ESPN, World Cup, The US

[Adam Wrong]

Both above comments qft

[Bryan Payne]

They didn't even care about it then, winning that event didn't raise the profile of it in the United States a bit... so no, it's not really an accurate statement at all.  But again, not on uncommon one to to used to respond to the US not warming up to  this game as a whole.  You don't flip a switch and suddenly say "hey this sport is awesome" not when you like other things and haven't been exposed to a sport enough to get an appreciation for it.  Soccer/football just has no cultural history in the United States, it's role is taken up by different parts of this country by other sports that already have legions of rabid fans.  You could easily say that the reason Europeans haven't warmed up to baseball is that they are shit at it, but that wouldn't be any more fair of a statement.

I realize that saying that's the only reason we don't like it makes you feel better, but again, it doesn't make it true.  And it's not no one likes a loser, it's no one likes someone who is perceived not to have tried.  Otherwise the Cubs (and redsox until a few years ago) would never have had any fans at all... which is far from the case.. and as Doug will tell you.. The Cleveland Browns.  The "underdog" is iconic in American sports as it is in most places. 

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

FOOTBALL: Played by the entire world and the most popular sport in the entire world

BASEBALL: Playerd by America, some Latin American teams and Japan

Thats the difference.

[Bryan Payne]

Both games also have roots dating all the way back to the 12th century, but that's neither here nor  there.   The popularity of the sport now  is immaterial to the problem.  If if everyone else in the world decided beach volleyball was the next big thing would England suddenly just universally like it?  Of course not it would take time... if it ever happened.

Soccer became a real organized sport around 1860's...  I think it's safe to say that the US was preoccupied and had a vested interest  at that time of rejecting anything "British"  (lot of dates, but '63 is generally considered when the first official rules were codified).  By then baseball and football (american)-(albeit in a form that has little in common with the game now- 1892 is when it started resembling)  were already popular here in the US in fact, in 1919, philosopher Morris Raphael Cohen described baseball as America's national religion.  Add to that that it would be impossible for soccer to ever have the cultural relevance given the history.. racial integration of baseball etc etc and so forth.. and that it wasn't really until WWII after our Civil War that we "stuck our heads out of the rabbit hole" so to speak and you can see why the sport never caught on.  Doesn't mean it won't, but it's going to take longer as it took until the 80's for most of us to stop saying "What's the World Cup?"  and THAT... yes that is a marketing problem when people don't even know what an event is.

But in regards to where baseball is played you did forget South Korea and China, Israel, and Taiwan which all have professional baseball leagues now.  So basically it's only Europe and Africa who don't play it... everyone else does.  There are is a professional Dutch and Italian league... though granted it's comparatively not  very popular.  Not compared to how Latin America and Asia has taken to the game. But the International Baseball Federation (IBAF) formed in 1938 which governs international baseball has  as of 2009, the IBAF has 117 member countries.  Not the size of scale of FIFA, however characterizing it as a localized sport is no longer accurate.

Money is also a hurdle.  MLS, the primary league in the US for fubol.  It obviously the key to making the sport popular in the US.. if it does well so will Soccer as a whole, otherwise it will forever be a niche sport.  From it's inception until 2004 (the Adu bubble), MLS lost over 350billion dollars.  Where as MLB made 6 billion dollars.  You want to talk about a marketing problem... THERE is your marketing problem.  They have the penetrate the American mind-set that it's a kids game by exposing them to the professional one and that's an uphill battle when getting tv time on a non-spanish language channel is very tough.  I think ultimately it will become popular in the US, but it'll probably take another couple generations before American's truly embrace it to the degree say England or Italy does; though I expect progress to be made in my lifetime.  Note. the riot's don't help Soccer's case any...  well not outside of Philly anyway.   

[Adam Wrong]

I think you are trying to avoid points by bringing up history AGAIN Bryan. The fact remains that the USA is pretty much one of the few countries to have little interest in football despite your team improving in ability and this can be attributed to your team not being 'the best' One of my favourite players is American (he is a Fulham player so woot) and yet he is not cared for over the pond.

Australia and NZ have increased their popularity in Football in recent years as their ability has improved. NZ are still regarded as minnows but you can't deny their fan base at the world cup is large and knowledgable. South African fans are passionate.

The US don't care for second place. Athletics for example has drifted to the back burner since Marion Jones turned out to be a roid fan, Michael Johnson retired and the only star you have is not highly regarded as he is the second fastest runner in the world as opposed to the fastest.

