6 ms·

For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular

For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular nearly everywhere else in the world), the NFL receives significant funding every year from the US Government and is part of the PR strategy to promote military enlistment as a patriotic act (1). I'd argue that many Americans view watching football to itself be a patriotic act. NBC removing Costas for speaking out about the injuries is significant because increased awareness of concussive and spinal column injuries would have no negative impact on the entertainment value of the sport. Nobody wants to see athletes who have worked their entire lives to get to the NFL suffer career ending injuries. So why suppress Costas? His effort to spread awareness was viewed as undermining the foundation of the game. The idea that the athletes are extremely tough, etc. Worrying about injuries makes the game less manly, and it is the association with manly duty and physical strength that makes the tie-in with military and patriotism so powerful. It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). In reality, the NFL has blocked overhead cameras from the telecast (3) because they would reveal significant coaching and execution mistakes that would make the sport seem far less professional. 1) https://thinkprogress.org/nfl-dod-national-anthem-6f682cebc7cd/ https://thinkprogress.org/nfl-dod-national-anthem-6f682cebc7... 2) http://theconversation.com/big-game-days-in-college-football-linked-with-sexual-assault-92725 http://theconversation.com/big-game-days-in-college-football... 3) https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/01/what-the-nfl-wont-show-you/252240/ https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/01/wh...

