News Post

Sound Off: Is Football (Finally) on the Rise in America?

05:03 PM - June 23, 2014 by RaychelSnr

The World Cup is setting ratings records left and right, the US Men's National Team seems poised to possibly move onto the elimination round of the World Cup, and football (soccer) is on the minds of more people in America today than ever before.

Of course, this isn't the first time Americans have been excited about football. In fact, it's not even the first time we've heard that the sport is on the rise here. But perhaps, just maybe, the grand old sport of football is finally catching a break here in America.

The English Premiere league is on NBC, the MLS is drawing once thought impossible crowds, and more people are watching.

Sound off: Is this it? Is football finally on the rise in America? Will there be any maintenance at all of the momentum the sport has generated with a (thus far) fabulous World Cup?

Game: SoccerReader Score: 5.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: SportsVotes for game: 2 - View All

Member Comments

# 41 UK0wnag3 @ 06/24/14 10:35 PM

Speaking generally, American sports reward teams for losing by giving them the first pick at young talent and they get to play at the same level.

# 42 NYwRiter94 @ 06/24/14 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	Speaking generally, American sports reward teams for losing by giving them the first pick at young talent and they get to play at the same level.

That's to encourage parity in leagues that are dependent upon television revenues. If the Pittsburgh Penguins didn't get three straight top two picks, the team would have moved, as there are other teams in Pittsburgh (the Steelers, Pirates) that people can watch. In the rest of the world, that's not an option. You have your soccer team and that's it. Conversely, if a crappy EPL team in a bad city drafted the next superstar, he'd just go play in Germany or Italy. If Aaron Ekblad or Sam Bennett (top NHL draft prospects) gets drafted first overall by Florida, they're not taking their talents to Russia for less money and a lower quality of life. American sports leagues feature all of the premier players in a given sport, unlike soccer where there are several leagues who compete for players.

As for the draw thing, I'm really glad to see people talking about the "win at all costs" perspective of the US. Sure, I'm just an ignorant biased American, but I truly believe that we do sports better than anywhere else in the world. Not because of the specific sports we play, but because with all of these different sports we play, we have had more opportunities to figure out what does and doesn't work in sports. There are some rules in soccer that make no sense -- why are there only three subs allowed in the World Cup with no re-entry? It doesn't make you "tough" to play a full 90 minutes, particularly because it just leads to players taking plays off and playing at less than 100%. Sure, there are breaks every 10 seconds in American football, but you also don't see Calvin Johnson taking a break to stretch out his hamstring on the line of scrimmage while the Detroit Lions are snapping the ball.

The diving is also absurd. My friend told me that it's not tolerated in the MLS, so I'll take his word for it, but I don't understand how people are willing to watch the mockery of injuries that these players put on.

Finally, the willingness to tie a game and the lack of drive to win shows itself in the way the players and teams play. I watched a player on Australia sit on an open opportunity to hit one of his players in stride entering the box, essentially giving him a perfect chance at a shot on goal. Soccer players seem content on making these very low-percentage plays such as crossing the ball to one forward in a sea of defenders, while an attempt at a much more creative play isn't even more inherently risky.

The pageantry of the World Cup is great and I love supporting my team. But the on field product is worse than my high school team's. To be fair, my school is a college player factory and a perennial powerhouse, but they played a very "Americanized" version of the sport which, honestly, is way more entertaining to watch and seems much more successful. Because soccer is far and away the only globally important sport in the rest of the world, people are too afraid to change rules or traditions, which then prevents the sport from improving.

# 43 eyeamg0dly @ 06/24/14 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	Speaking generally, American sports reward teams for losing by giving them the first pick at young talent and they get to play at the same level.

I can agree to this point of view. There are so many franchise rules in american sports to even out the playing field as much as possible. This is why we have team salary caps, drafts, etc. Personally I think we have too many rules that impede the flow our games.

We are so anal over every little facet of our games. Look at our obsession with stats and how we try to track every possible aspect of the game mathematically. I am surprised that the MLS hasn't started creating stats for its own sabremetrics system.

