If American football didn’t exist

rearnakedchoke said:
Soccer was considered a girls sports in the USA into the 70s, so they didn’t really focus on it. Even after USA 94 it didn’t pick up as it should have, or the USA would be a world power.
Click to expand...
This is exactly correct. Soccer and field hockey were girls sports.
If 'futbol' had truly been embraced in the US years ago, domestic teams would dominate the World.
 
Graves The Elder said:
This is exactly correct. Soccer and field hockey were girls sports.
If 'futbol' had truly been embraced in the US years ago, domestic teams would dominate the World.
Click to expand...
Yeah yeah soccer. That’s real cute. Especially how you bounce that ball of your head. Personally I don’t consider it a sport unless you use your hands.
 
rearnakedchoke said:
Soccer was considered a girls sports in the USA into the 70s, so they didn’t really focus on it. Even after USA 94 it didn’t pick up as it should have, or the USA would be a world power.
Click to expand...

You're right. Intrestingly a generation or 2 earlier(before the great depression) soccer had been bigger than football(first decade of the NFL). It was only a brief period but in that span the US came in third in the first World Cup.
 
We'd dominate soccer. The thing that make American football what it is, is the incredible combinations of size and speed. The raw athleticism needed to succeed at the sport. By comparison, a lot of soccer countries seem to prioritize skills over outright athleticism. If you took the best American football athletes and had them training in soccer from childhood, we'd produce talent at the same level as the European nations or Brazil, just more of them.
 
panamaican said:
We'd dominate soccer. The thing that make American football what it is, is the incredible combinations of size and speed. The raw athleticism needed to succeed at the sport. By comparison, a lot of soccer countries seem to prioritize skills over outright athleticism. If you took the best American football athletes and had them training in soccer from childhood, we'd produce talent at the same level as the European nations or Brazil, just more of them.
Click to expand...

Another thing we got to consider before saying US would "dominate" is that if soccer were number 1 it'd still be splitting the US talent pool with other sports. In other smaller powers like Brazil(which isn't that much smaller) and Germany soccer isn't just number 1 it's almost a monopoly for top athletes in a way even the NFL isn't in the US. NFL's number 1 it's not a monopoly on top talent.
 
ferrisjso said:
Another thing we got to consider before saying US would "dominate" is that if soccer were number 1 it'd still be splitting the US talent pool with other sports. In other smaller powers like Brazil(which isn't that much smaller) and Germany soccer isn't just number 1 it's almost a monopoly for top athletes in a way even the NFL isn't in the US. NFL's number 1 it's not a monopoly on top talent.
Click to expand...
We're not really splitting our top athletes though because our lesser talent doesn't play football, it plays those other sports. Of the big sports, basketball preselects for height, something that soccer has never cared about. So, tall people will still play basketball just like everywhere else. We don't see many 6'9 athletes in Bundesliga, for example.

Baseball primarily draws from overseas, it hasn't spent much time or money drawing from the elite U.S. athlete pool, preferring cheaper international stars. Hockey doesn't really have a national athlete draw at all, its more regional. The other sports? Tennis, golf, volleyball, etc. are the landing zones for athletes who don't have the insane athleticism required to be successful in football, baseball, basketball.

Football is the sport for elite athletes in this country. It already draws the best athletes. Shifting football athletes over to soccer is shifting the top of our talent pool into soccer, not splitting them with the other sports. A better comparison would be thinking about what would happen if the soccer crowd in Germany suddenly decided to focus on tennis, tennis would suddenly get the best German athletes instead of the leftovers. Well, that's U.S. football and soccer. Soccer would get the best U.S. athletes, instead of the 2nd tier.
 
panamaican said:
We're not really splitting our top athletes though because our lesser talent doesn't play football, it plays those other sports. Of the big sports, basketball preselects for height, something that soccer has never cared about. So, tall people will still play basketball just like everywhere else. We don't see many 6'9 athletes in Bundesliga, for example.

Baseball primarily draws from overseas, it hasn't spent much time or money drawing from the elite U.S. athlete pool, preferring cheaper international stars. Hockey doesn't really have a national athlete draw at all, its more regional. The other sports? Tennis, golf, volleyball, etc. are the landing zones for athletes who don't have the insane athleticism required to be successful in football, baseball, basketball.

