Bullshit about soccer in the US........ [Archive]

FinnJL

07-10-2007, 10:05 PM

This is NOT a pro/con-soccer thread, and i wouldnt like it to turn into one......

Here in europe its really "hip" to say that americans dont like soccer because they dont have the attention span to watch a "free-flowing" game, or that they want loads of scoring or that they get bored when seemingly nothing is happening for a while.....

I used to believe this, until i saw my first game of baseball......Baseball is relatively low-scoring, accompanied by the fact, that there can be several 15-30 minute passages during the game, where the first baseman scratching his balls for the 15th time is the most exciting that happens. And in my view(not trying to bash the sport), when something happens, like a homerun or a double play, it isnt really THAT exciting anyway.

The real reason why americans dont like soccer that much, is simply that it is not "americas game". When americans were young and playing in the yard you were dreaming of throwing that "hail mary" in the last seconds of the SuperBowl or hitting a homerun in game seven of the World Series. Just like the canadian kids are dreaming of scoring an overtime winner in game seven of the Stanley Cup finals. And even if loads of americans play soccer when they are kids, they dont dream of scoring any late winners in the World Cup, as they are simply playing for fun as they are too young to play football.

And if you think about it, is it any wonder that americans dont have any time for soccer, when they are already the worlds best in so many other sports. Why would you watch i.e. the MLS(a mediocre league, with leftovers from other leagues and not even the best US players), if you can watch your own countrymen play for the best teams in the world in MLB, NFL and the NBA. This is probably the reason why hockey is not nearly as big as the other "big" four leagues. Most of the players are from outside the US and most americans havent grown up playing hockey and dreaming about any Stanley Cups(except for some parts of the US maybe). As simple as that.

I do not understand why so many of my fellow europeans&non-americans see it as such a problem that the US doesnt care about soccer the way the rest of the world does. Why arent people harassing the UK for not caring about basketball, which is another true global sport. Why are the english watching some sports like rugby and cricket that are played seriously in a handful of countries instead of basketball? Because its not a british game, just like soccer isnt american.

Soccer is great, am.football is great, basketball is great, baseball is (probably) great. Lets just watch our sports, and watch them with a passion, and not constantly bash sports that other people like. Sorry about bashing baseball, but i just cant get what is so exciting about it.......

navid

07-10-2007, 11:17 PM

no shit sherlock

willsk84food.

07-10-2007, 11:26 PM

Great post. That is good reasoning on the whole "we don't give a fuck about soccer" idea.

poopchow

07-10-2007, 11:37 PM

its a good thoughtful post.

For americans, there is no reason to care for soccer. Give us the world cup and many of us will watch just for fun of it because there is so much excitement generated from one event.

Also, its true, there doesnt have to be much scoring, but it should feel as though the game is actually moving and that the defensive battle can be appreciated. I dont like soccer much, not 100% sure why, but if the players dont look like they are good, ie turning the ball over/ no amazing plays that we can really appreciate, then we wont watch.

AsHopeDies

07-11-2007, 09:52 AM

Shymega

07-11-2007, 11:25 AM

This country does not know what "good soccer" is. Don't watch the MLS or USA vs. Ivory Coast World Cup matches. Watch the English Premier League and Champions League games. If you're still not a fan, than you have no pulse, whatsoever.

poopchow

07-11-2007, 03:55 PM

I think it's really silly for anyone to say they can speak for people and say they know why, as a country, "we wont watch". No offense poopchow, but I believe it's thinking like that that warrants the OPs post. When it comes to the popularity of professional soccer in the US, I always ask, what other country has 5+ major sports? I think it actually has very little to do with the game itself. But I agree with the OP. Americans take a piece of ownership in Baseball, Football, and Basketball, so they are inclined to like those. Hockey and golf are really popular here too, but they are imports. Tennis and motorsports have a large impact in the sports market. There alone are 7 established, successful professional sports endeavors in the US. Is there room for another? There obviously is with the growth of the MLS, the increase in interest in the National team and the spike in popularity of the USSL back in the 70s. They just have to find the right formula.

None taken. Like i said, i cant really pin point the exact reason why i dont really care much for soccer. Americans simply cant get excited over it. And part of that can be because of the popularity of other sports, but maybe only a small amount. NASCAR, although mostly in the middle states has taken a boom in the past few years, poker (not athletically speaking, but its on ESPN) has been getting huge numbers. Look at the olympics. I bet you dont have many track and field fans here, or curling, or whatever, but so many people will watch that. Its only happens once every two years making it that more important, but the fact is, we can tolerate other sports and we can watch the 'lesser' sports just because the novelty of it and the excitement the events generate.

Americans have the room for soccer teams i believe, but we have no reason to get excited over it. And when i say that the game should be moving, i dont mean it as in people need to score or there needs to be breakaways every second. I mean that it should seem as though there is more fluidity and consistency in the game.... i think. Instead of a 3 second possesion where someone lets the ball squirt away then the other team has it for another 10 seconds before the same thing happens, there needs to be a better feel for the whole team concept or the fact that someone is in control.

If you look at the popular 3 sports, baseball, football, basketball, each team has their possession to do something. If you look at the sports that arent as popular, hockey, soccer, tennis, those sports are so back and forth, you dont feel as though you have missed something if you dont watch.

gigglemuffin

07-11-2007, 03:59 PM

I'm American and all I care about is soccer. Your point is somewhat flawed.

lordfarquad

07-11-2007, 04:19 PM

No, baseball sucks fuckin ass.

AsHopeDies

07-11-2007, 04:35 PM

I'm American and all I care about is soccer. Your point is somewhat flawed.

Are you talking about the original post? Because his point was that there are a lot of bullshit "reasons" why Americans don't like soccer, and that the formula is there for Americans to like soccer. I don't think pointing out the number of Americans that love soccer does anything to disprove his point.

modogthemonkey

07-11-2007, 04:45 PM

None taken. Like i said, i cant really pin point the exact reason why i dont really care much for soccer. Americans simply cant get excited over it. And part of that can be because of the popularity of other sports, but maybe only a small amount. NASCAR, although mostly in the middle states has taken a boom in the past few years, poker (not athletically speaking, but its on ESPN) has been getting huge numbers. Look at the olympics. I bet you dont have many track and field fans here, or curling, or whatever, but so many people will watch that. Its only happens once every two years making it that more important, but the fact is, we can tolerate other sports and we can watch the 'lesser' sports just because the novelty of it and the excitement the events generate.

Americans have the room for soccer teams i believe, but we have no reason to get excited over it. And when i say that the game should be moving, i dont mean it as in people need to score or there needs to be breakaways every second. I mean that it should seem as though there is more fluidity and consistency in the game.... i think. Instead of a 3 second possesion where someone lets the ball squirt away then the other team has it for another 10 seconds before the same thing happens, there needs to be a better feel for the whole team concept or the fact that someone is in control.

