AHC: Make football a popular sport worldwide.

[Ian_W]

And look how popular American football is in Samoa, and in general in the Samoan diaspora--Samoans are disproportionately represented at both college and NFL levels. Look at Marcus Mariota, Troy Polamalu, etc.

Not just American footy - league, union and boxing all see more Samoans than you'd expect.

Interestingly enough, Australian Rules doesnt. On the other hand, Tim Cahill was eligible for Samoa, so I guess that counts as 'disproportionatly represented' with just him

 

[Lenwe]

Which has never stopped casual games from using no protection, or the sport in general from using fairly minimal protection until the 50s. Besides, the injuries and bruises make it easy to sell the game as a test of manhood to young men. And if you can get football in several cultures to game the reputation as a "manly game" compared to "less manly" soccer, then I think you'd get American football a lot more popular.

You never played Futbol i gather? i mean i could understand that go an explain people that punch an tackle people are manly but say that futbol is less manly with all the kick an injuries that happen in a game

 

[Ian_W]

You never played Futbol i gather? i mean i could understand that go an explain people that punch an tackle people are manly but say that futbol is less manly with all the kick an injuries that happen in a game

The difference is that they happen, but they aren't planned.

"If they get up after a tackle, you didnt hit them hard enough" isnt a thing in association football - the idea is to get the ball, not cripple the man.

This isnt true in league, union or american football, where an ideal tackle means the opponent is unable to continue.

 

[Lenwe]

The difference is that they happen, but they aren't planned.

"If they get up after a tackle, you didnt hit them hard enough" isnt a thing in association football - the idea is to get the ball, not cripple the man.

This isnt true in league, union or american football, where an ideal tackle means the opponent is unable to continue.

So is a brutal and barbarous game, less possibility to be adopted, a principal point of the sport game, as we outside the USA understand the definitions, is a joyous pastime, a pastime where you literally try to make your friend unconscious, or they are trying to make you unconscious , have very little appeal for most of the world.
Not even most martial arts try to actively make your sparring partner unconscious in the training stage

 

[Lord High Executioner]

Japan (where there are American football-themed manga

There are, of course, also soccer manga and I've been given the impression that Captain Tsubasa runs circles around the
American football manga in terms of longevity, popularity and cultural impact.

And regarding injuries and tests/evidence of manhood, I've been lead to believe that the football gold standard is Bert Trautmann, 1956 FA Cup Final.

 

[Ian_W]

So is a brutal and barbarous game, less possibility to be adopted, a principal point of the sport game, as we outside the USA understand the definitions, is a joyous pastime, a pastime where you literally try to make your friend unconscious, or they are trying to make you unconscious , have very little appeal for most of the world.
Not even most martial arts try to actively make your sparring partner unconscious in the training stage

*shrug*

You're the bloke who posted the pictures of the injured players, insisting how manly it was.

Courage helps if you play the beautiful game, but you don't need it.

I'm not sure Garrincha was brave - but he is still one of my favorite footballers of any code.

 

[Lenwe]

*shrug*

You're the bloke who posted the pictures of the injured players, insisting how manly it was.

Courage helps if you play the beautiful game, but you don't need it.

I'm not sure Garrincha was brave - but he is still one of my favorite footballers of any code.

I concede the point,
And Garrincha was brave the guy have a knocked knee in both legs, product of malnourished and still continue to be one of the best futbol players of the world if that not courageous, and tenacious i dont know the definition of the word

 

[Arkenfolm]

'

You never played Futbol i gather? i mean i could understand that go an explain people that punch an tackle people are manly but say that futbol is less manly with all the kick an injuries that happen in a game

I watch/follow both American football and association football. Association football indeed has a lot of violence, which is why I'm annoyed by the controversy over players taking headers which is part of the game. And yes, I played association football when I was younger (like many Americans, I find it interesting how association football is associated with children in America). But I think a sport where half the team is expected to run into a wall of opponents every play and the rest are expected to actively tackle them (although attacking too aggressively is a penalty) will generally be perceived as more manly. I can't imagine how many bruises and bloody noses the average American football had a century ago.