# 44 eyeamg0dly @ 06/24/14 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	As for the draw thing, I'm really glad to see people talking about the "win at all costs" perspective of the US. Sure, I'm just an ignorant biased American, but I truly believe that we do sports better than anywhere else in the world. Not because of the specific sports we play, but because with all of these different sports we play, we have had more opportunities to figure out what does and doesn't work in sports. There are some rules in soccer that make no sense -- why are there only three subs allowed in the World Cup with no re-entry? It doesn't make you "tough" to play a full 90 minutes, particularly because it just leads to players taking plays off and playing at less than 100%. Sure, there are breaks every 10 seconds in American football, but you also don't see Calvin Johnson taking a break to stretch out his hamstring on the line of scrimmage while the Detroit Lions are snapping the ball. The diving is also absurd. My friend told me that it's not tolerated in the MLS, so I'll take his word for it, but I don't understand how people are willing to watch the mockery of injuries that these players put on. Finally, the willingness to tie a game and the lack of drive to win shows itself in the way the players and teams play. I watched a player on Australia sit on an open opportunity to hit one of his players in stride entering the box, essentially giving him a perfect chance at a shot on goal. Soccer players seem content on making these very low-percentage plays such as crossing the ball to one forward in a sea of defenders, while an attempt at a much more creative play isn't even more inherently risky.

You make some good points. I wonder how long it will be till someone truly tries to americanize soccer because its lack of specific rules. For example look at basketball before it had the shot clock. Dean Smith would coach his players to milk the time and hold possession to keep the other team from scoring. Thanks to the forward thinking of Dean Smith, the shot clock was established to prevent this "boring" style of play from continuing.

In the current state of soccer, why don't teams try overloading parts of the zone to create the mismatches to produce goals. Lets say I want to isolate CR7 on the wing. I would shift everyone else to the other side of the pitch. If the defense doesn't shift over, you have the numbers where you need to setup a pass. If they shift, you have the 1v1 or 1v2 match up you want.

Same thing in corner and free kicks. Why do they insist on piling in the box and leaving the goal up to chance or perfectly placed kick? Why not just put a few people in the box and the majority on the outside. The defense still has to mark these outside guys or else they will be taking shots from the outside. This creates the match ups you want on the inside.

That is just formations, imagine what happens if you actually run set plays from the buildup

# 45 UK0wnag3 @ 06/25/14 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	That's to encourage parity in leagues that are dependent upon television revenues. If the Pittsburgh Penguins didn't get three straight top two picks, the team would have moved, as there are other teams in Pittsburgh (the Steelers, Pirates) that people can watch. In the rest of the world, that's not an option. You have your soccer team and that's it.

The Premier League is highly dependent upon television revenues, so much so that I predict modern football will collapse upon itself within ten years. The bottom line is if you aren't good enough to play in the league, well take someone else. Also, to use Wigan as an example, it's a rugby town. Until the football team had success everyone was watching successful rugby league team. Let's not forget the whole Wimbledon/Mk Dons relocation debacle aswell.

Quote:


	Conversely, if a crappy EPL team in a bad city drafted the next superstar, he'd just go play in Germany or Italy. If Aaron Ekblad or Sam Bennett (top NHL draft prospects) gets drafted first overall by Florida, they're not taking their talents to Russia for less money and a lower quality of life. American sports leagues feature all of the premier players in a given sport, unlike soccer where there are several leagues who compete for players. As for the draw thing, I'm really glad to see people talking about the "win at all costs" perspective of the US. Sure, I'm just an ignorant biased American, but I truly believe that we do sports better than anywhere else in the world. Not because of the specific sports we play, but because with all of these different sports we play, we have had more opportunities to figure out what does and doesn't work in sports. There are some rules in soccer that make no sense -- why are there only three subs allowed in the World Cup with no re-entry? It doesn't make you "tough" to play a full 90 minutes, particularly because it just leads to players taking plays off and playing at less than 100%. Sure, there are breaks every 10 seconds in American football, but you also don't see Calvin Johnson taking a break to stretch out his hamstring on the line of scrimmage while the Detroit Lions are snapping the ball.

