Unpopular Football Opinions

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

I meant that you had a go at seemingly being disrespected for discussing your own opinions/experience. @Eco did the same then you say 'some shit bla bla'. It's quite dismissive!

Well yeah, look at the shift in tone when Spike said basically everything I had said. It's tiring hearing "I'm ignorant or ignore basic fact" when I'm just applying my own opinion, so it's called a taste of his own medicine. Not that hard to figure out.

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

Well yeah, look at the shift in tone when Spike said basically everything I had said. It's tiring hearing "I'm ignorant or ignore basic fact" when I'm just applying my own opinion, so it's called a taste of his own medicine. Not that hard to figure out.

Not gonna lie but Spike brought up some actual facts to debate the issue and didn't just rely on a few people met at a stadium on a few occasions. That's probably where the difference is. 

[nudge+]

22 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

It's like I said, you can only define popularity yourself. There are facts that can make it more or less true, but withoout generalization, what is the official number for fans of football in the USA? Is there even a number?

Like said it takes me 3 people in Peru to find someone who likes the sport. Here it takes me 15.

So define it before you start debating it so that everyone else responding to you knows what you mean in the first place because otherwise it doesn't make much sense. How do you define popularity then? 

The bolded part isn't really relevant anyway because a) it's based on the limited number of people you meet; b) you're in Canada. But even if that's the case in the US it doesn't mean much - just that the people you have met do not have interest in the sport. Also you're comparing the most popular sport with a lot of history in Peru with a young sport in the US; can't expect it to have the same reach in both countries by any means; it's an unfair comparison - especially considering that it has to compete with at least three major American sports there.

A disclaimer: I do not know how popular football is in the US. Nor do I care. But I'd say that various measurable factors such as the number of registered football players (at all levels), youth participation, TV viewership figures, average attendances, sold merchandise and the likes are more representative than personal anecdotal evidence.

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

Not gonna lie but Spike brought up some actual facts to debate the issue and didn't just rely on a few people met at a stadium on a few occasions. That's probably where the difference is. 

Like what? The cultural representation by latinos and hispanic people? Something I actually refrained from saying because I thought it wouldn't be a good argument?

Spike said exactly what I said. Attendances doesn't accurately represent popularity and that it's a city mentality (more indirectly though) because the USA is more than just the big cities. Also that places like Oklahoma aren't what we see as soccer maniacs. Of course though, ignore that if it's convenient. You ignored a lot of questions within the actual debate too. You hate to see it.

I agree that Spike expanded on my argument he said a lot of the same things I said and to be honest, you can't measure sport popularity without some form of generalization.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, nudge said:

So define it before you start debating it so that everyone else responding to you knows what you mean in the first place because otherwise it doesn't make much sense. How do you define popularity then? 

The bolded part isn't really relevant anyway because a) it's based on the limited number people you meet; b) you're in Canada. But even if that's the case in the US it doesn't mean much - just that the people you have met do not have interest in the sport. Also you're comparing the most popular sport with a lot of history in Peru with a young sport in the US; can't expect it to have the same reach in both countries by any means; it's an unfair comparison - especially considering that it has to compete with at least three major American sports there.

A disclaimer: I do not know how popular football is in the US. Nor do I care. But I'd say that various measurable factors such as the number of registered football players (at all levels), youth participation, TV viewership figures, average attendances, sold merchandise and the likes are more representative than personal anecdotal evidence.

In the bolded part, that is the point I am making. We get lower average attendances in Peru, which the sport is #1 over there, where as up here the MLS gets better attendances even though the sport isn't really that big.

As for the last bit, population is population but as Spike and I both pointed out, you will find very few Americans or Canadians that give a damn. It's usually the foreigners that care and that for me is telling why the sport was amateur for the longest time, and that is because people didn't care. They see it as a "sissy" sport here. Just because MLS fills grounds doesn't make the sport popular. I'd say sold merchandise and TV viewership figures are the most important facts there.

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Also that places like Oklahoma aren't what we see as soccer maniacs. Of course though, ignore that if it's convenient

It's not ignore through inconvenience, it may just be that there's nothing to respond back with or it's not worth debating over?

I get that Oklahoma isn't full of soccer maniacs. Like many other places perhaps. But there's plenty of other places that MLS is played at where it is popular, no? If those big cities didn't get the attendances or high average attendances then I'd be more agreeable with you.

But @nudge sums it up pretty well and perhaps something we should have all done - define popularity ourselves before discussing anything else. 

