[Redrum]

Somebody finally writes something sensible about the U.S. relationship to world soccer.   

The U.S. penchant for relying on athleticism vs. controlled, precision play takes a whupping.  "Hit and hope" upfield attacks supposedly slowly giving way to a more successful way of playing soccer.  Or,  maybe,  just becoming more like the rest of the world.  Who knows if it will actually pay off in championships?  Or whether a more controlled game will capture the public?

One notable barb on men's side:  "It's been a black mark on their record that a nation of 300 million has yet to produce even one striker good enough to sit on the bench of world powers like Spain, Brazil, Argentina, England or the Netherlands, let alone play in the first team. Anyone who thinks they're getting their fair share of elite athletes should consider what the NBA's dozen best point guards could do with a soccer ball if they grew up playing the game.    Yeah.  Too bad we're not East Germany or China,  moving those athletes into the sports most productive for the nation.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...001D24.DTL

[Redrum]

Somebody finally writes something sensible about the U.S. relationship to world soccer.   

The U.S. penchant for relying on athleticism vs. controlled, precision play takes a whupping.  "Hit and hope" upfield attacks supposedly slowly giving way to a more successful way of playing soccer.  Or,  maybe,  just becoming more like the rest of the world.  Who knows if it will actually pay off in championships?  Or whether a more controlled game will capture the public?

One notable barb on men's side:  "It's been a black mark on their record that a nation of 300 million has yet to produce even one striker good enough to sit on the bench of world powers like Spain, Brazil, Argentina, England or the Netherlands, let alone play in the first team. Anyone who thinks they're getting their fair share of elite athletes should consider what the NBA's dozen best point guards could do with a soccer ball if they grew up playing the game.    Yeah.  Too bad we're not East Germany or China,  moving those athletes into the sports most productive for the nation.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...001D24.DTL

[yvonne]

Source? link? context, please

[yvonne]

Source? link? context, please

[yvonne]

http://youtu.be/ydBvRFNeMKc

[yvonne]

http://youtu.be/ydBvRFNeMKc

[mark3k]

Soccer is not much more low-scoring than baseball

I believe that the average number of runs scored in an MLB game over the past few years was over 9 (both teams combined, of course).  Although I loved watching this WWC, I'm not a big soccer fan (cuz they don't score frequently enough!?!), so I couldn't tell you what the soccer equivalent may be in the World Cup, MLS or whatever, but I'd be shocked if it was over 5 -- that would qualify as "much more low-scoring" in my book! 

Heck, I'm originally from Detroit (a.k.a., Hockeytown USA) and I'm not much of a hockey fan for much the same reason.  Entire games frequently turn on often-fluky half-accidental redirections, etc. too often when the final score my be 2-1.  That can obviously happen in a 9-8 baseball game too, of course, but in that kind of a game, it's hard to argue that any one run "cost you the game."  On the flip-side, with final basketball scores ultimately reflecting several dozen FGs and FTs, no one shot is particularly definitive (similar to cricket matches, etc).  It always makes me laugh when announcers talk about baskets "really counting down the stretch", when we all know that they count for either 1, 2 or 3 points, whether they fall through the net in the first minute or the last. 

Maybe that's why I prefer American football and baseball (as do many other sports fans in this country)... in part, because scoring plays tend to really "count", without being so rare that we fall asleep waiting for them (or have to FF through the TiVo replay to find them)!?!

[mark3k]

Soccer is not much more low-scoring than baseball

I believe that the average number of runs scored in an MLB game over the past few years was over 9 (both teams combined, of course).  Although I loved watching this WWC, I'm not a big soccer fan (cuz they don't score frequently enough!?!), so I couldn't tell you what the soccer equivalent may be in the World Cup, MLS or whatever, but I'd be shocked if it was over 5 -- that would qualify as "much more low-scoring" in my book! 