If you look at the popular 3 sports, baseball, football, basketball, each team has their possession to do something. If you look at the sports that arent as popular, hockey, soccer, tennis, those sports are so back and forth, you dont feel as though you have missed something if you dont watch.

I also think that part of reason is as well,that there are not any big American superstars in the MLS or in the European leagues.If there was some household names like Jordan,Marino(the only big name AF player i know....well and OJ),Babe Ruth,Wayne Gretzky,and so on.That are American born and bread and not imports like Beckham and going further back Pele,Best and Beckenbauer that young kids can look up to and supporters of the teams believe are the best in the world.

An is afterthought is that when MLS teams are big enough.There should be a continental championship in the Americas like the European champions league over here...maybe even a world one would be cool.

Meio

07-11-2007, 05:20 PM

An is afterthought is that when MLS teams are big enough.There should be a continental championship in the Americas like the European champions league over here...maybe even a world one would be cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CONCACAF_Champions%27_Cup_2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Club_World_Cup_2007

Unfortunately US footy is too rubbish to qualify for the Club World Cup, because they get hammered by Mexicans in the CONCOCAF.

modogthemonkey

07-11-2007, 05:34 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CONCACAF_Champions%27_Cup_2007

This is for North America and the Caribbean teams.Like the gold cup it excludes south American teams like Santos and Boca juniors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_Club_World_Cup_2007

Yes but i was thinking of a world league championship,like European champions league.That is season long and not a tournament that lasts two weeks.

Meio

07-12-2007, 06:16 AM

This is for North America and the Caribbean teams.Like the gold cup it excludes south American teams like Santos and Boca juniors.

It includes teams from all over North America if they qualify, South America has it's own continental club tournaments.

Yes but i was thinking of a world league championship,like European champions league.That is season long and not a tournament that lasts two weeks.

Nice idea, but then big clubs will be playing dozens more games a season and each 'World League' game would take up to a week of travel and rest. A cup of the 'continental champions' is the best you can hope for I fear.

cormega

07-13-2007, 01:50 AM

The reason I think people in the States don't like soccer is because they weren'tbought up watching it. Its wierd to them and some Americans think its a sissy game. But on the other hand Canada is booming in soccer. I can say I'm certain Canada will be in the 2010 world cup. Many people might not know this but we have more registered soccer players in this country than hockey I know its a shock. Any experts have predicted in the next 6-10 Soccer will be our game. Its unbelievable here the media is creating a shitfest cause of what happened in the u20s. People actual pay attention here and we have some young talents int he best leagues around the world. For the states I think beckham will just be a fad and people there wont give a shit about any more but I'm hoping im wrong.

4savo4

07-13-2007, 11:26 AM

My theory is that if you look at all top American sports it's all to do with you're hands. They don't use there feet as much, Americans are predijust agaisnt feet. Oj but that is really my theory.

This country does not know what "good soccer" is. Don't watch the MLS or USA vs. Ivory Coast World Cup matches. Watch the English Premier League and Champions League games. If you're still not a fan, than you have no pulse, whatsoever.

That brought a tear to my eye. Not a gay though

QFT Anyway, i feel sorry for Beckham.

wackojacko

07-13-2007, 01:26 PM

A bit off topic but if the States' only sport was soccer I imagine that we would completely and totally dominate all. End of thread.

JLC

07-13-2007, 01:39 PM

A bit off topic but if the States' only sport was soccer I imagine that we would completely and totally dominate all. End of thread.

You could say that about a lot of countries if the only sport there was soccer, they would work just as hard, if not harder.

wackojacko

07-13-2007, 01:41 PM

You could say that about a lot of countries if the only sport there was soccer, they would work just as hard, if not harder.

Who, Canada? Pffft.

AsHopeDies

07-13-2007, 02:21 PM

You could say that about a lot of countries if the only sport there was soccer, they would work just as hard, if not harder.

I think his point, while misguided, is actually a pretty accurate one. Considering size alone, you'd have to think of the sheer pool of athletes you'd have to choose from, it would be massive. Take into account the amazing athletes the states produce in other sports and the melting pot aspect of the states, you'd have to think the formula would be there to create a dominant world power. I realize that all countries have to deal with this to a degree but one could easily argue that it's on a much smaller scale.

That brought a tear to my eye. Not a gay though

QFT Anyway, i feel sorry for Beckham.

Have either of you even seen an MLS game in the last 2 years?

4savo4

07-13-2007, 02:27 PM

Have either of you even seen an MLS game in the last 2 years?

What are you getting at?

MexAmercn_Moose

07-13-2007, 03:29 PM

What are you getting at?

its getting better, obviously it won't be English Premier League good, but its slowly getting there, last night i watched an MLS game and i have to say that i was a little impressed, it has vastly improved since its inaugural sesason

4savo4

07-13-2007, 03:32 PM

If a league rearanges games for a player's arrival, it's not a good league.

AsHopeDies

07-13-2007, 05:14 PM

What are you getting at?

I'm getting at the fact that it isn't nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

If a league rearanges games for a player's arrival, it's not a good league.

What games were rearranged?

4savo4

07-13-2007, 05:31 PM

I'm getting at the fact that it isn't nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

What games were rearranged?

A load of LA Galaxy's games, look at the table.

AsHopeDies

07-15-2007, 08:32 PM

A load of LA Galaxy's games, look at the table.

I'm looking at the schedule now...where's the rearranging?

4savo4

07-15-2007, 08:52 PM

That doesn't tell you, belive me it showed us on sky sports news.

firepiss

07-16-2007, 03:57 AM

Meio

07-16-2007, 07:13 AM

4savo4

07-16-2007, 08:04 AM

JLC

07-16-2007, 08:15 AM

Meio

07-16-2007, 08:40 AM

Why doesn't this guy jism all over F1 or Cricket? Fucking American sports are more complex than non-american sports ROFL.

AsHopeDies

07-16-2007, 10:59 AM

:lmao: :lmao:

It's not complex! Explain formations, offside rule, punishments, rules, then tell us again it's not complex.

you have 10 guys in the field to position however you'd like, you can't be beyond the last defender when the ball is played, you get punished when you do bad shit, rules...all sports have them. I'm just playing devil's advocate here but I think you see where I'm going. These arguments are laughable on each side of them. There are complexities to each sport, but the second you go from singing the praises of your sport to attacking another successful, popular professional sport, you begin to lose credibility.

Did you just say that baseball is more Complex than European Football?

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

Again, I'll play devil's advocate and present you with a similar question as posed by another football/soccer fan.

Explain what a balk is, what's the infield fly rule, signs given by the third base coach complete with keys and indicators and out specific rules, signs given by the catcher for pitches complete with another set of signs for when a runner is on second, signs given by the third baseman or from the dugout in bunt situations, scouting reports, fielder shifts resulting from scouting reports, the rules for when a ball goes out of play during a play, when is it legal for a runner to make contact with a fielder, then tell me baseball isn't complex.

