Dear american football... | Page 19 | Syracusefan.com

Dear american football...

djcon57 said:
Interested in your thoughts on this, Scooch. The numbers come from the poll you linked. http://thebiglead.com/2014/03/07/ml...l-with-american-kids-according-to-a-new-poll/

I really can't comment specifically on it. Sorry about that.

I will just say that the methodology is sound (calling it an "opinion" poll devalues it) and that "avidity" manifests itself in much different behavior among teens than it does among other age groups.

Here's a fun fact that might make my point... Teens are proportionally the most avid sports fans, but also watch the least amount of sports on TV (compared to every other age segment).
 
If soccer is so popular, why is USAToday telling us Americans why we should keep watching?

http://worldcup.usatoday.com/2014/0...urce=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=206567

You would think everyone in the US would watch no matter what! Right?

You linked to a special section of the USA today website specifically about the World Cup, then asked why they want people to watch the world cup? Probably because they want people to continue to go to their website they created for the world cup. RIGHT??
 
I really can't comment specifically on it. Sorry about that.

I will just say that the methodology is sound (calling it an "opinion" poll devalues it) and that "avidity" manifests itself in much different behavior among teens than it does among other age groups.

Here's a fun fact that might make my point... Teens are proportionally the most avid sports fans, but also watch the least amount of sports on TV (compared to every other age segment).

That not necessarily true according to Luker, ""You need to understand, [the] 12-17 [demographic] is among the hardest to win over. At that age, they follow a whole lot of everything."

http://www.espnfc.com/story/1740529
 
IthacaMatt said:
Really, Scooch, you're being a little know-it-all-y in this thread without posting any numbers to back it up. Here are current MLB ratings: http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2013/09/30/Media/MLB-ratings.aspx The Yankees are drawing about 200,000 viewers per game, and the Mets, Cubs, White Sox and Phillies - big market teams - are all well below that number. MLS on NBC last year drew 300,000 viewers per game. MLS on ESPN has been drawing around 200,000 per game, plus another 250,000 on Univision's sports channel. Premier League on ESPN is doing around 1 million for their game of the week. http://www.sbnation.com/mls/2014/2/12/5402024/mls-tv-ratings-nielsen-sports-report The World Cup just topped the World Series. Now, the MLS playoffs only did about 500,000 English speaking audience (maybe 1M total), so the baseball playoffs are still much bigger than our domestic league. But baseball is already on the ropes. Baseball started losing its younger fans when they moved the World Series games to night time. They are reaping the impact of that decision now, as their audience continues to skew older.

I posted all the numbers I can earlier. Sorry, I just can't contribute a lot of specifics.

One thing I'd keep in mind with the ratings you linked to is that there are roughly 100+ MLB games on TV every week between local and national telecasts. There are far fewer soccer matches on. So it's worth looking at viewing levels in aggregate.

Case in point: in the early 2000s NASCAR was "hot" and loved to tout that it's ratings beat the NBA. But that was incredibly dishonest. NASCAR Winston/Sprint Cup had all of one telecast each week, while the NBA had upwards of 50 games on locally and nationally. So yeah, to believe NASCAR it was more "popular" than the NBA. But in totality it was never remotely close.

And look, I think soccer will be bigger years from now than it is today. Every data point suggests that. And MLB has serious issues. But a sport doesn't triple it's avid fan base in a decade, just not the way it works.
 
djcon57 said:
That not necessarily true according to Luker, ""You need to understand, [the] 12-17 [demographic] is among the hardest to win over. At that age, they follow a whole lot of everything."

I know Rich. That statement contradicts itself.
 
djcon57 said:
The fact that you know him is honestly irrelevant and the fact you brought it up tells me where you are going with this...so I'll back away now and just link this article that uses more of his numbers and quotes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexmor...e-major-league-soccer-popularity-now-surging/

Fine, I tried to answer your question and you don't believe that answer.