 

[Pete U]

OK - serious attempt.

Different WW1 leads to earlier and longer US involvement and residual troops in Europe. The US form of Football gets considerable interest from Rugby players in the UK & France (initially) and gains a foothold, which leads to a US-led international federation in the 1920s.

As this is a professional sport that is not Rugby League, union players can try the game without being banned sine die and a good number seek to make a living. Seeing this happen in the UK & France, similar things happen in New Zealand, Australia & South Africa.

With the strong internationalist outlook, Canadian football converges. By the 1930 soccer World Cup, there are enough nations with established Gridiron leagues, playing to an aligned set of rules, that the WFF (World Football Federation) championships are set for 1932.

The USA beats Canada in the final, but the tournament produces enough close games and entertainment that interest continues to grow

 

[Black]

You're going down the path that crippled rugby union and cricket - making representative play the peak.

When club sides play, you can have them playing a bunch of games of the same weekend, and because those games are more or less equal, people show up to watch them.

When you have representative teams as being the thing, then people go 'Oh, I'll wait for the good players to play'.

It worked for soccer. You can still have national leagues, which are very popular in soccer and international play, which can spread the influence.

 

[V-J]

But I think a sport where half the team is expected to run into a wall of opponents every play and the rest are expected to actively tackle them (although attacking too aggressively is a penalty) will generally be perceived as more manly.

Are you aware of the existence of rugby? Over here, gridiron, in as much as it's a thing, is perceived as much less 'manly' than rugby, due to the wearing of armour. It's really not easy to second-guess cultures on what will or will not be seen as normative.

In any case as has been pointed out at the start of the thread, it's just sporting natural selection. All you need to play soccer/football, at least on a basic, minimalised level, is a ball. Absent a pitch, kids play kickabout in the street.

 

[TonyA]

I can absolutely see American Football played without the gear.

A.K.A. Lingerie Football League

 

[Matt]

Seems like a lot of the conversation is focusing on modern day barriers to entry to American Football. The cost of equipment and length of game are modern issues to consider.

The modern game is so long, at least for CFB and the NFL, because of increased TV ads. The average game time for something like a 1970s era NFL game, or any high school football game is much, much shorter. Even with the same four 15 minute quarters. The bulky armor associated with the game only started to proliferate in the 1970s era.

I'd argue that the best time to spread American Football would be in the immediate post-war era, when none of those issues have yet emerged.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Are you aware of the existence of rugby? Over here, gridiron, in as much as it's a thing, is perceived as much less 'manly' than rugby, due to the wearing of armour. It's really not easy to second-guess cultures on what will or will not be seen as normative.

In any case as has been pointed out at the start of the thread, it's just sporting natural selection. All you need to play soccer/football, at least on a basic, minimalised level, is a ball. Absent a pitch, kids play kickabout in the street.

I'm aware, I've watched rugby games. My impression from these games is that it's some combination of American football's violence with association football's free-flowing nature. It's quite violent indeed, and can be fun to watch although culturally as an American I enjoy my NFL and college football.

 

[Lord High Executioner]

But I think a sport where half the team is expected to run into a wall of opponents every play and the rest are expected to actively tackle them (although attacking too aggressively is a penalty) will generally be perceived as more manly.

Wasn't the argument phrased in a way that implied that football is safe, with no injuries, and therefore not as manly, not that is not intentionally violent and therefore not as manly?
There is a big difference in those two arguments.
(Such as one leading to the question that if it is injuries that demonstrate the manliness of a sport, what about cheerleading?)

Seems like a lot of the conversation is focusing on modern day barriers to entry to American Football. The cost of equipment and length of game are modern issues to consider.

I believe the argument was not length as much as length compared to "length of actual play/action" (combined with "being a sport of action" - cf. cricket).

The cost of equipment even in the immediate post-war era (when Europe and Japan were at their height of money available for leisure activities) is still
higher than that of one ball (or reasonable substitute) and "something to mark the goal with".

