Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Will they though? They've hidden it on AppleTV. I really think it was a backwards step for the league, but with Messi coming maybe that will result in increased subscribers? I'm not convinced.
It's funny, I was talking with my kids and the way they view soccer these days is so different from when I grew up, they see these players as the attraction, not the ground, not a club, but individual players. My kids love to talk about Ronaldo, Messi and Mbappe, but they couldn't tell you much about their teams. Soccer is permeating American society, just in a different, celebrity focused way.
I've said previously, I don't think MLS needs to be successful for soccer to grow in the US and with them moving behind a fairly niche paywall, I think soccer fans would rather watch higher quality games from Europe than they would a game involving Colombus vs New York Red Bulls.
And, I'm sure, a typical outsiders view here, but they need to look at relegation and promotion with USL.
Cable and network TV are dying. More and more are cutting the cord. With AppleTV, you can watch on Iphone.
In order to really grow, people especially children need believe there is a future in it. That is where MLS, and USL come into play.
What's the difference between the Fabinho foot stomp and a Ndamukong Suh foot stomp? Other than that Fabinho throws his arms up to the sky praying it's not a red card and always gets away with it. I watch Liverpool. He does probably 10 of those per year.
I watch a ton of Championship where there is no VAR. It's really physical.
American football is sanctioned violence. Every culture needs both, a violent game to simulate warfare, and a softer game people. Violent games are necessary to teach young lads how to be tough. But still need something fun so once you grow past a certain stage, you can actually partake without risking injury.
Yes...I stated the INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE MLS is what is needed to elevate soccer in the US and "steal" away talented Americans from other sports.
I live in Texas, a huge state with a huge hispanic population, and we have ZERO......I'll repeat that, ZERO, P5 Mens soccer programs, at the University level.
That is the infrastructure I am talking about. Why play a sport with a glass ceiling when you can make X amount more playing almost any other sport?
What "glass ceiling?"
MLS has its own structure, and that is mostly through its own academy clubs, which players get into from a young age. And if someone goes from Academy (or even ECNL) to MLS and is a standout in MLS, they end up in the Euro leagues, with the potential to make significantly more than most athletes in other American sports.
Soccer is immensely popular worldwide, and even if one doesn't make it to the top leagues to earn tens of millions per year, there are roughly 20 more pro leagues where one can make a great salary and play "pro" for years. There is no glass ceiling at all, and the possibilities are endless, given you have the skillset and train hard enough. The same can't be said for NBA (have to be freakishly tall) or NFL (have to be overweight/obese -- literally -- and are at high risk of permanent brain damage.)
If one can't make the NBA, what else is there? G-League? China? What if he's only 5'9"? He spent his entire youth life training, only to be told he's too short?
American Football is even worse. If you don't make the NFL, what's under it? CFL?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133
Why do you think Higher Education having a team is essential? Most of the world does not have this even Canada. Well Canada has USports, but that is more for un signed players and basically a step back.
I echo this sentiment. I grew up playing some pretty high level hockey. Only ONE guy I know ended up playing in college. It's not something anyone really thought about. That's a Basketball and American Football mindset. The rest played top Junior leagues, and either proceeded to go pro in North American leagues, in Europe, or simply retired if they didn't make the show.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133
Soccer you dont need to be any of those. It has more mass appeal for playing.
I think people are missing the point of the college/university vs. private development argument; namely, the former makes other sports much more accessible to a wider potential talent pool. And on a related note, football/baseball/basketball with their greater ubiquity in public school and university athletic programs enjoy a lot more taxpayer support that soccer has to compete against with more private funds. That limits access and reduces the available talent pool.
Even the poorest and most destitute school districts will bend over backward to make sure there's a football and basketball program; and many of those districts might not even be interested in soccer even if they had the means.
Most of the reasons for soccer's failure to launch have already been mentioned by others. To summarize:
1) Intense competition from already established sports from the NFL, NBA and MLB.
2) I would say that the fact that MLS contracts dont pay anything close to what talented athletes could make in the other Americans sports is the biggest factor. And I would say that it is also part of the reason for the almost complete disappearance of baseball from the radar of talented black kids. You get to the pros and the big contracts far quicker in basketball and football than you do in any other league.
