Soccer vs. The USA

[paynomind]

I was sorry to see the other thread disintegrate, and had a lengthy post at the ready when it got locked. Lets try to keep this one to the subject, so we don't hear the click of the thread-cuffs on our wrists.

___________________________________________________

Here is my opinion: If the MLS were going to go away, it would have by now. The fact that teams have been around as long as they have, losing money, makes me think that the owner(s) will continue to stick with it. Maybe they don?t PLAN on making money. Maybe they just love soccer. Maybe they have a 15 year plan. Maybe they have a 20 year plan.

The XFL is an interesting comparison. Lets talk about that. It was owned by a guy who WANTED to make money. He even said so. When his league didn't make money, he shut it down. The fact that the MLS teams are still here makes me think that they are here for the long haul. If all they wanted was a business opportunity to make dolla-dolla bills, yall.. they would have bowed out by now, I think.

I applaud the owners, and hope they stick around, and make soccer work in the U.S. I think it can, and I think it will succeed.

I disagree with folks who say that soccer doesn?t translate well to TV. I have enjoyed quite a few exciting games on TV. The Europeans watch a ton of it on TV. Now, don?t get me wrong. I?m not trying to say WE should like it because the Europeans like it. I?m just saying ? plenty of folks think it translates well enough to TV. Maybe it just isn?t a game you adopt via TV, but once you love it, you watch it on TV.

Are there folks in the US who don?t like the game? Absolutely. Are those numbers going down drastically generation after generation? I think so. I think there are fewer and fewer folks who don?t like soccer, and I believe when the sports media begins treating soccer as an equal, viewership, attendance, and support will go up amazingly.

That, my friends, is what I believe the secret to be. When sportscenter shows all the MLS scores every week, that?s when soccer will then follow with popularity.

What do you think could make soccer become a big fan-sport in the US? Or, why do you think it never will be?

[Waffles]

I think the notion of professional soccer being irrelevant in America is largely self-perpetuating (as with many perceptions that effect and are effected by the media). If professional soccer is percieved as being irrelevant, the media treats it as such, thus furthering the perception of irrelevance, and the media treats it as such, and so on and so forth...

I agree that the fact that it hasn't passed yet points to the likelyhood of it's staying long-term. Our World Cup run in 2002 was pretty popular and exciting, and a good showing in either the Olympics or in the '06 World Cup could go to great lengths to really establishing soccer in America.

The MLS is pretty well set up to succeed if they can build off some kind of American international success; they play the bulk of their season in the summer, when their only real sports competition is baseball.

It was encouraging to see the ChampionsWorld tour come within less than a hundred fans of breaking the Giants Stadium attendance record last year, which may suggest that American fans may come once the quality of play is at an optimal level. I'd love to see a time when the MLS is on par with some of the European leagues.

[See Red]

I think our World Cup Run in 2002 is fairly irrelevant. For the most part, Americans didn't watch the games, even though it was mostly because of the time of the games. There was also no major let down when America didn't win it. It leads me to conclude that it was being cheered for just because it was America, regardless of the sport. I'm sure if America does good enough to look like they may compete for a championship in that cricket thing that's coming up, it will get publicity too.

If I had to change the game to become popular in the US, I would have to look into everyway possible to raise the speed of the game and the scores of the games. I have watched soccer games in the past and I feel incredibly let down when I watch for 90+ minutes to see 2 goals scored. I also get confused when I see them playing and the clock is stopped at 45 or 90 minutes.

Oh, I would also give every team really really really hot dancers, and keep the camersa focused mostly on them throughout the course of the game.

*edit - additionally -- The DC United vs. San Jose (Quakes?) only managed a 1.4 in terms of ratings -- even WITH the media that a 14 year old soccer phenom managed to capture.

[Saintsfan]

I don't think soccer will challenge football in the US anytime soon, but I do think it will grow in popularity. Its all part of a wider phenomen called globalisation- the products we buy the films we watch etc are becoming increasingly similar.

The problem for soccer in the US is that, at least anytime soon, it won't have its national league as the best in the world, and the US likes to think of itself as the best in the world, even if it has to import czech hockey players and croatian basketball players to be able to do that! The MLS isn't big enough to draw the giants of world soccer.

As for a comparison between XFL and MLS well thats just laughable. But it does show that major sports leagues, in general don't run at a massive profit!

[See Red]

the US likes to think of itself as the best in the world, even if it has to import czech hockey players and croatian basketball players to be able to do that!

In our defense... we don't force players onto planes to come into our country to play in our professional sports leagues. THEY have to enter the draft, we don't just draft em' as young kids and ship em' over here when we think they're ready.

Also, when we compete against the world in sports, are athletes are Americans. We don't force Yao Ming or Peter Forsberg to suit up in Red, White, and Blue and play for the United States in the olympics or any other international tournaments.

Besides, we are the best in the world.

[Saintsfan]

the US likes to think of itself as the best in the world, even if it has to import czech hockey players and croatian basketball players to be able to do that!

In our defense... we don't force players onto planes to come into our country to play in our professional sports leagues. THEY have to enter the draft, we don't just draft em' as young kids and ship em' over here when we think they're ready.

Also, when we compete against the world in sports, are athletes are Americans. We don't force Yao Ming or Peter Forsberg to suit up in Red, White, and Blue and play for the United States in the olympics or any other international tournaments.

Besides, we are the best in the world.

Absolutely, my point was more that that won't happen in soccer because there is competition in Europe, which there isn't in Hockey or Basketball, certainly not competition with BIG BIG bucks involved. The NBA and NHL realise that to be the best league in the world they need to import the best players in the world, and fair play to them. MLS doesn't have the money to do that, and won't for a while.

