American exceptionalism, sports edition: Why don’t Americans like soccer?

The World Cup is around the corner.   This event is a reminder that Americans have their own games and are mostly indifferent to soccer.   This is bewildering to soccer fans because the rest of the world loves soccer – is soccer-crazed – yet Americans are genuinely bored by it.

Every few decades there’s a push to get Americans to see what a great game soccer is, so investors put together a league, pour millions of dollars into it, and promote it by bringing in a major international star – Pele in the 70s, Beckham in the 2000s, Messi in the 2020s.   And it works – it creates a buzz.   But then Americans show up at the stands and actually watch the game.   And once they watch soccer, they’re reminded why they prefer their traditional American games.

So why is that?   Why do Americans have a natural immunity to the charms of soccer?

There are 4 theories that are usually trotted out as possible explanations:  

·  AMERICANS LIKE AMERICANS

The Americans-like-Americans theory builds on the observation that Americans don’t excel in soccer because America’s best athletes go into football, basketball, baseball, MMA, and hockey.   The athletic leftovers wind up in soccer.  The result is that the best soccer players and teams in the world are not American.  And because Americans like Americans, they cannot attach themselves emotionally to soccer because there aren’t any good American soccer players or teams.  The problem with this theory is basketball, baseball, hockey, golf, and MMA: it is evident that Americans can and do attach themselves to foreign players with exotic names in virtually all the major American sports.  

·  COMMERCIALS

The commericals theory holds that Americans don’t like soccer because they are not exposed to it enough, and thus it remains a foreign element in American culture.   Why are Americans under-exposed to soccer?   Because it's not on TV enough.   And why is not on TV enough?   Because it isn’t profitable for TV stations to air a game that has no timeouts;  it’s simply too hard to sell commercials for soccer broadcasts.  

The problem with this explanation is that NASCAR doesn’t have timeouts either and yet advertisers have found a way to advertise their goods to NASCAR viewers.   Likewise, TV stations all over the world have found a way to advertise their goods during soccer matches.   This is because sports consumers all over the world actually like soccer, just like Americans actually like NASCAR.  The fans are devoted to the sport and thus watch the game, which draws in advertisers to advertise;  with or without timeouts.

·  LIMITED SPORTS-SPACE

This theory is that there’s a limited amount of “space” for sports, and that once this “space” has been filled by one sport, there’s no room for other sports.   This theory holds that in the late-19^th century, when soccer was popularized around the globe through European imperialism, the US already had its own dominant sports – boxing and baseball.  

This theory falls apart once it is uttered because everyone knows that boxing and baseball are no longer the dominant sports in America.   New games did, in fact, invade the American sports “space” and conquer territory there from boxing and baseball.   This re-emphasizes the original question: why not soccer?!

·  VIOLENCE

The violence theory answers this question well.   It highlights the commonplace and obvious observation that Americans like rough, violent games.   When one compares any American game to its European counterpart, it is evident that the American version is more physical and violent.   See, for example, football vs rugby/soccer; the NBA vs European basketball; North-American hockey vs European hockey; baseball vs cricket; or NASCAR vs Formula One.   In NASCAR, pushing and bumping are an integral part of the race, which is why the cars are tougher in NASCAR – they’re built to withstand bumps and bruises – whereas Formula One cars are delicate and refined, like thoroughbred racehorses.

So according to this theory, soccer is too “soft” for American sensibilities.   Certainly soccer fans sometimes witness collisions or kicks to the face, but these are not integral to the sport;  in fact, they are penalized.   In football, colliding and hitting is the game.   The rise and decline of the NHL in America tells the same story: hockey rose to prominence in the 80s and 90s, when fans could watch spectacular collisions on the ice and crashes into the boards.  But when the league took steps to reduce this physicality, the game’s popularity plummeted.   The same is true of the NBA.

The constant complaint one hears from Americans about soccer is that soccer players flop all the time.   It’s a turnoff for American audiences.   Americans like games in which players take the hit and go on, and play through injury:  if a ballplayer is hit by a pitch and can still walk, he is expected to walk it off, pretending it doesn’t hurt.   The same is true in football, hockey, and MMA.   When flopping became prevalent in the NBA, American fans complained about it so much that the league instituted penalties against it.  Indeed it’s one of the things that is associated with the NBA’s decline in popularity from its height in the 1990s to its nadir in the 2000s.

What this indicates is that Americans like rough, physical games, and soccer is too elegant and refined for Americans. 

An additional contributing factor to soccer's image problem in America is that it is broadly seen as a girls’ sport.  In America, both boys and girls play soccer in elementary school.  But in middle school, boys move on to their various American games – basketball, football, baseball – whereas the girls continue in soccer.  Soccer in America has thus gained an image as a game for children and for girls or women.  As boys grow up and approach manhood, they’re expected to play rougher games.   This means that the best boy-athletes go to football, basketball, and baseball, whereas the best girl athletes stick with soccer.  This explains why the US excels at women’s soccer, but not at men’s soccer.