Thanks Soccer - see you again in four years

I watched a grand total of 30 minutes of the entire tournament but it did generate tremendous media coverage that was hard to ignore. The next World Cup will not be as popular in the US because the time zone difference from Russia is really going to kill it.

From what I understand the EPL has a decent following in the USA but MLS ratings and attendance are strictly minor league. And don't go quoting some big sellout at Foxboro or the Meadowlands for an International friendly - that's stunt programming not everyday league stuff.

I know it's the most popular sport on the planet but could they change a few things for US?

1. Get rid of offsides
2. When play stops - stop the clock. That way we don't have to guess how much time is left in the fucking game. Oh and while we're at it can we count down to zero please.
3. Unlimited substitutions during stopages.
4. Go with ten players instead of eleven. Let's have some goals.
5. Sudden death overtime.

FWIW...Fox has the broadcast rights to the next 2 World Cups.

I would take the ESPN production over Fox's generally loud and grating approach.

gHost Spartan wrote:The World Cup is an amazing sporting event and one of the great things about it is that it hasn't been corrupted by television and artificial time outs like football and basketball. Keep it the way it is.

  

You funny

I enjoyed it...the little that I could watch. When the vast majority of games are on during the work day M-F it's tough to get into it. I realize there's not much they can do about that, I'm just sayin'.

WBill wrote:FWIW...Fox has the broadcast rights to the next 2 World Cups.

I would take the ESPN production over Fox's generally loud and grating approach.

I watched appx. 15 minutes of actual WC soccer this year. With Fox broadcasting, I will watch 15 minutes less in 2018. I wonder if they will use a glowing soccer ball in their broadcasts and soccer robots in their promos...?

gHost Spartan wrote:The World Cup is an amazing sporting event and one of the great things about it is that it hasn't been corrupted by television and artificial time outs like football and basketball. Keep it the way it is.

This. Strangelove doesn't have to fucking watch

gHost Spartan wrote:The World Cup is an amazing sporting event and one of the great things about it is that it hasn't been corrupted by television and artificial time outs like football and basketball. Keep it the way it is.

True dat.  They don't stop that clock for nothing. Then they add some mystery time at the end. Love it!

I disagree and agree with both sides being made in this thread. I don't think it's an amazing sporting event personally. I could take it or leave it. I did watch a bit, and was kinda even marginally "into" the US games and tooting them on. Overall, I do find it pretty boring and I do think the changes that Strangelove mentioned would make the sport much more palatable for me and other American sports fans.

That said, the rest of the world seems to enjoy it just fine as it is, and have for a long ass fuckin' time. There is no reason they should have to change the sport for us. That would be ridiculous.

Would be cool to see some of those changes in MLS, though, I guess. I still would never watch, unless Detroit got a team. Then I would consider it, as long as I could bet on it.

Went to an MLS game this weekend, and I loved it. Great atmosphere and a lot of fun to watch. MLS will take off and gain popularity.

First, I like football better than I like soccer. So, let's get that out of the way. But, I do like soccer. 

So, here's what I don't get about the complaining about the clock in soccer... Football has some of the most arbitrary rules of any sport. The clock stops. That's nice. Except when it doesn't stop because someone went down in bounds. Oh, but they got a first down! The clock will stop now until that fat dude on the sidelines finishes his sandwich and moves the sticks. Then it will start again. Sure, why not. And in the last two minutes? Never mind, just kidding, the rules regarding the clock are different now.

Speaking of random arbitraryness in football. Ref- "Oh yeah, no, the ball was down right here on that play. Sure, why not?" Next play, same thing. Then one more time.  Now we're going to measure to the inch whether the ball traveled 10 yards ignoring the fact that the spotting of the ball was probably screwed up by at least a foot in either direction on the previous three plays.

I'm not putting down football, I'm just saying that all sports have their strange idiosyncrasies. Just how it is... And getting rid of offsides is the worst idea ever. Changing it to a more hockey like offsides? Maybe, but it will obviously never happen. Getting rid of it would be stupid.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:First, I like football better than I like soccer. So, let's get that out of the way. But, I do like soccer. 

So, here's what I don't get about the complaining about the clock in soccer... Football has some of the most arbitrary rules of any sport. The clock stops. That's nice. Except when it doesn't stop because someone went down in bounds. Oh, but they got a first down! The clock will stop now until that fat dude on the sidelines finishes his sandwich and moves the sticks. Then it will start again. Sure, why not. And in the last two minutes? Never mind, just kidding, the rules regarding the clock are different now.