To endure a team that more than like end up empty handed is seen as a waste of time for the US. The knowledge they possess of football is that they aren't the best. The interest in the Confederations cup was huge right up until the second half of the final when Brazil woke up and won.

When you lose at golf, it is notoriously with sour grapes or just swept under the carpet (See any European won Ryder cup for instance)

Football is a game where you have an empassioned following for virtually every team no matter how good or rich they are. The richer and better the greater the fan base obviously but you can happily go to the 4th tier of football and see a couple of thousand fans in the pissing rain watching a goaless draw with Rochdale going on. US don't have that patience.

US Sports are much more commercially orientated. Football obviously is but is pretty much the most commercial sport we have and it is a fraction of what occurs in US Sports.

Bloody New York Post ran a headline that stated the US won 1-1 against England!

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

Both games also have roots dating all the way back to the 12th century, but that's neither here nor  there.   The popularity of the sport now  is immaterial to the problem.  If if everyone else in the world decided beach volleyball was the next big thing would England suddenly just universally like it?  Of course not it would take time... if it ever happened.

Soccer became a real organized sport around 1860's...  I think it's safe to say that the US was preoccupied and had a vested interest  at that time of rejecting anything "British"  (lot of dates, but '63 is generally considered when the first official rules were codified).  By then baseball and football (american)-(albeit in a form that has little in common with the game now- 1892 is when it started resembling)  were already popular here in the US in fact, in 1919, philosopher Morris Raphael Cohen described baseball as America's national religion.  Add to that that it would be impossible for soccer to ever have the cultural relevance given the history.. racial integration of baseball etc etc and so forth.. and that it wasn't really until WWII after our Civil War that we "stuck our heads out of the rabbit hole" so to speak and you can see why the sport never caught on.  Doesn't mean it won't, but it's going to take longer as it took until the 80's for most of us to stop saying "What's the World Cup?"  and THAT... yes that is a marketing problem when people don't even know what an event is.

But in regards to where baseball is played you did forget South Korea and China, Israel, and Taiwan which all have professional baseball leagues now.  So basically it's only Europe and Africa who don't play it... everyone else does.  There are is a professional Dutch and Italian league... though granted it's comparatively not  very popular.  Not compared to how Latin America and Asia has taken to the game. But the International Baseball Federation (IBAF) formed in 1938 which governs international baseball has  as of 2009, the IBAF has 117 member countries.  Not the size of scale of FIFA, however characterizing it as a localized sport is no longer accurate.

Money is also a hurdle.  MLS, the primary league in the US for fubol.  It obviously the key to making the sport popular in the US.. if it does well so will Soccer as a whole, otherwise it will forever be a niche sport.  From it's inception until 2004 (the Adu bubble), MLS lost over 350billion dollars.  Where as MLB made 6 billion dollars.  You want to talk about a marketing problem... THERE is your marketing problem.  They have the penetrate the American mind-set that it's a kids game by exposing them to the professional one and that's an uphill battle when getting tv time on a non-spanish language channel is very tough.  I think ultimately it will become popular in the US, but it'll probably take another couple generations before American's truly embrace it to the degree say England or Italy does; though I expect progress to be made in my lifetime.  Note. the riot's don't help Soccer's case any...  well not outside of Philly anyway.   

I am just going to start calling you Wikipayne

The history lesson is irrelevant its about culutural perception of the game not about anything else.

[Bryan Payne]

I think you are trying to avoid points by bringing up history AGAIN Bryan.

You haven't made a point to this point, just made a broad sweeping statement with little basis on fact or history.  The segment of the US that likes hockey still likes hockey despite the fact that we never win that either... the Canadians are clearly the best and the US ending up in  the Gold Medal game is considered an upset.  

The whole point of this was marketing and historical/cultural factors being why the game has never caught on... you brought up the sweeping statement about "losers."  Which other than repeating it over and over... I can match you instance for instance showing that you're incorrect with that assumption.  

For example the issue with sprinting  came at a time with  American sports in general is being rocked with the steroid issue to begin with... so of course those revelations about those specific athletes had an impact on that sport.   If you found out that David Beckham had been deliberately throwing games after years of similar revelations about refs and players... there would likely be a backlash in England as well.  How big?  Useless to speculate at this point, but there would be one.


It's not irrelevant Ian.  Simply referring to several comments  in regards to baseball being a sport only American's play and highlighting the history of sports in the us.  Most of the African countries that sweepingly adopted baseball had no organized sports previous to futbol so of course they adapted to it quite quickly.  Expecting the same thing from a country with major sports obsessions of their own for other sports is a little silly when you really look at it  objectively.  You don't wake up one day and decide a sport with no tradition or history or attachment to the culture is suddenly relevant, that takes time.  And is a process that is still just beginning in the US.  It has nothing to do with "American only likes a winner" which is pretty much absurd.

