Soccer is the most played and watched of the world. Almost every country practices football except USA. They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture.
According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ?
| Quote: |
| They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture. |
Not true. Many professional soccer leagues have started here and folded like a $2 suitcase. More kids in the US play soccer than any other sport, but to many in the states, it is just boring to watch. In fact, only baseball is more boring. No TV network will show soccer. American football rules the airwaves and the minds of sports fans until February, and then basketball and hockey take over until summer, when there's nothing to watch except baseball.
Also, there are no breaks in soccer in which to show ads. That is how networks make money, and precisely why they lose money during the world cup. All the other major sports are tailor made for television, except soccer. | d4rch wrote: |
| They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture. |
Everybody does what he wants
Culture?! It's too much...
| d4rch wrote: |
| According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ? |
Don't know for sure, but I thing that they are the only ones who call football soccer and American football (just) football.
The weird thing is that the u.s. football players hold the ball with the hand almost all match, except when they kick it.
Basketball is boring for me to watch...Small field, to much body contact...its is like handball for Europeans.
| HDirtwater wrote: |
| it is just boring to watch. |
It is exciting when you support a team. (a strong one that plays in an important championship)
| HDirtwater wrote: |
| Also, there are no breaks in soccer in which to show ads. |
There is a 15 minutes break. If it is a eliminatory match and the score is tie, another break.
If it is very hot, the players receive up to 5 minutes break for hydratation.. | d4rch wrote: |
They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture.
According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ? |
You're so far off base it's not funny. As was stated, we do play soccer. It's just boring and we don't like to watch it. There are more soccer balls on grass on any given day in the US than any other ball. I think a big reason we don't watch it is because we don't want to have to act like the idiots we see on tv fighting and rioting over nothing and acting like 8 year olds.
As for Foot/Baseball, we encourage other countries to play. We play our league games in other countries often. Japan, Canada, Mexico etc come to mind.
So please check your facts before you try to use a sport to bash US.And am very American. I lived in Germany for five months though. It is all about exposure. I was exposed and loved it. If Americans could see the love of the game that Europeans have they would wonder what is all the noise about and become involved.
i think that the amarcans like more voliance in the game
like the game madden (dont now how its named real:P)
there can ppl almost kill the enamy in socces they got more rules..
| d4rch wrote: |
| they completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture. |
yes... i totally agree. their pride is enormous. they cannot tolerate playing a sport they didn't created: their three top sports were their own creation, baseball being the MOST boring sport ever, american football (funny, they call it football and started calling soccer a sport everywhere else is called football) has the pride in it's name.. they believe (there are exeptions, i know, i'm speaking in general terms) that they are one world, and the rest of the planet is anotherone.. so, i quote again | d4rch wrote: |
| they completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture. |
it's true. their world. their culture. | d4rch wrote: |
| They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture. |
the same thing you can say about American Football ... you won't see a match broadcasted in Europe ... maybe that's whyI would say the reason soccer isn't popular in America is because we don't have the elite league like we do in other major sports. And even if we did, I think many Americans wouldn't give soccer much of a chance because it is such a low scoring game (yes, like baseball, but baseball is on the decline).
But I think soccer will grow in popularity...it has since the US's strong showing in the 2002 world cup.
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
| You're so far off base it's not funny. As was stated, we do play soccer. It's just boring and we don't like to watch it. There are more soccer balls on grass on any given day in the US than any other ball. I think a big reason we don't watch it is because we don't want to have to act like the idiots we see on tv fighting and rioting over nothing and acting like 8 year olds. |
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
| So please check your facts before you try to use a sport to bash US. |
| matthewleber wrote: |
| And am very American. I lived in Germany for five months though. It is all about exposure. I was exposed and loved it. If Americans could see the love of the game that Europeans have they would wonder what is all the noise about and become involved. |
This coming from a European (me): Soccer is sleep-inducingly boring. I've been exposed to it since early childhood, and watching it is still the fastest way to fall asleep that I know of. Mostly soccer fans will "explain" to me how that's because I don't get the "finesse" or "technique" of the game. They're right, I don't 
Mostly they can't actually point it out to me either.
| legion wrote: |
| the same thing you can say about American Football ... you won't see a match broadcasted in Europe ... maybe that's why |
Actually, you will, in certain countries. We get at least two games a week during the season, and it's the only sport I watch fanatically. But one has to seek it out.
| traxion wrote: |
| i think that the amarcans like more voliance in the game |
I'd like to agree with you, and say that it's about Americans liking more violence in the game - or that it's about American football being less of an intelligent sport than soccer. After all, we Europeans like to bash the general intelligence of Americans whenever possible. And I've heard it said lots of times by soccer fans.
