBen4)
-Scoring is pretty much 6 points in between the middle posts, 1 point in between the outer posts. You must kick the ball in.
-A mark is when a team player kicks the ball and you catch it - it means that the opposing team is prohibited from making contact with you until you yourself kick it again.
-You must cannot pass the ball by throwing, and you must bounce it on the ground every 15 meters if you're running with the ball.
I should start following this sport diligently...
-
I suspect that the reason American Football isn't more popular outside of America is the same reason that American Football is not more popular in my house. I fucking hate advertisements- presumably like most people- and the benefits of watching football (for me) do not come close to mitigating the boredom I experience when bombarded with ads and constant stop-and-go. I realize it's likely not that simple, but I think it does a fine job of capturing the general distaste most have with American Football.
If I had grown up immersed in the culture of American Football, like so many Americans do, I would likely appreciate it much more and subsequently be happy to sit through the rest of the muck along the way (as I do for basketball).
Tempus, regarding the "soccer is boring", it *can* be of course boring, but don't tell me American Football doesn't have boring games. You as an outsider only see the final result, the goal, but for soccer fans the interesting part is the 30 seconds before that, where the winning team outwitted the defense several times.
I for one can't wait for the World Cup to start.
Thank you.
-
I'm going to say this again. Everyone should start watching Aussie rules. It's truly a good middle ground... so why isn't it popular throughout the world? Not meaning for this question to be properly answered, it's rhetorical.
I don't quite understand all the rules yet, but the sport itself is awesome. See for yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxhqXzVBen4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxhqXzVBen4)
You might also like Gaelic Football:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEAbWrdB9XU
BTW, one thing that American Football has at least over Baseball is that American Football playoffs don't have the word "World" in it.
-
I only have a couple friends who are into Gridiron in New Zealand.
I think for most countries outside of the murices', the desire to see grown men smash each other and chase a ball is filled largely by Rugby Union and Rugby League.
They're both generally faster and more exciting than Gridiron, with less stoppages and more... I dunno, 'real' tackles and hit ups due to the lack of pussy-ass body armour :P
-
Also, I think the rules in American Football are overly complicated for a newbie. I've been following the sport for a few years, and I still don't know many of the different rules. With Soccer, you can basically pick up all the rules from watching one game. The Offside-rule might take some time understanding, but with American Football there's so much stuff going on. Different rules, different penalties, and there's a reason why the refs sometimes have to take a 1-2 minute break to decide on a situation.
-
It's gonna be interesting to see how American Football will recruit their talent in the coming years. I know conservatives had a field day with it, but I totally agreed with Obama when he said he wouldn't let his son, if he had one, play (professional) football. I mean, of the professional sports out there, it's certainly one of those that has the highest chance of really fucking you up. I can't count the number of times I've heard the sentence "yeah, I used to play football, but then this one hit took out my knee/back/neck etc".
-
You might also like Gaelic Football:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEAbWrdB9XU
Wonderful. Gotta move to Ireland now..
-
It's gonna be interesting to see how American Football will recruit their talent in the coming years. I know conservatives had a field day with it, but I totally agreed with Obama when he said he wouldn't let his son, if he had one, play (professional) football. I mean, of the professional sports out there, it's certainly one of those that has the highest chance of really fucking you up. I can't count the number of times I've heard the sentence "yeah, I used to play football, but then this one hit took out my knee/back/neck etc".
It's a huge problem for Football. They need to figure out a way to make it safer or else, yeah, it will die out because no one will play it. If I had a son, I'm not sure I'd let him play Football either.
-
I'm going to say this again. Everyone should start watching Aussie rules. It's truly a good middle ground... so why isn't it popular throughout the world? Not meaning for this question to be properly answered, it's rhetorical.
Unlike other countries, we can't even come up with a "football" that the entire country cares about. :lol We have a few different major football codes here, and they're each only popular in one state.