4savo4

07-16-2007, 11:05 AM

you have 10 guys in the field to position however you'd like, you can't be beyond the last defender when the ball is played, you get punished when you do bad shit, rules...all sports have them. I'm just playing devil's advocate here but I think you see where I'm going. These arguments are laughable on each side of them. There are complexities to each sport, but the second you go from singing the praises of your sport to attacking another successful, popular professional sport, you begin to lose credibility.

I accutally never attacked any American sport as i don't know enough about them and i never would really, i was accutally defending football he was saying it isn't complex and that pissed me off a bit. You answering my question is proving that it is complex as any other sport.

AsHopeDies

07-16-2007, 11:07 AM

Yeah...you're right, I don't really know what I was trying to say with that lol. Both sports are very complex...how about that?

Meio

07-16-2007, 11:32 AM

Explain what a balk is, what's the infield fly rule, signs given by the third base coach complete with keys and indicators and out specific rules, signs given by the catcher for pitches complete with another set of signs for when a runner is on second, signs given by the third baseman or from the dugout in bunt situations, scouting reports, fielder shifts resulting from scouting reports, the rules for when a ball goes out of play during a play, when is it legal for a runner to make contact with a fielder, then tell me baseball isn't complex.

Scouting reports?.... LOL What the fuck?

Oh and here's a question about signals. How do Football players know what's about to happen in a set-piece? There are no established signals and players might not speak the same language. How does that work?

Anyway, like I said if Americans were slaves to complexity they'd all give up Baseball for Cricket. Complexity is a bad argument.

USB

07-16-2007, 11:39 AM

Oh and here's a question about signals. How do Football players know what's about to happen in a set-piece? There are no established signals and players might not speak the same language. How does that work?

American football? or english football?

English football they decide for them selfs

American football the coach is mic'd up to the quaterback. i think. How does it work on defence?

Meio

07-16-2007, 11:53 AM

you can't be beyond the last defender when the ball is played,

Played? Played where? What about if I'm returning from an offside position? What about the goalkeeper, is he a defender? Which bit of me is not allowed past the 'last defender'? What if it's the opposition that play the ball?

American football? or english football?

Remind me, what is this thread about again?

English football they decide for them selfs

How naive.

USB

07-16-2007, 12:20 PM

?

They have set plays that they have planned out before hand, but in the match they dont look over to their coach for advice

Meio

07-16-2007, 12:26 PM

Does that make it any less complex?

AsHopeDies

07-16-2007, 01:51 PM

in a word...yes

a set piece in soccer isn't nearly as complex as a play that's run in an American football game. I'm not saying which is better, I'm not saying which is harder etc. I hate the complexity argument...I hate it a lot. But you posed the question.

Scouting reports?.... LOL What the fuck?

Uhh...yes scouting reports. Do you have no better retort than "LOL What the fuck?"

Are you trying to say they don't use scouting reports in football/soccer? They don't view film of the team they are about to play, studying their tendencies and establishing a game plan? Because if you are touting the complexity of the game and laughing at scouting reports, you are contradicting yourself big time.

Meio

07-17-2007, 06:56 AM

Are you trying to say they don't use scouting reports in football/soccer? They don't view film of the team they are about to play, studying their tendencies and establishing a game plan? Because if you are touting the complexity of the game and laughing at scouting reports, you are contradicting yourself big time.

I was laughing at your attempt to use scouting reports as an example of why Baseball was a complex game, do you want to use loan repayments on ground improvements too?

AsHopeDies

07-17-2007, 11:18 AM

I was laughing at your attempt to use scouting reports as an example of why Baseball was a complex game, do you want to use loan repayments on ground improvements too?

considering the fact that the catcher basically has a scouting report for every batter in his head and the fact that the complexities that go into calling a game are directly related to scouting reports, then yeah, it's an example. Baseball is the most statistical/math based sport there is. Scouting reports play a much bigger role in baseball than they do in any other sport. The scouting report of one batter literally changes the way every player approaches his at-bat. From the positioning of players to the way the pitcher pitches them. And these scouting reports not only change from situation to situation on the same batter, but they change from pitch to pitch. Believe me, Jorge Posada knows Manny's tendencies when he's behind in the count, ahead in the count, late in the game/early in the game, close game/down/ahead, etc. The fact that you would laugh at that only shows what little you know about the game.

Meio

07-17-2007, 11:21 AM

considering the fact that the catcher basically has a scouting report for every batter in his head and the fact that the complexities that go into calling a game are directly related to scouting reports, then yeah, it's an example. Baseball is the most statistical/math based sport there is. Scouting reports play a much bigger role in baseball than they do in any other sport. The scouting report of one batter literally changes the way every player approaches his at-bat. From the positioning of players to the way the pitcher pitches them. And these scouting reports not only change from situation to situation on the same batter, but they change from pitch to pitch. Believe me, Jorge Posada knows Manny's tendencies when he's behind in the count, ahead in the count, late in the game/early in the game, close game/down/ahead, etc. The fact that you would laugh at that only shows what little you know about the game.

How do you think the Germans are so good at penalty shoot outs? Scouting and analysis are not a reason for claiming that baseball is especially complex.

AsHopeDies

07-17-2007, 12:02 PM

Meio

07-17-2007, 12:21 PM

Yeah, you got me. Scouting a penalty shot tendency that may happen once every 10 games is the same as tendencies for every batter in every situation. What's sad is your complete inability to concede a point. I'm not saying baseball is better, I'm not saying baseball is more complex, I'm not saying football/soccer isn't complex and I'm not saying it's not a great game. But you can't even concede on little point about anything other than soccer. I love both sports, but scouting and scouting reports have a much larger impact on baseball than practically any other sport and it is an extremely valid point when it comes to the complexity of the game. Get over it.

Yeah, I'm just picking on that point like a scab. Once there is a point to be made (in this case originally that Association Football lacks complexity) I'll keep going at it, highlighting inconsistencies in peoples' arguments. What can I say, that's me.

I would say that the statistical 'complexity' demonstrated by such things as scouting might seem to be more apparent in Baseball than other sports because they go on about it more. Seems that US based sports love stats and coverage is stat heavy. That's not to say that pros in other sports (such as Football) don't enter into complex analyses of their opponents, and that media coverage never makes any mention of some figures, but they simply don't go on about it as much.

I might argue that Association Football is a more complex game than Baseball simply because there is much more going on, far more factors to consider, in any single game.

AsHopeDies

07-17-2007, 01:34 PM

I might argue that Association Football is a more complex game than Baseball simply because there is much more going on, far more factors to consider, in any single game.

But that's just it, you are throwing the word 'simply' around here far too easily. It can very easily be argued that there is much more going on in a baseball game and that there are far more factors to consider, you are taking for granted things that simply aren't true. AT BEST it's debatable. That being said, it's really not worth doing. The moment you take the time to dig deep into the internationally popular sports, you can see that they are all valid and that there is more to them then common spectators will ever know. It pisses me off when people get into these pissing contests about sports without giving any credibility to other sports, it's laughable at best.

