USA still doesn't get football; their loss

[SWF Reporter]

USA still doesn’t get football; their loss
By Kirk A Inniss (wired868.com)

The Euro Cup is on. And at the risk of being deemed an idiot, I add, in Europe. In the heart of Brooklyn, the Caribbean Cup is off and running. Across the rest of the footballing world, there’s a sprinkling of World Cup qualifiers.

At the same time, in every nook and cranny of our regular existence, the beautiful game thrives, kept alive by sad, aging dreams and youthful hearts. Football, soccer if you will, is one sport that has over a billion fans, hardy, unwavering, safely settled in its seductive insides. My guess is that such is the power of the beautiful game, there are “summer” evening sweats taking place across the length and breadth of the planet, even in some wintry climes. I kid you not.

Sad as that may seem to those of us smitten by the bug, some countries, though, have managed to remain outside the reach of football’s powerful magic, beyond the pale. For all its potential and its pull, even in America football, or soccer—to avoid confusion, is a sport that resides way down the die-hard fans’ food chain.

Read More

[Bakes]

Shit article.

[tempo]

Was this written 20 years ago?

[frico]

Was this written 20 years ago?

I dont think Americans will get football properly even in the next 20 years,the only people who really understand it and love it are the minorities,Latinos,West Indians,Asians and Europeans.Football hasn't got into the hearts of the people,not yet anyway.Their may be a very small percentage who try to get into it but they need schooling like they are doing at schools and colleges but the general American public minus the minorities dont care about soccer.Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

[D.H.W]

Was this written 20 years ago?

I dont think Americans will get football properly even in the next 20 years,the only people who really understand it and love it are the minorities,Latinos,West Indians,Asians and Europeans.Football hasn't got into the hearts of the people,not yet anyway.Their may be a very small percentage who try to get into it but they need schooling like they are doing at schools and colleges but the general American public minus the minorities dont care about soccer.Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

In the next 20years the minorities will be the majority. It has already passed the 50% for the first time ever this year. More people play the sport the better, there are alot of signs its growing. But to be honest, I really don't care about the Yankee.

[JDB]

Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

Wouldn't even know where to start with this nonsense.

[kaliman2006]

I do not agree with Mr. Innis' argument. Football in the USA, while not as popular as in other countries, is growing in popularity. When the USA has world cup qualifiers, stadia are usually sold out, and the same holds true when visiting club teams such as AC Milan, Manchester United and Barcelona visit the States.

In fact, Americans actually are more vocal in their support of their national team than Trinbagonians are, where fair weatherism and waggonism abounds. In short, Mr. Innis needs to reconsider his claim.

[Trinimassive]

The writer mentioned that the USA still doesn't GET football

Yuh could have a ping pong tournament in chinatown with thousands in attendance and show it on ESPN and the masses still NOT GET it.

He is making a fair enough premise. The article isn't perfect but he said enough to get his point across.

He mentioned having Lalas as an "expert" which really is laughable.

It's a sport where a team could play excellent football but not score a goal, where they may even lose and get all the plaudits, where the main striker could play the best game of his life but miss a one on one with a keeper and his team lorse even though they controlled 75% possession.
The people that GET football will say wow good game. Yuh think the American public at large would really truly GET that No they wouldn't because the game didnt have a single goal scored but the stadium could still be ram pack with people.
Most of the world that GET it will look at football as art being created, but to most Americans it's like paint drying and that is just plain boring to them.

[Deeks]

I have no problem with Lalas being an "expert". He has played at the highest level and has bonafide professional experience. He just needs to curb his f--king overexuberence. Just be natural. Don't try to instigate hostilities on certain players because of percieved issues some of them may have. Do I hear Balo???

[Deeks]

If I was good at researching, I probably can pick up a 100 article on US football along the same vein. To be honest, the US eh get it. They have it, albeit not all the way. The US can beat many countries that had it since the 1900s. YOU CAN'T FORCE A DONKEY TO DRINK WATER IF IT DON'T WANT TO(i eh too sure BOUT THIS QUote). All the that matter to the US is that they qualify every WC. Anything else is journalistic fodder.

[Dinner Mints]

Lawd, I hope they never get it. They might start beating us regular.

[Observer]

Rubbish! just look at the crowds in the US for International football and that alone should tell you something. To say is only minorities makes little sense, Latinos alone is 50 million people.

[D.H.W]

Should we care if they don't get it?

[Sam]

This writer is a tun tun.