Speaking of random arbitraryness in football. Ref- "Oh yeah, no, the ball was down right here on that play. Sure, why not?" Next play, same thing. Then one more time.  Now we're going to measure to the inch whether the ball traveled 10 yards ignoring the fact that the spotting of the ball was probably screwed up by at least a foot in either direction on the previous three plays.

I'm not putting down football, I'm just saying that all sports have their strange idiosyncrasies. Just how it is... And getting rid of offsides is the worst idea ever. Changing it to a more hockey like offsides? Maybe, but it will obviously never happen. Getting rid of it would be stupid.

Start stop or not... At least when that shit gets to zero, we know the game's over.

Gomer wrote:

Exactly. And they roll around with exagerated, pained grimaces on their faces like they just broke a leg until getting up 30 seconds later

Gomer wrote:
Start stop or not... At least when that shit gets to zero, we know the game's over.

Except.... It's not because the play isn't over yet. Which is essentially the same way soccer works. They add on a couple of minutes, when that time is up they let the current play play itself out then it's over. You know pretty much every time when the game is going to end if you watch even a handful of games.

Get rid of offsides? I can't take the OP seriously.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:First, I like football better than I like soccer. So, let's get that out of the way. But, I do like soccer. 

So, here's what I don't get about the complaining about the clock in soccer... Football has some of the most arbitrary rules of any sport. The clock stops. That's nice. Except when it doesn't stop because someone went down in bounds. Oh, but they got a first down! The clock will stop now until that fat dude on the sidelines finishes his sandwich and moves the sticks. Then it will start again. Sure, why not. And in the last two minutes? Never mind, just kidding, the rules regarding the clock are different now.

Speaking of random arbitraryness in football. Ref- "Oh yeah, no, the ball was down right here on that play. Sure, why not?" Next play, same thing. Then one more time.  Now we're going to measure to the inch whether the ball traveled 10 yards ignoring the fact that the spotting of the ball was probably screwed up by at least a foot in either direction on the previous three plays.

I'm not putting down football, I'm just saying that all sports have their strange idiosyncrasies. Just how it is... And getting rid of offsides is the worst idea ever. Changing it to a more hockey like offsides? Maybe, but it will obviously never happen. Getting rid of it would be stupid.

The only thing similar between soccer and football is the large grassy field. Hockey is very similar to soccer, and arena soccer proved to be the higher scoring action packed spinoff.

On soccer offsides: change it / get rid of it but that rule is a big part of why these games end so low scoring. That offside trap is an abomination. Of course if you go from 11 to 10 you might not need to change that rule.

In the knockout round and including that abortion of a third place game ten of the sixteen games "featured" two goals or less total.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:On soccer offsides: change it / get rid of it but that rule is a big part of why these games end so low scoring. That offside trap is an abomination. Of course if you go from 11 to 10 you might not need to change that rule.

In the knockout round and including that abortion of a third place game ten of the sixteen games "featured" two goals or less total.

Getting rid of offsides would turn the game into a school yard game of 500 except no one can use their hands except for one person. You'd have 3-4 really tall offensive players, 3-4 tall defenders and a goalie just hanging out all game inside of the six yard box waiting for a midfielder to hit a lob into the area so someone can head it. Basically, you'd have a game of nothing but corner kicks. That's a horrible option.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:On soccer offsides: change it / get rid of it but that rule is a big part of why these games end so low scoring. That offside trap is an abomination. Of course if you go from 11 to 10 you might not need to change that rule.

In the knockout round and including that abortion of a third place game ten of the sixteen games "featured" two goals or less total.

It will never change, if you like scoring then there's always basketball or football. Soccer is about strategy, and defense...it's a chess match and you watch it all unfold for that one exciting moment.

steveschneider wrote:

It will never change, if you like scoring then there's always basketball or football. Soccer is about strategy, and defense...it's a chess match and you watch it all unfold for that one exciting moment.

It's also about acting.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Getting rid of offsides would turn the game into a school yard game of 500 except no one can use their hands except for one person. You'd have 3-4 really tall offensive players, 3-4 tall defenders and a goalie just hanging out all game inside of the six yard box waiting for a midfielder to hit a lob into the area so someone can head it. Basically, you'd have a game of nothing but corner kicks. That's a horrible option.