Meio

07-17-2007, 01:47 PM

Well I used 'simply' in that sentence to refer to the fact that there are more people on the playing field at any one time, and you are likely to have 20 guys moving tactically and strategically (if it's down one end that would be 21 while the other not-engaged goal keeper smokes fags and plays on his PSP) all at once and this can go on for tens of minutes before a break in play. This makes Football more complex than Baseball in many respects.
You could try and break this down to stats such as individual player's prefered passing feet and passing types, and I'm sure to some extent the pros do, but that doesn't capture the true complexity of the game. There are bigger fish to fry and all them stats get in the way of focussing on what is important to the game which is the strategic flow.

FinnJL

07-19-2007, 05:43 AM

Opening poster returning here, with a few new insights....

It would seem that americans tend to appreciate stats, as someone mentioned.

I follow soccer and the NFL, NBA and the NHL quite heavily, so i think i am qualified for making this point. Lets take a look.....

NFL:

If someone threw 4 TD's and no picks for 351 yards and completed 24/33, you can tell with just looking at these numbers, that the QB in question had a great game. If a linebacker had 12 tackles, 2 sacks, a forced fumble and 2 picks, you can tell with just looking at these numbers that the guy had a great game. After every NFL-game sportscenter tells all these stats, and when they are discussing the games afterwards they bring up all kinds of stats all the time, and use them as "proof" when evaluating if someone had a good game or not.

NBA:

If someone had 22 points, 10 assists, and 11 rebounds(triple-double btw.) you can tell that the player played a massive part in his teams fortunes. After the games we hear how many points, assists and how many minutes Kobe played last night, and we get to know the free throw-% of different players, and how many rebounds Yao got this time around.

MLB:

Dont follow the game that much, but i know there are a LOT of stats.....

Soccer:

I follow the EPL as much as i follow the NFL and NHL but i do not know many stats that matter. In team stats, posession% and amount of corner kicks are pretty much the only stats that might pop up during the game, but quite honestly i have no clue what the average amount of corner kicks during a game is, and dont care for that matter. In individual stats, the scoring list is pretty much the only one that is followed and that people might bring up in conversations. If someone tells me that Gary Neville had a passing% of 74%, completed 23/33 passes, won 42% of his headers and won 15/22 of his tackles, while getting "dribbled past" 3 times, it doesnt really tell me anything. Im not saying you can tell everything about an NFL-game by just looking at the numbers, but in soccer that is really impossible.

Im absolutely not saying like many idiots say that you need to be "smarter" to appreciate soccer than am.football, but there are completely different mindsets you need to have when watching soccer compared to am.football and vice versa. Americans tend to appreciate the idea of posession with a set defense and offense. Americans also tend to appreciate pre-designed "plays". Soccer fans on the other hand love the "free flow" and creativity of soccer where you could say that noone really ever has posession of the ball. These are complete opposites to one another,and therefore it is rare that the other likes the other. When your used to watching sports with set possessions and predesigned plays, it can be really difficult to like a sport where these do not exist.

What im saying to all you dogmatists on "both" sides.....give the "other" sport a chance, and if possible, watch the game with someone who really know about the game so you can ask him when your confused. If you still dont like it, fine.....But dont bash the other sport because you simply cant get it.

I hate these Jim Rome-type of idiots who bash soccer for completely trivial reasons, like diving and crowd trouble. Yes, diving/time-wasting is really annoying at times, but its no reason not to like the game. And crowd trouble, jeez.....It happens really rarely in any of the developed countries, and usually happens only where the hardcore-fans stand, so there is no real risk in i.e. england to accidentally get in any sort of fight at a game.......

liquid jesus

07-25-2007, 12:36 AM

All i know is, American Football is alot more complex then english football. Im not too sure about baseball, but i wouldn't be suprised if it was more complex. All the strategy that goes into american football is amazing. Quarterback's have to memorize playbooks that are hundreds of pages long.

Meio

07-25-2007, 11:25 AM

4savo4

07-25-2007, 08:14 PM

AsHopeDies

07-26-2007, 11:15 AM

:lol: :lol:

Don't comment saying a sport is not complex when you don't know anything about it.

That response is what's wrong with this argument in a nutshell. He never said anything was not complex, he said it wasn't as complex as something else. He never even mentioned the level of complexity of English Football, he only spoke on the extremely high level of complexity of American Football. And the fact that your response feels like nothing more than a glorified version of ":mad: nuh-uh!!!:mad: ", just leads me to believe that you're just pissed that someone implied something you love isn't as great as something else. I hate to break it to you, but it's impossible for soccer to be the best, most complex, fastest, most exciting, most fluid, most beautiful, most popular, easiest to watch, hardest to play, best officiated, best managed, most perfect sport in the world.

I'd say I like English Football almost as much as I like American Football and I can say, without question, American Football is much more complex. It's the nature of the sport. Running set plays over and over again with 11 players, each with different rules, positions, and tasks is inherently more complex. It lacks the fluidity and improvisation of English Football as a result, so it's complexity is in no-way a sign of superiority.

Look at it this way. In one play of American Football. The entire offense has to memorize a playbook that can be many pages long. The play is called, the QB relays that play to the rest of the team. They then go get in formation, which is completely dependent on the called play. There can only be so many people on the line of scrimmage and everyone else has to be back a step. They have to wait for the center to snap the ball before they move at all or else it's a penalty. And they have to remember on what snap count they are going on. Then, once the play begins, they have to remember blocking schemes, receiver routes, the sequence of receivers, etc. etc. If all of these things go well and it's actually a completed pass or successful play, then they are more blocking schemes etc. And that's the extremely dumbed down version.

What's the point of saying all of this? It's just simply a more complex sport. But it's nearly complex to a fault and the start/stop nature of it is what leads to this complexity, but it also leads to lulls in the game and a lack of the fluid, improvised nature of soccer. Get beyond the pissing contest of conceding zero points to American Football and you can see this. If you continue to refuse to concede that American Football is more complex than Soccer, you are simply blind and incapable of productive debate or argument.

4savo4

07-26-2007, 11:37 AM

Meio

07-26-2007, 11:50 AM

That response is what's wrong with this argument in a nutshell. He never said anything was not complex, he said it wasn't as complex as something else. He never even mentioned the level of complexity of English Football, he only spoke on the extremely high level of complexity of American Football. And the fact that your response feels like nothing more than a glorified version of ":mad: nuh-uh!!!:mad: ", just leads me to believe that you're just pissed that someone implied something you love isn't as great as something else. I hate to break it to you, but it's impossible for soccer to be the best, most complex, fastest, most exciting, most fluid, most beautiful, most popular, easiest to watch, hardest to play, best officiated, best managed, most perfect sport in the world.

I'd say I like English Football almost as much as I like American Football and I can say, without question, American Football is much more complex. It's the nature of the sport. Running set plays over and over again with 11 players, each with different rules, positions, and tasks is inherently more complex. It lacks the fluidity and improvisation of English Football as a result, so it's complexity is in no-way a sign of superiority.