USA miles ahead than any other country in Concacaf other than Mexico and maybe Costa Rica but they surely ahead than any other Caribbean countries,,,,, on de field, off de field, club football and crowd,,,,. Etc etc.

We need to fix we house before we condemn others.

[frico]

Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

Wouldn't even know where to start with this nonsense.

Ah got news for you pal Americans dont know shit bout football,as I say its only the immigrant population and their off-springs,you know very well what I mean.I would like to put that clearer,football,soccer to the Yanks has grown due to the immigrant population over the last 50  to 60 years,in 1950 when the USA beat England not one player was a bona fide American,now its the sons of immigrants.

[JDB]

Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

Wouldn't even know where to start with this nonsense.

Ah got news for you pal Americans dont know shit bout football,as I say its only the immigrant population and their off-springs,you know very well what I mean.I would like to put that clearer,football,soccer to the Yanks has grown due to the immigrant population over the last 50  to 60 years,in 1950 when the USA beat England not one player was a bona fide American,now its the sons of immigrants.

Organized soccer is played extensively by middle-class, non-immigrant kids. The numbers surpass other sports at youth level. You could argue that US soccer is uffering because the number of middle kids playing is so huge and the system is so geared towards pay-for-play that they don't scout immigrant players well enough. Because the sport is solo popular with the 'Yanks'.

The rest of your post is just a mess. Basketball predates netball. WWF is not a sport. Also you can't say that Americans don't like sports invented outside the US and then say they interested in boxing and athletics, that makes no sense.

[elan]

Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

Wouldn't even know where to start with this nonsense.

Ah got news for you pal Americans dont know shit bout football,as I say its only the immigrant population and their off-springs,you know very well what I mean.I would like to put that clearer,football,soccer to the Yanks has grown due to the immigrant population over the last 50  to 60 years,in 1950 when the USA beat England not one player was a bona fide American,now its the sons of immigrants.

Organized soccer is played extensively by middle-class, non-immigrant kids. The numbers surpass other sports at youth level. You could argue that US soccer is uffering because the number of middle kids playing is so huge and the system is so geared towards pay-for-play that they don't scout immigrant players well enough. Because the sport is solo popular with the 'Yanks'.

The rest of your post is just a mess. Basketball predates netball. WWF is not a sport. Also you can't say that Americans don't like sports invented outside the US and then say they interested in boxing and athletics, that makes no sense.

Doh worry the sale of Lacrosse gear has increased in recent times and so to lacrosse fields are replacing soccer fields.

[asylumseeker]

... frico should also find the following tidbit instructive: the fastest growing sport in England is lacrosse.

[Cowen]

Lawd, I hope they never get it. They might start beating us regular.

Start  .
So what they doing to us now???

[E-man]

Is it China and India's loss, too?

[Trinimassive]

Hmmm I'm wondering if the problem is critical thinking or what it could be.

The writer is NOT saying that the US is not a good team, he is NOT saying that thousands do not go to games, he not saying they don't beat T&T regularly and most other teams in CONCACAF, that they do not make the World Cup every 4 years....

It is safe to deduce that he is saying that MOST of the USA do not understand the game, do not appreciate the game, do not have that passion that over a billion across the world experience and frankly couldn't care less.

Unless you live in a big city MOST of the USA couldn't care less about football, soccer, futbol, fusebol, succer, and all the different pronounciations that they say.  They have little knowledge of the World Cup, even less knowledge of Euro 2012, even lesser knowledge of club football, and most never heard of CONCACAF, CONMEBOL, UEFA, etc. Those are for the die hards.

Again he NOT saying dey not good, dey can't play, dey crowds suck......so raise the level of comprehension nah.

I could safely say that 90% of people i've met have no clue of the above, but being a country of 300 million if that 90% was to hold true that could mean 30 million follow the game and fill the stands.
But that still leaves it at 90% who couldn't care less which is MOST.

GET IT NOW lol.

Side note: Ah sure there are those that will still come and reveal the amount of density that exists 

[Bakes]

Hmmm I'm wondering if the problem is critical thinking or what it could be.

The writer is NOT saying that the US is not a good team, he is NOT saying that thousands do not go to games, he not saying they don't beat T&T regularly and most other teams in CONCACAF, that they do not make the World Cup every 4 years....

It is safe to deduce that he is saying that MOST of the USA do not understand the game, do not appreciate the game, do not have that passion that over a billion across the world experience and frankly couldn't care less.

