Unpopular Football Opinions

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

You are still clueless. Highlight 'for the most part' all you want, but you just called out a group of people 'rednecks' which is referred to Americans in the Southeast, which just happens to the be area where the largest fanbase in the MLS is located. 

You are full of contradictions and inaccurate information, that it gives me nothing but a mild headache and worn out keyboard. 

It's your opinoin, which luckily we are all allowed to have, but you've said nothing but absolute crap, basing it on what two people in England said, an Australian living in the U.S, and that on Twitter. 

1. Find me a contradiction

2. The whole argument IS about how British people overestimate the sport's popularity in the USA, so now you are just proving you missed the point.

3. You said it's behind the MLB, NFL and NBA, which is the whole point and now I'm apparently spouting "Inaccurate information"?

4. Maybe I misused my terms, but I'm talking about places like Kansas, Oklahoma, parts of Texas and basically the entire tornado alley area. If I got it wrong, then fine but that doesn't mean I'm "contradicting myself" or "inaccurate information" when I live in an area that is basically the USA's best friend and struggle to find football fans.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

even then that wasn't correctly quoted  

Well, it isn't based off what "2 people in England" said.

I've seen plenty of other people claim that, hence why I say "it's certainly unpopular on here" so now Eco claims me for contradicting myself but conveniently ignores what I said at the start.

Now about your quote, I mentioned that maybe YOU didn't specifically say that perhaps but you did say that it didn't fail, which regardless of how popular it is now, is false. It DID fail at the start, and you could argue it still has in some parts of the country.

[Eco]

1 hour ago, Grizzly21 said:

Not an unpopular opinion but it certainly seems to be unpopular here. Football/Soccer is not popular in the USA, regardless of what people will have you believe.

 

2 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

1. Find me a contradiction

See above. You are saying it's not popular. But despite the facts of attendance and passion, it turns out want it sounds like you mean, is that Americans are KNOWLEDGEABLE on the sport. This also coming from your experiences with the MLS...in Canada. 

2. The whole argument IS about how British people overestimate the sport's popularity in the USA, so now you are just proving you missed the point.

No, the arugment is whether or not soccer is popular. End of. That is entirely what you said to start this off. You never mentioned the British, you just said 'people on here'. 

3. You said it's behind the MLB, NFL and NBA, which is the whole point and now I'm apparently spouting "Inaccurate information"?

Again, it's not. You have many 100 popular sports on here. The fact that the MLS is becoming more and more popular, and getting a lot of interest from overseas, with the attendances getting larger and larger, and the level of talent also increasing, just means that it is popular. The major difference between the Big 4 sports here (NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL), is about 50-100 years difference in a head start. The USL, NASL, and all over leagues before the MLS just didn't have the backing that the MLS has created. MLS is the fastest growing sport here, and I would be shocked if it were in the top 3 major sports in the next 15 years. 

4. Maybe I misused my terms, but I'm talking about places like Kansas, Oklahoma, parts of Texas and basically the entire tornado alley area. If I got it wrong, then fine but that doesn't mean I'm "contradicting myself" or "inaccurate information" when I live in an area that is basically the USA's best friend and struggle to find football fans.

Yes, you mis-used your terms. 'Red Neck' is a derogatory word used for farming families in the Southeast. So if you want to talk about the mid-west, then I'd say major pro sports aren't common there like they are in other parts of the country. 

Kansas - MLS, MLB, and NFL
Texas - Has a ton
Oklahoma - NBA
Minnesota - All major sports
Nebraska, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota - None 

So really, by point in this is that their isn't the population, money, or reason for their to be many Pro teams there. Outside of Texas and Minnesota, the population in those states isn't too high, and the GDP isn't high either. College sports rule that area of the country. But if you go to the Far West or Far East, where the population mostly is, you'll see soccer as a top 3/4 sport. 

 

[Eco]

11 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Well, it isn't based off what "2 people in England" said.

I've seen plenty of other people claim that, hence why I say "it's certainly unpopular on here" so now Eco claims me for contradicting myself but conveniently ignores what I said at the start.