-
pussy-ass body armour :P
Sure...because without it, the players couldn't deliver the full speed, crippling, bone jarring hits that they do; and they would be just as sissified as the wimps who play rugby. :P :biggrin:
-
I don't know why people mock Football players for wearing pads. If they didn't, a player would probably die every game. That's not a joke.
-
That is the ONLY reason football players wear pads and a helmet. In the early days of the game too many men were dying playing football. In the early 1900's it was downright lethally brutal. With little or no protective equipment, players sustained gruesome injuries—wrenched spinal cords, crushed skulls and broken ribs that pierced their hearts. The Chicago Tribune reported that in 1904, there were 38 football deaths and 159 serious crippling injuries; most of which were players in high school!! Newspapers ran weekly football obituaries during the football season. The NY Times ran a piece calling for the game to be abolished saying, “This once athletic sport has degenerated into a contest that for brutality is little better than the gladiatorial combats in the arena in ancient Rome." Dozens of newspapers agreed, and Congress was ready to step in with bills banning football. Instead, President Theodore Roosevelt steped in and told them to find out a way to save men's lives or football would be outlawed. Things were very slow to change, and in 1905 alone, 19 more players were killed and over 150 left crippled. After that season more than 2 dozen colleges dropped their football programs, and instead switched to rugby.
Now the game has progressed by eons with regard to player safety since then; but players have also gotten much bigger, much faster and much stronger since then too. Even with all that equipment in the last 20 years at least 75 players (primarily in high school) have died due to head injury. The average concussion in football is equivalent to ramming your head into a brick wall at 20 mph. The average G forces sustained from helmet to helmet hits in college is five times more than fighter pilots sustain during tight turns and dives. The amount of force in an average open field hit now ranges from 1,200-2,000 pounds of force. That's insane. That's literally like having a ton of bricks fall into you while you're running towards it. There are 350 pound linemen now who run 40 yards in less than 5 seconds.
Now, I'm not saying that Rugby isn't rough. Sure it is. But comparisons between American football and Rugby over simplify any meaningful similarities. The hits, tackles and general contact in Rugby are not nearly as hard or jarring as in American football. Nor are they supposed to be. The games are by design different and therefore create different types of collisions.
I played football at the highest level in college that there is. I suffered about a half dozen concussions. I worry about those long term effects, I really do. And the multitude of lessor injuries I suffered in my 20's, now have come back to haunt me with pain and lack of mobility in my 50's. About 8 years ago now, I was experiencing horrific back pain. I went to an orthopedic specialist who did xrays then told me that my sacrum was nearly broken all the way through and across from its edge to my spine all the way across on my left side. He feels strongly it happened while I was in college. You can see that it at one time partially healed, but age and osteoarthritis have done their magic on the break, and worked it loose again. Now the only way to heal it is to have it fused, which might cause more pain than I have now. I played linebacker on defense, and apparently it's a fairly common injury with linebackers and defensive lineman. I probably didn't even know it when it happened, or if I did the pain was minor then. I can honestly say, many of those hits I took in college were brutal. I tell people, it was like being in a serious car crash every week during the season.
But especially now, the players are continually getting faster, and larger, and stronger. All components to escalate the amount of force delivered with each hit. I foresee football rules dramatically changing again, or the sport will eventually be banned in the next 10-15 years.
But please stop this bullshit that football is somehow easy or not rough because the players wear pads. That's like saying Delta Force soldiers are pussies because they wear kevlar vests. They're not.
-
I agree. The people who put down football because of pads are insane. The comparison to a big time NFL hit to a car crash is fairly accurate.
-
Yeah, I would put Football up there in terms of brutality with sports like boxing. Saying it's sissy is a stupid comment, in fact if anything, I would call playing the sport at a professional level "suicidal".
I also have no idea how they would "fix" it. Football is by design a high-impact sport, and the fact that we're just not willing anymore to accept the types of injuries that come from it, might mean it will slowly become less prominent.
