Reply With Quote
When was beisbol ahead
Muricans
Furthermore, length of season is a design advantage. You actually need to build a team for depth while also have minor league call ups constantly at ready because you can't just sign 1 or 2 elite players and coast to a sure playoff berth. Ideally I would actually like basketball to have a longer season. The game is too superstar dependent. The logistics won't allow it, but the NBA would be by far a more interesting league.
When was beisbol ahead
Muricans
Soccer, hockey, and baseball are all bad tv products but tv is changing and tv sports money may decline.
The NFL too might disappear if there is ever a cte reckoning, or it suc bs to permanent political drama.
Worldwide soccer is subsidized by both state and rich owners. There's no reason that couldn't happen here. 'it's just that historically other sports have been more valuable. The NFL is one of the most ed up management groups and will repeatedly step on their own s if given the chance. If a new branch of rich people want to subsidise soccer if would easily prosper here
Since always? Povertyball has never been more popular in America than baseball. This is despite hipster povertyball fans insisting for the past 30+ years that povertyball is "just a few years away from surpassing baseball."When was beisbol ahead
Muricans
ma nig
Water is wet..
Agreed. With US winning the rights to host the 2026 World Cup, I'm expecting a soccer boom of sort in the next decade or so
You mean like that "soccer boom" we were supposed to have from the 1994 World Cup? Good luck with that.
I find baseball perfect for naps tbh. The drawl of the old announcers combined with the white noise from the crowd in most games just gives me the perfect backdrop to fall asleep.
there were millions of soccer moms after that
Who cares about America tbh?
Youth soccer became popular here in the '70s, not the '90s. And even then, soccer is still viewed as a kids' "sport" that you eventually grow out of and start playing a real sport instead.
Wut? That doesn't make sense brah.Why does the world love it?
I don't think Americans hate soccer generally speaking. I bought the very first FIFA back in '94. I continued to buy soccer video games up until about '99. I've watched every World Cup to some degree since '94 (wont' be watching this year). I simply don't think the sport is worth investing time in over US sports (which I find better designed, and which is an opinion I can write a in' dissertation on vs. soccer, so me turning my nose up at soccer isn't out of Murrican pride). If I'm going to invest time into a soccer-like sport, it would be something like Gaelic or Aussie Rules (more of a Rugby-like sport), which I find better designed. My opinion is that soccer is one sport of many and unlike soccer nuts, I don't think the sport is some proverbial gift from God that is intrinsically superior to other sports.
And no, appeal to popularity is a fallacy. It grew through British imperialism, not because the peoples of the world "saw the light." And if you don't think that was a factor, the Brits managed to make a sport you would find more boring than baseball the 2nd most popular in the world.
Britain had a lot of colonies in the 1900's and late 1800's. The US hasn't been a colony in almost 250 years.
I think the varying waiting times (depending on the pitcher) can affect hitters mentally to a certain extent. Sometimes calling time before a pitch is used strategically by both pitchers and hitters. But sure, I can agree that it can't be exploited to the extent that dribbling a basketball around to keep the ball away from a Mikan was.
Design flaw or not though, it's still a big issue. You don't care because you're a diehard but as a casual fan I do. There's a lot more of me than there is you too. If fatball is smart they'll do something about it.
I think you know what I meant. It's hard to get excited for 1 out of 162 (or whatever it is). You just have to tread water until the trade deadline, get yourself a star and then the real race starts. And just to be fair, I will say that I think the baseball trade deadline is better than any other sport's deadline.Length of season a design flaw?
An example of a design flaw in baseball is probably the ground rule double rule. Even if was obvious a player was going to score from 1st, he has to stay at 3rd regardless. Ground rule doubles should be automatic triples imo.
But don't kid yourself about the season being so long because it add some more strategy/complexity to the sport. We both know the reason it's so long is greed. I'm sure owners rake in the money and it's why fatball players are able to have such crazy salaries.
Come on, stop looking at it through your fatball homer glasses. Does MLF hold a pitching derby during it's all-star weekend? Did MLF turn a blind eye to PEDs in the late 90s so we could see more shutouts or no hitters? Offense is what draws crowds. Not just in Fatball but in any major sport.Plenty of action in baseball. 300 pitches per game. It's just action you don't like because it doesn't unfold through "running around."
The only thing I dislike about soccer is the blatant match-fixing, tbh..other than boxing, it's the only sport where I always have to wonder whether the game is rigged
Russia hosting the WC will be a nice test in that regard..
Not the game but the governing body..Fifa is arguably the most corrupt sporting en y to ever exist especially in the Blatter era..
It took a sophisticated and large scale FBI/CIA sting operation to take him down...
I don't give a about either sport, they are both boring as tbh.
With that said, there is no way in soccer surpasses baseball in a few years.
So lets make this interesting got. First off, what is your definition of a a few years? Give me an exact number. Honestly whatever the it is I will elo bet your aunt ing ass that soccer does not surpass baseball in the USA in a few years.
Soccer will always be a fringe sport for poor pieces of or people that werent athletic enough to play a real sport in the US tbh. Deal with it.