His mind is set, all you can do really is steer him to basketball or football.

Maybe a better compromise is to keep offsides but make a goal worth 6 points the same as a touchdown so that Americans like dr strange love can see scores like 6-0 or 12-6 in the paper. There will even be the occasional 42-6 match like the Germany vs brazil match.

Turtleneck wrote:

It's also about acting.

The flopper aka Olympic diver is all over the NBA and NCAA division I basketball and you see receivers sell PI in the NFL and CFB. Coaches in a lot of american sports teach their players to flop all of the time. At least in soccer the announcers rip the player a new one and shame him for diving.

I had no idea Johnny Adams was an Olympic diver.

Izzo Court wrote:

The only thing similar between soccer and football is the large grassy field.  Hockey is very similar to soccer, and arena soccer proved to be the higher scoring action packed spinoff.

I didn't say they were similar. I said that they both have some random rules that don't really make sense if looked at from an outsiders perspective. And actually, I'd argue that football has more weird/random rules than any other sport does.

gHost Spartan wrote:The boners hating on soccer haven't grown up watching the sport or simply aren't intellectually sophisticated enough to comprehend the nuances and enjoy it for what it is.  

What we don't need are lessons about sports from gHost.

WBill wrote:FWIW...Fox has the broadcast rights to the next 2 World Cups.

I would take the ESPN production over Fox's generally loud and grating approach.

Gus Johnson doing soccer might be interesting...once. "AltidoooooooOOOOORE STILL RUNNING!!!!! GOAL KICK!!!!!!! NIL-NIL OH MY GOD!!!!!"

Kinda like this:



or this:



 

Fox is doing the next world Cup?! **** that noise man. I thought ESPN did a pretty solid job this year.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Fox is doing the next world Cup?! **** that noise man. I thought ESPN did a pretty solid job this year.

ESPN has really kicked it up a few notches the last couple of Cups, and this year was especially good. I'm sad to see ESPN lose it, because they have been very good for the sport in this country. Fox has a lot to live up to. Fox Soccer was always decent, and they do a good enough job with the Champions League, but the World Cup draws a lot more than just the die hard fans. They have to find the balance between appealing to the casual fans, but not turning off the die hards. It took ESPN about 15 years to figure that out. Fox has 4 years to figure it out, but they have the ESPN blue print, and if they're smart will call on their ties to Sky Sports. Hopefully that will be enough time to realize that Gus Johnson should not be announcing soccer. That's the only really big complaint I have about Fox's soccer coverage over the last 15 years. No Americans doing play by play, please.

MiamiSpartan wrote:
ESPN has really kicked it up a few notches the last couple of Cups, and this year was especially good. I'm sad to see ESPN lose it, because they have been very good for the sport in this country. Fox has a lot to live up to. Fox Soccer was always decent, and they do a good enough job with the Champions League, but the World Cup draws a lot more than just the die hard fans. They have to find the balance between appealing to the casual fans, but not turning off the die hards. It took ESPN about 15 years to figure that out. Fox has 4 years to figure it out, but they have the ESPN blue print, and if they're smart will call on their ties to Sky Sports. Hopefully that will be enough time to realize that Gus Johnson should not be announcing soccer. That's the only really big complaint I have about Fox's soccer coverage over the last 15 years. No Americans doing play by play, please.

Agree, losing Ian Darke (sp?) will be a shame.

Getting rid of offside is a ridiculous suggestion.

 Yeah, FIFA should totally cater to people who only watch a few minutes of soccer every four years.

It's the most popular sport in the world, and second place isn't even close. I think the sport will survive without your viewership.

it's dumb that they cannot use their hands in this sport...

Dr. Strangelove wrote:I watched a grand total of 30 minutes of the entire tournament but it did generate tremendous media coverage that was hard to ignore. The next World Cup will not be as popular in the US because the time zone difference from Russia is really going to kill it.

From what I understand the EPL has a decent following in the USA but MLS ratings and attendance are strictly minor league. And don't go quoting some big sellout at Foxboro or the Meadowlands for an International friendly - that's stunt programming not everyday league stuff.

I know it's the most popular sport on the planet but could they change a few things for US?