The flip side to that is once an NFL game reaches the blowout stage, most of the big players sit on the sidelines. You aren't gonna have Man Utd say "I know we've made three subs, but we're taking our other stars off aswell."

Quote:


	The diving is also absurd. My friend told me that it's not tolerated in the MLS, so I'll take his word for it, but I don't understand how people are willing to watch the mockery of injuries that these players put on.

It's gamesmanship, just as it happens in the NBA. No fan in the world likes watching it, but unfortunately it's part of the game. I'm not gonn deprive myself of watching a sport just because there's one aspect I don't like.

Quote:


	Finally, the willingness to tie a game and the lack of drive to win shows itself in the way the players and teams play. I watched a player on Australia sit on an open opportunity to hit one of his players in stride entering the box, essentially giving him a perfect chance at a shot on goal. Soccer players seem content on making these very low-percentage plays such as crossing the ball to one forward in a sea of defenders, while an attempt at a much more creative play isn't even more inherently risky.

That's because American sports are obsessed with Win-Loss records, whereas soccer realises that a season is a marathon, and it's about being consistent to accumulate points. As much as I love extra-innings and walk-offs in baseball, it's 162 games. One tie here or there shouldn't kill you.

Quote:


	The pageantry of the World Cup is great and I love supporting my team. But the on field product is worse than my high school team's.

Nope, not rising to that one.

Quote:


	To be fair, my school is a college player factory and a perennial powerhouse, but they played a very "Americanized" version of the sport which, honestly, is way more entertaining to watch and seems much more successful. Because soccer is far and away the only globally important sport in the rest of the world, people are too afraid to change rules or traditions, which then prevents the sport from improving.

# 46 gerg1234 @ 06/25/14 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	First question: Why do you Americans hate draws so much? What's wrong with sometimes just saying "It was a closely fought game, fair play" and shaking hands? Back on point, yes. Every time I go stateside (as I am right now, though flying home today) I notice how much soccer has grown from the year before. As an outsider it really is noticeable. There's been a huge football maturation.

Honestly, I find that most of my friends that hate the sport & complain about draws just use draws as an excuse. They don't complain on end when an NFL game ends in a tie.
Without getting too into it, I'd say that most Americans are pretty close minded. Hell, I was when it came to soccer. 10 years ago I hated the sport...didn't know why, I just did.

# 47 tbook24 @ 06/25/14 01:28 PM

soccer is only big during a major event like the world cup. then it goes back to being 5th amongst team sports again behind football, baseball, basketball and hockey. me i watch all sports from darts to rugby but they all fall behind the big 3 sports. soccer is not aggressive enough and americans get sick of seing the flopping aspect of the game.

# 48 fugazi @ 06/25/14 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	Back on point, yes. Every time I go stateside (as I am right now, though flying home today) I notice how much soccer has grown from the year before. As an outsider it really is noticeable. There's been a huge football maturation.

Exactly...the only people who think it isn't growing or isn't popular or isn't viable are people who don't pay any attention to soccer in the first place, so how would they know?

# 49 fugazi @ 06/25/14 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyeamg0dly


	As far as american sports played internationally, I am a bit more surprised that baseball hasn't gained popularity in Europe.

the guy that wants world american football is doomed to disappointmebt...

now, basketball, on the other hand...i could be down with a club level world championship

# 50 fugazi @ 06/25/14 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	Because soccer is far and away the only globally important sport in the rest of the world, people are too afraid to change rules or traditions, which then prevents the sport from improving.

I eagerly await your suggestions...

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	There are some rules in soccer that make no sense -- why are there only three subs allowed in the World Cup with no re-entry? It doesn't make you "tough" to play a full 90 minutes, particularly because it just leads to players taking plays off and playing at less than 100%.

this IS the voice of experience talking, yes?? You were a box-to-box midfielder or full back, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	Sure, there are breaks every 10 seconds in American football, but you also don't see Calvin Johnson taking a break to stretch out his hamstring on the line of scrimmage while the Detroit Lions are snapping the ball.

yes. yes, you do. he may go to the sidelines, but it happens.