British influence here was non-existent by the late-1800s/early-1900s, which is when soccer started to spread. Look at all the former Anglo colonies (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, US). Soccer isn't popular in any of them. The reason why is because the sports British settlers first brought with them to these countries were folk bat-and-ball and "football games" (primitive rugby-like games in which, yes, you used your hands to move an "eggball" toward a goal). By the time soccer was codified in 1863 and then started to spread a decade later, the former Anglo colonies already had embedded sports cultures revolving around bat-and-ball games (cricket, baseball) and rugby-like games (Rugby, Aussie Rules, American football).Wut? That doesn't make sense brah.
So yes, British influence is why baseball and American football are popular. Baseball is actually a British sport that was simply refined by Americans. American football obviously is a descendent of rugby.
Soccer was easier to spread to other countries because they didn't really have an existent sports culture yet. What domestic sports did Argentina have before the large British diaspora there started to spread soccer and rugby in the country? Same goes for Brazil. Introduced by a Brit ex-pat. Spain? Introduced by Brit expats. It's the same story with many countries. Brit ex-pats introduce the sport to countries that don't really have a domestic/thriving sports culture and soccer fills the void, becoming the defacto national sport of these countries. Same thing here, except, like I said, the bat-and-ball and eggball games were introduced first. The US didn't have any sort of global influence until after World War I. Too late to spread our sports by that point, as most countries already had sporting cultures in place by that time.
There are 22 people out there. It's ing crowded in front of both gates so we would just see terrible attempts at scoring.
The NFL owners are finding their balls so they will tell the politicos to off and the press will give up.
You sound like someone in a Soviet Union speaking about a 5 year plan.
They've done breakdowns on whether or not slow pitchers are more effective than fast pitchers, and the differences were so minimal as to be non-existent. But yes, baseball needs to address the issue and the pitch clock is likely coming next season.
Why is it "hard to get excited?" One criticism of basketball I see from people who don't like the sport is that there is too much scoring and no score means anything until the 4th, but yet you'll be there in game threads raging at every Parker misfire from the 1st quarter on because you know how these errors can compound into a loss, so that missed jumper in the 1st quarter in a game that ended 100-99 starts to look pretty important. I guess I'm on the flip side. Even though I like football, I actually think 16 games is way too short (you can't play any more unless you want players to die). Short samples are prone to variance and there's no way to recover from a 4 or 5 game skid in the NFL. You can argue, "well, that just means teams need to bring their best every Sunday." What if the team in question lost their QB and #1 WR for two months to injury?I think you know what I meant. It's hard to get excited for 1 out of 162 (or whatever it is). You just have to tread water until the trade deadline, get yourself a star and then the real race starts. And just to be fair, I will say that I think the baseball trade deadline is better than any other sport's deadline.
Hmm. I don't know of any recent team that was average until the trade deadline, signed a star, and then flourished to playoff run. The very best players in the MLB only add about 8-10 wins over a 162 game season, so no individual star is going to transform a .500 team at the trade deadline into a contender.
Just because I said there was 300 pitches per game (which qualifies as action) doesn't mean I'm endorsing pitching dominance. I'm actually anti-strikeout and would love to see strikeouts reduced to about 3 per team per game (6 per game overall. We're at 16 per game right now). The issue with "casual baseball watchers" is that you don't really pay attention (or don't understand) what's happening until the ball is in play, so you tune out anything prior until there's some proverbial "running around."Come on, stop looking at it through your fatball homer glasses. Does MLF hold a pitching derby during it's all-star weekend? Did MLF turn a blind eye to PEDs in the late 90s so we could see more shutouts or no hitters? Offense is what draws crowds. Not just in Fatball but in any major sport.
An example. 0-1 count. Next pitch is a slider that bends out of the zone the batter badly chases. I know the batter didn't see that pitch well, so I'm anticipating the catcher calling for that pitch again and also wondering if the batter can make the adjustment and lay off. He does. 1-2 count. What's coming next? I see the catcher now moving inside and calling for a pitch high in the zone. High inside fastball. Batter lays off as it narrowly misses the zone. This is "entertaining" because the batter battled back from a situation where he would reach base 18 percent of the time to 28 percent of the time. If he can work a 3-2 count, that percentage increases to 42%. Every pitch matters and subtly shifts the odds in favor of one way or another throughout the at-bat and game.
I'm not suggesting you should be entertained by this. If you need some type of motion (i.e. running, jumping, etc) to precede/accompany an in game event, then baseball will simply never appeal to you, since the most common baseball action is pitching. I'm "entertained" by it, even on an athletic level, because controlling a 95-100mph fastball, curveball, slider, etc is hard as , harder to do than making a 3 pointer in an NBA game. And having the eye/spatial awareness to do things like not swing at balls out of the zone or battle back by fouling off tough pay off pitches is also hard as . Main point is that there's plenty of compelling action before a ball is ever put into play.
What's "fatball?" I don't think it's baseball, since 95% in the league aren't fat and no elite player can be considered fat. Talking about the NFL?
Soccer was invented in England, so it's obvious that they are the ones that spread it out around, but that doesn't explain why it became, by far, the most popular sport in the World. Why soccer and not rugby or cricket? Why not some sport from other country? Easy, soccer was the funnest one of the bunch for the vast majority of the people, simple as that.
2 goals in 2 games
victim complex
and one was a bonus time own-goal2 goals in 2 games
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