Heck, I'm originally from Detroit (a.k.a., Hockeytown USA) and I'm not much of a hockey fan for much the same reason.  Entire games frequently turn on often-fluky half-accidental redirections, etc. too often when the final score my be 2-1.  That can obviously happen in a 9-8 baseball game too, of course, but in that kind of a game, it's hard to argue that any one run "cost you the game."  On the flip-side, with final basketball scores ultimately reflecting several dozen FGs and FTs, no one shot is particularly definitive (similar to cricket matches, etc).  It always makes me laugh when announcers talk about baskets "really counting down the stretch", when we all know that they count for either 1, 2 or 3 points, whether they fall through the net in the first minute or the last. 

Maybe that's why I prefer American football and baseball (as do many other sports fans in this country)... in part, because scoring plays tend to really "count", without being so rare that we fall asleep waiting for them (or have to FF through the TiVo replay to find them)!?!

[Robbie]

How about "runs/hour of gameplay"? Since soccer takes about 110 minutes (including halftime) and baseball takes around 200 minutes, then the rate is very similar.

Also, if you look at "touchdowns/hour" compared to "soccer goals/hour" then the numbers are very similar.

I like that I can go to a soccer game and watch the whole thing, and still be back home at a decent hour.

[Robbie]

How about "runs/hour of gameplay"? Since soccer takes about 110 minutes (including halftime) and baseball takes around 200 minutes, then the rate is very similar.

Also, if you look at "touchdowns/hour" compared to "soccer goals/hour" then the numbers are very similar.

I like that I can go to a soccer game and watch the whole thing, and still be back home at a decent hour.

[oman]

Anyone who doesn't think soccer is still catching on in the US and moving up at a pretty strong pace isn't paying much attention.

The mere fact that in the last men's world cup was literally the first time you could see soccer at virtually every bar in any urban area was actually very striking compared to prior wcs.  The MLS teams that don't sell most of their tickets are outliers. 

Local soccer's lack of popularity is pretty simple to explain -- it's too easy to get a superior product on Fox Soccer Channel and its too easy to watch every other premier league. 

The issue of why the US has not made greater strides in terms of the attack is harder to explain, but Bob Bradley is certainly not helping. 

The point is, the MLS business model is going to survive (despite the lack of relegation drama that is so important to foreign leagues) and the product is going to continue to get better.  Still not seeing any downside on the development.

Brek Shea in Dallas is a good example of a kid who will likely get a shot at an English Premiership team a la Dempsey at Fulham. 

[oman]

Anyone who doesn't think soccer is still catching on in the US and moving up at a pretty strong pace isn't paying much attention.

The mere fact that in the last men's world cup was literally the first time you could see soccer at virtually every bar in any urban area was actually very striking compared to prior wcs.  The MLS teams that don't sell most of their tickets are outliers. 

Local soccer's lack of popularity is pretty simple to explain -- it's too easy to get a superior product on Fox Soccer Channel and its too easy to watch every other premier league. 

The issue of why the US has not made greater strides in terms of the attack is harder to explain, but Bob Bradley is certainly not helping. 

The point is, the MLS business model is going to survive (despite the lack of relegation drama that is so important to foreign leagues) and the product is going to continue to get better.  Still not seeing any downside on the development.

Brek Shea in Dallas is a good example of a kid who will likely get a shot at an English Premiership team a la Dempsey at Fulham. 

[oman]

Okay, these stats need to be taken with an unbelievable grain of salt, but as someone who has regularly attended one of the lowest attended teams (FC Dallas) in the league, I can tell you that attendance is better and the league is marketing better.

According to the attendance figures provided by MLS Daily earlier this week (MLS Attendance Moves Past NBA, NHL), the 2010 MLS season’s average attendance makes them the third most attended league in the country. The figures go like this:

1.NFL – 67,508 (2009 season)
2.MLB – 30,213 (2009 season)
3.MLS – 18,452 (2010 season, as of 04/11/2010)
4.NBA – 17,110 (2009/10 season)
5.NHL – 17,004 (2009/10 season)
These figures are a little bit skewed; MLS teams play once or twice a week, while NBA and NHL teams sometimes play three or four times a week, which means that NBA and NHL games are still drawing more fans on a weekly basis.That’s not saying that MLS couldn’t draw those numbers a couple of times per week, mind you; only that, at the moment, they’re not trying to.

