Yeah right, then factor in how many breaks there are, how much stoppage there is and how many intervals for 'words from our sponsors' thrown in. Divide that by the time in play and there is (IMHO) a big difference in the energy used.
A midfielder with poor support may end up running back and forth across center for half an hour, but your right, sprinting 100 yards into a group of padded men every 5 minutes is much more tiring. That quarterback must be winded after the first 10 minutes from all that exercise.
The quarterback typically throws or hands off the ball and normally runs only as a second or third option as the play unfolds. The amazing thing the quarterback does is throwing the ball accurately 60 yards down the field right before a 250 lbs linebacker tackles him and tackling involve landing on him not sliding past his ankles.
Ooops, you made me research, here's some figures on calories burned based on players weight from http://www.nutristrategy.com. The numbers are based on a low weight for a football player and maybe a high one for soccer players. Soccer (155 lbs) 704 calories per hour Football (190 lbs) 776 calories per hour Football (280 lbs) 1066 calories per hour (extrapolated at 145 calories per 45 lbs) You have ninety minutes of a "word from our sponsors", their uniforms are shamelessly rented out to casinos, alcohol producers, gambling sites, and I suppose cigaratte makers too. You don't see the Green Bay Packers or New York Yankees defacing their uniforms with "a word from our sponsors" (don't bother bringing up NASCAR, we're talking athletics here).
I think you guys are getting off point here; I was under the impression that the "debate" was over the naming of the sport and whether the difference between calling it football and calling it soccer was detrimental to its success in the US. Personally I think its laughable that those calling it football can be blamed for a perceived lack of success in the US. In fact, even the OP has stated its a widely played sport in America and i'd wager (without any research) that its the next most popular sport after American Football, Basketball and Baseball - so is it right to say its not successful or popular then? Perhaps the real question is why isn't it given more attention by sports channels and the media? Why doesn't the US league attract major players in the prime of their career? Or perhaps why there aren't many home-grown stars or, ultimately, why it isn't as popular as the "big 3"?. The answers to those questions lie within US society, not in how people from other countries refer to the sport.
Calling it football in the US doesn't make less popular, it's just a bit silly when football (football) is so overwhelmingly popular and there is no common alternate name. The question was for those that want to see the sport grow, not for those that fear that it would grow in the US. High school football coaches encourage their athletes to participate in track and field, wrestling, and a few other sports. Some football players get involved in dance for the balance, flexibility and body control. Imagine what it would be like if millions of young football players were encouraged to take soccer as a cross training sport. It would be scary.
Soccer players do take other sports especially Cross Country and Track...Thats what I get involved in before the Season starts so I would be ready and fit
Again with the extremely strange logic... you seem to be saying: - If people from outside the US care about football, they should call it soccer - Doing the above will help the sport to grow in the US - Failure to call it soccer implies that you don't care about the sport and have a fear of it growing in the US If i'm misinterpreting things, by all means, please correct me in my understanding of your point. Otherwise, read through that little list and tell me if you honestly think its true?
kingcaw, Modify your first statement - If people from outside the US care about football, they should call it soccer when in a conversation from the US or Canada Words have different meanings in different places. If I met a guy named Randall in Australia I wouldn't call him Randy because I know what randy means there. I don't say pop when I am ordering a soda in New York but I would in Detroit. Why not adapt to the local language? BTW, that was a clear handball by Newcastle in the 83 minute. Villa's getting no breaks.
Well, setting aside the fact that this forum has no "nationality"; I actually do agree, to an extent, that for the purposes of clarity its always best to adapt to the environment. The majority of the people who work for and with me are from the US, as are many of my business contacts, so I'm constantly having to switch the spelling and usage of words (colour/color, realise/realize etc). If I came to the US and was discussing football, i'd refer to it as soccer without a second thought. The problem I had with your original post is the implication that people should call it soccer outright; as well as the implication that the locale of this forums admin means that people here should act and "speak" as though they were in the US when its simply not the case. My bigger problem, however, is with the two points you didn't address - where you basically blame the use of the word 'football' for what you see as a failing of the sport in the US; and go so far as to suggest that referring to it as football is an act of sabotage because for some reason we fear the sport becoming a success in the US. While I conceed that some sort of mass confusion over terminology in the US would certainly be detrimental to an extend, it pales in comparison to other issues which may be affecting the success of the sport in America. The fact that you seem to be placing such importance on the non-US usage of the word "football" either suggests to me an ignorance of internal issues, or an expectance of the "outside world" to comply with your choice to use the word "soccer"
I don't consider it a big issue, I think it's a silly little thing and I was only suggesting calling it soccer where it is called soccer. What do you see as the reasons for the games failure to catch on at a professional level in the US?