I'm not even sure what you disagreed with. I confirmed that MLS is increasingly popular among teens.

Carry on, then.
 
You linked to a special section of the USA today website specifically about the World Cup, then asked why they want people to watch the world cup? Probably because they want people to continue to go to their website they created for the world cup. RIGHT??
Umm...okay. Enjoy the rest of the World Cup.
 
You're comparing a "national team" event to a yearly championship. Where the location of the teams matter. It's somewhat regional. What's the MLS ratings? Is that close? Just curious.
I like how you ignore the post I made almost immediately after that one pointing out exactly that:

Yep. Obviously there is a bit of an asterisk, of course, since this was a national (team) EVENT, but still. That many people don't watch a soccer game based solely on patriotism.
 
I like how you ignore the post I made almost immediately after that one pointing out exactly that:

I just missed it - wasn't ignoring it. Once I hit quote I usually don't go back up - my bad!!!
 
I just missed it - wasn't ignoring it. Once I hit quote I usually don't go back up - my bad!!!
No worries man. I admit I skim 75% of posts and miss most things that don't refer specifically to my own arguments, honestly.
 
The American sports calendar is a very crowded elevator to find room in for something that to most of us is "new", especially if that sport is dominated by defense.

That said, I've never been bored watching a soccer game, just a bit frustrated. I agree that if you can watch hockey and lacrosse, (or even basketball), you can watch soccer. It's the same idea. Some guys would like to put a round thing in a net and some other guys don't want them to. One of the guys who doesn't want them to gets to stand in front of the net. I wonder sometimes what it would be like without that guy. Basketball seems to get along without him. But then, without that guy, the US wouldn't have even been in this tournament and nobody here would care about it.

I would like to go to the bathroom without thinking I might miss the winning goal. But knowing that winning goal could come at any time is part of the fun. And it would be nice to know precisely when the game is going to end. Not knowing that is lame. And give me "the golden goal" over penalty kicks any day.

Insisting that Americans must learn to like it because the rest of the world does is silly but deciding not to like it because the rest of the world wants us to is even sillier.
 
yeah its soccer why everyone was watching had nothing to do with the fact that it was a team representing this country...lol
 
And it would be nice to know precisely when the game is going to end. Not knowing that is lame.
You don't know that about American rules football (3-4 hours), baseball (2.5-5+ hours), lacrosse, ice hockey or tennis either.

The NASL did what you're hinting at. They had the clock count down from 45:00 to 0:00. Whenever the referee stopped the game for an injury he'd use the American football referee signal to stop the clock which would indicate to the clock operator that the countdown clock should be stopped. It was hokey.

They also tried some other things:

1. They added a 35-yard line to the field at each end. This line was placed 35 yards from the goal line. A player was could not be offside if he was outside the 35-yard line instead of having to be on his own half as in the rest of the world. Their theory was that with attackers being closer to the opposing goal that there would be more scoring. In the end, all it did was cause players to hang out around that line and virtually eliminate the long break-away passes that can be an exciting part of the game.

2. (you'll like this one) there were no tie games... there was a sudden death overtime (either 2 short periods or one 15-minute period -- my memory is failing me here). If the game was still tied after OT there would be a shootout to determine the winner. The process was similar as the traditional shoutout (5 for each team followed by 1 each until a winner was determined) with the exception that the shooter started at the 35-yard line and had only 5 seconds to dribble in and get a shot off.

3. The standings were also different. Back then most of the world used 2 points for a win and 1 point for a tie. Today the practice is to award 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie. The NASL awarded 6 points for a win in regulation and 3 points for a shootout loss (I believe) there were other point values for winning/losing in OT vs. the shootout, etc.. Additionally they awarded points for goals scored for the first 3 goals (I believe it was 1 pt for the first, 2 pts for the second and 3 for the third). It was a bit over-complicated.

They also contemplated changing the size of the goal, shortening the game to 70:00 with clock stoppages when the ball went out of bounds, etc.. These latter ideas were never implemented.