What I don't understand is why so many american football fans insist that soccer must be more like football, and if not, something is wrong. I'm amazed at how inflexible some people's minds are. Maybe not you, NY-whatever, but...yeah...lots of people.

They should make the clock stop! Why do they have draws? Why don't they do subs the same way we do? Why do they hug instead of patting each others butts? Why don't they have, like, an extra point? Why are they different? Sure, i never really watch it, and don't know much about it, but why don't they play the game the way I think it should be played? it's embarrassing.

# 51 TimLawNYC @ 06/25/14 05:48 PM

I think football is really popular in the U.S.; some 112 million people watched the most recent SuperBowl--a new record! Football is one of (if not THE) most popular sports in America.

Soccer, on the other hand, is always going to be a second-tier sport here. It's too slow-moving, with long stretches where seemingly "nothing" happens, and you're lucky to see more than 3 goals in a 90-plus minute match.

Soccer is a minor-league sport in our country, to the point that you kind of seem like a pretentious tool if you try to call it "football." With apologies to the rest of the world, we already have a far superior and much more popular sport called Football in the U.S.A.

We seem to have this conversation every four years around this time. Soccer is fun during the World Cup and people get into it, but in the four year interim it is rightly relegated to "also-ran" status where most forget about it in favor of more exciting games.

# 52 fugazi @ 06/25/14 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbook24


	soccer is only big during a major event like the world cup.

IKR! I mean, if it was important, they'd have their own dedicated cable channel like golf and baseball and the nfl, etc.

If soccer was "big" in the US, I wouldn't have to read about the Champions League on weirdo sites like "BBC", I could just watch it on ESPN!!

Saying soccer is only big during the WC is like saying the NFL is only big during the super bowl.

In other news...we don't teach people to think critically anymore.

# 53 fugazi @ 06/25/14 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimLawNYC


	Soccer is a minor-league sport in our country, to the point that you kind of seem like a pretentious tool if you try to call it "football."

Why? What do you call someone that tells others how they should refer to something?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimLawNYC


	With apologies to the rest of the world, we already have a far superior and much more popular sport called Football in the U.S.A.

Tell me of this superiority....

Now, mind you, I watched american football from the time I was 3yo until the present day...and have watched/followed soccer since the late 90s...so, as somewhat of an expert on both, at least as a spectator is concerned...I await your argument, though I'm sure it doesn't deviate far from the same tired arguments.

3 hours NFL games with about 13mins of action sounds ******** to me, but instead of being a cultural bigot about it...I appreciate what goes into making a few of those 13mins really great.

# 54 NYwRiter94 @ 06/25/14 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	The Premier League is highly dependent upon television revenues, so much so that I predict modern football will collapse upon itself within ten years. The bottom line is if you aren't good enough to play in the league, well take someone else. Also, to use Wigan as an example, it's a rugby town. Until the football team had success everyone was watching successful rugby league team. Let's not forget the whole Wimbledon/Mk Dons relocation debacle aswell.

That was part of the bigger argument I was making in the entire paragraph. There is no relegation in American sports leagues (something that is pretty cool, but probably wouldn't work in the US because of the aforementioned singularity of leagues and concentration of talent). I won't pretend to know the individual instances of each European city, but I would be willing to guess there's less inter-sport competition than in US cities (most of the major ones, at least).

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	The flip side to that is once an NFL game reaches the blowout stage, most of the big players sit on the sidelines. You aren't gonna have Man Utd say "I know we've made three subs, but we're taking our other stars off aswell."

That's not very often and only in the NFL, where injuries are so prevalent. In other sports you don't see that happen (maybe the NBA, but I'll get to that in a second).

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	It's gamesmanship, just as it happens in the NBA. No fan in the world likes watching it, but unfortunately it's part of the game. I'm not gonn deprive myself of watching a sport just because there's one aspect I don't like.

