PassTheBall wrote:PresIke wrote:PassTheBall wrote:First America has to stop calling it Soccer.MLS wants international fans? Call it by the international name.
Call the pigskin game "American Football".
lol. this argument? really? yeah, never heard that one before...
***sfx...crickets***
actually, this isn't an argument that makes much sense at all other than a way to demean folks.
i post on a man city forum and of course never use the word "soccer" there because that's the commonly used word, and there are some who react as you are about it. it's THEIR forum in their country so i'm respectful about it. just like if you went on an nfl team's forum and started saying "american football." it's disrespectful and really just stupid because it does not take into account what is commonly used.
i'm from nyc right, so we say "wait on line" rather than wait "in line." i have been vehemently told this is "incorrect" by folks from california more than a few times. no joke. language is always relative to regions, and countries. so to say one HAS to use one word or an other sounds about as intolerant as it gets.
around americans who mostly don't support the game i say "soccer."
around americans who are more into the game i switch around, and actually i prefer to say football.
funny thing is, and not sure where you are from, but soccer was actually the word used in england to describe the sport, originally.
meanwhile mls doesn't get many international fans because the quality of the league is not high enough. it's really that simple. the english premier league has a huge following in part due to it being one of, if not, the most competitive league in the world. the champions league in europe is obviously the best, and that's because it has the top clubs from europe who have many of the best players in it.
does the scottish premier league have a lot of international fans?
no, so your argument is as wack as it gets.
peace.
Yes, the Scottish Premeir League has more international fans than MLS League.
Celtic FC.
I am aware of the name origins of the sport.
It's a marketing thing, you can't expect to call a sport a different name than the rest of the world and still want the rest of the world to acknowledge it as easily. It's almost like changing the product. Especially given that the product is already at a lower level.
Wack is dead ;)
celtic? yes, i'm well aware of who they are, of course. in fact one of city's young strikers our supporters had hope for, will likely be sold to them...guidetti, and is playing for their squad this season. of course there's rangers, hearts, etc. but that league is not a real global brand if you ask me. i know who they are, as does anyone who is a serious follower of the sport, but outside of the uk or maybe some uk ex-colonies who really watches that league? i don't.
the english premier league...i never say epl, in case you were wondering...is one. la liga is, but it is VERY top heavy, and far less competitive, as is the bundesliga. some other leagues have appeal but really none compare to the uefa champions league, although the biggest, oldest clubs who benefit from financial fair play seem destined to remain atop...platini and uefa seems corrupt as is fifa and blatter, as the uk media spends more time than anyone reporting on to fans' there resentment about those organizations (i generally agree, btw).
as for you're main point...not really sure where this "marketing" idea you speak of comes from. what marketing idea? us "yanks" have been calling it soccer since before the sport was on anyone's radar here as a major one. why the heck would people suddenly change the name of a sport to suit those who don't live here or use the term when the same word means something else? it's not a good business strategy at all.
would it be nice if we did so? i've thought that at times, and used to suggest a reason is because americans don't like being told to change by outsiders. maybe, but i'm not sure this is really an example of that versus more something outsiders who sometimes come across biased and resentful towards america for its arrogance, appear to use this as some kind of way to show how we won't "change," justifying already held views.
why is the name of the game important at all? who really gives a care? not i, and i generally use the word football. you're argument is not really good man. i'm sorry.
it would be nice if non-americans -- mostly those from europe -- would stop treating us like ignorant folks who don't know the game anymore. it's an outdated line of thinking and partially why city and other big clubs are interested in the "growth of the sport" in "the states." we do have people here who have learned a lot since 1994.
let's not get caught up in silly semantics and language differences and see how the game is growing, americans are appreciating the game and this should show how younger generations are changing their view of the world in this country. i think it's a good thing, and i'd rather focus on that than the issue of how to define the game. it's just not worth any of our times, but i get why some feel that way still.
peace.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