Equally impressive is how MLS attendance stacks up against the attendance of their sister leagues in Europe (according to European Football Statistics):

1.Bundesliga (GER): 42,790
2.English Premier League (ENG): 34,088
3.La Liga (ESP): 28,971
4.Serie A (ITA): 23,899
5.Ligue 1 (FRA): 20,119
6.Eredivisie (NED): 19,319
7.MLS (USA): 18,452
8.Championship (ENG): 18,113
9.Scottish Premier League (SCO): 15,128
10.Bundesliga 2 (GER): 15,056


http://avoidingthedrop.com/2010/04/14/ml...-kill-for/

Here's to Bobby Warshaw as well....

[oman]

Okay, these stats need to be taken with an unbelievable grain of salt, but as someone who has regularly attended one of the lowest attended teams (FC Dallas) in the league, I can tell you that attendance is better and the league is marketing better.

According to the attendance figures provided by MLS Daily earlier this week (MLS Attendance Moves Past NBA, NHL), the 2010 MLS season’s average attendance makes them the third most attended league in the country. The figures go like this:

1.NFL – 67,508 (2009 season)
2.MLB – 30,213 (2009 season)
3.MLS – 18,452 (2010 season, as of 04/11/2010)
4.NBA – 17,110 (2009/10 season)
5.NHL – 17,004 (2009/10 season)
These figures are a little bit skewed; MLS teams play once or twice a week, while NBA and NHL teams sometimes play three or four times a week, which means that NBA and NHL games are still drawing more fans on a weekly basis.That’s not saying that MLS couldn’t draw those numbers a couple of times per week, mind you; only that, at the moment, they’re not trying to.

Equally impressive is how MLS attendance stacks up against the attendance of their sister leagues in Europe (according to European Football Statistics):

1.Bundesliga (GER): 42,790
2.English Premier League (ENG): 34,088
3.La Liga (ESP): 28,971
4.Serie A (ITA): 23,899
5.Ligue 1 (FRA): 20,119
6.Eredivisie (NED): 19,319
7.MLS (USA): 18,452
8.Championship (ENG): 18,113
9.Scottish Premier League (SCO): 15,128
10.Bundesliga 2 (GER): 15,056


http://avoidingthedrop.com/2010/04/14/ml...-kill-for/

Here's to Bobby Warshaw as well....

[mark3k]

Some valid points, Robbie (particularly the last one about soccer games not taking all night -- that's one of the things I like about going to hoops games at Maples).

However, without having done the research to specifically refute your suggestion, I'm fairly confident that the average number of scoring plays in football (even if you don't count extra-points) is notably higher than the average number of scoring plays in soccer... I'm guessing roughly on the order of 8 TDs/FGs/Safeties to perhaps 3 or 4 soccer goals per game.

Furthermore, while you have a lot of "downtime" between plays in baseball and American football (which is what really drives the longer length of those games), I would also suggest that a lot of fans like to have "breaks" when they can chat with friends, buy some food/beer, take a leak (see reference to buying food/beer), etc. without risking missing what may be the only score of an entire game!  I won't even begin to address the frustration of watching a game that ends 0-0... really?!?  ::)

[mark3k]

Some valid points, Robbie (particularly the last one about soccer games not taking all night -- that's one of the things I like about going to hoops games at Maples).

However, without having done the research to specifically refute your suggestion, I'm fairly confident that the average number of scoring plays in football (even if you don't count extra-points) is notably higher than the average number of scoring plays in soccer... I'm guessing roughly on the order of 8 TDs/FGs/Safeties to perhaps 3 or 4 soccer goals per game.

Furthermore, while you have a lot of "downtime" between plays in baseball and American football (which is what really drives the longer length of those games), I would also suggest that a lot of fans like to have "breaks" when they can chat with friends, buy some food/beer, take a leak (see reference to buying food/beer), etc. without risking missing what may be the only score of an entire game!  I won't even begin to address the frustration of watching a game that ends 0-0... really?!?  ::)

[oman]

MLS is not nearly the success you think, oman. There've been several media exposes about how attendance figures have been wildly inflated with free tickets. And TV ratings remain infinitesimal. I've been listening to impassioned speeches about the growth of soccer since the first incarnation of NASL in  1968, and it just never happens.