I personally hate basketball (college or professional, I'll watch my own school but that's about it). However, players who flop even once in a major game are attacked and criticized. It just seems like there's no accountability for it in soccer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	That's because American sports are obsessed with Win-Loss records, whereas soccer realises that a season is a marathon, and it's about being consistent to accumulate points. As much as I love extra-innings and walk-offs in baseball, it's 162 games. One tie here or there shouldn't kill you.

American sports also realize that in a country with so many popular professional sports, fans are not going to watch or attend your product if there is an inconclusive result. While the overall outcome of a season is important, overtime in sports is something that usually raises the intensity and excitement of the given sport to another level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UK0wnag3


	Nope, not rising to that one.

Yeah, I understand how that was interpreted, but I meant it from the standpoint of being a more fun sport to watch. I'm not implying that the players are better, because they clearly aren't, but the level I watched was high enough that the players were actually capable of completing passes and making plays, and I just thought the team game was more exciting to watch. To be fair, I also saw the game from a much better and closer angle than I have the few times I have seen professional soccer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	I eagerly await your suggestions... this IS the voice of experience talking, yes?? You were a box-to-box midfielder or full back, right?

No, but I played years of soccer in my life, have very close friends who have played their entire lives and still play at the Division 1 college level, and also have experience playing entire hockey games. In the NHL, an elite defender will max out at 30 minutes of ice time per game, half of the 60 minutes of gameplay. My senior year of high school, my partner and I would play 40+ minutes of an entire 45 minute game. It completely changes the way you play the game, as you intentionally sit back on certain plays including loose pucks and play a much more conservative style so you don't use up all of your energy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	yes. yes, you do. he may go to the sidelines, but it happens.

The team isn't playing a man down, though. I saw van Persie stretching out his hamstring on the 18 in the game against Australia while the ball was on that half of the field. It just seems mind-boggling to me that you could have players ON THE FIELD who are occupied with something other than the game that's going on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	What I don't understand is why so many american football fans insist that soccer must be more like football, and if not, something is wrong. I'm amazed at how inflexible some people's minds are. Maybe not you, NY-whatever, but...yeah...lots of people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	They should make the clock stop! Why do they have draws? Why don't they do subs the same way we do? Why do they hug instead of patting each others butts? Why don't they have, like, an extra point? Why are they different? Sure, i never really watch it, and don't know much about it, but why don't they play the game the way I think it should be played? it's embarrassing.

I don't think it should be like American football -- they are pretty obviously two extremely different sports. In my post, I mentioned ice hockey, American football AND high school soccer. The reason I brought up three different sports? Because that's what American sports are all about. People find things in different sports and apply them to their own and it makes the game better. Video replay, which originated in the NFL, is now being used in the NHL and MLB (maybe the NBA too? I have no idea) and it makes those games much better. The NHL introduced the playoff system which is now present in every American sport and some foreign competitions including the World Cup.

You complain that American fans want soccer to be more like American football. What I'm complaining about is that soccer fans refuse to believe that soccer is anything but perfect in its current form and that any changes to a sport that, honestly, is globally popular only because of its low cost and simplicity to play, will somehow destroy it.

# 55 fugazi @ 06/25/14 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	What I'm complaining about is that soccer fans refuse to believe that soccer is anything but perfect in its current form and that any changes to a sport that, honestly, is globally popular only because of its low cost and simplicity to play, will somehow destroy it.

Well, fwiw, I never said it was perfect, and I don't know anyone that has.

And I think you are really understating the reasons for it's appeal.

The game has evolved organically, just as baseball and football and basketball have. In fact, it is the IDIOSYNCRASIES of each game/sport that make it special.

The Draw, The Substitution, The Time Wasting...these are all things that require a critical approach and add strategy and depth to the game.

It's not about perfection, it's about the game having a spirit of it's own, just as do the others.