[Puckguy14]

Trust me though, if MLS had the money to land David Beckham, put him in Los Angeles or with the MetroStars (who for some reason are just MetroStars ) the league would get a boost. But it would take a miracle for that to happen.

MLS is fine, I know it wants to grow but baby steps is likely the better way as opposed to expansion ala the NHL.

[paynomind]

The scorign thing is something people bring up a lot, but it doesn't hold water. There are a BUNCH of hockey crazy folks on this board, and hockey games end 2-0 3-1 etc, just like soccer games do. Watch the MLS sometime, a lot fo those games end 6-4.

Soccer, and the beauty of it may need explained to some folks, but there are gorgeous and exciting plays all the time, without a goal. Hockey fans can transition quicker than others, as the games are similar.

Indoor soccer may be the way into people's living rooms, as it is MUCH faster, much higher scoring, much more short-attention-span-amwerican friendly.

[Saintsfan]

The scorign thing is something people bring up a lot, but it doesn't hold water. There are a BUNCH of hockey crazy folks on this board, and hockey games end 2-0 3-1 etc, just like soccer games do. Watch the MLS sometime, a lot fo those games end 6-4.

Soccer, and the beauty of it may need explained to some folks, but there are gorgeous and exciting plays all the time, without a goal. Hockey fans can transition quicker than others, as the games are similar.

Indoor soccer may be the way into people's living rooms, as it is MUCH faster, much higher scoring, much more short-attention-span-amwerican friendly.

I think this is the mistake that is made in the US, the best way to watch soccer is in its purist form. Forget indoor, forget 6 a side or whatever. Eventually, if it is well managed, particularly with modern immigration trends into the US from Latin America, soccer will make an impact.

But Puckguy is right, it has to be done slowly.

[Phil]

The scorign thing is something people bring up a lot, but it doesn't hold water. There are a BUNCH of hockey crazy folks on this board, and hockey games end 2-0 3-1 etc, just like soccer games do. Watch the MLS sometime, a lot fo those games end 6-4.

This is true, but...

Hockey is 60 minutes, soccer is approx 90. (Less breaks in soccer, but the breaks are good for hockey, as they give players a chance to rest, increasing the game speed, and give the fans a break before the next 20 minutes of action.) Actual real time required for a game is similar.

Hockey players skate faster than soccer players run.

Pucks fly faster than soccer balls.

Hockey players hit harder than soccer players.

I agree that soccer requires the better athletes (45 minutes non-stop ain't easy), and there's probably more strategy involved, however it's more of an acquired taste.

[yh]

So long as the MLS doesn't build its business plan around the expectations to fill 70,000 seat stadiums on a regular basis, post TV ratings rivaling those of the NFL and be able to sign every single world superstar to huge contracts, it will have a future. It's going to be a very modest future and will never get to the size or global reach of the NFL or the NBA, but it will get by just fine. The key, I believe, is building fan-friendly, but not necessarily colossal or super high tech stadiums that seat 20-30,000 fans and keeping those seats as close to filled as possible. With manageable payrolls, ticket costs will stay in a range that will make the game affordable family entertainment. And as long as the league doesn't mind occupying broadcast time that doesn't compete with other "big time" sports, there will always be some network and cable channel willing to put the games on television but it must be understood that they can't go looking for monstrous TV contracts either.

The NASL was a great league and lasted almost 20 years - what killed it was that as the first major soccer boom hit the US in the mid 70's, the NASL attempted to upshift the league into a peer of the NFL, NBA and MLB - a strategy which worked to some extent and for a brief time in markets like New York, Tampa Bay, Vancouver and Dallas, but which ended up burning up good, but significantly less successful franchises and eventually cratered even the strongest teams. The NASL moved too fast to establish itself as a premier sports "destination" and burned itself up after a fairly decent early existence. MLS has managed to keep things pretty cool and mainstream - they acknowledged that their first expansion was only marginally successful and folded its two worst performers and is only now starting to reevaluate modest expansion and is doing so very carefully. Investors are willing to put money up for smaller stadiums - that to me says that the business plan involved this time around is more realistic and feasible. MLS is in its ninth season - by this point in the NASL's history the league had already doubled in size. MLS is managing its growth to ensure a competitive talent pool and keeping demand as high as it can. The most appealing aspect to MLS, from a businessman's perspective, is that the principals involved seem to be exercising an appropriate degree of patience and are willing to grow the game at a reasonable rate. Let's not forget that the NFL was around for over 40 years before it began to truly blossom into the type of entity that rivaled or even surpassed baseball as America's game. I don't think MLS will ever reach that level, but most importantly, I don't think that is their asipiration and that may be the key to its success.

[Discrim]

I think this is the mistake that is made in the US, the best way to watch soccer is in its purist form. Forget indoor, forget 6 a side or whatever. Eventually, if it is well managed, particularly with modern immigration trends into the US from Latin America, soccer will make an impact.

But Puckguy is right, it has to be done slowly.

mistake...i wouldn't think so, but that's just me. i guess it just boils down to a love of sport and a state of mind, mine being they're still kickin a ball and trying to hit twine, regardless of whether it's Man U-Arsenal or Milwaukee Wave vs Philly Kixx.

no hard feelings, and besides, MLS has a model to learn from...in this case, the NASL, in what not to do. don't grow too fast; focus on soccer, the 11-man version-let the MISL be the main indoor league; focus on being the top soccer league in the States, don't try to be the NFL or MLB unless ya wanna fold. other plop i may have forgotten.

this step is optional but highly recommended: make some kind of deal with Pepe Pinton and REVIVE THE COSMOS!!! using any means necessary, revive the Cosmos and put em in The City.