Sadly, on these people's own scorecard, soccer turns out to be less of an intelligent sport than American football, regardless of appearances. Soccer has less strategy, less tactics, less possibilities, less finesse. Sad, at least, for a soccer fan who actually cares about intelligence. Most care more about it being entertaining, and if it is entertaining to them, that's all it needs to be, isn't it?
On a sidenote, as someone said earlier, Americans watch basketball too - a pretty much entirely no-contact sport. It's not about violence, it's about entertainment, and on that I agree with the yankees - Am. football and basketball (though I don't watch that) are infinitely more entertaining (both intellectually and "action"-wise) than soccer will ever be.my two cents:
americans love games where they can excel at, and since soccer, cricket and rugby are already popular in other countries, they realise that its gonna be difficult to be world beaters at it.
so they make their own games, they modify rugby, add new rules, babes loads of entertainment value, hype etc and call itamerican football.
they take cricket, mix n match withe the rules, shorten the length, and oodles of technology and call it baseball.
basketball is one game that i like, but again they chose it coz not many countries play basketball or have so much money pumped into the sport. It was real fun at the olympics when they lost in the basketball qualifiers!
You really need to give some historical reference to your claims. I don't think the US could have just taken games already played and modified for themselves like you suggest.
It's more about exposure as someone said in an earlier post. Soccer started in Europe so it is more popular there. That's what I feel.
I agree that it's more of a cultural reason. As mayur has pointed out earlier, Americans only like to play sports that they are good at or created. Soccer is no doubt one of the most popular sport in the world. I and my friends back in China all know the europeans football teams and players very well. It was just surprising to find out that none of my US classmates know any of the european soccer player. They only know about baseball, basketball and american football, and basically they only know about the althetes in US. So I think it's more of a cultural reason that soccer isn't popular in US.
It is suprising football (soccer) never took off in the states,expecially as the game migrated around the world at the end of the 19th century,at this time america was getting its biggest import of immigrants from europe ever,so why these people didnt set up football clubs,like happened in every other country of the world is strange,and i dont think its a televison things as in footballs beginnings as a sport,there was no television...
I do however think the USA's reluctance today to embrace football is because they are not the best in the world and probably never will be,america seems to have this attitude of only winning counts.they dont get that someone could support a club like newcastle united,over 50.000 turn up every home game to watch a club that havent won anything in over 30 years.. this sense of belonging to a club,wether they are successful or not is alien to americans...
also one more thing.. question for those of you from the US.. how can someone from LA support a team from Brooklyn? (the dodgers).. i dont get how you can move a team from one place to another,in this particular case from the north east coast to the south west coast and still claim its the same team,surely that takes away from the club,the very thing that it is,and becomes something completely different. a different team.
I think thats why maybe soccer/football took never off in the us,because americans dont see teams as part of their community,their town,their area,its all about franchises,and supporting a winning club/team,to your average european,it seems a bit souless.
Lack of attention span. Baseball is the only game that comes close to the slow pace of soccer and it is still way more faster than soccer. Americans can't wrap their heads around any sport having a final score of 1-0 and it being considered a good game.
| av1595 wrote: |
| Lack of attention span. Baseball is the only game that comes close to the slow pace of soccer and it is still way more faster than soccer. Americans can't wrap their heads around any sport having a final score of 1-0 and it being considered a good game. |
I wouldn't neccesarily say baseball's more fast-paced than soccer.soccer is ok but i only really can watch highlight reels or i get bored. Its not bad taken in small doses.
but i wanna play devils advocate for a min.
atleast the americans excel at what they play. It is a game after all and what you want in the end is fellin good about watchin a game.
if you come out of a football stadium you are thrilled no doubt. that in a sense encompasses the whole idea of sports.
sports is a form of entertainment and as long as it entertains the people it suffices...