The statistics, whether inflated, give the lie to any argument that soccer does not connect with the American psyche. 

It does, and it is a growing connection.

[oman]

MLS is not nearly the success you think, oman. There've been several media exposes about how attendance figures have been wildly inflated with free tickets. And TV ratings remain infinitesimal. I've been listening to impassioned speeches about the growth of soccer since the first incarnation of NASL in  1968, and it just never happens.

The statistics, whether inflated, give the lie to any argument that soccer does not connect with the American psyche. 

It does, and it is a growing connection.

[pefloresjr]

I don't think soccer is going to catch fire in the US anytime soon, but it is definitely growing.  Many more bars have the world cup men's and women's matches now than they used to.  It is still mostly a bandwagon, nationalistic, short-term crowd, but a certain percentage of those fans will stop to watch a game or decide to go to see a live local game.  A big problem is that the local games are just not played at a particularly high level so even soccer fans aren't that interested.  However, whenever there have been exhibition games in the Bay Area that feature good teams from Europe or the best teams from Mexico, there are brobdingnagian crowds. 

That brings me to the biggest reason that soccer will grow in popularity, the growing Latino population across the country.  My wife's aunts are nurses in small town Tennessee and they are both studying Spanish to keep up with the customers they serve in the hospital.  When I walk in the Mission district in SF, of those who are not white hipsters, there are a lot of soccer jerseys and shirts.  Mostly Mexican teams but also a lot of Spanish team jersys with a sprinkling of other Latin American and European league teams.  The future is already here, and it is a fan base that loves soccer.  They might not make up a high dollar fan base to support a better US league right away, but they will change the dynamic of Americans not liking soccer based on culture.  I'm a 3rd generation immigrant from Mexico who did not grow up with soccer and I have jerseys for the US men's team, the Mexican men's team, Barcelona and the Pumas from the Mexican league.  We actualy spend a small percentage of our tv hours watching Mexican soccer because my wife (with no Latino heritage) likes to watch and loves the Pumas.  Go figure.

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[pefloresjr]

I don't think soccer is going to catch fire in the US anytime soon, but it is definitely growing.  Many more bars have the world cup men's and women's matches now than they used to.  It is still mostly a bandwagon, nationalistic, short-term crowd, but a certain percentage of those fans will stop to watch a game or decide to go to see a live local game.  A big problem is that the local games are just not played at a particularly high level so even soccer fans aren't that interested.  However, whenever there have been exhibition games in the Bay Area that feature good teams from Europe or the best teams from Mexico, there are brobdingnagian crowds. 

That brings me to the biggest reason that soccer will grow in popularity, the growing Latino population across the country.  My wife's aunts are nurses in small town Tennessee and they are both studying Spanish to keep up with the customers they serve in the hospital.  When I walk in the Mission district in SF, of those who are not white hipsters, there are a lot of soccer jerseys and shirts.  Mostly Mexican teams but also a lot of Spanish team jersys with a sprinkling of other Latin American and European league teams.  The future is already here, and it is a fan base that loves soccer.  They might not make up a high dollar fan base to support a better US league right away, but they will change the dynamic of Americans not liking soccer based on culture.  I'm a 3rd generation immigrant from Mexico who did not grow up with soccer and I have jerseys for the US men's team, the Mexican men's team, Barcelona and the Pumas from the Mexican league.  We actualy spend a small percentage of our tv hours watching Mexican soccer because my wife (with no Latino heritage) likes to watch and loves the Pumas.  Go figure.

Cheers,
Pete F. 

[yvonne]

I think it's ridiculous to say that soccer isn't popular in the US. Millions of American kids play soccer every week. There's even an expression, "soccer mom," which refers to a suburban mother who is intensely involved with her children's activities. Soccer is immensely popular in the United States. That's why bars no long sneer at patrons who want to watch the World Cup.