Look at it this way. In one play of American Football. The entire offense has to memorize a playbook that can be many pages long. The play is called, the QB relays that play to the rest of the team. They then go get in formation, which is completely dependent on the called play. There can only be so many people on the line of scrimmage and everyone else has to be back a step. They have to wait for the center to snap the ball before they move at all or else it's a penalty. And they have to remember on what snap count they are going on. Then, once the play begins, they have to remember blocking schemes, receiver routes, the sequence of receivers, etc. etc. If all of these things go well and it's actually a completed pass or successful play, then they are more blocking schemes etc. And that's the extremely dumbed down version.

What's the point of saying all of this? It's just simply a more complex sport. But it's nearly complex to a fault and the start/stop nature of it is what leads to this complexity, but it also leads to lulls in the game and a lack of the fluid, improvised nature of soccer. Get beyond the pissing contest of conceding zero points to American Football and you can see this. If you continue to refuse to concede that American Football is more complex than Soccer, you are simply blind and incapable of productive debate or argument.

I think this is the crux of the disagreement.

I don't think Gridiron is more complex than Soccer, but it is more formalised. Imagine if Gridiron attempted to apply this formalisation to 'plays' that lasted from 3 seconds to 15 minutes? Imagine how many patterns would be required? It wouldn't happen. That's not to say there aren't formalised aspects of Soccer. Each player will have complex instructions detailing how they are expected to play for each individual game. If you ever get the chance to see some English coverage with Martin O'Neil acting as a pundit, you might be surprised as to the level of analysis a top level coach applies.

Don't get me wrong I don't know which is more complex, I'm just playing devils' advocate. I don't like sentences like your last one; red rag to a bull and all that.

AsHopeDies

07-26-2007, 12:45 PM

I read it wrong, but i never said American football is not complex, i don't know anything about it so i don't know which is more complex and i don't care but there a some people in here saying that Football is not complex at all, so that's what gets on my nerves.

As a fan and follower of the sport, I completely agree. Someone saying or implying that there is no complexity to soccer pisses me off too.

I think this is the crux of the disagreement.

I don't think Gridiron is more complex than Soccer, but it is more formalised. Imagine if Gridiron attempted to apply this formalisation to 'plays' that lasted from 3 seconds to 15 minutes? Imagine how many patterns would be required? It wouldn't happen. That's not to say there aren't formalised aspects of Soccer. Each player will have complex instructions detailing how they are expected to play for each individual game. If you ever get the chance to see some English coverage with Martin O'Neil acting as a pundit, you might be surprised as to the level of analysis a top level coach applies.

Don't get me wrong I don't know which is more complex, I'm just playing devils' advocate. I don't like sentences like your last one; red rag to a bull and all that.

This just feels like semantics, like it could easily lead to an argument about what the word 'complex' means. I wouldn't be surprised at the level of analysis, but the shear fact that the extent of complexity of the sport isn't obvious backs up the claim that it isn't "as complex" as gridiron. It's vastly complex and a beautiful game but it's simply not as complex as gridiron. What's the better sport? Well that's subjective, but I feel like the complexity isn't. If you've gotta go out of your way to explain how complex it is to someone, and any job-blow off the street can see how complex gridiron is, then it is a pretty easy conclusion that gridiron is more complex. But, much more importantly, who gives a shit which is more complex?

Meio

07-26-2007, 01:53 PM

It's vastly complex and a beautiful game but it's simply not as complex as gridiron.

I see no evidence for this claim.

AsHopeDies

07-26-2007, 02:54 PM

I see no evidence for this claim.

Then I recommend you open your eyes.

Meio

07-26-2007, 03:08 PM

Then I recommend you open your eyes.

Wow, so well argued, I'm convinced.

You've convinced me that a sport where a man can write down all the things his team is capable of doing in one book is more complex than one where there is so much going on this would be impossible, because it's too complex.

Yes Football is more complex AsHopeDies tellls me this so it is Truuuuuuuuuuee.

liquid jesus

07-26-2007, 04:04 PM

Meio

07-26-2007, 04:10 PM

This web page is hundred of lines long, doesn't make it more complex than my brain though eh? Your logic is utterly flawed .

4savo4

07-26-2007, 04:10 PM

those play-books happen to be hundreds of pages long sometimes even thousands. AshopeDies explained it pretty well in a few posts back all the shit that goes along with American Football. I know enough about soccer to know that Football is far more complex. Do you see soccer players having to memorize hundreds beyond hundreds of complex plays and formations like basically everyone on a NFL or College Offense has to do? I think not.

From what i'm gathering American Football is like a Musical with remembering plays like remembering dancing lol J/k but i can see it is Complex from what i'm reading. Football and american football are Equally as Complex but in there own ways let just leave it at that.

A Kop out i know.

AsHopeDies

07-26-2007, 04:12 PM

Wow, so well argued, I'm convinced.

You've convinced me that a sport where a man can write down all the things his team is capable of doing in one book is more complex than one where there is so much going on this would be impossible, because it's too complex.

Yes Football is more complex AsHopeDies tellls me this so it is Truuuuuuuuuuee.

Educate yourself and you won't sound like such a quack. I've given multiple examples and tried to explain it to you, as well as inviting you to educate yourself and learn enough about the sports to be able to see what's so painfully obvious. And yet your only retort is "I see no evidence for this claim". So, how can I come back with anything other than open your eyes? Seeing as no one can convince you, I can only invite you to see for yourself.

You are fooling yourself if you think a NFL playbook is a list of everything a team is capable of doing and if you think the reason there is no playbook for soccer is because it's too complex, even you have got to be joking when you say that. That is the equivalent of saying backyard football is more complex than the NFL because the only route the receiver knows is to "get open".

But this is completely retarded. It's an irrelevant argument that is clear as day. As you have said in the past, all you are doing is playing devil's advocate. You don't know shit about American Football, nor do you have any desire to. There are some of us that have an understanding of both sports and are making claims as a result, and then there are some that admittedly know jack shit about one of the sports and yet still choose to engage in the argument, makes no sense.

This web page is hundred of lines long, doesn't make it more complex than my brain though eh? Your logic is utterly flawed .

That makes absolutely no sense...at all.

From what i'm gathering American Football is like a Musical with remembering plays like remembering dancing lol J/k but i can see it is Complex from what i'm reading. Football and american football are Equally as Complex but in there own ways let just leave it at that.

A Kop out i know.

I'm not trying to argue with you, as you are at least conceding that they are both complex. But it's not like remembering dance moves in a musical. Because, to continue your metaphor, you have no idea what your dance partner is going to do. It's not as simple as remembering plays. You can't just know that you are running a hook pattern, you have to know why you are running a hook pattern. For example, to get the safety to bite and allow the slot receiver to run a slant and have a passing lane. If said safety doesn't bite, then you have to be able to improvise and come up with something else that can be effective.