As you can imagine, FIFA was less than amused. They allowed the 3 rules above as an experiment but considered the NASL as somewhat of a rebel. This irritation was the primary reason for the US not being awarded the 1986 World Cup after it was deemed that Colombia was not prepared to host it.

About the only thing that the NASL did that eventually made it to the rest of the world was the increase in the number of allowed substitutions from 2 to 3.

While I enjoyed the NASL, and lived it as a teenager, it was a bit odd. It was the only league in the US so you went with it. It was always a good time at an aging 20,000 seat Holleder stadium when the Cosmos came to town. As I've indicated, it was a great way for me to meet a lot of Dutch stars who played in the NASL as part of their retirement process. I've still got a nice scrapbook from back in the day.
 
I've been saying in this thread that soccer is more popular than ever in the US, and that's it's on a nice trajectory. And yes, I am certain that more people know the basics of the fans today than did 20 years ago.

But, that's not going to drive MLS ratings past MLB in the next 10 years, as some have suggested. The World Cup is awesome, I adore it. It's not an entirely accurate indicator of where soccer will "be" in a decade though.


Did you not read the statistical point? MLS already outdraws the regular broadcasts of nearly all of the biggest market teams!
 
If soccer is so popular, why is USAToday telling us Americans why we should keep watching?

http://worldcup.usatoday.com/2014/0...urce=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=206567

You would think everyone in the US would watch no matter what! Right?


Opus, even the most popular events are only seen by a portion of the U.S. The last Super Bowl was only seen by 111 million viewers (not TV sets, viewers), a little over 1/3 of the country. And that's the biggest event by far. So, no, I don't mind a little cheerleading by the media to try to prime the interest in soccer.

Soccer is deserving of a helping hand, because more and more people are finding it's an enjoyable experience. Sure, some of that is the fact that it's the national team, but I didn't see big parties like we just saw for any of the past Olympics, except maybe the 1980 hockey games against Russia and Finland, I think it was, for the Gold Medal.

Soccer is a great sport and is a much better viewing experience, once you know what to look for. There's a reason that the Premier League is the most watched television programming in the WORLD. Plus, soccer is the only TRUE "world" sport, so if you want to claim to be "World Champs" of anything, this is about the only team sport where that's true.
 
You're comparing a "national team" event to a yearly championship. Where the location of the teams matter. It's somewhat regional. What's the MLS ratings? Is that close? Just curious.


MLS regular season viewing is about 300,000 when the game is on NBC, a little under 200,000 when on an ESPN channel. Then there is the Spanish audience. Univision Sports has about 500,000 viewers per game for MLS. That's why we were seeing some Spanish language commercials during the World Cup on ESPN.

Regular season baseball games don't draw that well, with the Yankees having fallen from around 300,000 viewers per game to around 200,000 in the last few years.

When it comes to the playoffs, though, MLB smokes Major League Soccer. The World Series drew around 11 or 12 million viewers. The MLS playoffs drew around 500,000 English-speaking and maybe 1M Spanish speaking viewers.

I think part of that, aside from the fact that Major League Baseball spent decades as the most popular sport in America, is that there is only minor recognition of the make-up of teams in MLS. People don't have a sense of who the players are, past the first couple stars, on any particular team. In Portland and Seattle, they have a nice rivalry, rabid fan bases and custom-built soccer stadiums. Other regions are developing identities for their teams, but in some key markets, MLS teams remain faceless and haven't captured the imagination. There is work to do branding teams in MLS. This is where the recent return to the US of some national team players who are still in their prime is going to raise overall viewership (and average salary, and quality of play, and sponsorships) for the league and its players.

If FIFA gives us the World Cup in '22 if Qatar falls through, or in '26 as one of their spokesmen recently suggested, then you are going to see the growth spurt that has been slowly building up over the past 20 years.
 