The fact that there is no popular American professional league is a different issue altogether. It's not caused by an American dislike for soccer, though.

[yvonne]

I think it's ridiculous to say that soccer isn't popular in the US. Millions of American kids play soccer every week. There's even an expression, "soccer mom," which refers to a suburban mother who is intensely involved with her children's activities. Soccer is immensely popular in the United States. That's why bars no long sneer at patrons who want to watch the World Cup.

The fact that there is no popular American professional league is a different issue altogether. It's not caused by an American dislike for soccer, though.

[oman]

0-0... really?!?  ::)

Yep.  Really.

Again, in the world where relegation exists, this is not a big deal.  (The most emotional game I watched this last year was Blackpool's relegation match against Man U.  It wasn't a tie, but every tie matters when you are one of the bottom teams in the Premiership.)

At some point, for a few years after MLS got started, I might have thought that the regular season tie would be changed for American audiences, but that is not going to happen.

As mentioned above, there is something to be said for the hard stop.  I generally know when I am going to make it home from a game.  It also makes tournaments and championships that much more intense and sweet.

[oman]

0-0... really?!?  ::)

Yep.  Really.

Again, in the world where relegation exists, this is not a big deal.  (The most emotional game I watched this last year was Blackpool's relegation match against Man U.  It wasn't a tie, but every tie matters when you are one of the bottom teams in the Premiership.)

At some point, for a few years after MLS got started, I might have thought that the regular season tie would be changed for American audiences, but that is not going to happen.

As mentioned above, there is something to be said for the hard stop.  I generally know when I am going to make it home from a game.  It also makes tournaments and championships that much more intense and sweet.

[deepred]

Read this someplace else, can't remember where. But the gist is:

If teams were awarded 7 points for every goal, and 3 points each time they got into the opponent's third of the field, soccer would be rather high scoring as well.

[deepred]

Read this someplace else, can't remember where. But the gist is:

If teams were awarded 7 points for every goal, and 3 points each time they got into the opponent's third of the field, soccer would be rather high scoring as well.

[mark3k]

but it's not...  and because American football does have such scoring mechanisms and permutations (which occur with reasonable frequency), it introduces strategery (my personal favorite non-word) such as "should they take the field goal now or go for it on 4th down?  go for 2 or the kick the XP to tie and play OT?" etc.

Baseball also allows for far more strategery (and second-guessing by the fans), and the statistics alone make both sports far more compelling to most Americans -- witness the growth of Fantasy Football and Fantasy Baseball... both of which have absolutely dwarfed the (admittedly continuing) growth of soccer in this country.

I'm not saying soccer is a "bad" sport (I played myself in AYSO and high school), and I do generally enjoy watching it, but there is no question that it is a less appealing game to most Americans.  Heck, if you want to go look at attendance records, you'll find that WAY more Americans prefer to watch cars make a million left turns in a row around oval tracks each weekend (that one, I can't begin to understand or explain)!

[mark3k]

but it's not...  and because American football does have such scoring mechanisms and permutations (which occur with reasonable frequency), it introduces strategery (my personal favorite non-word) such as "should they take the field goal now or go for it on 4th down?  go for 2 or the kick the XP to tie and play OT?" etc.

Baseball also allows for far more strategery (and second-guessing by the fans), and the statistics alone make both sports far more compelling to most Americans -- witness the growth of Fantasy Football and Fantasy Baseball... both of which have absolutely dwarfed the (admittedly continuing) growth of soccer in this country.

I'm not saying soccer is a "bad" sport (I played myself in AYSO and high school), and I do generally enjoy watching it, but there is no question that it is a less appealing game to most Americans.  Heck, if you want to go look at attendance records, you'll find that WAY more Americans prefer to watch cars make a million left turns in a row around oval tracks each weekend (that one, I can't begin to understand or explain)!

[washingtonismoney]

I'm always perplexed by the discussion the soccer issue raises. Somehow the stakes of the discussion are always: will soccer make it as the super-duper number one sport or will it fail in a burning blaze because it's inherently unamerican? This doesn't seem particularly helpful to me. No one seems to feel the NHL is a failure because it hasn't displaced the NFL.