FinnJL

07-26-2007, 04:17 PM

My 2 pence......

I wouldnt say that am. football is absolutely more complex than soccer, because you cant equate "a lot of stuff to remeber" with complex.

The complexity of am.football is more tangible, as we see the results every play. Every person on both sides has a set, pre-rehearsed assignment on every pre-rehearsed play. The coach or the coordinators calls the play before every(almost) play, the QB tells the team what to do this time, and the players have to dig in their memories to remember what to do. In this regard, the game is very simple. If you think about it, there are a very limited number of possibilities that can actually happen in one play, and there is only a very limited number of results that can occur of a decision the coach makes before every play. Yes, the defense can blitz, when the offense didnt expect it, or the defense can play man when the offense were expecting a zone. But all in all, most of the things that happens are predesigned, and therefore just a matter of physical abilities+study.
Obviously there are plays where it doesnt go according to plan when the QB throws too short and the receiver has to change his route, or the QB has to scramble around blitzing linebackers and rush instead of the pre-designed hail mary or something, but this isnt any different from things that happen in soccer, when the midfielder tries a through pass onto the strikers feet, but passes too wide and the striker has to run wide or something.....This is just a matter of simple awareness and football/soccer-brains and therefore doesnt have anything to do with the complexity of the game........

Obviously if you think that complexity is simply a matter of having more stuff to remember, or having a specific assignment on every single play, then we disagree on the word, and the debate shouldnt continue. If not, then lets continue.......

What can make soccer more complex than am.football then? In my opinion it is tactics. I know that you like soccer and probably know a lot about it, but id still like to say this......Positioning&positional awareness in soccer, meaning what you do when your not in posession of the ball, is something that can be argued is thousands of times more complex than the set routes or blocking assignments in am.football. Positioning in soccer may seem accidental at times, but it sure as hell isnt, and far from it. Width, gaps, amount of pressure on the ball, positioning of the defensive line, the type of passes + much more is absolutely 100% predesigned, EVERY SINGLE GAME in soccer! And the thing that adds to the complexity of soccer, is the fact that both teams are in constant motion, and the manager has to comprehend the game totally to make positional/tactical changes instead of just making decisions on the success of different prerehearsed plays. It is difficult to understand the significance of the tactics in soccer, but the complexity of understanding the flow of the game, and the reasons why things happen, is something that in my mind dont compare to the complexity of the calling different plays in am.football, no matter how many things you have to remember........

Love both sports to death, and i agree that the average am.football player has to memorize more specific things than soccer players. Has nothing to do with complexity though.

Meio

07-26-2007, 04:21 PM

Educate yourself and you won't sound like such a quack. I've given multiple examples and tried to explain it to you, as well as inviting you to educate yourself and learn enough about the sports to be able to see what's so painfully obvious. And yet your only retort is "I see no evidence for this claim". So, how can I come back with anything other than open your eyes? Seeing as no one can convince you, I can only invite you to see for yourself.

You are fooling yourself if you think a NFL playbook is a list of everything a team is capable of doing and if you think the reason there is no playbook for soccer is because it's too complex, even you have got to be joking when you say that. That is the equivalent of saying backyard football is more complex than the NFL because the only route the receiver knows is to "get open".

But this is completely retarded. It's an irrelevant argument that is clear as day. As you have said in the past, all you are doing is playing devil's advocate. You don't know shit about American Football, nor do you have any desire to.

That makes absolutely no sense...at all.

You have provided me with no edidence of the obvious greater complexity of American Football only a complexity of a certain type of formal description. As if you are saying that a computer program is more complex than a brain because it has been formally described.

You'll have to do better than a playbook I'm afraid. To me a playbook actually indicates the simplicity of the game. If the teams' methods of play can be mapped out in a mere few hundred pages of description then, to my mind it is not that complex. Compare the way real people do things to the way Expert Systems describe processes; it's analogous.

Sure American Football might be complex, but timing and playbooks do not make it more complex than Association Football.

4savo4

07-26-2007, 04:23 PM

I'm not trying to argue with you, as you are at least conceding that they are both complex. But it's not like remembering dance moves in a musical. Because, to continue your metaphor, you have no idea what your dance partner is going to do. It's not as simple as remembering plays. You can't just know that you are running a hook pattern, you have to know why you are running a hook pattern. For example, to get the safety to bite and allow the slot receiver to run a slant and have a passing lane. If said safety doesn't bite, then you have to be able to improvise and come up with something else that can be effective.

Yeah i know it was a joke but you basically have to have a good memory and obviously good football skill :P

Where i have made you're text bold, i have know idea what you just put. It's like me putting the Offside rule to someone who didn't know about football lol.

FinnJL

07-26-2007, 04:29 PM

You can't just know that you are running a hook pattern, you have to know why you are running a hook pattern. For example, to get the safety to bite and allow the slot receiver to run a slant and have a passing lane. If said safety doesn't bite, then you have to be able to improvise and come up with something else that can be effective.

Everything that you mentioned above happens in soccer all the time if you change the safety to central defender and slot receiver to winger. The difference with soccer is that you dont start from set positions, and to understand how to even get in these situations where you have the opportunity to try to get the defender to bite means that you have to understand the game a lot more complex than a head coach in am.football. As a manager you have to understand the tactics&the flow of the game in a totally different way(some would argue, more complex) as you dont get the chance to start over from set positions all the time......The fact that the manager didnt tell the striker to run a "hook pattern" 10 seconds before he did, doesnt mean that it isnt part of a sort of a predesigned "playbook".

AsHopeDies

07-26-2007, 05:06 PM

Very good points, but what I'm arguing is that American Football is basically both of those things that you described in your first post, and that is why it is more complex. To me, it has all of the complexity of Soccer, with these set plays, rules, positions, assignments, etc.

The thing it seems that you are missing about American Football, in my opinion, is that only one side of every play is "prerehearsed". You have absolutely no idea what the other team is going to do, so you have to edit these plays on the fly to ensure their success. Away from the ball positioning in soccer is very similar to the action away from the ball in American Football, only not as complex. Your line about how it may seem accidental at times somewhat backs up my point, there is arguably more action away from the ball in football than there is in soccer and no one would think that any of this action is accidental, it is that important and that imperative. Blocking schemes, running lanes, passing lanes, these are all dictating my action away from the ball. It's arguable that the most important aspects of football take place away from the ball.

"Has nothing to do with complexity though."

Ehhh...I think it has plenty to do with complexity. Say I'm on the offensive line and I have a blocking assignment that I remember incorrectly. I then perform it incorrectly, it's not as simple as oh I fucked up, sorry guys. There are infinite possibilities. Like I said earlier, it's not a simple matter or remembering what to do. It's a matter of remembering why you are doing it. You've got a task to perform, and you have all of these parameters and rules that go into it, it makes it much more complex.

You have provided me with no edidence of the obvious greater complexity of American Football only a complexity of a certain type of formal description. As if you are saying that a computer program is more complex than a brain because it has been formally described.