I heard about anecdote, when USA beat (I think England) their opponent 1:0. It was some 50-60 years ago, and all newspapers in U.S. brought that news as victory of 10:0. They thought original result was a press error, how could people play the game for 90. minutes and score only once!?
Americans would like to be football nation, as in everything that is worldwide commercial, but the football is breaking their limits: they simply cannot force themselves to watch that "boring game"...
| truespeed wrote: |
| I think thats why maybe soccer/football took never off in the us,because americans dont see teams as part of their community,their town,their area,its all about franchises,and supporting a winning club/team,to your average european,it seems a bit souless. |
I, being a pretty average European, don't find it soulless at all. As for Americans not seeing teams as part of their community, tell that to the tens of thousands who protested the attempt to move the Patriots away from New England.
Still, the biggest difference between soccer fans (in Europe) and football fans, seems, to me, to be that the soccer fans tend to think they almost own the club. Actually, that has been cited by researchers as one of the factors in hooliganism (just to give the source, "Spectator Violence in Sports: A North American Perspective" (written by Canadians, if that matters to you) http://www.springerlink.com/content/kq64617853456218/ - not publically available online).
Interestingly, in US sports, the violence (with a few exceptions) stays on the field - even at something like the Superbowl - while a simple friendly league game can spark riots in Europe. While researchers in the US disagree on the amount of sports-related violence, almost every single study made shows an extreme lack of "hooliganism" compared to Europe.
There are many other possible factors, of course, one being the demographics of the spectators (some might also argue that the violence on field provides a catharsis to the spectator that less violent sports lack), but Roberts and Benjamin, in the above mentioned article, blame mostly the owner vs. spectator mentality for the relative lack of spectator violence in the US when compared to Europe.
As for myself, I've always been disgusted at what really amounts to micro-nationalism bordering on fascism when it comes to European football supporters and their relation to their clubs. Another (albeit minor) reason I find soccer utterly not-for-me. I rarely agree with S3nd K3ys, but I do find this comment... very fitting:
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
| I think a big reason we don't watch it is because we don't want to have to act like the idiots we see on tv fighting and rioting over nothing and acting like 8 year olds. |
Seems to me that in American sports, the fans are dedicated to the sport, while a fair amount of Europeans are dedicated to a club - which is probably also why shouting expletives at not only the opponent but also members of your "own" team if they're doing bad, is more common in the US than in Europe. Paradoxical in a country where you can hardly criticise the president without being called "unpatriotic".
In short, dedication to a club/team is great (I have that too, even if not a soccer team), but I hardly find this kind of unconditional dedication, where you have to defend your team's honour with violence in the streets, where it's about identification through locality, where the team is more important than the sport, "soulful". More like "disturbing" | Kaneda wrote: |
In short, dedication to a club/team is great (I have that too, even if not a soccer team), but I hardly find this kind of unconditional dedication, where you have to defend your team's honour with violence in the streets, where it's about identification through locality, where the team is more important than the sport, "soulful". More like "disturbing" |
Im only guessing,but have you ever been to a football match? hooliganism is pretty much a thing of the past in england,at every match there are very few arrests,i saw a report on tv the other day ,and even the top teams who get gates of over 40.000 every home game (in man utds case over 70.000) , arrests only amounted to about 100 over a full season (i could have my figures wrong here but i know it was a small amount) So in man utds case they get 1.330.000 + ppl a season turning up and only 100+ arrests,i think thats pretty good.
Maybe 10 to 15 years ago your argument about football violence would of had some basis,but not now,football is a family entertainment sport as much as say gridiron is in america.
Take the world cup in germany,considering the amount of young men from all over europe who travelled over there,add to the mix,drink, and usually you could expect a lot of trouble,but that wasnt the case,there was hardly any,no more than you would see on an average saturday night in any city center.
A clubs identity is where they are situated,sheffield wednesday would no longer be sheffield wednesday if they moved to hull and called themselves hull wednesday,(do ppl in brooklyn still support the LA dodgers? i doubt it) and your comment about americans only being interested in the sport rather than the club isnt exactly a good point to argue,the fans do in effect own a club,as without them there would be no club.