edejong 8y ago
Too bad a cogent argument with references is doenvoted without discussion.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  My guess is because of this: >For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch... I'd argue that many Americans view watching football to itself be a patriotic act. I love football and don't find it boring at all. The GP is writing off millions of people as irrational, overly patriotic morons. The comparison to the rest of the world is silly as well because a lot of us find soccer to be about the most boring thing ever behind NASCAR and golf, but obviously many disagree with me. >> It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). Yeesh, spare me. Yeah, it's insane how most announcers have "gruff, hyper-masculine voices" considering the majority of them were players themselves. Players in a sport which attracts the most athletic and physically gifted men in the country. How could it be? It's almost as if high levels of testosterone are correlated with higher levels of strength, athletic ability, and a deeper voice.
  - resters 8y ago
    To be clear, my point is not that Football is boring -- I like to watch it now and then when it's a close game. It's that without the government sponsorship, the sport and viewership would be significantly smaller, probably about as popular as rugby.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      It seems to me that your point was exactly that it was boring and that its popularity is due solely to US government propoganda. It seems that way because that's exactly what you said. I just don't know how you escape that given what you wrote: >For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular nearly everywhere else in the world), the NFL receives significant funding every year from the US Government and is part of the PR strategy to promote military enlistment as a patriotic act (1). >I'd argue that many Americans view watching football to itself be a patriotic act. And now we have >It's that without the government sponsorship, the sport and viewership would be significantly smaller, probably about as popular as rugby. Where did you get this idea? The military stuff is very recent and does not in any way constitute a large portion of the NFL's revenue. You're just making things up to fit your own notions of how the world works.
    - mulmen 8y ago
      That's absolutely wrong. The main revenue stream for the NFL is advertising, not government subsidy.
      - astura 8y ago
        And even if it was, football is still very popular outside of the NFL.
    - function_seven 8y ago
      The government sponsorship thing is very recent. Football has been very popular for much longer than the whole military recruitment angle has been in effect. People didn't start watching football when they heard that a few jets would be flying over before kickoff. (And, for the record, I hate all that jingoistic crap. The sport would be much better without it)
- cortesoft 8y ago
  Calling an activity 'boring to watch' is not a cogent argument.
mulmen 8y ago
This post is full of unfair generalizations and misinformation. > For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular nearly everywhere else in the world). People watch the NFL because they find it entertaining. It's not boring to the fans and viewers. NFL football is a carefully constructed entertainment product that goes to great lengths to remain competitive and engaging to audiences. There are no teams outside the United States so it's not surprising there is little viewership outside the US. > the NFL receives significant funding every year from the US Government and is part of the PR strategy to promote military enlistment as a patriotic act (1). The money "provided by the US government" is specifically provided by the US military for recruitment purposes, it is not a significant part of the NFL's revenue (that comes from advertisements). It is also not the only place the US Military spends money for recruitment. They also sponsor a drag racing team, created a video game, host air shows and public events on bases and have two air show teams that tour the country. > NBC removing Costas for speaking out about the injuries is significant because increased awareness of concussive and spinal column injuries would have no negative impact on the entertainment value of the sport. That's wrong. By raising awareness of the injury risk viewers now know the big impressive hits they like to see have real potential consequences. This makes them less entertaining to watch. This reduces appeal for advertisers and directly threatens the NFL's core business. I am not defending what the NFL and NBC are doing here but it's really not complicated to follow the motives (money). > So why suppress Costas? His effort to spread awareness was viewed as undermining the foundation of the game. The idea that the athletes are extremely tough, etc. Worrying about injuries makes the game less manly, and it is the association with manly duty and physical strength that makes the tie-in with military and patriotism so powerful. The NFL is only tangentially associated with the military and even then only before games and even then only starting around 2009. The selling point of the NFL is not that it is "manly", the selling point is potential (suspense) for and eventual realization of lot of action and excitement. > It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). Amazon has a female announcing team for their Thursday night coverage. Many of the announcers were previously NFL players, it is not surprising they would have male voices. I don't see any connection to bro culture whatsoever other than "bros" like to watch football, just like a lot of other people. > In reality, the NFL has blocked overhead cameras from the telecast (3) because they would reveal significant coaching and execution mistakes that would make the sport seem far less professional. The NFL is selling an entertainment product. This is editing.
hart_russell 8y ago
>boring to watch I bet you enjoy watching people pass a soccer ball for 90 minutes to a 0-0 tie
function_seven 8y ago
You're describing a caricature of a typical American Football fan. You say its popular despite being boring. Have you considered that maybe it's not boring? Sure, you don't appreciate the game (and that's okay), but it's obviously not boring to millions of fans who pay good money to see the games. If you're on reddit, checkout /r/nfl for what fans of the game talk about, and for an idea of the average fan. We're not a bunch of redneck 'Murica types. At least, not any more so than US fans of baseball or basketball. > It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). I need to know which announcers you're talking about. All the ones I'm thinking of are not that at all.
Rebelgecko 8y ago
For anyone who has ever wondered why soccer is so popular outside of the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular in America, the "entertainment capital of the world"), Association Football receives tens of millions of pounds in subsidies from the British government[1] (which even has a minister of sport!), and is part of the PR strategy to promote promote British Imperialism by influencing the Laws of the Game to resemble traditional Cambridge Rules. I'd argue that many soccer "fans" view watching their nation in the FIFA World Cup to itself be a patriotic act, despite the rampant corruption which soccer loving nations refused to prosecute until after the United States took action[2]. Before any arrests were made, British Prime Minister David Cameron actually criticized the BBC for investigating FIFA's corruption because it might interfere with England's bid to host the World Cup [3]. The Oxford man in charge of the World Cup bid called the BBC "unpatriotic"[4] for trying to reveal the rampant corruption that is endemic to soccer. So why suppress the BBC? Their effort to spread awareness was viewed as undermining the foundation of the game. The idea that the sport is egalitarian and based on merit, etc. Worrying about finances makes the game less appealing to poorer Commonwealth nations, and it is the association with rags-to-riches stories (like Pelé's) that makes the tie-in with wealth and imperialism so powerful. It's really absurd how some soccer announcers scream "GOOOOAAAALLLLLLLL" as if the length of their shouts is proportional to their manhood[5] and how the entire sport coalesces around "hooligan" culture[6] and promotes values like sexual harassment and destruction of property. Soccer's rampant homophobia and sexism probably stems from soccer hooligan culture's "ritualized male violence"[7]. Even though Britain has passed multiple laws to limit hooligan culture (Football Spectators Act of 1989, Football Offenses Act of 1991, Football Disorder Act of 2000, etc.), MPs are currently considering a new law to ban specific homophobic chants[8] now that they've become loud enough to be audible on television broadcasts, making the sport seem far less professional. [1]: https://www.sportengland.org/media/13753/all-awards-april-2009-dec-2018.xlsx https://www.sportengland.org/media/13753/all-awards-april-20... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_corruption_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_corruption_case [3]: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/sports/soccer/27sportsbriefs-fifa.html https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/sports/soccer/27sportsbri... [4]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/9201248.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/9201248.stm [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkIGO2UA-u8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkIGO2UA-u8 [6]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMynJt3pUvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMynJt3pUvM or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUUOLFAbJ6A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUUOLFAbJ6A, which features soccer fans harassing women at a lingerie store in Copenhagen [7]: https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=756c8e86-9b1a-4d82-b5d1-7f0d7f5566f6 https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=756c8e86-9b1a-4d82-b5d... [8]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/homphobic-chanting-ban-stadiums-illegal-damian-collins-conservative-lgbt-protection-a8411961.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/homphobic-cha...

edejong 8y ago

Too bad a cogent argument with references is doenvoted without discussion.