Football is the sport for elite athletes in this country. It already draws the best athletes. Shifting football athletes over to soccer is shifting the top of our talent pool into soccer, not splitting them with the other sports. A better comparison would be thinking about what would happen if the soccer crowd in Germany suddenly decided to focus on tennis, tennis would suddenly get the best German athletes instead of the leftovers. Well, that's U.S. football and soccer. Soccer would get the best U.S. athletes, instead of the 2nd tier.
Click to expand...

Fair point. I was going to say basketball but yeah you're right the tallest NFL guys are short by NBA standards I guess.
 
Rand M Arthur said:
Multiple rugby players have played in the NFL, within 2 years of ever touching an American football. There is no mythical gap in athleticism between both sports. Of course most who make the switch don't make it, most college football players don't make it. But the fact that some do, despite competing against guys who have 10+ years of field IQ experience, should be clear enough.
Click to expand...
There probably is some athleticism gap, only because different things are important. The pure anaerobic capacity in gridiron, bit more aerobic capacity and technical prowess in rugby. If gridiron didn't exist, some of the NFL players probably would have done very well in rugby but others great players would not.

panamaican said:
We're not really splitting our top athletes though because our lesser talent doesn't play football, it plays those other sports. Of the big sports, basketball preselects for height, something that soccer has never cared about. So, tall people will still play basketball just like everywhere else. We don't see many 6'9 athletes in Bundesliga, for example.

Baseball primarily draws from overseas, it hasn't spent much time or money drawing from the elite U.S. athlete pool, preferring cheaper international stars. Hockey doesn't really have a national athlete draw at all, its more regional. The other sports? Tennis, golf, volleyball, etc. are the landing zones for athletes who don't have the insane athleticism required to be successful in football, baseball, basketball.

Football is the sport for elite athletes in this country. It already draws the best athletes. Shifting football athletes over to soccer is shifting the top of our talent pool into soccer, not splitting them with the other sports. A better comparison would be thinking about what would happen if the soccer crowd in Germany suddenly decided to focus on tennis, tennis would suddenly get the best German athletes instead of the leftovers. Well, that's U.S. football and soccer. Soccer would get the best U.S. athletes, instead of the 2nd tier.
Click to expand...
Probably true in a counterfactual where gridiron just up and disappears, but if it never developed, we'd definitely have rugby league or rugby union having developed in the vacuum, rugby football codes were around the same time as the earliest days as american football. If Gridiron disappeared, the fanbase would be primed for rugby league.
panamaican said:
We'd dominate soccer. The thing that make American football what it is, is the incredible combinations of size and speed. The raw athleticism needed to succeed at the sport. By comparison, a lot of soccer countries seem to prioritize skills over outright athleticism. If you took the best American football athletes and had them training in soccer from childhood, we'd produce talent at the same level as the European nations or Brazil, just more of them.
Click to expand...

Disagree here though - it isn't a lack of talent, its a lack of a developmental pipeline as to why the US is garbage at men's soccer. The overlap between talent pools isn't absolute as it is - you can be below average height and be a soccer superstar - how many NFL or even college football athletes are under 5'7?
 
Last edited:
ocean size said:
There probably is some athleticism gap, only because different things are important. The pure anaerobic capacity in gridiron, bit more aerobic capacity and technical prowess in rugby. If gridiron didn't exist, some of the NFL players probably would have done very well in rugby but others great players would not.
Click to expand...

This is where training comes in. Christian Wade is a former England national team rugby player. Obviously a very capable player. He got taken on by the Bills a few years back and decided to give it a go, and has been on the practice squad building his field IQ since.

His gym stats have inproved since he started football specific training, but the difference isn't night and day. A couple of offseasons and he is athletically in there with the rest of his RB corps. 450lbs squat, 4.3ish 40 yard, 350lbs bench. 37inch vert. Competative T test, I forget the numbers.

His numbers from the England camp where only a couple of percentage points lower, but he had a higher cardio base then too.

My view is that the athleticism gap doesn't exist if you can train any performance difference out within two off seasons.
 