(I'm reminded of the last time I saw the "Why does the world keep insisting on playing football instead of [baseball] like normal people?"-discussion,
where the low entry cost of football was met with "So what, you can buy a used baseball glove for just $[small amount].")

 

[Matt]

The cost of equipment even in the immediate post-war era (when Europe and Japan were at their height of money available for leisure activities) is still
higher than that of one ball (or reasonable substitute) and "something to mark the goal with".

(I'm reminded of the last time I saw the "Why does the world keep insisting on playing football instead of [baseball] like normal people?"-discussion,
where the low entry cost of football was met with "So what, you can buy a used baseball glove for just $[small amount].")

Lots of folks seemed to be harping on the 3 hour average game time for a modern NFL game. While a full length non-tv game may run around 2 hours, I think there are rule changes that could be implemented to speed up the time of play. It does start approaching Rugby at this point. However, there can always be a demand for a more "pastoral" paced game ala cricket or baseball. It would then have to compete with.... cricket and baseball.

I don't want to get all basebally on this, but I think the barrier for entry in the immediate post war era would just be a ball.

Regardless, I think spreading gridiron type Football in areas where it's not established once you're into the 20th Century to a helluva challenge. Soccer exists in the niche that it would fill for most of the world, and over the long term the barrier to entry is never going to change that much (ie, the cost to equip even an amatuer football player for organized play has skyrocketed, but stayed remarkably consistent for soccer.)

It works in North America only because it is so thoroughly culturally entrenched. Even then, the long term viability of the game is up for some debate. If we're going to talk about exporting North American sports we'd have to look at baseball, where at least it's significantly different from it's competitors to find a niche in random places like Italy, the Netherlands, and all over East Asia.

 

[V-J]

I was trying to think of a scenario where America was more internationally-engaged early on in its history leading to a kind of analogue to the British commercial expat clubs phenomenon you got with football in South America and Europe. But then I remembered that when natives actually got control of those clubs IOTL, like with Genoa CFC, they thought 'Fuck cricket, we're playing football from now on'. So it's hardly any guarantee of perpetuating things.

 

[Riain]

I think we've thrashed this out for long enough to make a pros and cons list.

Mine would be 2 CONS.

1. The requirement for so many players limiting the population pool able to field regulation teams; small towns don't have enough suitable people to maker a regulation team.
2. The lack of ball handling as a pre requisite skill that can be built organically, without more people and equipment.

Any others? Any PROS why it should/could gain more support?

 

[baldipaul]

However, there can always be a demand for a more "pastoral" paced game ala cricket or baseball. It would then have to compete with.... cricket and baseball.

It works in North America only because it is so thoroughly culturally entrenched. Even then, the long term viability of the game is up for some debate. If we're going to talk about exporting North American sports we'd have to look at baseball, where at least it's significantly different from it's competitors to find a niche in random places like Italy, the Netherlands, and all over East Asia.

This is slightly off topic, but if you want to expand baseball than you’re going to come up against cricket, which already has associations in the countries you’re targeting. The ICC has associations in most countries the n the world.

The Netherlands national side for instance plays in UK one day competitions.

Even in the USA there’s a very healthy grassroots cricket scene. There’s a Test Standard ground in Miami, more people play cricket in New York State than in England, the NYPD run a cricket league to attempt to rehabilitate criminals of Caribbean and South Asian heritage. There’s even a cricket club in Compton (Straight Outta) for the same purpose and for the homeless.

 

[Pete U]

This is slightly off topic, but if you want to expand baseball than you’re going to come up against cricket, which already has associations in the countries you’re targeting. The ICC has associations in most countries the n the world.

The Netherlands national side for instance plays in UK one day competitions.

Even in the USA there’s a very healthy grassroots cricket scene. There’s a Test Standard ground in Miami, more people play cricket in New York State than in England, the NYPD run a cricket league to attempt to rehabilitate criminals of Caribbean and South Asian heritage. There’s even a cricket club in Compton (Straight Outta) for the same purpose and for the homeless.

I don't know - an early enough expansion of baseball beyond the US, and it could easily become the pre-eminent international bat and ball game. Even now there are fewer than a dozen nations playing cricket at test level