The Goat Pen

heh

Respect the skyhook...

http://time.com/2940442/kareem-abdul-ja ... world-cup/

He's basically right. Although I think the interest is going up, its trajectory is nowhere near steep enough for us to see any real leaps in popularity over the next decade, or so.

I think you'll be dead wrong. Just one decade ago was practically the dark ages for soccer compared to now. Fox Soccer channel had just begun to get real distribution, and you had the barest beginnings of people with cable actually able to watch matches overseas, plus a large number of MLS games were on this crappy channel.

MLS contracted from 12 teams to 10 in 2002 I think, and was basically considered on life support. In 2003 they switched from gimmick ball to actually using the rules that the rest of the world uses and then the current era of rising demographic power began and MLS is about have 24 franchises, some of which would legitimately be considered rich in some countries where soccer is the #1 sport. Most people claim that "Mexicans" are the only thing driving the sports growth, but they are pretty much dead wrong. 20-30 year old white dudes are driving the growth. Even with stagnation in developing new interest in the sport you will see a huge increase, perhaps nearly doubling in the next decade because after another decade interest wont primarily be in the 20-30 age bracket, it will be in the 20-40 year old age bracket, and as the fanbase ages it will also have correspondingly more purchasing power and that's if we're only rpducing young fans at the same current rate.

Right now I can get soccer year round. I can see my local MLS team on TV for every game, I can see every single game that is played in the top level in England, the European club championship is televised on broadcast TV. The cable channels that broadcast soccer are largely on the basic or just one level up rather than on the most expensive tiers as they were a decade ago. I think just the level of exposure your going to see over the next decade will ensure that you wont see any drop in the number of young adults and teens being soccer fans, and in order for it to level off and not grow for the next decade soccer will have to be a fad that kids drop for the next 10 years. Its not gonna happen that way.

How can one be pretty much dead wrong?

In fairness, I've been hearing about the coming soccer revolution not for the past decade, but literally for the past 30 years. Hasn't happened yet, but seems to at least be making some strides now. It will never be as popular as football or basketball in this country. Not in my lifetime. It might eclipse baseball, b/c the only people that like baseball are old farts like Rat and nobody cares what they think. Baseball is a dying sport for dead people...

How can one be pretty much dead wrong?

"pretty much" because they are correct in that Latin American immigration does have an effect but they are dead wrong in how they want to apply its significance. Growth from Latin American immigration is marginalized in its impact on most of us, largely by the Spanish language and it is not what is driving the bus in terms of what most people see going on with the rise of soccer in English language broadcast media, and its not even as evident as you would think in the US national team player pool, where white guys and European dual nationals dominated this particular squad.

aTm,

Point of order on professional soccer in the United States, it depends on football for its existence. I don't think there is even one professional soccer franchise (anywhere in the country) that plays in a stadium that was built/designed for the sole purpose of playing soccer. In that sense, professional soccer is a tick consuming the blood resources and infrastructure provided by the NFL and college football "host." It is in their stadiums where you see the games.

Robert Kraft may own a soccer franchise and he may claim that he cares about it. But really, the only reason why he owns the New England Revolution is because he has that massive infrastructure already built and paid for that the New England Patriots (the only team he really cares about) uses. Soccer can not stand alone (stand on its own two feet) in the United States without a massive infrastructure subsidy (say a new NFL stadium or perhaps playing in an old NFL stadium like the Pontiac Silverdome) because there just isn't enough profit (or really any profit) for the so-so ticket prices and the cheapie negotiated broadcasting contracts.

I don't think there is even one professional soccer franchise (anywhere in the country) that plays in a stadium that was built/designed for the sole purpose of playing soccer

HA. Shut your trap, dunce. You know nothing of what you are talking about. I stopped at this line. Research something at least before trying to teach someone who knows more than you.

A few days ago I had lunch with a client of mine who owns a few Mexican restaurants here in town. He is a Mexican national and he told me that his teenage boys play American football and not soccer for a simple reason. In high school, everybody sees who are the most popular and who gets girls, and it's the football players. Yeah, with elementary kids, soccer is very popular because most parents are not ready for their little ones to be bashing heads yet, but once the top athletes reach middle and high school they gravitate to football.

Two things can change this. High schools can move soccer season to the spring to compete against baseball and track rather than the juggernaut that is football. The other thing that can happen, and is very possible in our ever more pussified society, is that high schools will ban football because of the danger. Other than those two things happening, soccer will always be in the shadows except for once every 4 years in the middle of summer when nothing else is going on.

innocentbystander wrote:aTm,

Point of order on professional soccer in the United States, it depends on football for its existence. I don't think there is even one professional soccer franchise (anywhere in the country) that plays in a stadium that was built/designed for the sole purpose of playing soccer. In that sense, professional soccer is a tick consuming the blood resources and infrastructure provided by the NFL and college football "host." It is in their stadiums where you see the games.

Robert Kraft may own a soccer franchise and he may claim that he cares about it. But really, the only reason why he owns the New England Revolution is because he has that massive infrastructure already built and paid for that the New England Patriots (the only team he really cares about) uses. Soccer can not stand alone (stand on its own two feet) in the United States without a massive infrastructure subsidy (say a new NFL stadium or perhaps playing in an old NFL stadium like the Pontiac Silverdome) because there just isn't enough profit (or really any profit) for the so-so ticket prices and the cheapie negotiated broadcasting contracts.

There are. They are smaller stadiums, but built just for soccer.

Kids will play pretty much anything they are asked to play. There are far more "spots on a team" for football players at high school level than there are "spots on a soccer team" and the soccer spots that do exist are still struggling because they are "pay to play" and expensive whereas football is paid for by the schools. More players will stick with soccer as more money is available for player development. Its not really that big a factor anyway. We don't need EVERY kid in the country to play soccer to be good.

aTm wrote:

I don't think there is even one professional soccer franchise (anywhere in the country) that plays in a stadium that was built/designed for the sole purpose of playing soccer

HA. Shut your trap, dunce. You know nothing of what you are talking about. I stopped at this line. Research something at least before trying to teach someone who knows more than you.

Okay I just googled and learned about Toyota Park. I take back what I said earlier about all franchises playing in existing NFL stadiums.

Good start. FYI, 15 out of the 19 MLS teams play in a stadium either designed or redeveloped specifically for soccer. DC and New England are the only two still in the dark ages of sucking balls in an NFL stadium. Seattle also plays in an NFL stadium, but that's their best option, they sell 40,000 tickets to every game and fill it up for some games.

"We don't need EVERY kid in the country to play soccer to be good."

You don't need every kid, but you do need a portion of the top athletes. Anybody can tell by watching that USA is less athletic compared to the South American and European teams. Outside of our goalie, and that's debatable, not one player on our team would start for Belgium.

Actually, very few people say that. Most soccer commentators from Europe say that the US is one of the most athletic and fit teams in pretty much any tournament they play in. The problem with our team is skills related not athleticism related.

Oh, they are fit, but they are clearly outsized. They go pretty far with heart, but it can only take you so far against stronger athletes.

aTm is busting people down for spreading soccer lies and misconceptions today. A mighty "huzzah!" to the Batman of soccer!

Hey, I hear soccer is boring and no one ever scores any goals!

sardis wrote:Oh, they are fit, but they are clearly outsized. They go pretty far with heart, but it can only take you so far against stronger athletes.

I don't think they are stronger athletes or that we're outsized. The Belgium side are better technicians, more finesse, if you will.