# 56 fugazi @ 06/25/14 11:15 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_L...cer_attendance

MLS attendance vs. other US major sports

League	Sport	# Teams	Season	Average attendance	Average vs. prior season	Total Attendance	Source
National Football League	American football	32	2011	64,698	–280	17,124,389	^[2]
Major League Baseball	Baseball	30	2012	30,895	+533	74,859,268	^[3]
Major League Soccer	Soccer	19	2012	18,807	+935	6,074,729	^[4]
National Hockey League	Ice hockey	30	2011-12	17,455	+323	21,470,155
National Basketball Association	Basketball	30	2013-14	17,407	+59	21,411,543	^[5]

MLS attendance vs. other soccer leagues worldwide

League	Country	Season	Teams	Games	Total attendance	Average attendance	Source(s)
Bundesliga	Germany	2011–12	18	306	13,811,075	45,179	^[6]
Premier League	England	2012–13	20	380	13,643,273 ^[b]	35,903	^[7]
La Liga	Spain	2012–13	20	380	11,504,567	29,430	^[8]
Liga MX	Mexico	2011–12	18	334	8,495,000	25,434	^[9]
Serie A	Italy	2011–12	20	380	8,914,420	23,459	^[10]
Eredivisie	Netherlands	2011–12	18	306	5,978,689	19,538	^[11]
Ligue 1	France	2012–13	20	380	7,299,737	19,261	^[12]
Major League Soccer	USA / Canada	2012	19	323	6,074,729	18,807	^[13]
Chinese Super League	China	2012	16	240	4,497,578	18,740	^[14] 1
Primera Divisi�n Argentina	Argentina	2011–12	20	380	6,902,798	18,165	^[15]^[16]
Football League Championship	England	2012–13	24	552	9,791,690	17,331	^[17]
Bundesliga 2	Germany	2012–13	18	306	5,283,396	17,240	^[6]
J. League 1	Japan	2013	18	306	5,271,047	17,226	^[18]
Campeonato Brasileiro S�rie A	Brazil	2012	20	380	4,941,520	13,004	^[19]

# 57 yankeesgiants @ 06/26/14 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	Exactly...the only people who think it isn't growing or isn't popular or isn't viable are people who don't pay any attention to soccer in the first place, so how would they know?

Demos of new participants tell the story. The rise in American soccer participation has been in the suburban yuppie/hipster demo. Basically the offspring of the preppies that supported the NASL in the 70's & 80's and lacrosse in the 90's. Why is this important? Because this demo doesn't need sports for upward mobility. That is huge problem because growth & participation aren't the same thing.

# 58 NYwRiter94 @ 06/26/14 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi


	The Draw, The Substitution, The Time Wasting...these are all things that require a critical approach and add strategy and depth to the game. It's not about perfection, it's about the game having a spirit of it's own, just as do the others.

Playing not to win and wasting time add strategy and depth?

And I never said it was about perfection. I also never complained about the passion and fervor with which soccer fans support their teams. I was complaining about the on-field product in professional leagues and environments. I think the game of soccer is a great game which is (relatively) held back by its stubborn leaders at the professional and international level.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fugazi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_L...cer_attendance

MLS attendance vs. other US major sports

League Sport # Teams Season Average
attendance Average vs.
prior season Total Attendance Source

National Football League American football 32 2011 64,698 �280 17,124,389 ^[2]

Major League Baseball Baseball 30 2012 30,895 +533 74,859,268 ^[3]

Major League Soccer Soccer 19 2012 18,807 +935 6,074,729 ^[4]

National Hockey League Ice hockey 30 2011-12 17,455 +323 21,470,155

National Basketball Association Basketball 30 2013-14 17,407 +59 21,411,543 ^[5]

MLS attendance vs. other soccer leagues worldwide

League Country Season Teams Games Total
attendance Average
attendance Source(s)

Bundesliga Germany 2011�12 18 306 13,811,075 45,179 ^[6]

Premier League England 2012�13 20 380 13,643,273 ^[b] 35,903 ^[7]

La Liga Spain 2012�13 20 380 11,504,567 29,430 ^[8]

Liga MX Mexico 2011�12 18 334 8,495,000 25,434 ^[9]

Serie A Italy 2011�12 20 380 8,914,420 23,459 ^[10]

Eredivisie Netherlands 2011�12 18 306 5,978,689 19,538 ^[11]

Ligue 1 France 2012�13 20 380 7,299,737 19,261 ^[12]

