• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Why are USA so **** at ‘soccer'?

Always thought The World Series' name needed to be looked at
Its because a Boston paper in the1920's/30s sponsored a series ..the paper went out of business ..The paper was called "The Boston World" but for reasons the yanks only know they dropped the Boston but kept the world series probably to big it up!
 

They wanted one hundred quid for the nipper to play five a side once a week for two months. Got a silly plastic medal at the end. It isn't played at junior school.
 
There are so many sports ahead of it and no grass roots infrastructure to support development.

I listen to a lot of coaching podcasts / content and people who have gone out to the states to coach talk about how far behind it is (though is improving).

It's also a rich kids sport. They don't have 'soccer' pitches knocking about for average kids and there isn't the exposure or access to coaching and development.

Agree it's an untapped market however.
 
Always thought The World Series' name needed to be looked at

At its inception, it was named as such as a ‘marketing ploy’ seeing as the United States had the only professional baseball teams in the world.
Therefore it was (correctly) felt that the winners would be the best in the world.

Things are different now, to an extent….but I would still put money on an MLB team winning a best of seven game series.

Its because a Boston paper in the1920's/30s sponsored a series ..the paper went out of business ..The paper was called "The Boston World" but for reasons the yanks only know they dropped the Boston but kept the world series probably to big it up!

Urban Myth.
 
More money in other sports. The best athletes go to Basketball, NFL and Baseball. To make the same kind of money in football, they'd have to leave the US, come to Europe and play at an Elite European level for their entire career.
I think using the term athlete and baseball in the same sentence is rather too generous..

 
Pocchetino was talking about this the other day and I think he hit the nail on the head. Youth soccer in the US is very popular (my 5-year-old plays for a club here) but it’s invariably part of an organized club/league structure. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bunch of kids playing on a field with jumpers for goalposts, which you often see in the rest of the world. Poch was saying that it’s hard to fall in love with the game that way and I tend to agree. It helps explain why the kids gravitate to other sports when they get older.
 
Its because a Boston paper in the1920's/30s sponsored a series ..the paper went out of business ..The paper was called "The Boston World" but for reasons the yanks only know they dropped the Boston but kept the world series probably to big it up!
But they call the Super Bowl and NBA winners world champions too.
 
Its because a Boston paper in the1920's/30s sponsored a series ..the paper went out of business ..The paper was called "The Boston World" but for reasons the yanks only know they dropped the Boston but kept the world series probably to big it up!

“ A common misconception is that the event was named after The New York World newspaper, which sponsored the games. However, historians trace the name to earlier 19th-century baseball guides that used grand titles.The historical context includes:The First Showdowns: In the 1880s, postseason matchups between the National League and the American Association were branded as the "World's Championship" to declare the best team in the country.The Modern Era: When the first modern series was played in 1903 between the Boston Americans and the Pittsburgh Pirates, the organizer (Pirates owner Barney Dreyfuss) officially called it a "World's Championship Series".The Scope: Because professional baseball leagues did not exist elsewhere at the time, winning this postseason series meant a team was realistically the best in the world.”
 
Because it’s their 5th most popular sport if that? If it was their most popular and they took it seriously they’d be one of the best in the world.
Disagree, the average Yank has an attention span of about 30 seconds, ok for rounders and NFL, but being to handle 45 minutes , not a chance
 
Youth system is all based on "pay to play" so rich kids get on the high profile teams and pay big $$$ to go to travel tournaments. The administrators make a pretty penny telling the rich kids' parents they are very good and ned to pay up more. So the grassroots is fucked as the inner city youth is priced out.

On the top end, no promotion - relegation in MLS means theres no investment in lower levels, so there's no incentive to find up and coming players who didnt' hit when they were kids.

Long and short of it.
 
My ten year old daughter plays soccer and gets made fun of on occasion for it as it's somehow perceived to be a "sissy" sport. When I was young (I'm 40 now) almost nobody I knew played the sport and though we had a high school team, it was a bit of a joke and nowhere near as competitive as other sports. There are just so many sports that are more developed, more profitable, and more respected culturally.

Soccer has exploded as a youth sport in recent years, but not necessarily at a high level, but more as a recreational thing for kids who aren't interested in the other sports. Rules are simple, not much equipment required, and cheap to play. The coaches around here for youth recreational leagues barely know the rules, haven't played before, and aren't even really fans of the sport. It's most of just a get the kids outside and running around for 6 to 12 year olds. Participation after puberty seems to fall off a cliff.

My daughter is interested in playing for a more competitive team and our town of 30,000 didn't have enough girls interested at U12 to form a team, so we've had to drive 45 minutes into a larger city (200k) to have here try out for a competitive travel club, but she is unlikely to make it as she has only ever played rec league in our small town. The cost to play in the team is about $1,500 per year. And even if she does make the team, it'll mean significant travel (hours each way) just to play in a few tournaments and about 8 to 10 games a season.

So I think the distance between our cities, lack of coaching, no significant club infrastructure outside of large metropolitan areas, cost, time spent traveling, cultural stigma, and competition from other sports that already have robust college and professional infrastructure means we won't see the US become a soccer/football juggernaut anytime soon. Some day maybe...
 
A sleeping giant in some ways just like how we’ve been mentioned in the past.

Is it because as a nation and culture that they have no to little interest in ‘soccer’?

You look at the absolute specimens that play their national sports. They’re monster athletes!

From American Football, Basketball or even running.

But you look at their ‘soccer’ team and it’s far from it.

In a modern game were the mavericks are fading and its more about tactics and athleticism, they should be far, far better.
I think it will change eventually, the building blocks are in place and football is growing in popularity over there.

Kids will grow up with their own home-grown heroes playing the game which, in turn, will encourage them to participate.

China is more of a mystery, their leader loves football and has encouraged investment in the game but they're still absolutely shite.
 
They are improving all the time, they'll likely have a super generation before long. It only takes two or three top players to make a massive difference.
 
Youth system is all based on "pay to play" so rich kids get on the high profile teams and pay big $$$ to go to travel tournaments. The administrators make a pretty penny telling the rich kids' parents they are very good and ned to pay up more. So the grassroots is fucked as the inner city youth is priced out.

On the top end, no promotion - relegation in MLS means theres no investment in lower levels, so there's no incentive to find up and coming players who didnt' hit when they were kids.

Long and short of it.

I have a couple of mates - two brothers - who went out to play in the States about 25 years ago and are both coaching there now.

One of them is involved in a new academy type thing that combines football with higher education and he was back recently watching lads who’d been released by EFL teams and playing in matches where scouts turn up to see if any of them are worth offering contracts.

He was saying his job was to see if any were good enough to be offered a scholarship at this place, but the fees he was talking about were astronomical. Literally $50,000 a year but there are people who can afford it and pay it to get their kids in, even if they are no more than average players.
 
It's just not that popular outside of a couple of areas. The fortunes you can earn in the NBA & NFL dwarf what can be earned domestically the MLS.
Their better players don't need to stay in the MLS though if they can earn more money abroad.

Kids that are better at football will choose to play that sport regardless of the financial incentives on offer in other sports.
 
Back
Top