Unless you live in a big city MOST of the USA couldn't care less about football, soccer, futbol, fusebol, succer, and all the different pronounciations that they say.  They have little knowledge of the World Cup, even less knowledge of Euro 2012, even lesser knowledge of club football, and most never heard of CONCACAF, CONMEBOL, UEFA, etc. Those are for the die hards.

Again he NOT saying dey not good, dey can't play, dey crowds suck......so raise the level of comprehension nah.

I could safely say that 90% of people i've met have no clue of the above, but being a country of 300 million if that 90% was to hold true that could mean 30 million follow the game and fill the stands.
But that still leaves it at 90% who couldn't care less which is MOST.

GET IT NOW lol.

Side note: Ah sure there are those that will still come and reveal the amount of density that exists 

You have to be one deluded nannyhole to suggest that you and the writer are the only ones who "get" the article.  The article is shit.. full stop.  The laundry list of things that are misleading, presumptive, speculative... and just plain WRONG in this article, is too long to fully address in any great detail, but let's try to list them:

1. "(Football) is to be found near the bottom of every list of major league sporting events"
- 'every list' chronicling what?  Measured by what... TV ratings? Viewership? Attendance? Participation?  What exactly?

2. ESPN coverage rights "has more to do with finance than with any real desire to bring the sport to the masses."
- Really?  The writer sat in on the media strategy sessions to know this?  Assuming he's correct, everything is about "finance"... can the writer name one network or media outlet that broadcasts any sporting event out of a disregard of 'finance', and in favor of a greater desire to 'bring the sport to the masses'?  As I said, a factoid misleadingly used in pursuit of his particular agenda.  In fact it undermines his argument en toto.  If there's money to be made from the broadcasts then that suggests a certain  popularity of the sport, sufficient to justify ESPN's substantial investment in it.  Hardly supportive of his "dying sport" argument.

3. What does having Alexi Lalas in studio have to do with a desire to "bring the sport to the masses" or lack thereof?

4. "[E]ver since the 1994 World Cup was staged in that country, [football] was on its death bed, receiving a little life support."
- I won't even touch on the poor grammar... but even focusing on the substance... what planet does this fool live on?  The 1994 World Cup gave birth to the MLS, which, think what you will of the League, continues to grow and thrive, adding 4 (5?) teams in the past 3 years.  In it's 16 years in existence the League has survived contraction, and now is struggling to contain growth. The League secured its first broadcast contract within the last 5-6 years, and viewership and attendance are at an all-time high. 

ESPN now has Saturday and Sunday morning broadcasts of live EPL games, a development which took place in just the past 5 years.  ESPN has also added occasional live broadcasts on Mondays and Tuesdays, and on ESPN Desportes as well.  Fox Soccer channels numbers have been so incredible in that same period that even the regular FOX channel has begun live broadcasts of occasional games, and for the first time, every single EPL game was simulcasted on the League's final game day.  Suffice to say this would not be done with a sport that isn't already popular, or which is suffering declining popularity.

Not sure what the off-target cracks at American football and basketball have to do with anything... or the side bar discussion on race for that matter.  I get that the author is shooting for a bit of sarcasm perhaps, but he fails miserably in the process.  When the line between sarcasm and reality is blurred beyond recognition then focus becomes lost, as one is forced to devote entirely too much effort trying to distinguish one from the other... or worse, guessing which statements belongs where.

[Trinimassive]

Hmmm I'm wondering if the problem is critical thinking or what it could be.

The writer is NOT saying that the US is not a good team, he is NOT saying that thousands do not go to games, he not saying they don't beat T&T regularly and most other teams in CONCACAF, that they do not make the World Cup every 4 years....

It is safe to deduce that he is saying that MOST of the USA do not understand the game, do not appreciate the game, do not have that passion that over a billion across the world experience and frankly couldn't care less.

Unless you live in a big city MOST of the USA couldn't care less about football, soccer, futbol, fusebol, succer, and all the different pronounciations that they say.  They have little knowledge of the World Cup, even less knowledge of Euro 2012, even lesser knowledge of club football, and most never heard of CONCACAF, CONMEBOL, UEFA, etc. Those are for the die hards.

Again he NOT saying dey not good, dey can't play, dey crowds suck......so raise the level of comprehension nah.

I could safely say that 90% of people i've met have no clue of the above, but being a country of 300 million if that 90% was to hold true that could mean 30 million follow the game and fill the stands.
But that still leaves it at 90% who couldn't care less which is MOST.