Now about your quote, I mentioned that maybe YOU didn't specifically say that perhaps but you did say that it didn't fail, which regardless of how popular it is now, is false. It DID fail at the start, and you could argue it still has in some parts of the country.

I have found your contradiction there. You quote people who saying they said something that they didn't. We stated facts to disprove your opinion (Attendance, popularity increases), yet you say that they are either misleading or unimportant. You said you base this off of your experiences in a different country (Canada), and using the intel provided by twitter, some brits, and an Aussie guy living in the US. 

It's like you have this opinoin, and whether or not you're wrong, you don't care, you just want to keep this opinion and fight until the death. 

[Stan]

10 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Well, it isn't based off what "2 people in England" said.

I've seen plenty of other people claim that, hence why I say "it's certainly unpopular on here" so now Eco claims me for contradicting myself but conveniently ignores what I said at the start.

Now about your quote, I mentioned that maybe YOU didn't specifically say that perhaps but you did say that it didn't fail, which regardless of how popular it is now, is false. It DID fail at the start, and you could argue it still has in some parts of the country.

No.

1. You said we called it a powerhouse. We did no such thing. We said it is on the rise which is factually true.

2. The original question in that thread was 'why has football failed in USA (and other countries)?' as if it was still a present fact. It's not. The figures for attendance increasing by 6m between 2003 and 2018 put paid to that fact. If it is failing, it doesn't increase in popularity. There'd be no logic there. So it may have failed at the start, but for 15 years straight attendance figures for the league as a whole are rising. You can't logically say that it's still failing or is decreasing in popularity.

 

In general, I find you're happy to believe what some people say to suit your agenda but when other people present first-hand opinions to you (like @Eco does) or present facts to you (like I have) you're conveniently willing to ignore them or just brush them off.

I'm still yet to see anything concrete or totally factual from you to say why MLS is failing - it's all word of mouth or hearsay.

What about merchandise figures? Are they on the increase? Season-ticket uptake over the years? Away fan followings? If any of those are on some kind of significant decrease then perhaps it'd be easier to believe you when you say 'football is not popular in the USA'. But you go off on one sweeping generalisation and stick to it. 

[Guest]

@Eco 

"People on here" on a UK based football forum with 75% British posters. Right.

You are the one contradicting yourself now, you said it loud and clear.

53 minutes ago, Eco said:

I'm not saying it's on par with the MLB, NBA, or NFL...

So yeah, you said it.

I'm also not saying people are not knowledgable on the sport. I actually think football fans from America and Canada are some of the most knowledgable there are, but again in my experiences in both Canada and the USA, it takes me 15 people before finally meeting somebody who does care about the sport. In Peru, its 1/3, it was easy and the attendances are less than 10K on average for some of the top teams. When I went to the grounds, they only know the European stars, like Rooney or Ibrahimovic. Some didn't even know what is a goal situation, or the players on their own teams. 

[Lucas]

Sure you don't work for The Sun @Grizzly21 with these misquotes and fabrications? 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

No.

1. You said we called it a powerhouse. We did no such thing. We said it is on the rise which is factually true.

And then I said:

38 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

I don't remember if you said that specifically Stan but I have seen it on other forums.

 

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

2. The original question in that thread was 'why has football failed in USA (and other countries)?' as if it was still a present fact. It's not. The figures for attendance increasing by 6m between 2003 and 2018 put paid to that fact. If it is failing, it doesn't increase in popularity. There'd be no logic there. So it may have failed at the start, but for 15 years straight attendance figures for the league as a whole are rising. You can't logically say that it's still failing or is decreasing in popularity.

 

I don't remember if I said "it is decreasing in popularity". If I did, then yes that's wrong. But many leagues in the USA have failed, and it wasn't until they reached the MLS that they found a successful league. 1996, and the sport was amateur for the longest time. That for me is failing, what the video for me was implying is "why football is not popular or a powerhouse in said country"

5 minutes ago, Stan said:

In general, I find you're happy to believe what some people say to suit your agenda but when other people present first-hand opinions to you (like @Eco does) or present facts to you (like I have) you're conveniently willing to ignore them or just brush them off.

