Really, because it sounds like Rugby, but wait, you "tough" americans need to put 40 pounds of gear to play that one! (This is a joke, kind of)DJmagma said:football (american one) convays power, skill, energy, raw power, barreling past your opponents at break neck speed, over coming them one at a time. it's a endurence test, and conveys the American spirit perfectly.
Well, there are plenty of soccer fields here, that's for sure. I even met an Irish guy who who comes here to coach it in Eden Prairie. But I should clarify my post a little more. I don't hate soccer, I just find it incredibly boring to watch, which makes it even harder to get interested in. It does take a lot of stamina to play so that part I admire, but I hear the same gripes about my favorite sport, baseball, being boring. To each their own I say.mmiller1114 said:yea the whole Americans hate soccer/football is a massive generalization. I met a good amount of people here in Minnesota (a state on the border of Canada) that like soccer/football. but we do live in a country where the people that scream the loudest no matter if they are a minority will get the most attention because they are the ones that get turned into the stereotypes. and right now i bet there are Americans standing on their roofs naked screaming "I HATE SOCCER" and all the world dose is look at them and take notes.
I don't know how many times I have read, in this thread, that Rugby is just American Football without pads. I have to tell you that it's completely false. While American Football gets it's name, and origins from Rugby football, just like soccer gets its origins from Associated football. (seriously soccer originated as a term for football in Britain).Swarley said:I find it quite boring, so little going on. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate it, I've just never really watched a match that I've enjoyed. Though I'm Canadian, so I guess this thread isn't about me.
Really, because it sounds like Rugby, but wait, you "tough" americans need to put 40 pounds of gear to play that one! (This is a joke, kind of)DJmagma said:football (american one) convays power, skill, energy, raw power, barreling past your opponents at break neck speed, over coming them one at a time. it's a endurence test, and conveys the American spirit perfectly.
Slaanax said:Americans have money to spend on more expensive sports that's why. Soccer is most popular with countries that can't afford things like shoulder pads and Ice skating rinks.
Well, for this world cup I've got one word for you: Vuvuzela.Cerrax said:This has probably been done to death, but I couldn't find it.
So what is with all the hate for the World Cup?
I honestly can't understand it. I certainly prefer other sports over it, but I don't get the rabid rage over it that I see a lot of Americans have.
I totally agree that Ghana was more deserving to win, and honestly, as an American, I'm kind of glad they did for all the reasons you listed, but my point was that it shouldn't happen. Logistically, there should be enough good soccer players in America to beat just about anybody, just by using statistical probabilities that complete freaks of nature with more athletic talent in their pinky than most of us have in our entire bodies would be here. I mean, we're talented in literally everything else (we have a competitive curling team when the Olympics come around; you can't possibly tell me that curling is so much more interesting to the average American than soccer that there are more curling stars in this countryRoaminthecrimesolvingpaladin said:But then again Ghana are a nation that is passionate about football. It would have been depressing to see a nation that cares so much go out as opposed to a nation that treats football so casually. Also, it would have been depressing for the final African team in the first African world cup to go out to a nation that, overall doesn't care. Overall, the team that deserved it won. I understand that that wasn't your original point but I needed to say it somewhere.Falcon123 said:Maybe it's because the United States has never had a real star or ever been very good. We get owned every year by countries that are so much smaller than us (Ghana! Really? We have 300 Million + in our country and we can't find 11 players who are good enough to beat Ghana?!?). If we spent the time actually training soccer players instead of turning anyone with natural athletic talent into a baseball, football, or basketball star, we might have enough talent on the team to inspire some fandom, but as long as we lose to countries the average American would deem inferior in most ways (again, GHANA?!?), no one will be able to sell the sport when we already dominate in most other sports about which we currently care.
Also basically no one is willing to watch a game that is tactical enough that there is the possibility of a draw
Well, maybe America got beaten by Ghana because they're more passionate about the game, in that there eeryone plays it all the time, and as such there are far more players who can actually exercise their potential. It's quite possible that in America, quite a lot of potentially talented football players are lost to other, more popular, more exposed sports? Anyway, that's just my opinion...Falcon123 said:I totally agree that Ghana was more deserving to win, and honestly, as an American, I'm kind of glad they did for all the reasons you listed, but my point was that it shouldn't happen. Logistically, there should be enough good soccer players in America to beat just about anybody, just by using statistical probabilities that complete freaks of nature with more athletic talent in their pinky than most of us have in our entire bodies would be here. I mean, we're talented in literally everything else (we have a competitive curling team when the Olympics come around; you can't possibly tell me that curling is so much more interesting to the average American than soccer that there are more curling stars in this country), so we should have a talented soccer team. But we just don't. Weak strikers + weak defense = round of 16 exit, regardless of our goalie or midfielders (Donovan is awesome, but he's imported from Scotland so he barely counts).
When we field a good team that can legitimately compete with the rest of the world (and it honestly shouldn't be this hard...), soccer will sell here. Until then, we'll write it off as "that European sport no real American cares about".
Football (soccer)is the non-contact variant of the game. You can't have a go at people for complainig about injuries in it, it isn't the point.asinann said:They also play it without anyone strong of fast enough to play American Football.Tranka Verrane said:No, we just call it rugby and play it without padding. Also, this isn't a USA and Europe thing, this is a USA and rest of the world thing.JourneyThroughHell said:They don't.
I've met a lot of americans on these forums who were pretty passionate about soccer.
But, hell, even if you're right, most Europeans dislike American football also, so the door swings both ways.
For the record, I'm not particularly interested in fottball of any flavour. But I'm gay.
It also doesn't help that there is more acting and delaying through injury in a single game of soccer than in the last decade of American Football. We might stop the clock for a bit, but at least the only people we have in the game that fall over and act like they're hurt whenever someone looks at them cross-eyed are the kickers, and we usually get them from soccer teams.