The Chosen said:
Would America have the best soccer/football players? All of America’s best athletes go to sports like American football and baseball
Click to expand...
Well, the US might have created another code of football or become a rugby country.

But unless you have national interest and infrastructure in place, it doesnt really matter what your athletes are

Given its population and resources, if football/soccer or rugby (league or union) became a national obsession, and therefore had youth development leagues and a healthy infrastructure, it would do very well. Not sure about domination however.
 
BAM said:
Well, the US might have created another code of football or become a rugby country.

But unless you have national interest and infrastructure in place, it doesnt really matter what your athletes are

Given its population and resources, if football/soccer or rugby (league or union) became a national obsession, and therefore had youth development leagues and a healthy infrastructure, it would do very well. Not sure about domination however.
Click to expand...
US won the first Olympic gold medal in Rugby
 
If there was no American Football, then Rugby would be the most popular sport in its place.
 
ocean size said:
There probably is some athleticism gap, only because different things are important. The pure anaerobic capacity in gridiron, bit more aerobic capacity and technical prowess in rugby. If gridiron didn't exist, some of the NFL players probably would have done very well in rugby but others great players would not.


Probably true in a counterfactual where gridiron just up and disappears, but if it never developed, we'd definitely have rugby league or rugby union having developed in the vacuum, rugby football codes were around the same time as the earliest days as american football. If Gridiron disappeared, the fanbase would be primed for rugby league.


Disagree here though - it isn't a lack of talent, its a lack of a developmental pipeline as to why the US is garbage at men's soccer. The overlap between talent pools isn't absolute as it is - you can be below average height and be a soccer superstar - how many NFL or even college football athletes are under 5'7?
Click to expand...
If you're going to find them, it's going to be at running back. But the counter position here is that soccer players are getting taller. I know people like to point to Messi and height but Ronaldo is 6'1" and Haaland is 6'4". Tyrone Mings is 6'5". Lukaku is 6'3". I think the height argument is like pointing to all of the barely 6'0" guards and saying height doesn't matter in the NBA.

I disagree on the developmental pipeline element, at least recently. We've seen an increase and a change in the type of Americans playing in the top European leagues. More skill players, more starters. And we're seeing then showing up in the top teams, not just the 2nd tier or teams facing relegation.

That's not to say we're at the level of those countries when it comes to producing talent but I think the developmental pipeline is significantly better than even a decade ago.

I do think that if there was never any American football, many of those athletes would have ended up in lacrosse, not soccer. But the international appeal of football would have won out and our population size difference would seal the deal.
 
panamaican said:
If you're going to find them, it's going to be at running back. But the counter position here is that soccer players are getting taller. I know people like to point to Messi and height but Ronaldo is 6'1" and Haaland is 6'4". Tyrone Mings is 6'5". Lukaku is 6'3". I think the height argument is like pointing to all of the barely 6'0" guards and saying height doesn't matter in the NBA.

I disagree on the developmental pipeline element, at least recently. We've seen an increase and a change in the type of Americans playing in the top European leagues. More skill players, more starters. And we're seeing then showing up in the top teams, not just the 2nd tier or teams facing relegation.

That's not to say we're at the level of those countries when it comes to producing talent but I think the developmental pipeline is significantly better than even a decade ago.

I do think that if there was never any American football, many of those athletes would have ended up in lacrosse, not soccer. But the international appeal of football would have won out and our population size difference would seal the deal.
Click to expand...
Even with high level soccer being relegated to the privileged middle class (at least for white and black native born Americans) they still make regular world cup appearances
 
The Chosen said:
Even with high level soccer being relegated to the privileged middle class (at least for white and black native born Americans) they still make regular world cup appearances
Click to expand...

While this is true it's only because you qualify by continent and US is usually second best in it's continent. Hence why not qualifying last time was so embarassing because it's all but set up so the US makes it every time. It's like Australia patting themselves on the back for always qualifying when they are basically their own continent. They've since moved to Asia for soccer purposes.

Btw why don't the "it's football" people get mad at the Aussies for calling their soccer team the "socceroos'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,928
Messages
55,455,470
Members
174,786
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top