-
One idea I heard that I really liked.
Football players should have to weigh in like in boxing. Certain positions, especially linemen, should have weight caps so they don't get too big.
To me this makes so much sense in terms of player safety. And it would actually make the game better to watch because speed and skill would become more emphasized.
-
One idea I heard that I really liked.
Football players should have to weigh in like in boxing. Certain positions, especially linemen, should have weight caps so they don't get too big.
To me this makes so much sense in terms of player safety. And it would actually make the game better to watch because speed and skill would become more emphasized.
That sounds good but I would go more for a rugby kind of rule where players are only allowed to do clean tackles, no over the shoulder tackle, no bumping against another guy to make him fall down. That would make it a little less pleasing for the fans that are looking for people getting hit hard but it would ease things on the players.
-
Is that the only source of bad impacts though? I always assumed the scrimmage line was pretty bad too.
-
They are already trying to eliminate the "bad" tackling with the rules implemented recently. Its a start I guess. I however do not like that they are changing the game so much. Id rather the league give players better health benefits for the long term, have players sign contracts with the NFL that they understand the bodily damage they will recieve, and let the people who want to play and make the big bucks continue. I guess its not the nicest POV on the situation, but as long as people are willing to make those risks, I say let them.
-
Problem is health benefits are meaningless when it comes to brain damage.
-
Problem is health benefits are meaningless when it comes to brain damage.
True, but thats part of the deal they would be signing when they join the league. I think its fair if the NFL wrote out the risks to your health and were honest about them, as long as players agree to those risks then they should be allowed to play. I do understand my thought process is not the most humane way, but I think it works for everyone. No one should be playing football if they expect to live their live after football pain free.
-
Regarding soccer, I like watching the World Cup, but that's about it.
Anyone else remember the MISL, the indoor soccer league that was pretty popular in the early to mid 80s? When I was a kid, we'd got to St. Louis Steamers games all the time, and the place was always packed. I don't know what happened, but it's like all of a sudden the country stopped caring about indoor soccer.
-
Regarding soccer, I like watching the World Cup, but that's about it.
Add the Eurocup, and that's about it for me :lol
-
True, but thats part of the deal they would be signing when they join the league. I think its fair if the NFL wrote out the risks to your health and were honest about them, as long as players agree to those risks then they should be allowed to play. I do understand my thought process is not the most humane way, but I think it works for everyone. No one should be playing football if they expect to live their live after football pain free.
I used to feel the same way, but over time the depths of how badly the game affects your brain have become more and more impossible to ignore. Right now, I feel like my Football viewing is on a clock. Every year, it gets more and more uncomfortable to watch, which means I enjoy it less and less. At some point, even the most hardcore football fan is going to watch the game and not think "wow, that was badass," but "Omg, what if years down the road that player's going to commit suicide because of that hit."
Some aspects of the game are going to be what they are. If the players want to play and the viewers want to watch, then so be it. Nagging body injuries especially. But the brain damage is too gruesome, and at some point it becomes a moral issue to have a sport that is basically a brain damage factory.
What's worse is how the NFL's approaching this. They hid this information. We all know it. It just hasn't been proven in court. It's the same problem cigarette companies had. Once you get past all the bullshit, the NFL is moving on this very slowly because it would be a tacit admission they made a mistake in the first place.
The thing is, in the outside world that doesn't matter. Inevitably, some Football fans would complain that the game is getting soft. Shit, I did. But reality wins every argument. Football was almost banned once, and it can be banned again far enough into the future if it isn't fixed. Right now, the league's strategy is working. But it can't work forever. Better to work proactively (more reasonable PED rules, weight standards for players, better tackling rules), than to wait until it's too late. I hated the kick-off rule change, but it was actually one of the smartest things the league did.
I have an Uncle who's letting his two sons play Football. I asked about the safety implications. He said that you have to teach kids how to tackle right by wrapping their arms around the other player instead of banging them. If you do that, then the game is being played right. My uncle is not the kind of person who you would say is "socially conscious," but even he wants the game to be safer if only because his sons are playing it.