I'm still yet to see anything concrete or totally factual from you to say why MLS is failing - it's all word of mouth or hearsay.

What about merchandise figures? Are they on the increase? Season-ticket uptake over the years? Away fan followings? If any of those are on some kind of significant decrease then perhaps it'd be easier to believe you when you say 'football is not popular in the USA'. But you go off on one sweeping generalisation and stick to it. 

I have no agenda. I haven't brushed of your facts either. I'm telling you my experiences in different countries.

Facts can't be debated directly, but you can argue why the facts aren't so telling, which at least when it comes to attendances, I think it doesn't mean so much. Some countries with a much higher football fan percentage get much lower attendances. I honestly believe it depends on the sport culture or society of the country.

And the whole point was that it's not as popular in North America as I've seen some people say it is overseas. It's unpopular on here, but the common stereotype is that football/soccer is not popular in this part of the world.

[Eco]

2 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

I'm also not saying people are not knowledgable on the sport. I actually think football fans from America and Canada are some of the most knowledgable there are, but again in my experiences in both Canada and the USA, it takes me 15 people before finally meeting somebody who does care about the sport. In Peru, its 1/3, it was easy and the attendances are less than 10K on average for some of the top teams. When I went to the grounds, they only know the European stars, like Rooney or Ibrahimovic. Some didn't even know what is a goal situation, or the players on their own teams. 

But then why do you say it's not popular? 

Those sports I listed ahead of it are definitely my assumptions across the country. Here in Atlanta, United may be more popular than everything except the Falcons. We have a great baseball team, but their are most United fans out and about, and United are certainly more popular than our NBA team. 

Watch LAFC and the Galaxy. They both draw more than the NFL and NHL teams. Now that's an NBA city for the most part, but I'd bet that MLS is either number 2 or 3 in LA. 

Again, I'll point out that you state something, like you did in your original quote, and can't back it up. You quote two people to have said something that they most certainly did not, yet you still fight and argue. 

I'll leave you to it as you aren't going to change, but the MLS IS popular here. 

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

But then why do you say it's not popular? 

Those sports I listed ahead of it are definitely my assumptions across the country. Here in Atlanta, United may be more popular than everything except the Falcons. We have a great baseball team, but their are most United fans out and about, and United are certainly more popular than our NBA team. 

Watch LAFC and the Galaxy. They both draw more than the NFL and NHL teams. Now that's an NBA city for the most part, but I'd bet that MLS is either number 2 or 3 in LA. 

Again, I'll point out that you state something, like you did in your original quote, and can't back it up. You quote two people to have said something that they most certainly did not, yet you still fight and argue. 

I'll leave you to it as you aren't going to change, but the MLS IS popular here. 

You have also said in NBA thread, that when showing major sports victories in Atlanta, they don't show Atlanta United because there is "no love" for the MLS. So if you are going to say I contradicted myself, please think about what you've also said.

Quote

Who is saying this though? If it's TSN, then I understand the gripe, if it's ESPN, then it's because the CFL isn't popular at ALL here. 

Even worse really if it's ESPN as they have the MLS rights, but when the Blues won the Stanley Cup and the had a montage of all this past years champions (Patriots, Clemson, Virginia, Red Sox, Golden State, and then nothing). No Atlanta United. 

Quote

Argos certainly don't count, and MLS gets zero love as it's not one of the big 4 major team sports. 

And MLS tickets are much cheaper than NBA or NFL.

[Azeem]

For me from the outside soccer in US looks like ' good if we win at it but nobody actually cares if they lose '

And for me that essentially means the sport isn't popular 

[Eco]

4 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

You have also said in NBA thread, that when showing major sports victories in Atlanta, they don't show Atlanta United because there is "no love" for the MLS. So if you are going to say I contradicted myself, please think about what you've also said.

And MLS tickets are much cheaper than NBA or NFL.

That's an ESPN problem though. They are just absolutely ignorant on these types of things, despite the fact that they own the rights to the MLS. Which is exactly what I said. 

I'm sorry, but I don't use ESPN as a gauge on whether or not a sport is, or is not popular. 

