There’s just something about soccer that produces more madness and lunacy amongst the American writer than any other entity, maybe except healthcare. During the World Cup, this insanity gets magnified by exponential leaps and bounds. We have to validate the “Americanness” of the event, people suddenly break the news that soccer is not a “high scoring” sport, and then there’s the tried and true debate over the years of whether or not soccer has “made it,” shifting the goal posts to wherever you’d like to finish your argument.
It’s all an exercise in frivolity – why can’t we just accept soccer and the World Cup for what it is? The World Cup is the world’s most popular sporting event and soccer’s popularity is still growing in the United States, but it’s not replacing the NFL anytime soon.
See – was that so difficult? For some people, yes. Yes it most certainly is.
It’s that difficult because there are some people that still see soccer as FOREIGN and therefore SCARY. Combine that with the propensity to refuse to evolve with the times and you have quite the recipe for columns that are straight from the last century.
Three news entities published these sort of columns over the last several days, setting the bar higher for the hottest of hot takes. Skip Bayless could actually learn a thing or two from these guys…
First, because the current climate in Washington D.C. is so disgustingly toxic, Politico published a column entitled “Why soccer is un-American” by Stephen H. Webb. Aside from the same tired old tropes about soccer being a low-scoring sport and thereby not popular (as opposed to other low-scoring sports like, say, baseball) we have some other truly exceptional stereotypes and generalities on display:
To the American mind, the only time games are supposed to be tragic are when we lose in a sport we love in the international arena. A real sport, like hockey. Otherwise, Americans should be able to make progress in any game, overcoming obstacles, changing rules, buying the best players. That has not happened in soccer because the design of that game has old-world values written all over it: Individuals should not try to stand out from the crowds, one group should not have too many advantages over another, drawing attention to yourself is distasteful, and so on. The tools of your trade shouldn’t be too splashy, either—why use your hands when your feet will do?
Although Americans love games that highlight individual performances—and the more the better—soccer seems designed to minimize their frequency. How many times during a baseball, (real) football or basketball game does someone do something that is utterly transcendent in its expression of skill and strength? Many times. Such moments of beauty are the main reason we find sports so attractive.
In soccer, however, these performances are more like an accident than a natural part of the so-called beautiful game.
Yes, transcendent performances in soccer like this or this or this or this… are all just accidents.
But to wrap this up in the flag and go from “I DON’T LIKE SOCCER” to “SOCCER IS UN-AMERICAN” is one of the most extraordinary leaps I’ve ever seen made. Take some time to really think about what it means to be “un-American.” Then think if soccer belongs in that category. You know what? I don’t like milk. I find the taste to be bland and unappealing. Maybe that makes milk un-American too.
But wait, there’s more…
CLICK TO CONTINUE READING: WHICH ONE OF THESE HOT SOCCER TAKES IS THE HOTTEST?
Comments are closed.