Why, in the words of Homer Simpson, will America never embrace football ('soccer')?

Raymitox
Wait a minute... ties are possible in NFL? I didn't know that, seriously.

 
 
Only during the regular season, obviously.  I believe it's only if no one has scored after 2 OT periods....so it's pretty rare.  
 
But games have gone longer.  I remember a very famous AFC Championship game between the San Diego Chargers and the Miami Dolphins in the 80's that went into triple OT before a winner was finally decided.   AMAZING game, and one of the most historic games in the history of the NFL.
 
EDIT: Correction...boy was I ever off by a long shot.  It was a Division Playoff game, and it was in 1994.  Sorry...

Nevermind....after doing more research, I've discovered that I remember the game incorrectly.   It was, in fact, 1981...and while it was an epic battle that went to OT...it was not triple OT.   (hey, give me a break, it was over 30 years ago)

You're forgetting that a tie could be the result of some seriously good offensive game by both parties (a 4-4 for instance) or a display of insane defense or goalkeeping (a 0-0 or 1-1). So it's not like both teams were just jerking around not wanting to win.
 
Back in days in soccer there could not be a tie so games that ended in one had to go through extra-time and then penalty shots as the last resource. The problem was that weak teams would just defend and try their luck in the shootouts. That resulted in a lot of undeserved rewards for weak teams that brought nothing to the table. The tie system allows for a league that is more consistent with the game played by both teams.
 
You have to remember that European leagues (Premier league, La liga, Seria A etc.) reward consistency during the season. So, teams that only seek ties will face relegation eventually. Nothing more exiting that watching two teams facing relegation at the end of the season, they don't settle for a tie they bring everything they can. If you want direct elimination you have the FA cup, the champions league with its away goal system which is just genius.
 
Something I've realized about Baseball and American Rugb...i mean american football, is that they have a lot of resting time which is used for ads but also to allow overweight players to be part of the game which is good since overweight population in america is not an anomaly . CC Sabathia, Big Papi, or most defenders in a american football are at least chubby and could not run 5 minutes straight, let alone sprint which is more demanding like is the case for Soccer players. 
 
H
 
 

Well, I for one HATE away goals rule. Yes, it makes the game more offensive, but it is very unfair in my opinion.

Ties flat-out suck.  They should be outlawed.  Play the game until someone wins.  If the game lasts three days, then that's awesome.  The ultimate in competition.  Ties are evil.

@Taffer
 
Yeah i see your point about how exciting the game was.... I just hate not being able to define the winner. Almost leaves too much open for discussion. 

Raymitox
Well, I for one HATE away goals rule. Yes, it makes the game more offensive, but it is very unfair in my opinion.

 
Indeed. It's ridiculous that a 3-3 draw can have more weight than a scoreless match. The object of the game is to outscore the other team. To proclaim one team's goals more valuable than the other's is absurd.

Wow.  They do that? 
 
How incredibly stupid.

The NFL has ties. It doesn't happen often.

Well, think about a good team that is not too good playing at Camp Nou for example. This year they have allowed something like 2 goals in 18 games. Some teams are almost impossible to score against when they are at home. I don't know if it's a dimension of the pitch difference, or the pressure from the crowd but when a team is a home it almost always has an advantage. Therefore the rule.
 
Basically if a game is tied at 1-1 the visitor is given reward because it is bloody difficult to score. Having 80,000 people against you messes up your concentration, ask Figo every time he went back to Camp Nou ( note that this rule happens only in most cups tournaments, not league tournament).
 
H

Maybe a football (soccer for the sake of confusion) fan can explain to me.
 
Why not have a "shootout" to define the winner?   Is that really such a terrible idea?    (similar to what hockey does now?)

jammindude


Maybe a football (soccer for the sake of confusion) fan can explain to me.

Why not have a "shootout" to define the winner?   Is that really such a terrible idea?    (similar to what hockey does now?)

Football has shootouts (penalty kicks) in direct elimination tournaments but they are used as the last resource as there is a bigger amount of luck involved. Now, for league tournaments, which reward consistency over 38 games or more, defining a winner just for the sake of it is not a relevant assessment for either team. You have to prove that you are the best not in one game but in 38 games.
 