Once you strip that away, soccer's growth seems to put it in the same sort of sphere as the NHL for most years (attendance is high, and, attendance-wise, Seattle's team is one of the most supported...in the entire world. And Seattle is artificially limiting its paying attendance), and up on par with the Olympics during World Cup years. That seems like a perfectly respectable state to be in.

Re: the development of American soccer players. For the men, it isn't up to snuff. On the other hand, if you want to take rough peers to us--i.e. rich nations that took up the game in the early 1990s--we're definitely ahead of South Korea and Australia, and behind Japan. The talent is getting slowly, frustratingly better. We'll see where that takes us in ten, fifteen years.

(my take on the "discipline" theory: obviously the NBA shows that Americans are comfortable in certain contexts with an aggressive, it's-all-on-me creative presence. The problem is that the people who happened to take over the soccer establishment while still growing were probably not basketball fans and instead suburban folk who mistakenly felt soccer was an egalitarian game. In fact, soccer--not unlike life--is a cruel game that gives the impression that it is egalitarian while actually being a haven for the ruthless imperialist oligarchs of the world.)

[washingtonismoney]

I'm always perplexed by the discussion the soccer issue raises. Somehow the stakes of the discussion are always: will soccer make it as the super-duper number one sport or will it fail in a burning blaze because it's inherently unamerican? This doesn't seem particularly helpful to me. No one seems to feel the NHL is a failure because it hasn't displaced the NFL.

Once you strip that away, soccer's growth seems to put it in the same sort of sphere as the NHL for most years (attendance is high, and, attendance-wise, Seattle's team is one of the most supported...in the entire world. And Seattle is artificially limiting its paying attendance), and up on par with the Olympics during World Cup years. That seems like a perfectly respectable state to be in.

Re: the development of American soccer players. For the men, it isn't up to snuff. On the other hand, if you want to take rough peers to us--i.e. rich nations that took up the game in the early 1990s--we're definitely ahead of South Korea and Australia, and behind Japan. The talent is getting slowly, frustratingly better. We'll see where that takes us in ten, fifteen years.

(my take on the "discipline" theory: obviously the NBA shows that Americans are comfortable in certain contexts with an aggressive, it's-all-on-me creative presence. The problem is that the people who happened to take over the soccer establishment while still growing were probably not basketball fans and instead suburban folk who mistakenly felt soccer was an egalitarian game. In fact, soccer--not unlike life--is a cruel game that gives the impression that it is egalitarian while actually being a haven for the ruthless imperialist oligarchs of the world.)

[yvonne]

When I wear one of my many England national team shirts (I have them going back to 1986), Americans — except Mexican Americans — invariably ask me whether I play soccer. As often as I'm asked this, I'm still taken aback because I'm wearing an England shirt, and it's obvious I don't play for the England national team. I think the disconnect is that in this country, soccer is a sport that people play, but not one that people watch.

[yvonne]

When I wear one of my many England national team shirts (I have them going back to 1986), Americans — except Mexican Americans — invariably ask me whether I play soccer. As often as I'm asked this, I'm still taken aback because I'm wearing an England shirt, and it's obvious I don't play for the England national team. I think the disconnect is that in this country, soccer is a sport that people play, but not one that people watch.

[yvonne]

The Seattle Sounders have a pregame rally that rivals any European team's in fervour, if not size. Maybe I can coax a heathen into talking about it.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/...every-game

[yvonne]

The Seattle Sounders have a pregame rally that rivals any European team's in fervour, if not size. Maybe I can coax a heathen into talking about it.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/...every-game

[Robbie]

If anyone wants to join me at the March to the Match, drop me a line. (Or you can join me at a pickup soccer game. I play and I watch.)

One of the reasons I really enjoy Sounders matches is because of the involvement of the crowd. It rivals college sports. (Which is also why I prefer college football to the NFL.)

I know that Seattle (and Portland) are not typical of other regions in the country, but the soccer 'boom' isn't coming. It's here. And it isn't so much a boom as years of growth.