[Guest]

I think @Grizzly21 may have a point about attendances not necessarily being a sign of popularity. As far as I am aware a lot of teams represent an entire state so they have a lot of people they can appeal to. If they only represented a city the attendances would probably be much lower.

[nudge+]

4 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Just because MLS fills grounds doesn't make the sport popular.

It indicates that there's enough interest though; even if it's concentrated in "bubbles" and is thus limited to certain cities and states. Now it would be interesting to see the actual numbers for other factors (TV viewership; registered players; merchandise sold) and it might give a better overall view.

I think USA is a special case anyway due to its size and diversity.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Stan said:

It's not ignore through inconvenience, it may just be that there's nothing to respond back with or it's not worth debating over?

I get that Oklahoma isn't full of soccer maniacs. Like many other places perhaps. But there's plenty of other places that MLS is played at where it is popular, no? If those big cities didn't get the attendances or high average attendances then I'd be more agreeable with you.

But @nudge sums it up pretty well and perhaps something we should have all done - define popularity ourselves before discussing anything else. 

For the record, and I said this several times but as always it was ignored, I honestly think it has to do with the sports culture in the country. I genuinely think the United States, Canada, and places like Australia and Argentina have a huge sports culture that will bring people to games even though they don't know what they are watching. A place like Peru has a non-existent sports culture and events in general. This does not accurately describe the popularity situation in the country as anything will bring fans and fill up games.

As an example, and I'll stick closer to Canada with this one, but Toronto Wolfpack in the English Rugby League brings 7K people non average in a 9k stadium. That doesn't mean rugby league is popular over here. 7K isn't much of course but in that stadium, in a country where rugby as a sport to watch is almost non-existent I'd say it brings a good chunk. For me it's the sports culture that drags these people to games.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, nudge said:

It indicates that there's enough interest though; even if it's concentrated in "bubbles" and is thus limited to certain cities and states. Now it would be interesting to see the actual numbers for other factors (TV viewership; registered players; merchandise sold) and it might give a better overall view.

I think USA is a special case anyway due to its size and diversity.

MLS final

1.8M for last years final

1.1M for 2017's final

2.0M for 2016's final (and as a guess, I would say this was higher because it was Toronto's first final in a long time)

1.2M for 2017's final

Compare this to Liga MX numbers. I can't find any side by side examples, but Liga MX numbers are HUGE. 

Of course, Premier League is much more popular in North America than the MLS, so there's a whole other argument for it, but it just proves my point that the only reason MLS brings fans game in and game out is the sports culture and that city mentality I'm trying to preach about.

[nudge+]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

MLS final

1.8M for last years final

1.1M for 2017's final

2.0M for 2016's final (and as a guess, I would say this was higher because it was Toronto's first final in a long time)

1.2M for 2017's final

Compare this to Liga MX numbers. I can't find any side by side examples, but Liga MX numbers are HUGE. 

Of course, Premier League is much more popular in North America than the MLS, so there's a whole other argument for it, but it just proves my point that the only reason MLS brings fans game in and game out is the sports culture and that city mentality I'm trying to preach about.

Why are you comparing them to other countries though? It would make more sense to compare it to other sports in the US to be able judge how popular or unpopular it is there... 

I agree about US sport culture being different by the way - but if any sport attracts a significant proportion of the population (both to the stadiums and to TV screens) then it surely indicates popularity of the said sport; regardless of how knowledgeable the spectators are or what their reasons for watching are... 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, nudge said:

Why are you comparing them to other countries though? It would make more sense to compare it to other sports in the US to be able judge how popular or unpopular it is there... 

I agree about US sport culture being different by the way - but if any sport attracts a significant proportion of the population (both to the stadiums and to TV screens) then it surely indicates popularity of the said sport; regardless of how knowledgeable the spectators are or what their reasons for watching are... 

Honestly I don't think MLS is a good gauge to compare to other sports. I think European leagues are the strongsuit in the United States and Canada. All I was trying to prove with that is how misleading those attendance numbers are. Just because they bring people to the ground, doesn't mean it's popular. Especially when it's only to see former European stars or to support the city.

2.0 Million in the MLS final on TV seems very low if you ask me.

[nudge+]

7 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Honestly I don't think MLS is a good gauge to compare to other sports. I think European leagues are the strongsuit in the United States and Canada. All I was trying to prove with that is how misleading those attendance numbers are. Just because they bring people to the ground, doesn't mean it's popular. Especially when it's only to see former European stars or to support the city.

