Will more stats for soccer (MLS) bring in more american fans?

I like soccer precisely because it isn't obsessed with statistics and because the game is too fluid to be described statistically. Statistics are god-awful boring and my eyes glaze over whenever sports fans start quoting statistics (and we all know what Mark Twain said about lies, damned lies, and statistics). Soccer needs to remain different from other North American sports, not slavishly imitate them. If these new stats are useful for coaches or for sports betting, great, but they have no real place in soccer culture as such.

 

I am 100% positive it would help attract new people to the game. People like winners and people like a success story. If you give them a way to relate to the players they will. People that don't already understand the game need an easy way in. Stars help point out the players that they should be watching. Not only would a new fan know who to watch, but they could more easily understand why a specific player is good and worth watching.

Stats encourage learning.

 

I understand the reasoning behind it. And I could see how it would make a SLIGHT difference, but I don't think it would be that significant.

I guess if Fantasy soccer got big, then more people would get into MLS. Or if there are some people who are obsessed with stats in general, then they may get into MLS.

But, I don't think American sports fans are as stat crazy as everyone makes them out to be. Sure, I like my favorite players to get good stats (including soccer). But in the end, all that really counts are the W's, and I think most American sports fans feel the the same way.

Stats have just always been away to:
1) Bide time during stoppages in a game (especially baseball)
2) Another way to analyze/over-analyze the game

 

The way to attract more fans is to have another 5 to 4 game like last year. Americans want scoring. Our version of the World Cup is the NCAA Basketball tournament and our version of the Champions League is the Super Bowl. Both the Super Bowl and NCAA Tournament involve games that have more than 3, or 4 points scored. Americans have learned to watch sports that constantly stop. No matter what MLS does they will not win over non-soccer fans until ever game ends 5 to 4 and then, it will be a sport that still isn't as popular as football.

 

Uh...that was the most horrid display of soccer. Yeah, people scored but the whole game was so freaking sloppy and, well, embarrassing. It was like watching a bunch of 7 year olds go at it. If that is what it takes to attract "new" fans, then I say to hell with them.

There are plenty of people in this country who appreciate the sport for what it is and can appreciate good football/soccer/etc. Those are the people we should be interested in, not Joe Blow American who is a NFL/NCAA fan.

That approach was tried and failed. Now, MLS, after having spent considerable research $$ to figure this out rolleyes has learned that it's easier to convert soccer fans than non.

Play the game beautifully. 1-0 and 0-0 games can be infinitely more exciting than any 5-4 game.

 

I totally want to know how often Juan Pablo Angel scores against left handed keepers whilst being defended by a 4 man back line with the average age of 29 on turf without football lines on nights with full lunar eclipses. Because if he has a low average in game situations like that I am totally putting in Emilio as my forward on my fantasy soccer team. Also I think Alexi Lalas deems it vital info when looking for transfers.

 

Well I used to be the epidemy of an ANTI-Soccer person and the low scoring never bothered me when I started to get into soccer.

The low scoring is just an excuse for people who hate on soccer. MANY times baseball games end 2-0, 2-1, etc.. And, there are lots of football games that end 21-14, etc. which translates to 3 scores to 2. So, I don't think the low scoring is that big of deal.

I think one of the bigger factors in the typical American sports fan's (who doesn't like hockey, because the majority don't) take on soccer is his/her confusion about possession in soccer. In EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN SPORT, there is a defined possession for each team/a way to turn possession over to another team. In soccer you just don't have this. Yes, you have possession in soccer. But, for some reason, American sports fans don't understand the build up of this possession and how it turns into goals. That's why you really need to watch a couple of games to really get into it and to begin understand the intracacies of the sport, IMO.

Another big part of the sport reaching the younger generation (and you guys may left at this) is the production of fun and in-depth soccer games that non-soccer kids will want to play. I am a member of the younger generation and at the beginning of my descent into the dark abyss of soccer (later, in my teen years), i discovered all the rules of soccer, all the major leagues in soccer, all the players in soccer through the playing of EA Sports' FIFA series.

I knew EXACTLY who Jason Kreis was before I even followed MLS because I scored 60 goals with him playing as the Dallas Burn on FIFA 03. I know exactly what haircut David Beckham had in 2002 while playing with Man U because it was featured in FIFA. (it was a foe-hawk by the way)

I have many friends who don't watch soccer but they know who Coventry City and Nottingham Forest are because they brought them up from the Third Division to the Premier League in FIFA's manager mode.



(I also learned the rules of Hockey when I was seven by playing Gretzky '96 on N64. And playing QB Club 98 also helped me to get the rules of footall down pat)

Seriously, sports games are an important tool in reaching out to the younger generation and exposing them to soccer. You'd have to be a fool not to think so.

 

Absolutely irrelevant. More stats mean nothing but changing the essence of this game. We, true soccer fans, don't care about numbers and stats!. We just enjoy the game, even if it ends 0-0 and players end with "bad numbers".