More than "winning" What it needs in the US to succeed is a "face of soccer" so to speak.  A player who is considered one of the best (not necessarily the best) to lend credibility to the sport and be it's up front visible spokesman.  Donovan is probably the best American right now, but he's not the kind of dynamic personality that is really going to draw people.

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

To be fair it has everything to do with Americans liking winners...I know a few other countries play a lot of baseball. Japan for example it is MASSIVE there and I have acknowledged both its popularity in Japan and Latin America.

With the exception of baseball which I know has a reason for being called the World Series outside of pure arrogance. Why do the NBA Champions or the NFL Superbowl winners refer to themselves as WORLD CHAMPIONS?

If thats not a taste of American arrogance to sports and WINNERS BEING IMPORTANT! I dont know what is.

Your comments about Hockey though dont really do anything apart from help the case Americans only like winners. The USA might not be as good as some nations like Canada, but they are competitive. In soccer they arent as competitive on the internantional stage...hence they dont give a fuck.

[Cory]

Your comments about Hockey though dont really do anything apart from help the case Americans only like winners. The USA might not be as good as some nations like Canada, but they are competitive. In soccer they arent as competitive on the internantional stage...hence they dont give a fuck.

QFT.

US are good in hockey, they're constantly making the big medal games, so I dont get where this point comes from. Its always between Canada, USA, and Russia, and the odd time Sweden.....but who gives a fuck about hockey?

Its like Ricky Bobby for the perspective from the americans. If you ain't first, yer last. If they're can't win, they'll say piss on it.

[Bryan Payne]

Yes we're "good" Cory, but we're not "the best" which is what they were saying was the only thing that mattered in the US.  One of the comments said that they don't care of you're in second.  Obviously we do where the Olympics are concerned as going in the 'experts' gave the US only an outside chance of getting a medal, yet every game of the hockey rivaled the NBA finals for ratings.

I still think you're oversimplifying the issue, there is more to it than that... and I think you know it.   This same thing  would have happened with most of the European Countries standing alone if one of the big three sports in the US had swept the globe, because they already had the all consuming cultural passion in place.  It would (and is) taking time.  Basketball is becoming popular in several european countries... but like soccer it's taking time to develop a fan base.  You don't see a sport once and instantly become a rabid fan.  In most other countries they're raised to idolize futbol players and with rabid attachment to local clubs.  That doesn't happen here, thus the sport isn't as accepted yet.

The links between sports and culture and the cultural importance countries put on given sports can't be overestimated they come to identify the country it becomes part of what it means to be English, or American, or whatever.  And that linkage is far more important than a perceived arrogance. 

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

Basketball isnt becoming popular its like a second sport in loads of European countries. So how the Lakers call themselves the WORLD CHAMPIONS when they havent beaten some of the top teams of Europe smacks of that arrogance again.

Thats how I see it anyways.

[Bryan Payne]

...becoming a second sport... as opposed to the virtually unknown it was fifty years ago?

Point being the timeline for  acceptance of a sport by a country that has... established sports needs to be adjusted.  It doesn't happen overnight. 

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

...becoming a second sport... as opposed to the virtually unknown it was fifty years ago?

Point being the timeline for  acceptance of a sport by a country that has... established sports needs to be adjusted.  It doesn't happen overnight. 

I think the point your missing is you have NO CLUE about acceptance of sport outside the United States. Yet I think given the fact that I have lived in the USA I might have a clue speaking to Americans how they view things such as soccer.

Wanna keep dodging that Laker and NFL point as well?

[Bryan Payne]

As opposed to the seven years I spent living in Germany attending a Brit run school?   

There's not really a point to rebut.  Unless you really thing that one of those teams could actually beat the Lakers as they stand right now.  Is the name odd?  Ok sure.  But as the expression predates the acceptance of these sports by the rest of the world... it was fairly accurate and now historically entrenched.

[Ian "Wolfie" Trumps]

As opposed to the seven years I spent living in Germany attending a Brit run school?   

There's not really a point to rebut.  Unless you really thing that one of those teams could actually beat the Lakers as they stand right now.  Is the name odd?  Ok sure.  But as the expression predates the acceptance of these sports by the rest of the world... it was fairly accurate and now historically entrenched.

Germany in a British run school aint the same thing mate and yes I think some of those teams could give American club teams a run for their money as proven when the USA Basketball mens team has failed to win Gold medals.