Multi-tiered football league

[the butch]

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.

[the butch]

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.

[iampantherman]

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.

[the butch]

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.

[iampantherman]

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.

[JawnyBlaze]

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.

[iampantherman]

As a disclaimer, I don't care for soccer at all.

That's obvious.

It just isn't as exciting a game to watch, not as complex and teamwork focused.

Then you must not have played it or really understand the sport. "Exciting" is subjective, but it is most definitely as teamwork focused as any other team sport available.

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..

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.

Also, contrary to popular opinion, soccer is very popular in Canada and the US. The MLS is very competitive with the NBA and the NHL in terms of attendance here in the US! The typical NFL fan is oblivious to this fact however.

Link

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.

Who said that?!

I said:

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.

And lol at "The 3 main Australian sports are clearly superior to soccer in every way"

It's your opinion, not objective fact.

In the end though, no matter what angle you look at it from soccer is the most popular sport on our planet. That's not opinion, that's FACT!

To put it another way. It is much more likely that one day in the future soccer becomes the #1 sport in America than it is that American football will ever become the #1 sport in the rest of the world. The NFL will never be truly embraced outside of the US. Soccer has a substantial passionate following in the US already, and has for a long time.

[JawnyBlaze]

I didn't mean to imply my opinion about the 4 types of football (3 Australian types and NFL) was fact, just my opinion. Admittedly I don't know soccer nearly as well as football, but I've watched my fair share and it seems FAR less teamwork dependent than football. Seems a lot more like basketball, where teamwork is necessary (passing, setting up for scoring plays, etc) but much less so than football.

JawnyBlaze, on 16 October 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

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..

iampantherman, on 15 October 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

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.

You're saying those places aren't third world places, I'm saying the a lot places mentioned where soccer is played and beloved are third world places. Maybe we're just differing on the term "third world", and maybe that's a miscommunication on my part. I'm not limiting the places I'm talking about to places like Somalia, DRC and Ethiopia. In the strictest sense, there's not many third world countries left.

I was referring to places like, in Asia: Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Burma, Cambodia, Korea, etc places that would technically be called "developing" nations, not necessarily "third world". The logic used doesn't change, they're still poor countries where economical limitations can be used as a reason for the popularity for simpler sports like soccer and basketball. The two "first world" countries in Asia, China and Japan, soccer is less popular than the ones I just mentioned. In Japan, baseball is the most popular sport (with soccer #2, sumo #3, golf #4). In China, I couldn't find actual rankings, but by my personal experience (and without going into much detail, I'm more knowledgeable about China than your average person) ping pong and basketball are more popular in China than soccer.

In Australia, soccer is behind Rugby Union, Rugby League, Australian Rules Football, cricket and possibly even NFL (that one might be a stretch though, just going off my personal observations on that one).

In South America, pretty much every country falls into the "second" or "third" world status.

Only Europe has first world countries where soccer is the dominant sport. And much of Europe is still second or third world...so the point in all of this is that no one is

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.

, we're referring to much of Europe, Asia and South America which ARE third world (or at least decidedly non-first-world) places.

I'm not trying to argue football will ever overtake soccer as the international sport, I'm just trying to explain

Soccer is the most beloved sport on planet Earth, and by a large margin.

as a result of European influence and economic convenience, not because

Soccer is cherished around the world for a reason- it is a fantastic sport and in my opinion- the best of them all.

Dismissing soccer isn't derived from some feeling of insecurity, especially backed by the evidence to that opinion being "the world popularity" of soccer. The world popularity of soccer has easy to see explanations that have no impact on a first world country that has long since left our European influences behind...such as the good ol' USA (and Australia too a lesser degree in the second part). Therein lies the reason behind American indifference to soccer. Not insecurity.

[4Corners]

Relegating teams would never, ever work in the NFL and this country. There is too much money at stake.

Not knocking your idea though because I think at its core it's a good idea it just would never happen here.

Can u imagine the type of posts here if the panthers were about to be relegated to the CFL because they've sucked recently.