Who cares how many times Zidane touched the ball with his left or right? Or how many times Maradona, Cruijff, Pele or Di Stefano "created" a shot? Come on! This is not baseball or basketball. If people don't get what this game is about, we must not try to adapt it to them. That is not how it works. We need to make people appreciate the game the way it is.

 

Stats won't make a difference but gambling will.

 

I disagree. That was a very entertaining game. My friend from England who is a big EPL fan said he planned to watch part of the 5 to 4 game, but once it got going he couldn't switch the channel because it was such a good game. Lots of goals doesn't make for a bad soccer game just like few goals doesn't make for a bad soccer game. My dad is kind of in the middle. He likes watching soccer every now and then. He made a comment after the 2006 World Cup when he said something like, "Now it's time to watch real football. At least they score." With that being said the 0-0 tie between Sweden and T&T was one of the best games I watched during the 2006 World Cup. Of course that one point put T&T in great position to advance. The beginning of the MLS season is not the time for a 0-0 tie. There are plenty of people who would watch if they didn't believe the stereotype that the game will end 1-0 everytime. Also I think the small crowds are a turn off as far as attracting interest in MLS. When you watch Boca vs River, of Chelsea vs Man U. on FSC and see 60,000+ in the stands cheering that makes the game look intense, but when a crowd of 10,000 quiet fans are watching it make the game look meaningless.

 

Haha.

Seriously, even if soccer stats are sometimes useful, how can you really be sure the person creating the stats really knows how to differentiate between a good pass and a bad one, or between a really creative string of passes and mere time wasting by a side that is afraid to attack?

Lots of brilliant and creative players disappear for most of the game and then come out of nowhere with a fantastic dribble or pass or shot that wins the game. If you relied on their overall stats, they would look extremely poor compared to other players, and yet they have something that those other players do not. There is a lot going on in soccer which simply cannot be captured by statistics.

If more stats brings in some new soccer fans via fantasy soccer or gambling, great. But this isn't going to "save" soccer or make it a popular sport in the USA. Soccer has to remain true to its own nature, and appeal to the soccer fans who already exist, or who can be converted to liking soccer as it actually is, and not try to change soccer to make it fit into the preconceptions of people who don't like soccer and who don't understand soccer.

 

Is there a stat for interceptions and tackles. This would be a good way to keep track of Defensive type players.

 

If someone really loves the sport and consumes it on a regular basis, then the importance of having stats is diminished. I'm a stats junkie, but I get along just fine without it in soccer because I consume the sport in a serious way...someone who is obsessed will take the effort to learn the intricacies of the sport, and in most cases, themselves have some experience playing the sport enabling them to relate to the intricacies.

However, I think stats can have a lot of pull with drawing in casual fans because among other things it de-abstracts the role of the athlete and allows people who do not know things to follow along. And casual fans are needed for critical mass. Those large Super Bowl audiences are not all hardcore fans, they are mostly casuals who know just enough about the sport to have a talk at the watercooler about it. Or how about fantasy football? I attribute the rise of the NFL to America's most popular league to the interest in fantasy, because it gave people a reason to watch any games in the league--rather than just the local or popular team.

Having a lot of meaningful statistics enable casual fans to be able to make some reasonably valid inferences about the sport such as who's doing good, who's the team/league's best players, etc, etc, without necessarily having to be intimately knowledgable about the sport themselves. I don't know that much about basketball, but I could look at the sports page and infer from looking at the categories to know enought to be able to strike up a conversation with someone about the NBA and not sound like an idiot.

How is some dilettante going to recognize that Nemanja Vidic or whoever is a top defender in the sport without having the knowledge of the role and tasks of a defender in keeping the ball out of the net. How does one quantify a good defender if they don't know what their (abstract) role is?

I think it hurts the Yanks abroad too. I think a lot of American sports people might be casually interested to see how our players do in the world's best leagues if they had a mechanism to keep track of things, but what do have to go on (besides goals and clean sheets)?....DaMarcus Beasley was on the field when his team scored a goal...Dempsey made a nice pass which eventually led to his teammate drawing a cornerkick...Freddy Adu was subbed in to the game in the 88th minute...etc.

All that said, you simply cannot have copious statistics just for the sake having them. In most cases they wouldn't be meaningful, if they were they would already be tracked. Soccer just doesn't lend itself to stats, it's one of the disadvantages of the game and that's just how it is...but yes, more stats (as long as they aren't retarded creatures of ESPN) would definitely help with drawing interest from American viewers.

 

Of course it's not going to, because soccer doesn't need "saving".

I wasn't necessarily jumping on you for saying that, but I can't tell you how many times I've read that phrase in SI or heard it on ESPN. It's not like soccer is hanging on by a thread. It is a very sustained sport here in the US that is continuing to grow in popularity and is not going anywhere anytime soon. (some people really just like to deny this fact).

Sports like curling or street louge (sp?) need saving. Not soccer.

 

There's been gambling on MLS basically since the league came into being. It hasn't made a difference.

 

With good stats, it'll be easier for talk radio to cover soccer. I mean, who here watches more than half of all MLS games? That'd be 3-4 every week! With good stats, if you don't see a match, you can still have SOME idea of who played well and who didn't.