This needs to happen and it can happen. Will it?
-
I cant argue with anything said.
The better tackling is something the NFL is trying and I recall hearing that they were pushing this to the youth with the idea if the kids can learn to tackle the right way, over time, itll eventually lead to NFLers tackling the right way. The problem is the speed of the NFL game seems to make this difficult. I never played so I am not going to say if that is true or not, just my opinion. I hope they can find a way to make this all work because the sport is amazing to watch, but watering it down is not really a solution IMO. What about redesigning the helmets? I dont have any ideas of my own, but something that gives a better landing when hitting the ground, but still safe enough to take a hit?
-
I think the biggest problem is no the speed but actually the equipment, it limits the arm movement which might make it harder to do better tackling. Also they need to start pushing for people not to jump on guys that are already on the ground, that's totally unnecessary.
-
I think the biggest problem is no the speed but actually the equipment, it limits the arm movement
Not that I've ever seen.
-
What about redesigning the helmets? I dont have any ideas of my own, but something that gives a better landing when hitting the ground, but still safe enough to take a hit?
What what I understand, they're trying desperately to do this. The NFL signed a deal in the late 80's to make Riddell the official helmet of the league, and then renegotiated the contract to that exclusivity would end. Considering what it probably took to make Riddell to agree to this, it's obviously important to the league that the different manufacturers compete to make a better product.
The problem is that they haven't found it yet. And from what I hear, there's no meaningful progress.
Also they need to start pushing for people not to jump on guys that are already on the ground, that's totally unnecessary.
This is really tough, because what happens is that a defender will already be in his tackling motion against the QB, but not make the hit until it's out of the QB's hands. And now it's a flag for the defender. It's not really fair.
I'm sure there's a solution out there, but it's probably really tough to figure out.
-
In the end, it's a simple question of acceleration/deceleration. The head is essentially a sphere on a pivot (your neck), and given enough impact it will accelerate enough (which is what causes the concussions). A helmet has as its main function the distribution of an impact over your whole head (so that a pointy object doesn't break through your skull). The secondary function is to even out the acceleration, but that can only be done over that tiny gap between the inside of the helmet and your skull. You can do some evening out, but in the end there's a physical limit, unless you increase that gap. Which means, the only way to improve the helmets would be to make them significantly bigger. Think Lord Helmet.
And now I want to see Football being played with Lord Helmet style outfits.
-
Change will have to start at the youth level, and either football will self-correct, or it won't and it'll go away. I read a while back that one of the primary reasons that the FB position had disappeared was because it disappeared at the highschool level. Nowadays you have to convert a TE rather than draft somebody who's been doing it for 10 years. The rest of the positions could face a similar fate. As more and more parents start to forbid their kids from playing, the talent that the NFL can draw from will diminish. My guess is that as a result of this some new "Safety-oriented" youth leagues will pop up and those will create different types of players down the road.
Of course the other possibility is that the only people who grow up playing football are monsters, encouraged by their hypermasculine fathers to be as sadistic as possible, leading to a future where only the crazed and suicidal can make a career out of it. Not sure which would be more entertaining.
-
I think the biggest problem is no the speed but actually the equipment, it limits the arm movement
Not that I've ever seen.
Not for the game as it's played nowadays but what I was trying to say is that it looks to me that it's hard to go for a softer and more technical tackle with the armor. The way I see it a clean tackle requires for you to bump the other guy using your shoulder to get him off balance while at the same time being able to surround the guys legs to prevent him from re-gaining it. Not sure how easy that is with the shoulder pads, maybe it's just my impression.
-
I think that most sports evolve and as much as I don't like the tone of new rules and how it bogs down the game, it is what it is and I need to adapt to the changes.
I like Soccer and been to many Revolution games and even the 0-0 game were exciting.