I laid out for you the complexity of a single play. In a dumbed down format and only from one side of the ball. The only mention of a playbook in this scenario was simply stating that all 11 guys had to remember the play when it was relayed to the field. Every player on the field has a responsibility and a goal on every play. The fact that each player has that responsibility so often makes it more complex to me, and those responsibilities are always changing and never go as planned.

FinnJL

07-26-2007, 07:10 PM

Maybe we could agree to disagree, as the main argument seems to be whether the fact that the players have set assignments on every play(blocking, pass rushing etc.) makes a game more complex or not. And i know its not just about remembering.

In a tactical sense, if we look at a full game for the whole team, i think soccer is more complex than am.football. But maybe in an individual sense am.football is more complex than soccer. Thats my compromise......

The main beef i have with the word complex, is that its opposite is simple. And to call soccer a simpler game than am.football does not make any sense to me.......

But as i said some page ago, to compare soccer and am.football is pointless, as the mindsets required for each game is completely different. Thats probably why there are so few of us who can appreciate the beauty of both sports.....

Let's have a good 07/08, in both sports.......(+the NHL)

Meio

07-26-2007, 08:43 PM

I don't agree about your reason as to why Americans don't care for soccer. I remember when I was 8 years old in school. Everybody loved playing soccer during recess or outside of school. But as we grew older, the less and less we care about soccer. We decided to play basketball or our football because we got smarter as we grew older. Which means American likes sports that are more complex.

As for you talking about baseball, I agree. The sport is boring, I don't like it either. But is more complex than your European football. lol.

This post is the whole reason for the discussion about complexity.

Like I said before, if complexity were the real reason for Football's failure in the US, the US would be playing Rugby and Cricket rather than American Football and Baseball and would like Basketball and Ice Hockey less.

With respect to any sport being more complex than any other is a difficult call to make without years of mathematical analyses on decisions made by each player in all situations and so on.

One thing I think has come out of this discussion is that US sports and US sports coverage enjoy confounding 'simple' games with masses of convoluted plays and statistics. It's a very american trait to apply obfuscative language and such in (what appears to my ears) an attempt to seem more formally authoritative. You know like police using Ve-e-hical rather than car, stuff like that.
I remember thinking 'how typically understated' when listening to the comms on thrust SSC all those years ago. I remember clearly Andy Green bringing the thrust up and releasing the breaks and saying "SSC rolling" to which the response from control was "Roger rolling". In my imagination the American competitors were saying things like, "Speed run Gamma initiated, SoA in transit to first phase.", "Roger that Spirit we have your CTCT. All systems go. God speed.".
It's the same when you're watching American sports and they're babbling statistics about how far the lineman drives to the ground every week and shit like that. You know you wouldn't get Jonathan Pearce boring the crap out of the audience with much of that nonsense, he'd be too busy wetting himself that someone kicked the ball or something.

Maybe Soccer needs lots of pointless stats, then the yanks will like it. They already seem to be making up some alternative jargon to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world. Still it might end up like Rugby and American Football in 100 years, with the Americans being the bestest at World League Soccer, while the rest of the world carry on playing Football.

4savo4

07-26-2007, 09:21 PM

Meio

07-26-2007, 10:00 PM

If football was making money in America, people would be playing it the players are not on much money they are paid peanuts compared to the rest of them. If Soccer players are on what Basketball, AM.Football,Baseball players on there is no doubt there would be more players in that Country. Kid's get to an age where you have to pick a sport and they don't choose football because it doesn't make them as much money as the other sports do.

The same could be said for Footballers from other countries too, but many of them keep at it and end up playing Football in Europe. Look at the number of Africans in Europe.
True it does work the other way round too, maybe more so because of the Collegiate system and drafting and so on. For example if there were a way for him to have done so without speculatively emigrating to the US at 16, Martin Johnson might have ended up playing American Football. As it was he 'ended up' playing Rugby becuase at the time there were clubs that would pay him his expenses and he could get a decent level of competition out of it. Having said that though, he was invited to play Rugby in New Zealand for a while as a lad (which he did), so he wasn't averse to travelling. Maybe the recruitment system for the NFL is so formalised that outsiders like Johnson have no chance of showing up on the radar.
Anyway that's not how it works in Football. If someone makes a case for a scout to go and look at someone with skill they will, and if they prove to be good enough will be invited to a trial. The scouts will have their usual scouting haunts, but can be encouraged to look further afield (eveyone loves a bargain).
No I don't buy it that all the kids want to play in NFL or NBA for the money, there is shit loads of money in Football, you just have to look outside of your own city and the US collegiate system.

EDIT: NFL average wage (2007) $1.4m EPL average (2006) £676k, which is about the same. NBA blasts them both at $5.2 million (which makes little sense to me as the squad salary cap is $55 million and I'm sure squads have more than 10 players, so maybe they're taking other fees into account in which case EPL players go up significantly and I'm guessing NFL might too, then again I suppose it depends on what they mean by average).

AsHopeDies

07-27-2007, 12:52 AM

Basketball teams don't have many more than 10 players on their rosters and football teams have like 40 something, that's why that average is flawed.

But to address what you said earlier, I think it's simple, stereotypical, and somewhat surprising that you would fall into the "it's an american thing to do" trap. Don't patronize me with your bullshit about Americans taking simple sports and adding statistics and jargon to make them seem complex. That's simply not the way it is. You claim that Americans simply don't understand the complexity of soccer and yet turn around and claim that you have any authority to claim that these American sports are simple but Americans over complicate them. That's horseshit. One could easily turn the argument around and have just as strong of a claim.

The argument that Soccer isn't popular in the States because of it's complexity is rediculous, at least we agree on that. It's clear that the large number of domestic professional sports is the reason for Soccer's current status in the states. I mean, the MLS is still making money, it's still popular. It's just a very unique situation in the United States that we have 4 to 8 extremely popular professional sports leagues. It's hard to make a dent in that market. Especially when the majority of these sports were created in the U.S. The reasons trickle down from there with popularity and financial reward, causing the best American athletes to choose other sports.

I think FinnJL said it best, we're simply going to have to agree to disagree. No one is conceding points or getting anywhere. I think we all can see that they are both complex sports and there are many reasons for their popularity. Beyond that, it's just hot air, myself included.

Mr. Heskey

07-27-2007, 01:13 AM

This is how I see it:

Soccer's complexity is being able to think up of what to do on a dime. Plays and formations can switch suddenly and and players have to be educated on what to do at what times. Basically quickness and improvisation is what will get you points in soccer.

I see american football as a war. There are two sides, each with 2 generals (head coaches) and colonels (offensive + defensive coordinators). On the field you have your major (the QB) the captain (the RB or TB) the lieutenants (receivers) and your non-officers (the line). I know this is a kinda dumb analogy but I think it works quite well. A lot of foreigners would argue that coaches are a bad thing to have in the game, that they should let the players decide. Well we think that coaches are a just as big part of the game as the actual players are. In soccer, coaches don't really matter that much. If I had to pick which was more complex, I would say am football is considerably more complex and difficult to grasp.