 

Q: Will more stats for soccer (MLS) bring in more american fans?
A: No.

 

While lots of goals don't inherently = bad soccer, that particular game was retched, as was the LAG v FCD Superliga game. Both had horrible midfield play, crappy defending, goalkeeping that was a joke and no organization.

If I wanted to watch that, I'd go down the street and watch the local Little League go at it. When I watch a professional match, I expect to see, well...professional-level play. People went nuts and all, sure. But 90% of the people at that game were 14 year old girls screaming their hearts out who, with about 99% certainty, haven't returned to see a single game in NY. Hardly, in my mind, a great example of soccer.

Just for example, a game that had lots of goals and was wonderful to watch (for homer reasons as well as others) was the 2nd leg of the Hou v FCD playoffs last year. 5 goals in that game, and the defending on both sides was good (if not frantic on Dallas' end, even more-so after the red card). While Dallas hardly displayed much attacking skill, they showed great defending in trying desperately to hold Houston back and their midfield stepped up defensively. Also, Burse was freaking crazy that night. Sure, 4 goals went past him, but he stopped another 4 or 5 from going in. That was a good team effort defensively (until overtime...) on Dallas' part and great offense from Houston.

Or, if you like, how about the 2nd leg DC v Chicago from last year? Another good example of "high-scoring" that was well played. Not the greatest of tactics on Chicago's part, but they executed those tactics to the number.

Sorry, I don't want, and I don't think others do either, "all games to be 5-4" just so we can get Joe Blow into soccer. Let them enjoy their football with their "high scoring". I'll take a hard fought 0-0 over a bad performance 5-4 anyday.

 

I agree. I don't want a 5 to 4 game every week either, but the 5 to 4 game was fun to watch.

 

You can't quantify a player's performance with statistics. Its a fact of the game and the reason why it is so beautiful. Guys like that author are idiots.

 

I think this notion has some merit but the way SI has presented it is just a bit off. What they are really looking for in soccer is another measure of game progression besides scoring, or other levels of scoring.

Example: A football field is a giant measuring stick. Each play is an attempt to first break the line of scrimmage, then the first down marker, then the end zone. The success of each and every play can be literally measured, and progress towards to overall goal of wining is measured by the score and the clock. In addition, there are multiple levels of scoring, so a drive can actually have several possible, measurable outcomes. A first down is in a way a form of scoring, or at least can be looked that way by fans. So the game is full of "scoring" in some form, which also makes up the incredible number of stats collected for football (and what I think the author really means by soccer needing stats). This progress shows up on the scoreboard along with the actual score.

In baseball, you have an actual score, but each play ends in a ball, a strike, a hit, a run, an out etc., all of which are recorded on the scoreboard. These are forms of scoring, even if they don't count towards the final score, they appease fans.

Basketball is closer to soccer, and I think many people look at soccer similarly to basketball. Basketball doesn't have as many other forms of scoring, but the game can be divided better into a "play-by-play" narrative where each play has a definable outcome, a score or not a score. The fact that 50% of these "plays" do end in a score is appealing and measures constant progress.

Soccer, is much more difficult to divide up into smaller levels or types of scoring. Some people like to talk about possession, but this is not climactic and not a reliable predictor of progress towards winning. Experienced soccer fans know what to look for. We are looking for the defense to be punctured by a good cross, a difficult pass, an attacker beating his man one on one or by making a good run, forcing a defensive mistake or surprising the goalkeeper with an unlikely strike. We also know that we are gaging the balance of taking risks versus playing it safe by the number of players sent forward (one of the biggest reasons that soccer truly should be viewed live whenever possible. A camera just cannot give you the same view of the field to see all that is going on). I think we recognize that there is a progression which must occur, win the ball, control the ball, create a numerical advantage in some form, find the player in the best position to score, and finish. But this progression never happens the same way twice, so it is very difficult to pick up on when there are no numbers or markers telling you it has happened. It just takes time and experience to learn the flow of the game, and not everybody is willing to invest that time to do so.

I've often wondered if adding a tiered system of scoring wouldn't help soccer in America (not that I'm suggesting that; I love soccer as it is and am happy with the progress it has made as a spectator sport). Give 5 points for a goal, and a point for a corner kick, or create mini goals in the corner of the field worth a point or something like that. Having a smaller, more easily attained objective could satisfy the constant need to see the scoreboard change many who are conditioned to American sports seem to have. I don't think the type of stats SI is talking about are the answer, but I think they aren't totally wrong in that the lack of of more quantitative measures of game progress might hurt soccer a little.

 

Sorry, but professional coaches worldwide are obsessed with quantifying performance. A large industry has in fact evolved in Europe and elsewhere that develops statistical tools for soccer, and which real coaches use and take very seriously. Google "ProZone" and "Opta" to see what I mean. I agree that from a fan's point of view, these stats don't make the game more entertaining. But they most definitely have a place on the competitive side of the sport and that place is getting larger and larger.

 

I suspect that's why he put the word "save" in quotation marks.