Soccer faces the extra obstacle in that to get to the big paying leagues in Europe, you are pretty much going to have to move to Europe as a kid to start training and coming up through the youth academies system over there. Nothing in America comes close to the level of development and expertise that a kid would get from being in the Barca or Man U systems. That is understandably a massive ask for families here to either have the resources to pull it off or be able to make the adjustment to life in an entirely different country with no guarantee that it will payoff in the end, the payoff being the kid becoming a star in Europe.
So essentially a kid here in the US has the prospect of a ceiling on his development as a player which of course also caps the money that he can make playing soccer. Far easier to just pivot to basketball or football where the path to success is far less daunting, and is only going to become easier now that NIL is now available to star football and basketball player in college. You can be a millionaire as an 18 year old.
It's a shame because I actually think a few native born successful American stars would really blow up soccer here in the US. On Youtube, there are several reaction videos of Americans watching highlight reels of the great Brazilian star Ronaldinho. The flash and obvious talent of the guy would translate immediately to American viewers. I could easily see an Allen Iverson playing soccer would be an instant TV attraction.
I think people are missing the point of the college/university vs. private development argument; namely, the former makes other sports much more accessible to a wider potential talent pool. And on a related note, football/baseball/basketball with their greater ubiquity in public school and university athletic programs enjoy a lot more taxpayer support that soccer has to compete against with more private funds. That limits access and reduces the available talent pool.
Even the poorest and most destitute school districts will bend over backward to make sure there's a football and basketball program; and many of those districts might not even be interested in soccer even if they had the means.
For how long will our current college/university system remain sustainable though? The cost of public education has gone through the roof in recent years/decades, and a lot of that is due to the amount of funding that goes into college sports (mainly basketball/football) in this country.
Makes me wonder: Why is it that this is only an issue with the US when it comes to athletics? No other country that I know of does this -- players pretty much all go through private development programs, rich and poor.
I think people are missing the point of the college/university vs. private development argument; namely, the former makes other sports much more accessible to a wider potential talent pool. And on a related note, football/baseball/basketball with their greater ubiquity in public school and university athletic programs enjoy a lot more taxpayer support that soccer has to compete against with more private funds. That limits access and reduces the available talent pool.
Even the poorest and most destitute school districts will bend over backward to make sure there's a football and basketball program; and many of those districts might not even be interested in soccer even if they had the means.
True, however there is a caveat. School districts also have to listen to its constituents. If its constituents begin to feel soccer is a good option then they will have to bend over backwards too.
Now why will constituents think soccer is a good option suddenly? The real future is in coaching at the youth level. But in order to get youth interest in the sport, there is needs to be the pro league so kids can dream about playing in it. MLS/USL does not pay as good as NBA or NFL, but it pays well enough, and the entry barriers are less. It is better than sitting in an office especially if you are not academically inclined.
You dont risk concussions and serious injuries. You dont have to be at least 6'6". Plus soccer already shares the field with the football field. It can field a large team, so more kids can play. You can have freshmen, JV, and varsity teams of 11 starters each, and a few more bench warmers. Plenty of appeal right there for parents to push soccer on their kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biafra4life
Most of the reasons for soccer's failure to launch have already been mentioned by others. To summarize:
1) Intense competition from already established sports from the NFL, NBA and MLB.
2) I would say that the fact that MLS contracts dont pay anything close to what talented athletes could make in the other Americans sports is the biggest factor. And I would say that it is also part of the reason for the almost complete disappearance of baseball from the radar of talented black kids. You get to the pros and the big contracts far quicker in basketball and football than you do in any other league.
Soccer faces the extra obstacle in that to get to the big paying leagues in Europe, you are pretty much going to have to move to Europe as a kid to start training and coming up through the youth academies system over there. Nothing in America comes close to the level of development and expertise that a kid would get from being in the Barca or Man U systems. That is understandably a massive ask for families here to either have the resources to pull it off or be able to make the adjustment to life in an entirely different country with no guarantee that it will payoff in the end, the payoff being the kid becoming a star in Europe.