2.0 Million in the MLS final on TV seems very low if you ask me.

Not MLS - "soccer" in general. How many registered soccer players in the country? How many youth participants? How many spectators tune in for soccer matches in general? How many cable subscriptions? How many shirts sold? Etc. etc. etc. No one is saying that attendances is the only factor to decide how popular the sport is and it's surely doesn't paint the whole picture on its own; but it's one of them and can't be dismissed either.

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

Just because they bring people to the ground, doesn't mean it's popular. Especially when it's only to see former European stars or to support the city.

2.0 Million in the MLS final on TV seems very low if you ask me.

Just means that you make your definition of popularity even more niche?

It's as if several thousands fans can attend a match - millions across a season - but you're assuming their reasons for watching. Again, a sweeping generalisation.

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

Just means that you make your definition of popularity even more niche?

It's as if several thousands fans can attend a match - millions across a season - but you're assuming their reasons for watching. Again, a sweeping generalisation.

I'm not assuming their reasons for watching. When people there don't even know the players of their own team, how can you say they are really there to support said club? I've been here for 13 years mate. It's not a coincidence that it happens every single time.

Also practice what you preach. Going against facts  

[Eco]

2 hours ago, Grizzly21 said:

@Eco don’t say i am a headache to you next time we debate. It is almost sad to see you that way when I gave my own opinion and experiences and then ignore my questions as well as basic logic to prove a point.

@Spike is right, and I agree 100% with him. The reason I didn’t use the heritage argument is because you would have said “population is population” or some shit bla bla bla.

Griz - you are a headache, becuase this isn't the first time you've said something dislikable, gotten negative feedback, and then went all into your emotions. You do give me a headache, it's a statement, not an opinoin. 

@Spike does not give me a headache however, as he says facts and states his opinoin since he has lived in the US. He has lived in Chicago, which is one of the worst supported teams out there, so I understand why he thinks it's not popular. His facts, while I don't totally agree, are something that I can understand. 

Instead, you literrally said soccer in the U.S. is not popular, by using Twitter, a forum full of brits, and using an MLS club NOT in the U.S.A. I couldn't think of a worse argument. 

I still think attendance should be a measure on how popular a team is/isn't. We have some large stadiums here that fill out quite well, and I think that's a testament to how much interest people have. Who is hell is going to drive through LA/NYC/Atlanta traffic to see a sport they don't care about? I wouldn't think anyone. 

The fact that this country is obsessed with our Women's Soccer team, for me, screams that it matters and it's a popular sport here. 

Is it more regionalized that the MLB and NFL? Absolutely. But again, you are comparing a league that's been around over a 100 years, to one that's been here in the State since the mid-70's...maybe. 

[nudge+]

Just did a quick search for some raw data. 

The most recent Gallup survey (still two years old):

American Football still well ahead but it seems the other three sports (basketball, baseball and soccer) are pretty even in terms of being "favourite sport to watch" for the participants of the survey at 11%, 9% and 7% respectively, they are followed by ice hockey, auto racing and tennis. Soccer is the only sport that gained popularity since the last poll. What's also interesting is how popularity of baseball seems to have dropped throughout the decades. American Football lost ground as well.

This one is an even more interesting graph: 

It seems that soccer is the second most popular spectator sport among young adults in the age group of 18 to 34 years old (tied with basketball). Also, soccer is the third most popular sport for 35 to 54 years old and children under 18 (just 1-2% behind basketball). It's the older generation of over 55 that has no interest in the sport at all (1% only). Those findings seem to support the claims of an earlier ESPN survey that claimed that soccer is the second most popular sport in the US among those aged 12-24:

Once again, it's behind American football but above basketball (almost tied). 

 

Now for participation: the last year's Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA) report on the number of participants in team sports in the US:

Basketball has a clear lead here with baseball second and soccer third. American football is behind even if flag and tackle versions are counted together.

To expand on that there's also participation rates based on ethnicity:

Hispanics make up the highest percentage of people playing soccer in the US but only slightly ahead of Caucasian/Whites. 

When it comes to youth participation, soccer is the most popular sport for 6-9 year olds, then it loses out to basketball and is the second most popular sport in the age group of 9-13 then it's shortly overtaken by baseball but then retakes the second place at the age group of 17-18 year olds. 

 

 

 

[Eco]

2 hours ago, Grizzly21 said:

When I brought this back up you said I was contradicting myself, I work for the sun bla bla bla. Tiring to see a normal discussion be returned with "you're a headache".

Your memory is absolute shit. 