Ive never been to america,or met an american,i can only comment on what i see,maybe im wrong,maybe they are just as passionate about their teams as football fans over here are,or maybe sport to them is just another product,like coca cola and playstation. | truespeed wrote: |
| Im only guessing,but have you ever been to a football match? |
You're guessing what? You never say. Oh right, it's always comfortable to blame differing opinions on "you don't know any better". Yes, I have. But it's not like it's necessary, when most of the football-related violence takes place in the streets all over the city. Personally witnessed 8 such incidents in the past 3 years. Over the same time period, I've seen 3 non-football related fights. And this is the capital.
| Quote: |
| hooliganism is pretty much a thing of the past in england |
As far as I recall, I never said anything about England. Hardly a "thing of the past", but yes, it's declined in England over the past few years. Largely due to massive police attendance which shouldn't be necessary in the first place. Take a look at Germany, Poland, France, Italy, heck, even Denmark. Put the two main Copenhagen teams up against each other and you'll have 100-150 arrests in a matter of an evening. 111 at the last game they played.
Now, sure, you can say that's what happens when you mix lots of people with some alcohol. Except that the Roskilde Festival - a week with twice as many people attending - and much more alcohol consumed - had 39 arrests over the entire week, 25 of them for possession of drugs, 10 for minor fights. 10 in a week vs. 100-150 in an evening. Nice.
| Quote: |
| Take the world cup in germany,considering the amount of young men from all over europe who travelled over there,add to the mix,drink, and usually you could expect a lot of trouble,but that wasnt the case,there was hardly any,no more than you would see on an average saturday night in any city center. |
Yeah, because 4-500 people are arrested or taken into custody on an average saturday night in any city center. June 24, 2006, 400 people taken into custody. June 14, 429 people arrested - Poles, Germans and Britons mainly.
| Quote: |
| A clubs identity is where they are situated |
... to a football fan. To me, a club's identity would be their members, their collaboration, their team spirit, their style of playing, their supporters (no matter where they hail from), not what town their headquarters happen to be in. Not like most of them are inhabitants of the town anyway.
| Quote: |
| (do ppl in brooklyn still support the LA dodgers? i doubt it) |
Why wouldn't they, if they, as you claim, "dont see teams as part of their community,their town,their area"? Then surely to these "soulless" people, it wouldn't matter where the club is situated. Let me let you in on a secret. They do.
| Quote: |
| and your comment about americans only being interested in the sport rather than the club isnt exactly a good point to argue |
Noone said "only". Also, you started that argument, indicating that the identity of a club is its geographical location. Which, sure, is partly what Americans think too (re: the threat of Patriots moving), and yet I know more Americans who support a team from a different area because of how the team plays, than I know Europeans who do the same. The one exception probably being Boston and New York when it comes to baseball - Red Sox vs. Yankees.
| Quote: |
| the fans do in effect own a club,as without them there would be no club. |
And yet it's exactly this ownership that a lot of soccer fans feel they're losing, when an American businessman "buys" their club. 
I cant argue with your figures on hooliganism in denmark as obviously i dont know,but your from there so you know better than me,perhaps the danish police and clubs could learn a thing or 2 from the english premiership if things are like you say.
. | Quote: |
| Largely due to massive police attendance which shouldn't be necessary in the first place. |
English football grounds are policed mainly by stewards,of course there are police in attendence,but its the stewards who are the most visable presence inside the stadiums.
| Quote: |
| ... to a football fan. To me, a club's identity would be their members, their collaboration, their team spirit, their style of playing, their supporters (no matter where they hail from), not what town their headquarters happen to be in. Not like most of them are inhabitants of the town anyway. |
I agree a little in as much as many of man utds fans hail from outside of manchester,at the same time if manchester united ever moved from manchester and changed their name to say london utd,they would lose their support overnight,it happened at wimbledon when they moved to milton keynes,they call themselves milton keynes dons (dons being wimbledons nickname) but very few of the original wimbledon fans follow them,instead they set up another wimbledon club called afc wimbledon.
