Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Multi-tiered football league


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#11 iampantherman

iampantherman

    Member

  • Joined: 02-August 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 317
  • Reputation: 34
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:21 AM

Here's all you need to know about soccer- a midget cripple can become the best player in the world. Good luck seeing that in the NFL.



I never understand the hatred for soccer by NFL fans. Perhaps it's an inferiority complex; knowing that the NFL will never reach the heights of popularity enjoyed by the beautiful game. If you love sport and athletic competition, it is easy to appreciate myriad sports, but I hear so much venom from NFL fans about that "pussy sport". lol Soccer players have more finesse and nuance in their abilities than most athletes in the world, and I for one enjoy watching their skills. The NFL/American football has many elements that make it an exciting sport, but to dismiss soccer is to bury your head in the sand like a frightened ostrich. Soccer is the most beloved sport on planet Earth, and by a large margin. Soccer is cherished around the world for a reason- it is a fantastic sport and in my opinion- the best of them all.

#12 Hawk

Hawk

    Banned

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 15,399
  • Reputation: 1,894
Moderators

Posted 14 October 2012 - 11:25 AM

guess that just means there are pussies in the world than we originally thought!!!

of course it's popular...what do you think 3rd world countries play? what do you need....a ball...and even if you don't have a ball, a rolled up sweater, a rock, anything...and you can play with 1 or 2 people. It only makes sense that more people play soccer than hockey.


that would be like comparing how many people play hockey in Canada compared to how many play in north Africa!

#13 Argus Plexus

Argus Plexus

    Super Kami Guru

  • Joined: 13-September 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,802
  • Reputation: 847
  • LocationCape Fear Area
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 12:13 PM

If there were academies rather than relying on schools, the talent in the league would go up by a significant amount.

#14 iampantherman

iampantherman

    Member

  • Joined: 02-August 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 317
  • Reputation: 34
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 02:17 PM

guess that just means there are pussies in the world than we originally thought!!!

of course it's popular...what do you think 3rd world countries play? what do you need....a ball...and even if you don't have a ball, a rolled up sweater, a rock, anything...and you can play with 1 or 2 people. It only makes sense that more people play soccer than hockey.


that would be like comparing how many people play hockey in Canada compared to how many play in north Africa!



You're dismissing most of Europe, much of Asia, Austrailia, and much of North and South America where soccer is played and beloved in decidedly non-third-world places. The hatred is rooted in insecurity. Soccer will always be the world's sport. The NFL can never dream to achieve that status. It will never happen.

#15 Dick the Butcher

Dick the Butcher

    The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,653
  • Reputation: 939
  • LocationCharlotte, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:17 PM

how would you define the 'crappy teams?' you have a decent proposition in theory, but it just doesn't work. that's why there is arena football, the cfl, other minor league teams, and at one point, even the xfl.

#16 Dick the Butcher

Dick the Butcher

    The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,653
  • Reputation: 939
  • LocationCharlotte, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:21 PM

there is also college football to better prepare athletes to go to the nfl, unlike college soccer where only so many players might make it big time. you would essentially have 20 teams getting 2 first rounders every year, while those other 12 that are in the 'minors' will have no chance to get talent.

#17 iampantherman

iampantherman

    Member

  • Joined: 02-August 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 317
  • Reputation: 34
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:25 PM

how would you define the 'crappy teams?' you have a decent proposition in theory, but it just doesn't work. that's why there is arena football, the cfl, other minor league teams, and at one point, even the xfl.



They would defined by their records/ tie-breakers just like playoff tie-breakers. The worst teams would go down, the rest would stay up in the first year of the change. After that maybe 3-4 go down/up every year thereafter. It would amount to an NFL with 20 teams and an NFL league 2 with 12 teams.

#18 Dick the Butcher

Dick the Butcher

    The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,653
  • Reputation: 939
  • LocationCharlotte, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 06:43 PM

They would defined by their records/ tie-breakers just like playoff tie-breakers. The worst teams would go down, the rest would stay up in the first year of the change. After that maybe 3-4 go down/up every year thereafter. It would amount to an NFL with 20 teams and an NFL league 2 with 12 teams.


but that makes no sense, b/c teams have up and down years. being a panther fan, you should know that more than anything. what if we started your plan this year? teams like green bay, detroit, new orleans, dallas, cleveland, and kansas city would all be at risk of not being in the nfl based off of ONE YEAR. those are legendary teams. the nfl wouldn't even be a viable sport [$$$] anymore if just half those teams went down.

#19 iampantherman

iampantherman

    Member

  • Joined: 02-August 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 317
  • Reputation: 34
HUDDLER

Posted 14 October 2012 - 07:15 PM

It would certainly require a change in mentality on the part of fans. I'm not suggesting that league 2 would be non-NFL football, rather that it would be league 2 of NFL football. In one way it would provide more opportunity for success for teams and fans. Even if you find yourself in the 2nd tier of the NFL, you only have to make it into the top 3 or 4 of that league to be promoted back to the top tier, plus you have the possible "glory" of winning the lower league. Like I initially said though, I assume that I am in the minority, but I, for one, would love it if the NFL would split into a top and secondary league. I'm sure it won't happen, but it would be for fun to me anyway. I just really hate the incentive for poor performance in terms of draft, scheduling, etc. in the NFL. I guess some like parity, and it has its advantages, but it is really counter to the nature of competition. It's forced equality.

#20 JawnyBlaze

JawnyBlaze

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 11-May 10
  • posts: 7,326
  • Reputation: 1,844
SUPPORTER

Posted 15 October 2012 - 09:55 PM

You're dismissing most of Europe, much of Asia, Austrailia, and much of North and South America where soccer is played and beloved in decidedly non-third-world places. The hatred is rooted in insecurity. Soccer will always be the world's sport. The NFL can never dream to achieve that status. It will never happen.


I've been living in Australia for a couple years now and soccer is nowhere near as popular as the two rugby leagues and Australian Rules Football. I've met as many or people interested in NFL here as soccer (though I wouldn't necessarily say that's true for all of Australia, haven't been all over the entire continent...) Most of the soccer fans here are European transplants, whereas a lot of the NFL fans (or NFL-interested, if "fan" is a bit too strong of a word to describe them) are Australians who are interested in sports similar to their own.

As a disclaimer, I don't care for soccer at all. Never been interested, not when I lived in an Asian country for a couple of years where it was the dominant sport, not now, not ever. But I don't hate it, soccer players are certainly in better overall shape than football players. It just isn't as exciting a game to watch, not as complex and teamwork focused.

I agree with the previous poster about the reason for its popularity. It certainly seems to be rooted in the accessibility (all you need is a ball, and people from poorer countries will choose the obviously economical choice) and the effect of British (and European) colonialism. Most of these countries where soccer is the dominant sport were colonized by England, the Netherlands, Spain or France. The effects of that time spent under European rule continues to be very clear today, and soccer is a big example of that.

And much of Asia, South America and plenty of Europe are third world countries. You mention North America, but the only part of North America where soccer is popular is Mexico...which is as close as North America gets to third world..

The spread of basketball is also testament to the "accessibility" reason. Basketball is becoming a very international sport too, and it's because all you need is a ball and a hoop.

In summary, soccer is not the dominant world sport because it is a superior sport...that's just ludicrous. The 3 main Australian sports are clearly superior to soccer in every way, combining the cardiovascular rigor and finesse of soccer with the physicality of NFL. I still prefer NFL, myself, by a large margin because A ) it's what I grew up liking, and B ) the rugbys and AFL still don't have the complexity and teamwork heavy nature of NFL.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users