I don't think that its anything to do with the sport itself being at fault; its just that American Football, Basketball and Baseball are behemoths in terms of popularity. Perhaps there is the "American element" at play there, with society embracing home-grown sports more than "imported" ones - the same could be said for England in some respects; football, cricket and rugby are all very "English" (even though they're not all home-grown sports) - while the big 3 I mentioned are all very American. This of course snowballs into everything else; sponsors aren't willing to plough masses of money into the US's 4th most popular sport; TV companies aren't willing to give it as miuch airtime etc etc. Again the same goes across here in the UK; Football rules all in terms of attention and coverage; Rubgy and Cricket do get some attention, but nowhere near the amount as football does. Something like that is hard to turn around, and it looks like its going to get harder. While I have to applaud LA Galaxy to a small extent in trying to raise their profile by buying in a high profile player (ie ask someone from the UK to name an american football team and you can bet the answer will be LA Galaxy) but theres a long way to go. It doesn't help, of course, that investors and businessmen from the US are looking at English teams and vying for ownership rather than trying to help american teams develop.
Dude, if you have no idea, its called Football! American call it soccer because theres already American Football who is using the common football term. Everywhere else in the world call it football.
kingcaw, It is interesting to see all the American marketing money and ownership money going to the EPL and else where. The Galaxy do have beer, nutrition products, home improvement centers, etc adverts on their jerseys but I am sure they don't cost near as much as over there. The sad thing with Beckham is that he had a game this week, Super Liga against rival DC United and only 17,000 showed up to a venue that holds 27,000. Worse yet, part of those 17,000 were 8000 tickets given a way as compensation for a no-show by Maria Sharapova at a tennis event at the same venue. Beck's scored a goal and assisted on another in 2-0 win. By the way, the 4th sport here is ice hockey and it grew from 6 teams in 1966 to 30 teams now, most of which play in sold out arenas of 20,000 and there are probably six cities looking to lure teams to move but no takers.
Ah, hockey, completely forgot about that! And yeah, that is kind of sad; although bare in mind that there are still a lot of premiership clubs that fail to fill the stands; Middlesborough immediately come to mind, as I always seem to notice just how many empty seats there are; and the away fans stand at todays Portsmouth v Bolton game was pitiful.
I too have noted watching EPL games that the stands (unless it's home for Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, or Liverpool) are not full. I've noted the same for the other top leagues in the world. Are tickets overpriced for the market? BTW, 60,000 showed up to watch Beckham tonight in New York, final New York 5 LA 4. Beckham had a number of assists, highlights are pretty entertaining on http://web.mlsnet.com/
I do sympahise with you tbarr60 and we should perhaps adopt a 'when in Rome' policy. After all when I go to France I don't insist on using an English word for something when I know the French use a different word. (Unless I don't know the French word but that's another issue). However - we're not in Rome, we're in cyber space! If I'm having a chat with some other English people (or people who come from nations that don't have other football codes) we will keep calling it 'football' I'm afraid. You Americans can get your own back though. Start some baseball threads and go on about 'left-field bunts past the inner-ring 3rd baseman' and we won't have a CLUE what you're on about!
Yes. Over-priced tickets to watch over-paid foreign mercenaries who don't give a shit if they're playing for Blackburn, Bolton or Bologna. Also there are about 21-25 home games a season (unlike the 8 or so in the NFL) If you're paying around $80-$100 A TICKET you tend to pick and choose your matches