Why Isn't American Football More Popular Outside of America?

[Nekov]

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. 

[TheVoxyn]

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.

[hefdaddy42]

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.

[Fourth Horseman]

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)

[Fluffy Lothario]

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.

[Sigz]

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.

[Fluffy Lothario]

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.

[TheVoxyn]

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?

[cyberdrummer]

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.

[hefdaddy42]

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.

[TheVoxyn]

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.

[hefdaddy42]

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.

[TheVoxyn]

The thing is, cricket isn't internationally popular either. Only the UK and former colonies really practice the sport.

[6sAllTheWay]

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!

[yorost]

@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.

[rumborak]

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.

[King Postwhore]

Both different but you have to give it up for the strikers in soccer.  Sprinting all the time.  That's stamina.

[TheVoxyn]

Cyclists, getting on a bike and cycling 150+km every day for more than half a month.

[bosk1]

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.

[eric42434224]

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?

[Nekov]

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.

[eric42434224]

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.

[bosk1]

Swimmers?

[eric42434224]

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.

[rumborak]

Hockey as in ice hockey, or field hockey?

[Jaffa]

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.

[lonestar]

I had actually heard some time back that motocross riders were the most fit.

[eric42434224]

@ Rumby   

@ Jaffa, no it was a long time ago, and I read it in a magazine article that was quoting the study.

[GuineaPig]

I think Jaffa's referring to this.

Boxing was determined to be the most physically demanding sport overall, with hockey coming in second (and American football third).

[eric42434224]

I think Jaffa's referring to this.

Yes, the study was very similar to that.

[cramx3]

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.

[Implode]

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?

[hefdaddy42]

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. 

[lonestar]

College football games aren't just sporting events.  They are the most awesome spectacle there is.

fix'd

[Nekov]

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.