GET IT NOW lol.

Side note: Ah sure there are those that will still come and reveal the amount of density that exists 

You have to be one deluded nannyhole to suggest that you and the writer are the only ones who "get" the article.  The article is shit.. full stop.  The laundry list of things that are misleading, presumptive, speculative... and just plain WRONG in this article, is too long to fully address in any great detail, but let's try to list them:

1. "(Football) is to be found near the bottom of every list of major league sporting events"
- 'every list' chronicling what?  Measured by what... TV ratings? Viewership? Attendance? Participation?  What exactly?

2. ESPN coverage rights "has more to do with finance than with any real desire to bring the sport to the masses."
- Really?  The writer sat in on the media strategy sessions to know this?  Assuming he's correct, everything is about "finance"... can the writer name one network or media outlet that broadcasts any sporting event out of a disregard of 'finance', and in favor of a greater desire to 'bring the sport to the masses'?  As I said, a factoid misleadingly used in pursuit of his particular agenda.  In fact it undermines his argument en toto.  If there's money to be made from the broadcasts then that suggests a certain  popularity of the sport, sufficient to justify ESPN's substantial investment in it.  Hardly supportive of his "dying sport" argument.

3. What does having Alexi Lalas in studio have to do with a desire to "bring the sport to the masses" or lack thereof?

4. "[E]ver since the 1994 World Cup was staged in that country, [football] was on its death bed, receiving a little life support."
- I won't even touch on the poor grammar... but even focusing on the substance... what planet does this fool live on?  The 1994 World Cup gave birth to the MLS, which, think what you will of the League, continues to grow and thrive, adding 4 (5?) teams in the past 3 years.  In it's 16 years in existence the League has survived contraction, and now is struggling to contain growth. The League secured its first broadcast contract within the last 5-6 years, and viewership and attendance are at an all-time high. 

ESPN now has Saturday and Sunday morning broadcasts of live EPL games, a development which took place in just the past 5 years.  ESPN has also added occasional live broadcasts on Mondays and Tuesdays, and on ESPN Desportes as well.  Fox Soccer channels numbers have been so incredible in that same period that even the regular FOX channel has begun live broadcasts of occasional games, and for the first time, every single EPL game was simulcasted on the League's final game day.  Suffice to say this would not be done with a sport that isn't already popular, or which is suffering declining popularity.

Not sure what the off-target cracks at American football and basketball have to do with anything... or the side bar discussion on race for that matter.  I get that the author is shooting for a bit of sarcasm perhaps, but he fails miserably in the process.  When the line between sarcasm and reality is blurred beyond recognition then focus becomes lost, as one is forced to devote entirely too much effort trying to distinguish one from the other... or worse, guessing which statements belongs where.

LOL you still like name calling  ....when you start off like that yuh think yuh sound more intelligent than the writer you're criticizing?

What you say changes nothing. Majority of the US don't GET IT.

Yuh could jump high, jump low, talk bout yuh nannyhole...it changes nothing.

I could easily bet you $10,000 that I could walk into any Starbucks, any Books-A-Million, any Walmart at random and ask 100 people about EURO 2012 and who are the teams, ask them to name 5 players from the US soccer team (their national team) that played Guatemala and would be lucky to find 10 people out of 100 who could answer those questions. THAT is what the writer getting at. They not that interested. PERIOD.

No matter what ESPN showing all day all night means nothing. ESPN showed strong man tournaments and other crappy programming and I couldn't name one so called strong man neither could most of the US.

The writer may have brought up all kinda unnecessary "facts" but he was never talking about the US team or their exploits but about Americans in general and there is no real argument that the masses aren't interested.

So quit with your name calling because I could come up with names too but what would that prove 

[Bakes]

LOL you still like name calling  ....when you start off like that yuh think yuh sound more intelligent than the writer you're criticizing?

What you say changes nothing. Majority of the US don't GET IT.

Yuh could jump high, jump low, talk bout yuh nannyhole...it changes nothing.

I could easily bet you $10,000 that I could walk into any Starbucks, any Books-A-Million, any Walmart at random and ask 100 people about EURO 2012 and who are the teams, ask them to name 5 players from the US soccer team (their national team) that played Guatemala and would be lucky to find 10 people out of 100 who could answer those questions. THAT is what the writer getting at. They not that interested. PERIOD.