 

[Eco]

4 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

You have also said in NBA thread, that when showing major sports victories in Atlanta, they don't show Atlanta United because there is "no love" for the MLS. So if you are going to say I contradicted myself, please think about what you've also said.

And MLS tickets are much cheaper than NBA or NFL.

Prices are always tricky to me as a measuring stick. 

NFL is certainly more expensive that Atlanta United. 

NBA - it depends, and even so, our NBA arena holds 20k, whereas we get 75k+ into an Atlanta United match. It's a bit unfair to compare the two based on price alone. 

Meanwhile, our NBA rarely sells out, unless one of the big teams or names come to town. 

Atlanta United sells out every match. 

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

That's an ESPN problem though. They are just absolutely ignorant on these types of things, despite the fact that they own the rights to the MLS. Which is exactly what I said. 

I'm sorry, but I don't use ESPN that a gauge on whether or not a sport is, or is not popular. 

  

And in that sense, I don't use attendances as a gauge whether a sport is popular or not. See how it works both ways? 

Explain to me why LAFC or the Galaxy brings more people than Alianza Lima in Peru, a country which the sport is #1?

I'll tell you. The sports culture in Peru doesn't exist. It has fans as all places, but you won't get events filled up. Only on very few occasions,

BTW, La Galaxy and LAFC both average around 25,000. It's not THAT high. Toronto FC gets similar numbers and I can tell you first hand that in Ontario you won't find many people who like the sport directly.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Eco said:

Prices are always tricky to me as a measuring stick. 

NFL is certainly more expensive that Atlanta United. 

NBA - it depends, and even so, our NBA arena holds 20k, whereas we get 75k+ into an Atlanta United match. It's a bit unfair to compare the two based on price alone. 

Meanwhile, our NBA rarely sells out, unless one of the big teams or names come to town. 

Atlanta United sells out every match. 

I'll give you this: 53K on average (which is the number I saw when I looked it up) is a very good total and it probably means soccer IS popular in that area. That is also generalizing though, which is what Stan said I was doing. So you 2 are doing the same thing. These sort of opinions can't be discussed without some form of generalization. Seattle also gets a good average attendance but that's 2 cities that average over 30,000. I knew it was quite popular in Seattle but not so much Atlanta so you got me to turn my head there.

Toronto FC is third highest and again, I'm telling you first hand people don't really care over here. When the Raptors won the NBA this year, people said it's been almost 30 years since a Toronto championship, ignoring TFC's win in 2017 and the people there don't know what they are watching when they go to the ground.

[Eco]

2 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

And in that sense, I don't use attendances as a gauge whether a sport is popular or not. See how it works both ways? 

Explain to me why LAFC or the Galaxy brings more people than Alianza Lima in Peru, a country which the sport is #1?

 I'll tell you. The sports culture in Peru doesn't exist. It has fans as all places, but you won't get events filled up. Only on very few occasions,

BTW, La Galaxy and LAFC both average around 25,000. It's not THAT high. Toronto FC gets similar numbers and I can tell you first hand that in Ontario you won't find many people who like the sport directly.

Oh jesus man...if you want to ESPN as your gauge on popularity, then you can have it. Meanwhile, I've been to over 10 different MLS stadiums, have had season tickets to my local team, but I clearly am not aware that the MLS is not popular here. 

Oh yeah, let's play the attendance game and how it's not THAT high...

LAFC averages 22,042 this year...in a stadium that holds 22,000 (100.2%)

Galaxy averages 24,444 this year....in a stadium that holds 27,000 (90.5%)

Meanwhile, we have..

The MLS is 7th in the world in terms of Average Attendance for last year, coming in at 21,873. This is behind ONLY, Bundesliga (1), EPL (2), La Liga (3), Chinese Super League (4), Liga MX (5), and Serie A (6). This is will increase after this year, as newcomers Cincinnati FC are averaging 27,442 a match. 
 

[Stan]

20 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

And then I said:

 

I don't remember if I said "it is decreasing in popularity". If I did, then yes that's wrong. But many leagues in the USA have failed, and it wasn't until they reached the MLS that they found a successful league. 1996, and the sport was amateur for the longest time. That for me is failing, what the video for me was implying is "why football is not popular or a powerhouse in said country"

I have no agenda. I haven't brushed of your facts either. I'm telling you my experiences in different countries.