Meio

07-27-2007, 01:51 AM

Basketball teams don't have many more than 10 players on their rosters and football teams have like 40 something, that's why that average is flawed.

about 15 (looked up hornets they have 14), and I looked up a few NFL teams and they have nearly a hundred players a team on the payroll. Remember this isn't the squad, this is the extended squad, like Manchester United have 29 players on their payroll at the minute, but they wouldn't be able to have all of them as nominated players at every game.
Still the NBA is a tiny number of players for the amount of money in the game.

But to address what you said earlier, I think it's simple, stereotypical, and somewhat surprising that you would fall into the "it's an american thing to do" trap. Don't patronize me with your bullshit about Americans taking simple sports and adding statistics and jargon to make them seem complex. That's simply not the way it is.

Hey I just said that's the way it seems to me.

You claim that Americans simply don't understand the complexity of soccer and yet turn around and claim that you have any authority to claim that these American sports are simple but Americans over complicate them. That's horseshit. One could easily turn the argument around and have just as strong of a claim.

I didn't make either point. I might have suggested that you do not understand the complexity of Football. I also suggested that Americans take complex sports, simplify them, and then waffle on about loads of pointless stats, using the biggest words they can think of, in an effort to make it seem more complex.

Seemingly it's not just me that has noticed the stats obsession:
Johnson's interest in the game is purely as a fan. He did play as a teenager for the youth team of the Leicester Panthers, his local American football team, but he didn't consider taking it any further. 'I'd never be quick enough. In our sport, you try to get good rugby players and make them into athletes. In the NFL they've got some good athletes who they make into players. How quick you do the 40 [run 40 yards] is the big thing. "What? He does the 40 in 4.2? He's that quick?" They love their stats.'
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-5-2005-65387.asp

The ideas about the very best athletes choosing other sports is fair enough, happens all over, most of the 'jocks' in India are practicing their reverse swing or sweep strokes even if they worship Man. U., and Martin Johnson was getting his face stood on while he dreamed of catching the winning pass for the 49ers. If we're talking about second tier athletes looking for a trade though, to reject Association Football is a bit blinkered don't you think? There are thousands upon thousands of people making their living from Football. There are fully professional leagues in many countries. Another point is, what if you are fit, agile, fairly quick, good kinesthetic intelligence, but not really tall enough for Basketball, not really mad quick or massive enough for American Football, not really long enough for swimming, rubbish hand eye coordination, think that gymnastics really is a bit... you know, and that running round and round in circles is boring, you might not do very well at any of the US developed sports, but you might get on really well at the Footy. Horses for courses, what happens to the lithe, agile, spatially aware athletes in the US?

firepiss

07-27-2007, 06:18 AM

Football isn't complex when you're 8.

Explain the offside rule and by extension the offside trap. Explain why 442 is better than 424 and in what situation you might opt for a 424 formation.

Well gee my golly, as a kid we all knew the point of scoring, kick the ball in the goal. :bigwink:

about 15 (looked up hornets they have 14), and I looked up a few NFL teams and they have nearly a hundred players a team on the payroll. Remember this isn't the squad, this is the extended squad, like Manchester United have 29 players on their payroll at the minute, but they wouldn't be able to have all of them as nominated players at every game.
Still the NBA is a tiny number of players for the amount of money in the game.

Hey I just said that's the way it seems to me.

I didn't make either point. I might have suggested that you do not understand the complexity of Football. I also suggested that Americans take complex sports, simplify them, and then waffle on about loads of pointless stats, using the biggest words they can think of, in an effort to make it seem more complex.

Seemingly it's not just me that has noticed the stats obsession:

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-5-2005-65387.asp

The ideas about the very best athletes choosing other sports is fair enough, happens all over, most of the 'jocks' in India are practicing their reverse swing or sweep strokes even if they worship Man. U., and Martin Johnson was getting his face stood on while he dreamed of catching the winning pass for the 49ers. If we're talking about second tier athletes looking for a trade though, to reject Association Football is a bit blinkered don't you think? There are thousands upon thousands of people making their living from Football. There are fully professional leagues in many countries. Another point is, what if you are fit, agile, fairly quick, good kinesthetic intelligence, but not really tall enough for Basketball, not really mad quick or massive enough for American Football, not really long enough for swimming, rubbish hand eye coordination, think that gymnastics really is a bit... you know, and that running round and round in circles is boring, you might not do very well at any of the US developed sports, but you might get on really well at the Footy. Horses for courses, what happens to the lithe, agile, spatially aware athletes in the US?

No offense, but your reply is a bad excuse. Stats? Is the reason? LMAO.

The reason why I got into US football was because of the object of the game and the rough knocks. Sure it isn't as brutal as rugby, I just love the lay out of the game and the hitting at the same time.

I do talk about stats, but that is the least of reasons why I love the sport. It's another excuse to talk about the sport I so much love.

The real reason why I love the sport is because I grew up on it....then again I grew up on soccer....US football some how won me over. hmmmm...

AsHopeDies

07-27-2007, 09:26 AM

Another point is, what if you are fit, agile, fairly quick, good kinesthetic intelligence, but not really tall enough for Basketball, not really mad quick or massive enough for American Football, not really long enough for swimming, rubbish hand eye coordination, think that gymnastics really is a bit... you know, and that running round and round in circles is boring, you might not do very well at any of the US developed sports, but you might get on really well at the Footy. Horses for courses, what happens to the lithe, agile, spatially aware athletes in the US?

Perhaps you play in one of the two main professional soccer leagues in the United States? Or perhaps you stick with soccer and play internationally? You are kidding yourself if you think nobody in the states plays soccer past college and your are really kidding yourself if you believe that the MLS is not growing every year in popularity and it's foothold on a strong, growing fan base.

USB

07-27-2007, 09:31 AM

The real reason why I love the sport is because I grew up on it....then again I grew up on soccer....US football some how won me over. hmmmm...

Not hard to understand seeing as you guys fricking bum american football

AsHopeDies

07-27-2007, 09:48 AM

Not hard to understand seeing as you guys fricking bum american football

Ok guys, new rule in this thread, if you are about to type something, think to yourself, "is this something that could be said back to me, only with the sports reversed, and be as effective as it is now that I am using it?" If the answer to that question is yes...just keep it to yourself lol ;)

Seriously though, what's keeping us from saying that you guys feel the way you do about association football because you 'fricking bum' it. (My English English is a bit rusty but I'm guessing that means you are saying we really like it?)

I implore us all to just squash this complexity argument, it isn't going anywhere and it never will. They are both amazing sports, requiring high levels of complexity and athleticism, anything beyond that, we're obviously not going to agree on.

you know, and that running round and round in circles is boring

How's he gonna like soccer if he thinks running round and round in circles is boring? ;)