No matter what ESPN showing all day all night means nothing. ESPN showed strong man tournaments and other crappy programming and I couldn't name one so called strong man neither could most of the US.

The writer may have brought up all kinda unnecessary "facts" but he was never talking about the US team or their exploits but about Americans in general and there is no real argument that the masses aren't interested.

So quit with your name calling because I could come up with names too but what would that prove 

I sound no less "intelligent" than you did by your ridiculously presumptive statement about people's understanding of the article.  You insist on focusing on the very minor point that most Americans don't follow football, while conveniently ignoring the larger point made in the article that interest in the sport is diminishing almost to the point of it being non-existent.

The author said NOTHING of "the majority of the US don't get it"... he said "USA still doesn’t get football" direct quote.  You might want to familiarize yourself with either English, or a good reading comprehension book before you start questioning people's understanding.

You could walk into any Hi-Lo, ScotiaBank or rum shop and ask 100 people to name 5 players from the Soca Warrior team that lost to Guyana in the qualifiers and you would struggle to find the same 10 to answer correctly.  So I'm not sure what this nonsense survey of yours would prove, except that Trinis must not "get" football either.

ESPN's increase broadcast reflects growing interest in the sport... quite the contrary to what is stated in the article.  But then again, it's clear that you self eh understand what's stated in the article, so no surprise that point is lost on you.

No one has suggested that the writer was talking about the US team and its exploits.  Yuh sure yuh read the comments here... and understand them?

Try yuh best and come up with names if yuh want... they might actually make more sense than the shit yuh posting right now.

[Preacher]

For me a key road block for Football becoming popular in the US is advertizing dollars.  The author, even though he didn't point to it directly, made the point.  American Football, Golf, Baseball, Basket Ball, Volley Ball, Tennis, on and on allows interruption for the prime reason of selling commercial product to viewers, front and center.  Football does not lend itself to that.  If it did they'll be all over it. 

[Bakes]

For me a key road block for Football becoming popular in the US is advertizing dollars.  The author, even though he didn't point to it directly, made the point.  American Football, Golf, Baseball, Basket Ball, Volley Ball, Tennis, on and on allows interruption for the prime reason of selling commercial product to viewers, front and center.  Football does not lend itself to that.  If it did they'll be all over it. 

Preacher, there are tons of ways to sell ads without in-game dollars... "official sponsorships" watermarks on the viewing screen, strategically-placed banners and logos... along with sponsorship of the half-time show (ala "the Lexus halftime report for the NBA), and commercial ads during halftime.

The problem isn't unique to the US.  Other broadcasters around the world are faced with the same problem of selling ads on a broadcast that cannot be interrupted except at halftime and have figured it out.  ESPN, Fox Soccer et all don't have to reinvent the wheel when it comes to this, all they have to do is copy the template already set... which they have done.

[frico]

Trinimassive has explained the argument very factual and everyone should understand what he has explained,there is no need to quote it,please read it again...the man couldn't be more right.I have had the unfortunate experience of speaking to Americans on quite a few occassions and I have purposely brought up the game of football,soccer to them,suffice it to say they know nothing.When they staged the WC in94 Americans were interviewd by BBC,not one could actually say what was going on,one American said,"some kind of world soccer is taking place",it was a laugh and an insult to football loving people.When USA beat TT in November 89 less than 1% viewed it in the US by delayed transmission and they were obviously the immigrant population and their off springs.

[Deeks]

Americans are very self centered and think that sports invented outside of America isn't worth playing or even watching,give them baseball,glorified netball(basketball)boxing,American football and athletics,oh and WWF.

Wouldn't even know where to start with this nonsense.

Ah got news for you pal Americans dont know shit bout football,as I say its only the immigrant population and their off-springs,you know very well what I mean.I would like to put that clearer,football,soccer to the Yanks has grown due to the immigrant population over the last 50  to 60 years,in 1950 when the USA beat England not one player was a bona fide American,now its the sons of immigrants.

Frico, what is a bona fide American.

[Trinimassive]

LOL you still like name calling  ....when you start off like that yuh think yuh sound more intelligent than the writer you're criticizing?

What you say changes nothing. Majority of the US don't GET IT.

Yuh could jump high, jump low, talk bout yuh nannyhole...it changes nothing.

I could easily bet you $10,000 that I could walk into any Starbucks, any Books-A-Million, any Walmart at random and ask 100 people about EURO 2012 and who are the teams, ask them to name 5 players from the US soccer team (their national team) that played Guatemala and would be lucky to find 10 people out of 100 who could answer those questions. THAT is what the writer getting at. They not that interested. PERIOD.