Here is my take: FWIW

Pro Soccer:
1) You cannot deny there was a systemic change of interest from 1994 to current in the World Cup from a grass roots perspective. At other times there was no bridge between youth interest and participation and World Cup interest but for some reason this was different.
2) Guys under 30 seem to love soccer. I am 48 and work in an office with a lot of guys under 30 and I hear them talking EPL a ton but baseball is barely mentioned. And I live and work in Baltimore which has a baseball team.
3) Kids are wearing soccer jerseys as much as baseball. It might just be where I live but that is what I see. Now, the football jerseys dwarf both combined.
4) I coached a girl’s softball team under 10. The most common complaints were -this is boring; why does it take so long.
Anti Soccer:
1) How do you sustain interest when the MLS is a minor league?
2) Hate to involve race but the best athletes in this country and generally African Americans. I know several African American families and the general vibe is that soccer is a white kid’s sport and the ones who do play are often criticized for playing sports like soccer and lax instead of football or basketball.
3) If you are a great soccer player you have to go to Europe to make the most money and play against the best players. Tony Parker and Dirk are not playing in the Euro League.

4) What happens next World Cup when it is in Russia with a 6 hour time difference and Fox has the rights? I think part of the appeal was that the game times in Brazil mirrored most of the US. I also think ESPN, which is the major source of sports information, promoted the hell out of it.
 
I posted all the numbers I can earlier. Sorry, I just can't contribute a lot of specifics.

One thing I'd keep in mind with the ratings you linked to is that there are roughly 100+ MLB games on TV every week between local and national telecasts. There are far fewer soccer matches on. So it's worth looking at viewing levels in aggregate.

Yes, that's the problem broadcasters have - nearly all sports have saturation coverage on TV now. That's why college basketball, NBA and MLB regular season games get crap ratings - there are too many games on. Football used to be unique, because it was once a week on Saturdays for college, and Sundays for pros, with 1 Monday Night game.

Now the NFL has begun risking their average TV ratings with over-saturation. Saturday games during Bowl season, Thursday night games, three timeslots on Sundays now instead of two, etc. Watch what happens. Their average per episode rating is going to start going down.
 
I watched about 15 mins of the World Cup: saw the same crap as always (flopping and no scoring). Call me a dinosaur...I'll never watch soccer. Better hope the younger kids like it cuz the typical Native-Born American adult just doesn't get it.
 
Here is my take: FWIW

4) What happens next World Cup when it is in Russia with a 6 hour time difference and Fox has the rights? I think part of the appeal was that the game times in Brazil mirrored most of the US. I also think ESPN, which is the major source of sports information, promoted the hell out of it.

You know American TV doesn't control the schedule when there are games from Brazil on at noon time or 4 pm. If it did all of these games would be on at primetime. The audience would have been so much greater if the Tuesday's game vs Belgium started at 8 pm. That said, I totally agree with the Russia thing. Won't all the games be shown in the US in the early or late morning. Are people really going to take off work for that.
 
I watched about 15 mins of the World Cup: saw the same crap as always (flopping and no scoring). Call me a dinosaur...I'll never watch soccer. Better hope the younger kids like it cuz the typical Native-Born American adult just doesn't get it.

I hate the flopping but I don't even have a huge issue with that. People flop in every sport these days (heck, even in baseball on a "hit by pitch"). My problem is the bs act after the flopping. I get it, sometimes you twist and ankle and it hurts and you can't just get up and shake it off right away. But give me a break with the laying on the ground, writhing around like your leg was just snapped in half when it was a minor trip. Get the and get back in the play!!!
 

Similar threads

    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Monday for Football
Replies
0
Views
464
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Friday for Football
Replies
1
Views
972
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Football
Replies
3
Views
924
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
2
Views
840
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Friday for Football
Replies
0
Views
426

Forum statistics

Threads
170,310
Messages
4,884,072
Members
5,991
Latest member
Fowler

Online statistics

Members online
51
Guests online
837
Total visitors
888


...
Top Bottom