You make a lot of good points,and yes i have seen news items on american fans protesting over their clubs being moved to another city/state which i guess shows their club means a lot to them,but if i was a new yorker and my team moved to LA i wouldnt carry on supporting them,as they wouldnt be my team anymore ,they would be an LA team,on that subjext im not really sure why this happens in american sports,why cant they just set up another league to accomadate the new citys wanting to join in to the NFL,NBA, ect instead of someone buying out a club and moving it elsewhere.
and finally on the subject of michael glazier taking over at man utd,yes their was sceptism initially but i think most fans are coming round to the fact that hes there and there to stay and their initial fears about him seeing man utd as a cash cow, to be milked for all its worth seem to have been allayed Simple ...
America needs to be the best.
With so many better countries out there (Brazil, France, Germany, Ghana to whom USA lost in 2006 world cup, the list continues) they cannot hope to be the best so it is not promoted professionally.
Keeping that in mind there is a USA rugby team, stranger than that they have also appeared in the world cup tournament, yet no rugby on US tele.
The US are the worlds best at their own sports simply because not many other countries play them professionally, perhaps with the exception of ice hockey and maybe basketball.
Ever wonder how they can call the baseball world series that when its contested by American teams?
| Quote: |
| yes... i totally agree. their pride is enormous. they cannot tolerate playing a sport they didn't created: their three top sports were their own creation, baseball being the MOST boring sport ever, american football (funny, they call it football and started calling soccer a sport everywhere else is called football) has the pride in it's name.. they believe (there are exeptions, i know, i'm speaking in general terms) that they are one world, and the rest of the planet is anotherone.. so, i quote again |
Basketball was invented by a Canadian. 
1) Slow paced is not a valid argument. Golf, baseball, poker are growing sports or have a wide following and are not fast. Hell, poker isn't even a sport.
2) Violence. Also, not a valid argument. Football and hockey are full of on the field violence in terms of contact. NASCAR is violent in terms of crashes.
3) Commercials are also not a valid argument. Other countries show soccer matches just fine and I'm sure the networks make money off the broadcasts.
4) Being the best. Didn't we just lose the basketball and baseball world championships?
Those 4 are all arguments I've heard.
Why I think we hate it.
Ties: We want a winner or loser. Look how hockey changed their rules to eliminate the tie.
Body use: We can't really understand using only the legs. Track and field is popular overseas in some areas: we can't stand it here.
Subtlety: You kick the ball into the net. They merely see the strategy in soccer as try to get the ball into the middle, either by crosses or keeping it on the ground. It's like them watching and saying, "I can kick a ball"Our continued indifference to the sport worshiped around the world can be easily explained in two parts. First, as a nation of loony but determined inventors, we prefer things we thought of ourselves. The most popular sports in America are those we conceived and developed on our own: football, baseball, basketball. If we can claim at least part of the credit for something, as with tennis or the radio, we are willing to be passively interested. But we did not invent soccer, and so we are suspicious of it.
The second and greatest, by far, obstacle to the popularity of the World Cup, and of professional soccer in general, is the element of flopping. Americans may generally be arrogant, but there is one stance I...stand behind, and that is the intense loathing of penalty-fakers. There are few examples of American sports where flopping is part of the game, much less accepted as such. Things are too complicated and dangerous in football to do much faking. Baseball? It's not possible, really - —you can't fake getting hit by a baseball, and it's impossible to fake catching one. The only one of the big three sports that has a flop factor is basketball, where players can and do occasionally exaggerate a foul against them, but get this: The biggest flopper in the NBA is not an American at all. He's Argentinian! (Manu Ginobili, a phony to end all phonies, but otherwise a very good player.)
But flopping in soccer is a problem. Flopping is essentially a combination of acting, lying, begging, and cheating, and these four behaviors make for an unappealing mix. The sheer theatricality of flopping is distasteful, as is the slow-motion way the chicanery unfolds. First there will be some incidental contact, and then there will be a long moment - —enough to allow you to go and wash the car and return - after the contact and before the flopper decides to flop. When you've returned from washing the car and around the time you're making yourself a mini-bagel grilled cheese, the flopper will be leaping forward, his mouth Munch-wide and oval, bracing himself for contact with the earth beneath him. But this is just the beginning. Go and do the grocery shopping and perhaps open a new money-market account at the bank, and when you return, our flopper will still be on the ground, holding his shin, his head thrown back in mock-agony. It's disgusting, all of it, particularly because, just as all of this fakery takes a good deal of time and melodrama to put over, the next step is so fast that special cameras are needed to capture it. Once the referees have decided either to issue a penalty or not to our Fakey McChumpland, he will jump up, suddenly and spectacularly uninjured - excelsior! - and will kick the ball over to his teammate and move on.