Correct me if I’m wrong but even in hockey the winner of a shootout doesn’t get the full three points right? So just determining a winner for the sake of it is just silly IMO. You want to minimize luck not enhance it. If you want to win you have 90 minutes to score, if neither team does, or they both score the same amount of time then having a winner is not a fair assessment. Again leagues are not based on what happens in 1 game but in a whole season. If you hate ties watch direct elimination tournaments their assessment of a champion is different.
 
It’s like being evaluated on math tests where the solution gives you 1 point and the process gives you the other 9 points. Sure you can give the answer but that’s not the assessment of the test.  League tournaments are like that, an assessment of the whole season performance and not one game.
 
Again, it’s not like a tie means that the game was boring or that neither team went for the win, that rarely happens. A tie is the result of serious good defending or serious good attacking power by both teams.  Watch FC Barcelona VS Sevilla from two months ago, that was a seriously good game thanks to the enormous attaking power of Barcelona and the insane goalkeeping by sevilla. It was a 0-0 tie that had every fan of both teams on the edge of the seat until the last minute.
 
Having a penalty shootout in every game is an incentive for visitor teams to do nothing and then try to win the gamble that is penalty kicks and get away with 3 lucky points. If you think about it, you can avoid relegation by just doing that but if your strategy is to tie every game you will almost 100% be relegated.
 
That's my take on this subject. Remember, leagues and cups reward different things.
 
H

IMO, what makes soccer so appealing to a large percentage of the world population, is that soccer fans are more than fans of a particular sport. In fact, they are not fans at all, but family members of a certain team. So when that team looses you actually feel violated. This means that the emotional attachement to a team is proportional to the excitment someone feels when that team is playing. 
 
From what I can see, in American sports loosing or winning is not that big a deal. In soccer - at least for some people like me - winning and loosing are life changing events. ;)
 
 

SeventhSon


I believe it is cultural and economically driven.  American Football, actually US Football because soccer is more popular in the other Americas, is a sport of dominance and reflects a free and capitalistic mentality.  It's all about taking advantage of situations, playing on strengths, crushing weakness and seeing how far you can bend the rules without suffering consequences - fundamental US mentality.  Soccer is limited in that you essentially can't use your hands.  People in the US will never embrace a sport where by default people's hands are symbolically tied.  It really does come down to socialism vs. capitalism.  So much so that there are many debates going on now in the US about banning US Football in school in favor of soccer and the progressive left has been pushing soccer on our kids for a couple of decades now as a less violent alternative to US Football that also accepts females into the sport.  Personally, I think soccer is better exercise than football and a great sport, but I think the reason why it isn't a religious experience in the US like it is in other parts of the world is simply cultural. 

This is gold!

HFactor


Well, think about a good team that is not too good playing at Camp Nou for example. This year they have allowed something like 2 goals in 18 games. Some teams are almost impossible to score against when they are at home. I don't know if it's a dimension of the pitch difference, or the pressure from the crowd but when a team is a home it almost always has an advantage. Therefore the rule.

Basically if a game is tied at 1-1 the visitor is given reward because it is bloody difficult to score. Having 80,000 people against you messes up your concentration, ask Figo every time he went back to Camp Nou ( note that this rule happens only in most cups tournaments, not league tournament).

H

But aren't the keeper and defenders also affected by the crowd? Shouldn't there be equal credit given to them for not getting beaten?

As HFactor already said: the rule for higher value of goals scored in away matches only applies in some cup tournaments and also when there is no winner after 2 matches (home and away).

it also applies to both teams as it is used only in direct elimination tournaments where there is a home and away game. So it's fair to both parties.
 
H

jammindude


Maybe a football (soccer for the sake of confusion) fan can explain to me.

Why not have a "shootout" to define the winner?   Is that really such a terrible idea?    (similar to what hockey does now?)

Winners coming out of shootouts may not deserve the victory. A well balanced game should end in a tie. This makes sense to me: you don't always need to have a winner.
 
And regarding crowds' pressure, it's like the 12th player. Having 80,000 screaming fans against you is hell!