EpicEng 8y ago
My guess is because of this: >For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch... I'd argue that many Americans view watching football to itself be a patriotic act. I love football and don't find it boring at all. The GP is writing off millions of people as irrational, overly patriotic morons. The comparison to the rest of the world is silly as well because a lot of us find soccer to be about the most boring thing ever behind NASCAR and golf, but obviously many disagree with me. >> It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). Yeesh, spare me. Yeah, it's insane how most announcers have "gruff, hyper-masculine voices" considering the majority of them were players themselves. Players in a sport which attracts the most athletic and physically gifted men in the country. How could it be? It's almost as if high levels of testosterone are correlated with higher levels of strength, athletic ability, and a deeper voice.
- resters 8y ago
  To be clear, my point is not that Football is boring -- I like to watch it now and then when it's a close game. It's that without the government sponsorship, the sport and viewership would be significantly smaller, probably about as popular as rugby.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    It seems to me that your point was exactly that it was boring and that its popularity is due solely to US government propoganda. It seems that way because that's exactly what you said. I just don't know how you escape that given what you wrote: >For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular nearly everywhere else in the world), the NFL receives significant funding every year from the US Government and is part of the PR strategy to promote military enlistment as a patriotic act (1). >I'd argue that many Americans view watching football to itself be a patriotic act. And now we have >It's that without the government sponsorship, the sport and viewership would be significantly smaller, probably about as popular as rugby. Where did you get this idea? The military stuff is very recent and does not in any way constitute a large portion of the NFL's revenue. You're just making things up to fit your own notions of how the world works.
  - mulmen 8y ago
    That's absolutely wrong. The main revenue stream for the NFL is advertising, not government subsidy.
    - astura 8y ago
      And even if it was, football is still very popular outside of the NFL.
  - function_seven 8y ago
    The government sponsorship thing is very recent. Football has been very popular for much longer than the whole military recruitment angle has been in effect. People didn't start watching football when they heard that a few jets would be flying over before kickoff. (And, for the record, I hate all that jingoistic crap. The sport would be much better without it)
cortesoft 8y ago
Calling an activity 'boring to watch' is not a cogent argument.

mulmen 8y ago

This post is full of unfair generalizations and misinformation. > For anyone who has ever wondered why American Football is so popular in the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular nearly everywhere else in the world). People watch the NFL because they find it entertaining. It's not boring to the fans and viewers. NFL football is a carefully constructed entertainment product that goes to great lengths to remain competitive and engaging to audiences. There are no teams outside the United States so it's not surprising there is little viewership outside the US. > the NFL receives significant funding every year from the US Government and is part of the PR strategy to promote military enlistment as a patriotic act (1). The money "provided by the US government" is specifically provided by the US military for recruitment purposes, it is not a significant part of the NFL's revenue (that comes from advertisements). It is also not the only place the US Military spends money for recruitment. They also sponsor a drag racing team, created a video game, host air shows and public events on bases and have two air show teams that tour the country. > NBC removing Costas for speaking out about the injuries is significant because increased awareness of concussive and spinal column injuries would have no negative impact on the entertainment value of the sport. That's wrong. By raising awareness of the injury risk viewers now know the big impressive hits they like to see have real potential consequences. This makes them less entertaining to watch. This reduces appeal for advertisers and directly threatens the NFL's core business. I am not defending what the NFL and NBC are doing here but it's really not complicated to follow the motives (money). > So why suppress Costas? His effort to spread awareness was viewed as undermining the foundation of the game. The idea that the athletes are extremely tough, etc. Worrying about injuries makes the game less manly, and it is the association with manly duty and physical strength that makes the tie-in with military and patriotism so powerful. The NFL is only tangentially associated with the military and even then only before games and even then only starting around 2009. The selling point of the NFL is not that it is "manly", the selling point is potential (suspense) for and eventual realization of lot of action and excitement. > It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). Amazon has a female announcing team for their Thursday night coverage. Many of the announcers were previously NFL players, it is not surprising they would have male voices. I don't see any connection to bro culture whatsoever other than "bros" like to watch football, just like a lot of other people. > In reality, the NFL has blocked overhead cameras from the telecast (3) because they would reveal significant coaching and execution mistakes that would make the sport seem far less professional. The NFL is selling an entertainment product. This is editing.