So essentially a kid here in the US has the prospect of a ceiling on his development as a player which of course also caps the money that he can make playing soccer. Far easier to just pivot to basketball or football where the path to success is far less daunting, and is only going to become easier now that NIL is now available to star football and basketball player in college. You can be a millionaire as an 18 year old.
It's a shame because I actually think a few native born successful American stars would really blow up soccer here in the US. On Youtube, there are several reaction videos of Americans watching highlight reels of the great Brazilian star Ronaldinho. The flash and obvious talent of the guy would translate immediately to American viewers. I could easily see an Allen Iverson playing soccer would be an instant TV attraction.
Entering NBA/NFL means risking concussions, injuries, and need to be very tall (for BBall), and likely obese (for FB). It is in fact not easier to make it in those sports even to college.
But the real future in any sport is in coaching. MLS/USL will get kids to dream, and parents will want to put kids into it since less potential for injury. Kids dont need to be 6'6". Plus Messi just signed with Miami for godly money.
Now of course, the amount of soccer players is so huge, the wages will always be depressed. But as long as kids dream, there are demands for coaches which will provide a a future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal813
For how long will our current college/university system remain sustainable though? The cost of public education has gone through the roof in recent years/decades, and a lot of that is due to the amount of funding that goes into college sports (mainly basketball/football) in this country.
Makes me wonder: Why is it that this is only an issue with the US when it comes to athletics? No other country that I know of does this -- players pretty much all go through private development programs, rich and poor.
The irony of all this is the rising cost of public education is the only reason college sports, and college in general has been able to reach the heights it has now. It is a self terminating situation like stomach viruses.
For how long will our current college/university system remain sustainable though? The cost of public education has gone through the roof in recent years/decades, and a lot of that is due to the amount of funding that goes into college sports (mainly basketball/football) in this country.
No actually, the college price run-up has very little if anything to do with athletics and much more to do with a) administrative featherbedding, and b) increasingly opulent student facilities.
For the big universities in particular, the football and basketball programs are net revenue generators that help subsidize the non-revenue-generating sports programs. Even for smaller universities whose football/basketball teams don't pay for themselves through network contracts, corporate sponsorships, ticket sales, etc., they still have marketing value for the university, boost merchandise sales, etc.
And this still doesn't address the fact that most of our homegrown football/basketball/baseball talent comes up through the ranks of public school systems whereas most of our soccer talent comes up through private clubs. So soccer is still competing with taxpayer money to find and develop its talent.
No actually, the college price run-up has very little if anything to do with athletics and much more to do with a) administrative featherbedding, and b) increasingly opulent student facilities.
For the big universities in particular, the football and basketball programs are net revenue generators that help subsidize the non-revenue-generating sports programs. Even for smaller universities whose football/basketball teams don't pay for themselves through network contracts, corporate sponsorships, ticket sales, etc., they still have marketing value for the university, boost merchandise sales, etc.
And this still doesn't address the fact that most of our homegrown football/basketball/baseball talent comes up through the ranks of public school systems whereas most of our soccer talent comes up through private clubs. So soccer is still competing with taxpayer money to find and develop its talent.
THIS!!!!!!
The biggest problem IMO the future of soccer faces is that poor children get little to no exposure to good coaching, so the best athletes in poor communities concentrate on baseball, basketball, and football, where the coaching is taxpayer supported. My community has a taxpayer supported community football and basketball program where the teams feed into the high school programs and the players get far better coaching in these sports.
The biggest problem IMO the future of soccer faces is that poor children get little to no exposure to good coaching, so the best athletes in poor communities concentrate on baseball, basketball, and football, where the coaching is taxpayer supported. My community has a taxpayer supported community football and basketball program where the teams feed into the high school programs and the players get far better coaching in these sports.
The high poverty rate city next to me has a very active youth soccer program. The demographics of the city are heavily Portuguese and Hispanic so there is a lot of participation. I know some of the coaches. The ethnic Brazilian High School girls coach had a 4 year free ride in college playing soccer and lacrosse and had cat-like grace and athleticism that is quite remarkable. I remember her playing with my best friend’s daughter in youth soccer. That’s how I got introduced to the New England Revolution. It’s Massachusetts so there is more state money spread around to the poor cities than most places.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