Of course, the Sounders got shellacked by Manchester United last night, but to be fair in the first half (when the starting lineups were in) Seattle had the advantage in possession and shots, but ended up down 1-0 at halftime. Once substitutions were made it became rather one sided. And why Rooney was a substitute is unknown to me. He is better than anyone of the Sounders bench. By a lot. (And Stubhub prices were above $100 per ticket for the worst seat in the house in the hours leading up to the game, even in a 67,000 seat stadium.)

It's not a matter of 'why doesn't everyone appreciate the thing I love?' It's a matter of 'this is fun for me'. Other people can have fun at hockey games or MMA events. Not me. I spend my entertainment dollars where I want to. Live and let live.

[Robbie]

If anyone wants to join me at the March to the Match, drop me a line. (Or you can join me at a pickup soccer game. I play and I watch.)

One of the reasons I really enjoy Sounders matches is because of the involvement of the crowd. It rivals college sports. (Which is also why I prefer college football to the NFL.)

I know that Seattle (and Portland) are not typical of other regions in the country, but the soccer 'boom' isn't coming. It's here. And it isn't so much a boom as years of growth.

Of course, the Sounders got shellacked by Manchester United last night, but to be fair in the first half (when the starting lineups were in) Seattle had the advantage in possession and shots, but ended up down 1-0 at halftime. Once substitutions were made it became rather one sided. And why Rooney was a substitute is unknown to me. He is better than anyone of the Sounders bench. By a lot. (And Stubhub prices were above $100 per ticket for the worst seat in the house in the hours leading up to the game, even in a 67,000 seat stadium.)

It's not a matter of 'why doesn't everyone appreciate the thing I love?' It's a matter of 'this is fun for me'. Other people can have fun at hockey games or MMA events. Not me. I spend my entertainment dollars where I want to. Live and let live.

[Redrum]

Echoes from the Pleistocene.  Seattle Sounders...San Jose Earthquakes.  Takes me back with the LA Aztecs played at East Los Angeles College  stadium.  Went to several of the games.  Crowds in the... hundreds.  But not so much gang banging goin' on. All the stars were from Latin America.  Good to see some of the old names,  maybe the exact team organizations,  survived,  although I'll bet the management and ownership didn't.

Oh,  and Oman.  You need to explain your stats better.  I presume those are per-game attendance,  or total season attendance X1000 or something. 

[Redrum]

Echoes from the Pleistocene.  Seattle Sounders...San Jose Earthquakes.  Takes me back with the LA Aztecs played at East Los Angeles College  stadium.  Went to several of the games.  Crowds in the... hundreds.  But not so much gang banging goin' on. All the stars were from Latin America.  Good to see some of the old names,  maybe the exact team organizations,  survived,  although I'll bet the management and ownership didn't.

Oh,  and Oman.  You need to explain your stats better.  I presume those are per-game attendance,  or total season attendance X1000 or something. 

[oman]

I'm always perplexed by the discussion the soccer issue raises. Somehow the stakes of the discussion are always: will soccer make it as the super-duper number one sport or will it fail in a burning blaze because it's inherently unamerican? This doesn't seem particularly helpful to me. No one seems to feel the NHL is a failure because it hasn't displaced the NFL.

I think the NHL comparison doesn't work because hockey is geographically popular in much more limited scope. 

I think I agree with your point that soccer in the US is indeed somewhere in between an utter failure and the super-duper number one sport here.  The key aspect is that it is still growing.

[oman]

I'm always perplexed by the discussion the soccer issue raises. Somehow the stakes of the discussion are always: will soccer make it as the super-duper number one sport or will it fail in a burning blaze because it's inherently unamerican? This doesn't seem particularly helpful to me. No one seems to feel the NHL is a failure because it hasn't displaced the NFL.

I think the NHL comparison doesn't work because hockey is geographically popular in much more limited scope. 

I think I agree with your point that soccer in the US is indeed somewhere in between an utter failure and the super-duper number one sport here.  The key aspect is that it is still growing.