I never mentioned you working for the Sun. Just like Stan and Lucas never said the MLS is a powerhouse. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Eco said:

Griz - you are a headache, becuase this isn't the first time you've said something dislikable, gotten negative feedback, and then went all into your emotions. You do give me a headache, it's a statement, not an opinoin. 

@Spike does not give me a headache however, as he says facts and states his opinoin since he has lived in the US. He has lived in Chicago, which is one of the worst supported teams out there, so I understand why he thinks it's not popular. His facts, while I don't totally agree, are something that I can understand. 

Instead, you literrally said soccer in the U.S. is not popular, by using Twitter, a forum full of brits, and using an MLS club NOT in the U.S.A. I couldn't think of a worse argument. 

I still think attendance should be a measure on how popular a team is/isn't. We have some large stadiums here that fill out quite well, and I think that's a testament to how much interest people have. Who is hell is going to drive through LA/NYC/Atlanta traffic to see a sport they don't care about? I wouldn't think anyone. 

The fact that this country is obsessed with our Women's Soccer team, for me, screams that it matters and it's a popular sport here. 

Is it more regionalized that the MLB and NFL? Absolutely. But again, you are comparing a league that's been around over a 100 years, to one that's been here in the State since the mid-70's...maybe. 

No, I am a headache to you cos you think I'm ignorant. It's more an agenda against me if anything. Look later in the thread and I used facts, yet you ignore every good point I've made prior. So please don't go around speaking shit. I also said "it's unpopular on here" why is that so fucking hard to understand ffs.

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

Your memory is absolute shit. 

I never mentioned you working for the Sun. Just like Stan and Lucas never said the MLS is a powerhouse. 

And you gave it a like, so you agreed.

[Guest]

Cue the "you make yourself the victim too much" post. It's coming.

[Eco]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

No, I am a headache to you cos you think I'm ignorant. It's more an agenda against me if anything. Look later in the thread and I used facts, yet you ignore every good point I've made prior. So please don't go around speaking shit. I also said "it's unpopular on here" why is that so fucking hard to understand ffs.

No, you are a headache because you seemingly can't have a conversation with me without getting upset and in your feelings. 

Just now, Grizzly21 said:

And you gave it a like, so you agreed.

No - I thought it was fucking funny. 

Jesus, I bet you're a joy at parties mate. 

[Eco]

1 minute ago, Grizzly21 said:

Cue the "you make yourself the victim too much" post. It's coming.

You sure do love playing the victim. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Just now, Eco said:

No, you are a headache because you seemingly can't have a conversation with me without getting upset and in your feelings. 

No - I thought it was fucking funny. 

Jesus, I bet you're a joy at parties mate. 

Quote somewhere in the post before Spike walked in that I insulted you or got heated.

You're making things up now. I gave my opinion and you attacked me for "being ignorant and lying with inaccurate information". So this ones on you I'm afraid.

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, nudge said:

Just did a quick search for some raw data. 

The most recent Gallup survey (still two years old):

American Football still well ahead but it seems the other three sports (basketball, baseball and soccer) are pretty even in terms of being "favourite sport to watch" for the participants of the survey at 11%, 9% and 7% respectively, they are followed by ice hockey, auto racing and tennis. Soccer is the only sport that gained popularity since the last poll. What's also interesting is how popularity of baseball seems to have dropped throughout the decades. American Football lost ground as well.

This one is an even more interesting graph: 

It seems that soccer is the second most popular spectator sport among young adults in the age group of 18 to 34 years old (tied with basketball). Also, soccer is the third most popular sport for 35 to 54 years old and children under 18 (just 1-2% behind basketball). It's the older generation of over 55 that has no interest in the sport at all (1% only). Those findings seem to support the claims of an earlier ESPN survey that claimed that soccer is the second most popular sport in the US among those aged 12-24:

Once again, it's behind American football but above basketball (almost tied). 

 

Now for participation: the last year's Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA) report on the number of participants in team sports in the US:

Basketball has a clear lead here with baseball second and soccer third. American football is behind even if flag and tackle versions are counted together.

To expand on that there's also participation rates based on ethnicity:

Hispanics make up the highest percentage of people playing soccer in the US but only slightly ahead of Caucasian/Whites. 

When it comes to youth participation, soccer is the most popular sport for 6-9 year olds, then it loses out to basketball and is the second most popular sport in the age group of 9-13 then it's shortly overtaken by baseball but then retakes the second place at the age group of 17-18 year olds. 

 

 

 

So it's quite popular then