hart_russell 8y ago

>boring to watch I bet you enjoy watching people pass a soccer ball for 90 minutes to a 0-0 tie

function_seven 8y ago

You're describing a caricature of a typical American Football fan. You say its popular despite being boring. Have you considered that maybe it's not boring? Sure, you don't appreciate the game (and that's okay), but it's obviously not boring to millions of fans who pay good money to see the games. If you're on reddit, checkout /r/nfl for what fans of the game talk about, and for an idea of the average fan. We're not a bunch of redneck 'Murica types. At least, not any more so than US fans of baseball or basketball. > It's really absurd how Football announcers have these gruff, hyper-masculine voices and how the entire sport coalesces nearly every negative aspect of masculinity and bro culture (2). I need to know which announcers you're talking about. All the ones I'm thinking of are not that at all.

Rebelgecko 8y ago

For anyone who has ever wondered why soccer is so popular outside of the US in spite of being fairly boring to watch (and in spite of being fairly unpopular in America, the "entertainment capital of the world"), Association Football receives tens of millions of pounds in subsidies from the British government[1] (which even has a minister of sport!), and is part of the PR strategy to promote promote British Imperialism by influencing the Laws of the Game to resemble traditional Cambridge Rules. I'd argue that many soccer "fans" view watching their nation in the FIFA World Cup to itself be a patriotic act, despite the rampant corruption which soccer loving nations refused to prosecute until after the United States took action[2]. Before any arrests were made, British Prime Minister David Cameron actually criticized the BBC for investigating FIFA's corruption because it might interfere with England's bid to host the World Cup [3]. The Oxford man in charge of the World Cup bid called the BBC "unpatriotic"[4] for trying to reveal the rampant corruption that is endemic to soccer. So why suppress the BBC? Their effort to spread awareness was viewed as undermining the foundation of the game. The idea that the sport is egalitarian and based on merit, etc. Worrying about finances makes the game less appealing to poorer Commonwealth nations, and it is the association with rags-to-riches stories (like Pelé's) that makes the tie-in with wealth and imperialism so powerful. It's really absurd how some soccer announcers scream "GOOOOAAAALLLLLLLL" as if the length of their shouts is proportional to their manhood[5] and how the entire sport coalesces around "hooligan" culture[6] and promotes values like sexual harassment and destruction of property. Soccer's rampant homophobia and sexism probably stems from soccer hooligan culture's "ritualized male violence"[7]. Even though Britain has passed multiple laws to limit hooligan culture (Football Spectators Act of 1989, Football Offenses Act of 1991, Football Disorder Act of 2000, etc.), MPs are currently considering a new law to ban specific homophobic chants[8] now that they've become loud enough to be audible on television broadcasts, making the sport seem far less professional. [1]: https://www.sportengland.org/media/13753/all-awards-april-2009-dec-2018.xlsx https://www.sportengland.org/media/13753/all-awards-april-20... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_corruption_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_FIFA_corruption_case [3]: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/sports/soccer/27sportsbriefs-fifa.html https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/sports/soccer/27sportsbri... [4]: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/9201248.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/9201248.stm [5]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkIGO2UA-u8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkIGO2UA-u8 [6]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMynJt3pUvM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMynJt3pUvM or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUUOLFAbJ6A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUUOLFAbJ6A, which features soccer fans harassing women at a lingerie store in Copenhagen [7]: https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=756c8e86-9b1a-4d82-b5d1-7f0d7f5566f6 https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=756c8e86-9b1a-4d82-b5d... [8]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/homphobic-chanting-ban-stadiums-illegal-damian-collins-conservative-lgbt-protection-a8411961.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/homphobic-cha...