I just find watching soccer boring. I have tried to get into it, but can't sit through a whole game.  I even have the MLS Galaxy playing just a few minutes from here and have never made a game.  American Football, Basketball, Hockey, even Baseball I can enjoy... soccer not so much.  Sorry to be an ugly American.

SantaShreds

 you don't always need to have a winner.

 
Could not disagree more if you told me the sky was green.

You just don't get the point of a league then sadly! As HFactor said - a LEAGUE is not about winning the game - it's about winning the season. I think when there's a race for the title like there is in the Scottish Premier League right now, it's much more exciting in the long run.
 
Take the Scottish situation right now. The league has been won by either Celtic or Rangers for 19 years in a row or something ridiculous like that. It's usually always quite close between the two. My team, Celtic, had an AWFUL start to this season. At the start of November we were 15 points behind Rangers. And suddenly we found ourselves 3-0 down to a very poor team. Our manager (a Celtic legend) was considering resigning because it was going so bad. However, he must have done something magical to the team at half-time because we jumped up to grab a draw at 3-3. Since then we won 8 games in a row, slowly but surely catching up to Rangers who would occasionally draw and only claim a point.
 
Tonight we were just 2 points down from our orc-like rivals. We played them at home tonight and won 1-0. It was a hell of a fight from both teams. But what a fantastic way to become top of the league. 15 points down, the Rangers players boasting about how "the season is over" and taking pole position from THEM.
That fantastic chase wouldn't have been so risky, exciting and stretched out if you couldn't have draws.
Sorry for the lengthy post - so happy for my team. They've done such a good job shutting those dicks up!
Ah but football is clearly boring.

I know all about leagues.  I follow three professional leagues very closely here in the U.S.
 
I just don't think that you play a game to tie.  You play until someone wins.  The contest is not over until someone wins.  Pretty simple, really.  And soccer is so freaking easy (hockey, too) to accomplish this.  Play to regulation.  If the score is tied, then play sudden death until someone scores.  Oh, the game is going on too long?  Then give up a goal.  Don't want to lose?  Awesome.  That makes great competition for the fans.  Tie game?  YAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN.
 
"A tie game is like kissing your sister."

I understand your position about the ties, but you gotta think about player's consistency. Playing soccer puts a lot of strain into a player's body, more so than, say baseball and basketball (football is an exception). Everytime a soccer match goes to penalties you can see the players having cramps.
 
As far as playing on the opposite team's field, it is hell, specially in American stadiums 'caused they have a very particular design. Such design gives the players an optical illusion that makes players believe the fans are throwing themselves against them

Personally, I rather both teams going at it for 90 minutes and draw a 0-0 that is well deserved by both teams than have a 0-0 where a team brought nothing to the table, defended the whole game and then takes 3 points aways on a penalty kick rounds.
 
H

Ugh it just wouldn't work without well-earned draws. Sudden death is an awful idea because of what you mentioned. And it would fuck about TV scheduling, not to mention pretty much everyone in attendance at the stadium.
Penalty shootouts are the worst thing to happen in the game. Say an underdog team are going against the favourites for the league title, they've held their own and it's 0-0.  They just CAN'T get past this world-class defense, but at the same time they've fought damn hard to keep from conceding a goal.
Too bad - penalty shootout. Oh look, their team has strikers and a goalkeeper worth millions, good luck going one-on-one with those guys. You just wasted around 2 hours of your time fighting hard to scrape a point from that team. You get shit all for that effort, sorry!
 
Guess we just have to agree to disagree. No draws is a ridiculous idea to me, but essential to you!

Raymitox


I understand your position about the ties, but you gotta think about player's consistency. Playing soccer puts a lot of strain into a player's body, more so than, say.... basketball

 
Really?  How is soccer more of a strain than basketball?

Taffer

 You get shit all for that effort, sorry!

 
Effort means nothing if you don't win. 
 

Taffer
Guess we just have to agree to disagree.

 
It's all good, buddy.  Life would be boring if we all agreed all the time.

Penalties as a decider is a last resort as the element of luck is so high.