Major League Soccer USA / Canada 2012 19 323 6,074,729 18,807 ^[13]

Chinese Super League China 2012 16 240 4,497,578 18,740 ^[14] 1

Primera Divisi�n Argentina Argentina 2011�12 20 380 6,902,798 18,165 ^[15]^[16]

Football League Championship England 2012�13 24 552 9,791,690 17,331 ^[17]

Bundesliga 2 Germany 2012�13 18 306 5,283,396 17,240 ^[6]

J. League 1 Japan 2013 18 306 5,271,047 17,226 ^[18]

Campeonato Brasileiro S�rie A Brazil 2012 20 380 4,941,520 13,004 ^[19]

Not really sure what this has to do with anything. MLS has much cheaper ticket prices (about half price) than the NHL and NBA, and would have a lower average attendance than the NHL and NBA if you take out the outlier Seattle Sounders FC, who play in the Seahawks stadium and have double the attendance of any other team. The Chicago Blackhawks lead average attendance for both the NHL and NBA with 117.3% attendance and 22,623 average fans, which is smaller than the capacity for eight (AKA almost half) MLS stadiums.

As for the comparison with other leagues, the USA clearly matches favorably with the other countries on that list in regard to the total population with disposable income to spend on luxuries such as tickets to professional soccer matches. The only notable achievements are surpassing Argentina and Brazil, although they really aren't that impressive when you consider the three countries' ranking in the above demographic.

Throw out your misleading statistics, but we're not going to fall for them.

# 59 cubsfan203 @ 06/26/14 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	Not really sure what this has to do with anything. MLS has much cheaper ticket prices (about half price) than the NHL and NBA, and would have a lower average attendance than the NHL and NBA if you take out the outlier Seattle Sounders FC, who play in the Seahawks stadium and have double the attendance of any other team. The Chicago Blackhawks lead average attendance for both the NHL and NBA with 117.3% attendance and 22,623 average fans, which is smaller than the capacity for eight (AKA almost half) MLS stadiums. As for the comparison with other leagues, the USA clearly matches favorably with the other countries on that list in regard to the total population with disposable income to spend on luxuries such as tickets to professional soccer matches. The only notable achievements are surpassing Argentina and Brazil, although they really aren't that impressive when you consider the three countries' ranking in the above demographic. Throw out your misleading statistics, but we're not going to fall for them.

The numbers are relevant to this conversation. Over the past 5-10 years the MLS attendance numbers have been on the rise. Over the same time period both the NHL and NBA have been flat at best, but really have gone down slightly.

A 20% increase in attendance since 2004 isn't something to scoff at.

# 60 fugazi @ 06/26/14 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYwRiter94


	Not really sure what this has to do with anything. Throw out your misleading statistics, but we're not going to fall for them.

um....this thread posed a question.

and in this thread, a number of people offered their opinion that soccer would never be this or that or take over these 4 yadda yadda etc.

while i don't particularly care, bc the issue isn't whether the MLS will become bigger than MLB or NFL or anything...and bc I will spend most of my soccer time watching other leagues...

I can't for the life of me figure out how anyone could make such a ridiculous statement regarding a table that showed MLS had higher per-game average attendance than NBA and NHL.

Even with the caveats you mentioned, which are far from damning, the fact remains. I didn't say it suggested some kind of great change in the landscape, just posted the fact.

I don't know what is misleading about it.

The top NBA teams draw more than twice the lower ones per game...

regardless, I don't see how anyone that has paid any attention to the sports landscape in the US since the early 90s can't discern the considerable, consistent, and obvious rise in the popularity of soccer in the US.

I would say you are trolling, except you seem to take your argument way too seriously.

And re: the other post about demographics...I don't think it's altogether true...and to whatever degree it is, it will change. The local HS team here is mostly Hispanic...i've seen places where they have strong African or Asian immigrant communities with the same thing...Soccer is not confined in America to the children of NASL supporters or yuppies...and support for the MLS stands to gain as these gruops integrate.

« Previous 1 234 5 Next »

More Links

Sound Off: Is Football (Finally) on the Rise in America?