No matter what ESPN showing all day all night means nothing. ESPN showed strong man tournaments and other crappy programming and I couldn't name one so called strong man neither could most of the US.

The writer may have brought up all kinda unnecessary "facts" but he was never talking about the US team or their exploits but about Americans in general and there is no real argument that the masses aren't interested.

So quit with your name calling because I could come up with names too but what would that prove 

I sound no less "intelligent" than you did by your ridiculously presumptive statement about people's understanding of the article.  You insist on focusing on the very minor point that most Americans don't follow football, while conveniently ignoring the larger point made in the article that interest in the sport is diminishing almost to the point of it being non-existent.

The author said NOTHING of "the majority of the US don't get it"... he said "USA still doesn’t get football" direct quote.  You might want to familiarize yourself with either English, or a good reading comprehension book before you start questioning people's understanding.

You could walk into any Hi-Lo, ScotiaBank or rum shop and ask 100 people to name 5 players from the Soca Warrior team that lost to Guyana in the qualifiers and you would struggle to find the same 10 to answer correctly.  So I'm not sure what this nonsense survey of yours would prove, except that Trinis must not "get" football either.

ESPN's increase broadcast reflects growing interest in the sport... quite the contrary to what is stated in the article.  But then again, it's clear that you self eh understand what's stated in the article, so no surprise that point is lost on you.

No one has suggested that the writer was talking about the US team and its exploits.  Yuh sure yuh read the comments here... and understand them?

Try yuh best and come up with names if yuh want... they might actually make more sense than the shit yuh posting right now.

STEUPS. You just like to argue yes.

You say something & figure is lawyer time, "I saying something and I sticking to it EVERYTIME REGARDLESS"

[Football supporter]

LOL you still like name calling  ....when you start off like that yuh think yuh sound more intelligent than the writer you're criticizing?

What you say changes nothing. Majority of the US don't GET IT.

Yuh could jump high, jump low, talk bout yuh nannyhole...it changes nothing.

I could easily bet you $10,000 that I could walk into any Starbucks, any Books-A-Million, any Walmart at random and ask 100 people about EURO 2012 and who are the teams, ask them to name 5 players from the US soccer team (their national team) that played Guatemala and would be lucky to find 10 people out of 100 who could answer those questions. THAT is what the writer getting at. They not that interested. PERIOD.

No matter what ESPN showing all day all night means nothing. ESPN showed strong man tournaments and other crappy programming and I couldn't name one so called strong man neither could most of the US.

The writer may have brought up all kinda unnecessary "facts" but he was never talking about the US team or their exploits but about Americans in general and there is no real argument that the masses aren't interested.

So quit with your name calling because I could come up with names too but what would that prove 

I sound no less "intelligent" than you did by your ridiculously presumptive statement about people's understanding of the article.  You insist on focusing on the very minor point that most Americans don't follow football, while conveniently ignoring the larger point made in the article that interest in the sport is diminishing almost to the point of it being non-existent.

The author said NOTHING of "the majority of the US don't get it"... he said "USA still doesn’t get football" direct quote.  You might want to familiarize yourself with either English, or a good reading comprehension book before you start questioning people's understanding.

You could walk into any Hi-Lo, ScotiaBank or rum shop and ask 100 people to name 5 players from the Soca Warrior team that lost to Guyana in the qualifiers and you would struggle to find the same 10 to answer correctly.  So I'm not sure what this nonsense survey of yours would prove, except that Trinis must not "get" football either.

ESPN's increase broadcast reflects growing interest in the sport... quite the contrary to what is stated in the article.  But then again, it's clear that you self eh understand what's stated in the article, so no surprise that point is lost on you.

No one has suggested that the writer was talking about the US team and its exploits.  Yuh sure yuh read the comments here... and understand them?

Try yuh best and come up with names if yuh want... they might actually make more sense than the shit yuh posting right now.

STEUPS. You just like to argue yes.

You say something & figure is lawyer time, "I saying something and I sticking to it EVERYTIME REGARDLESS"

Actually, you could ask any 100 Trinis to name 5 Pro League teams and you would struggle. I know this because I actually did a survey in 2010 concerning North East. Obviously, it was a shock to me that Trinis (even those wearing EPL and La Liga football shirts) didn't know the names of the (at that time) 10 professional clubs.