1. Get rid of offsides
2. When play stops - stop the clock. That way we don't have to guess how much time is left in the fucking game. Oh and while we're at it can we count down to zero please.
3. Unlimited substitutions during stopages.
4. Go with ten players instead of eleven. Let's have some goals.
5. Sudden death overtime.

6. Every time something happens I don't like/understand, a representative of FIFA jumps out of my television and explains to me how the game works.

CrazySparty wrote: Yeah, FIFA should totally cater to people who only watch a few minutes of soccer every four years.

It's the most popular sport in the world, and second place isn't even close. I think the sport will survive without your viewership.

I acknowledged soccer (or football as they quaintly call it) and it's popularity worldwide. Hell why wouldn't it be? All it takes to play is a ball (or a head if you're in Afghanistan). Plus those poor bastards don't have American football.

I'm just saying that it will never be more than the fourth or fifth most popular sport in the United States. It's a once every four years event - the World Cup gets good ratings when the time zone is right.

I know they won't change for US - they hate US. Though they really should let people know how much time is left in the fucking game.

Really don't see much practical difference from a football or basketball clock reading 2 minutes with the possibility the clock may still be stopped a dozen times for timeouts, fouls etc.

WBill wrote:

Really don't see much practical difference from a football or basketball clock reading 2 minutes with the possibility the clock may still be stopped a dozen times for timeouts, fouls etc.

The last two minutes to a college bball game can be infuriating. I hear people bitching about how the game of baseball needs to be sped up, I say bullshit speed up the last 2 minutes of a college basketball game.

steveschneider wrote:

The last two minutes to a college bball game can be infuriating. I hear people bitching about how the game of baseball needs to be sped up, I say bullshit speed up the last 2 minutes of a college basketball game.

The last few minutes of an even close game CAN be flat out awful in a college game. Time out, foul, time out, foul....   

College basketball should lower the amount of time outs.

steveschneider wrote:

The last two minutes to a college bball game can be infuriating. I hear people bitching about how the game of baseball needs to be sped up, I say bullshit speed up the last 2 minutes of a college basketball game.

And now they go to the monitor for every fuckin out of bounds play in college hoops.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:

I acknowledged soccer (or football as they quaintly call it) and it's popularity worldwide. Hell why wouldn't it be? All it takes to play is a ball (or a head if you're in Afghanistan). Plus those poor bastards don't have American football.

I'm just saying that it will never be more than the fourth or fifth most popular sport in the United States. It's a once every four years event - the World Cup gets good ratings when the time zone is right.

I know they won't change for US - they hate US. Though they really should let people know how much time is left in the fucking game.

The time zone has never been right for the US. These were primarily middle of the day games (except for 6pm games during the Group stages, and one single 9pm game on a Saturday night). Even when the World Cup was in the US, it was mostly afternoon games. And the game times (US time) won't be much different in 4 years. They will be played primarily as late afternoon and night games local Russian time. It is only a 2-3 hour difference from the previous two World Cups (South Africa and Germany). What you're likely to see is that instead of games at 6pm Eastern, there will be games at 9am Eastern in the group stages, but then the later round games will still be late morning and mid-afternoon like they were this year. They try to maximize the ability of people in Europe and the Americas to both watch, so games tend to be evening games in Europe and day games in the Americas. It's only when games were in Japan/South Korea that there were middle of the night games, because that can't be avoided without playing in the middle of the night in Asia.

Ratings weren't good for this World Cup because of the game times. Ratings were good because it was the best World Cup in most people's memory, and certainly the best since 1990, when US viewers were first able to watch more than 1 or 2 games live during the whole tournament.

gHost Spartan wrote:The boners hating on soccer haven't grown up watching the sport or simply aren't intellectually sophisticated enough to comprehend the nuances and enjoy it for what it is. Americans are very smug when it comes to soccer and changing the rules to make it more exciting, while at the same time embracing constant rule changes in NFL and college football which actually make the game even more boring. Soccer fans outside of the US can't understand why there are so many clock stoppages in football, and for the most part I agree. NFL is changing the game into a fantasy football database and a highlight reel for individual performances. The team concept barely exists anymore. It's a shame too. I'd love to see the NFL go old school with maybe not dudes playing offense and defense but at least to have the game be much more continuous and fluid. When it takes over 10 minutes to change quarters because of TV time outs then you know something is wrong.