Facts can't be debated directly, but you can argue why the facts aren't so telling, which at least when it comes to attendances, I think it doesn't mean so much. Some countries with a much higher football fan percentage get much lower attendances. I honestly believe it depends on the sport culture or society of the country.

And the whole point was that it's not as popular in North America as I've seen some people say it is overseas. It's unpopular on here, but the common stereotype is that football/soccer is not popular in this part of the world.

 

8 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

And in that sense, I don't use attendances as a gauge whether a sport is popular or not. See how it works both ways? 

Explain to me why LAFC or the Galaxy brings more people than Alianza Lima in Peru, a country which the sport is #1?

I'll tell you. The sports culture in Peru doesn't exist. It has fans as all places, but you won't get events filled up. Only on very few occasions,

BTW, La Galaxy and LAFC both average around 25,000. It's not THAT high. Toronto FC gets similar numbers and I can tell you first hand that in Ontario you won't find many people who like the sport directly.

What do attendances mean to you then? 

Comparing people going to watch a match to a TV station that chooses what to air aren't that comparable.

LA Galaxy average 25,000 in a 27,000 seater stadium. 93% capacity.

LAFC average 100% capacity. In relative terms, in actual fact they're both quite high.

Again, for me that shows popularity of a sport in that fans regularly flock to see their team in action throughout a season.

[Stan]

FFS @Eco you always beat me to the same points .

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

Oh jesus man...if you want to ESPN as your gauge on popularity, then you can have it. Meanwhile, I've been to over 10 different MLS stadiums, have had season tickets to my local team, but I clearly am not aware that the MLS is not popular here. 
 

I don't use neither ESPN nor attendances for popularity. It's all a generalized guess. @Stan's point on the TV views was the only real fact we could use to estimate it's popularity. 

Again, why do some MLS clubs bring more people than Alianza Lima or Universitario which is in a country where the sport is #1? I've given you the answer already. 

Why do I meet more football fans in Peru on average, than when I go to the USA or here in Toronto?

For me it is telling that MLS isn't considered a "major title" for teams in the USA and Canada. It wasn't here in Toronto, and you said to me that is the case with Atlanta United.

Again, if only 2 cities average more than 30,000 then you are generalizing that it's popular in the whole country when you really only have to show for 2 cities. LA Galaxy and LAFC bring in a good capacity but why would it be any higher if the stadium was bigger? They don't fill it up after all, only get close. You could make the arguments for other teams like Portland or Kansas who DO fill up at small grounds, but still you don't know if that would necessarily be true. Why are the stadiums so small then? (that last one was a genuine question rather than a wiseass rhetoric btw)

[Eco]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

I don't use neither ESPN nor attendances for popularity. It's all a generalized guess. @Stan's point on the TV views was the only real fact we could use to estimate it's popularity. 

Again, why do some MLS clubs bring more people than Alianza Lima or Universitario which is in a country where the sport is #1? I've given you the answer already. 

Why do I meet more football fans in Peru on average, than when I go to the USA or here in Toronto?

For me it is telling that MLS isn't considered a "major title" for teams in the USA and Canada. It wasn't here in Toronto, and you said to me that is the case with Atlanta United.

Again, if only 2 cities average more than 30,000 then you are generalizing that it's popular in the whole country when you really only have to show for 2 cities. LA Galaxy and LAFC bring in a good capacity but why would it be any higher if the stadium was bigger? They don't fill it up after all, only get close. You could make the arguments for other teams like Portland or Kansas who DO fill up at small grounds, but still you don't know if that would necessarily be true. Why are the stadiums so small then? (that last one was a genuine question rather than a wiseass rhetoric btw)

This one is rather easy if you think about it. Smaller stadiums typically mean cheaper stadiums, less clean up, cheaper bills and less failure points. Plus you only have to look towards Juventus to see that having a smaller stadium isn't a bad thing. 

[Guest]

The attendance for the 3rd biggest team in Peru over the weekend.