American sports are, for better or worse, built upon transparency, or the appearance of transparency, and on the grind-it-out work ethic. This is why the most popular soccer player in American history is Sylvester Stallone. In fact, the two greatest moments in American soccer both involved Sylvester Stallone. The first came with Victory, the classic film about Allied soccer-playing POWs, and the all-star game they play against the Nazis. In that film, Stallone plays an American soldier who must, for some reason - —no one can be expected to remember these things - replace the goalie on the POW team. Of course, Stallone knows nothing about soccer, so he must learn to play goalie (somewhere, Moron McCheeby grins triumphantly). Stallone does this admirably, the Allies win (I think), and as the crowd surrounds them, they are hidden under coats and fans and sneak away to freedom.
The second most significant moment came when the World Cup came to the United States, in 1994. It is reported that Stallone attended one of the games and seemed to enjoy it.
It's inevitable, given the way the U.S. teams are improving every year, that eventually we will make it to the semifinals of the World Cup, and it's likely, one would think, that the United States will win it all in the near future. This is a country of limitless wealth and 300 million people, after all, and when we dedicate the proper resources to a project, we get the job done (see Vietnam, Lebanon, Iraq). But until we do win the Cup - and we have no chance this particular time around, being tossed into the Group of Death, which will consume us quickly and utterly - soccer will receive only the grudging acknowledgement of the general populace. Then again, do we really want - or can we even conceive of - an America where soccer enjoys wide popularity or even respect? If you were soccer, the sport of kings, would you want the adulation of a people who elected Bush and Cheney, not once but twice? You would not. You would rather return to your roots, Communist or otherwise, and fight fascism with your feet.
| d4rch wrote: |
Soccer is the most played and watched of the world. Almost every country practices football except USA. They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture.
According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ? |
I see there a number of varying opinions, so here's mine. (Opinion)
As an American, I like to see some scoring, not too much like basketball, but enough to keep the game full of high points. ( or low points if you're losing) Also, there are battles within the game, to get 10 yards, to stop your team from gaining a 1st down etc..
American football gives us the right amount of physical action (bordering on violence), and scoring.
Soccer is more like American hockey in that everyone runs around (or skates) for 10 to 20 minutes before anyone scores, but hockey does have the added allure of a good possibility to see a fight.
Human nature to be attracted to this.
I know this is my upbringing and environment, otherwise I'd be a rabid Manchester United fan.
BruceWell, I personally don't like soccer because I don't enjoy playing it. I am white and where I live it's not considered a "white" sport. But where I live, soccer is very popular because I live in Southern California which is right next to the Mexican border so white people make up abou 10% of the population, so I live in a very hispanic influenced area where soccer is popular. I just happen to find it boring.
| d4rch wrote: |
Soccer is the most played and watched of the world. Almost every country practices football except USA. They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture.
According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ? |
most people aren't, they play soccer and whatnot, but...hey, why don't other people play rugby? except england? sure it's a minor sport and is violent, but hey, the viewers would love it! | anburiku wrote: |
| d4rch wrote: | Soccer is the most played and watched of the world. Almost every country practices football except USA. They completely refuse to give a chance this game to enter in american culture.
According to you, why are they so protectionnist with their own sport (US Football, Baseball...) ? |
most people aren't, they play soccer and whatnot, but...hey, why don't other people play rugby? except england? sure it's a minor sport and is violent, but hey, the viewers would love it! |
2 words,
Forward pass.
BruceIts true, the american people dont like soccer because they are prteccionist with they're own sports.
The USA had a great chance to increase the popularity of soccer when they hosted the World Cup tournament in 1994. It's certainly become more popular since then, but it still had to compete with the baseball-NFL football-NHL hockey league cycle every year. Perhaps it just hasn't caught on as many people thought it would.