The attendance for the Canadian Premier League, a country that "doesn't care"

Well aware this has nothing to do with the MLS, but just proof that attendances aren't exactly the main gauge for whether a sport is popular or not. Hell, I think Barcelona is another example where I'd bet a lot of people at the Camp Nou are tourists.

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

I don't use neither ESPN nor attendances for popularity. It's all a generalized guess. @Stan's point on the TV views was the only real fact we could use to estimate it's popularity. 

Again, why do some MLS clubs bring more people than Alianza Lima or Universitario which is in a country where the sport is #1? I've given you the answer already. 

Why do I meet more football fans in Peru on average, than when I go to the USA or here in Toronto?

For me it is telling that MLS isn't considered a "major title" for teams in the USA and Canada. It wasn't here in Toronto, and you said to me that is the case with Atlanta United.

Again, if only 2 cities average more than 30,000 then you are generalizing that it's popular in the whole country when you really only have to show for 2 cities. LA Galaxy and LAFC bring in a good capacity but why would it be any higher if the stadium was bigger? They don't fill it up after all, only get close. You could make the arguments for other teams like Portland or Kansas who DO fill up at small grounds, but still you don't know if that would necessarily be true. Why are the stadiums so small then? (that last one was a genuine question rather than a wiseass rhetoric btw)

That last question is still odd, regardless.

Five stadiums in the Premier League hold less than 30,000. Would you now say that football is not popular in the UK based on that logic/analogy?

You can't just go round building bigger stadiums because you regularly fill out. It's not sustainable business to go big constantly. Especially with how costly it is to build stadiums added to the fact locations and transport have to be taken in to account too.

LAFC literally get 100% capacity and you say they don't fill up?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

That last question is still odd, regardless.

Five stadiums in the Premier League hold less than 30,000. Would you now say that football is not popular in the UK based on that logic/analogy?

You can't just go round building bigger stadiums because you regularly fill out. It's not sustainable business to go big constantly. Especially with how costly it is to build stadiums added to the fact locations and transport have to be taken in to account too.

LAFC literally get 100% capacity and you say they don't fill up?

I don't know the answer to the MLS, but in England *I think* it has to do with the smaller towns or areas having teams in the PL (with notable exceptions).

As for LAFC, oops. Misread.

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

The attendance for the 3rd biggest team in Peru over the weekend.

 

The attendance for the Canadian Premier League, a country that "doesn't care"

Well aware this has nothing to do with the MLS, but just proof that attendances aren't exactly the main gauge for whether a sport is popular or not. Hell, I think Barcelona is another example where I'd bet a lot of people at the Camp Nou are tourists.

Surely if tourists go to a game in a foreign country, it would show some level of popularity about the teams/sport?

So you're in actual fact supporting our argument that it is popular and going against what you originally said?

If football wasn't that popular in Spain, and Barcelona weren't an attractive club, would a tourist generally go to see them? Probably not.

As it is, it is vastly popular in Spain, and they are an attractive club to watch with a huge stadium, so it's a popular choice for a one-off game. 

If I went to America, I'd love to see an NFL/MLS game. Even baseball even though I don't like it. Then I might get a Peruvian guy come up to me and ask me about baseball. I'll be telling him I have no fucking idea how this game works and it's my first game there but I'm doing it for the experience. Then he may take that as gospel and he's entitled to do what he likes with that information. But it doesn't mean it's a true reflection of the rest of the thousands of other fans that may be in the stadium at the same time...

[Eco]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

That last question is still odd, regardless.

Five stadiums in the Premier League hold less than 30,000. Would you now say that football is not popular in the UK based on that logic/analogy?

You can't just go round building bigger stadiums because you regularly fill out. It's not sustainable business to go big constantly. Especially with how costly it is to build stadiums added to the fact locations and transport have to be taken in to account too.

LAFC literally get 100% capacity and you say they don't fill up?

Love the stadium argument, simply because Juve built a much smaller stadium, which has been great for them and the atmosphere. It's now hard to get a ticket, people are more excited to go, and you can tell that it's greatly improved the atmosphere.