Comments on: The Invisible Sport http://frogparade.com/2007/09/139/ We like it here! One German and one American translating Los Angeles for the World. Sun, 29 Jan 2012 02:30:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: william http://frogparade.com/2007/09/139/comment-page-1/#comment-38 william Sat, 13 Oct 2007 00:21:50 +0000 http://frogparade.com/?p=139#comment-38 American Football diverged from Rugby when Teddy Roosevelt decreed that helmets should be worn for safety. Others took it upon themselves to change the rules further. With no sporting contact between the US and Europe, US Football drifted farther and farther from the "pure" sport of Rugby. American Football diverged from Rugby when Teddy Roosevelt decreed that helmets should be worn for safety. Others took it upon themselves to change the rules further. With no sporting contact between the US and Europe, US Football drifted farther and farther from the “pure” sport of Rugby.

]]> By: Karen http://frogparade.com/2007/09/139/comment-page-1/#comment-37 Karen Fri, 12 Oct 2007 18:47:46 +0000 http://frogparade.com/?p=139#comment-37 Except that all of the big 3 sports were quite popular before TV was even invented. So, I have no idea why they're more popular than other sports here in the US. Except that all of the big 3 sports were quite popular before TV was even invented. So, I have no idea why they’re more popular than other sports here in the US.

]]> By: Petra http://frogparade.com/2007/09/139/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Petra Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:00:06 +0000 http://frogparade.com/?p=139#comment-36 One interesting fact is that American football has its origin in rugby. So how did it happen that the one gained in popularity and the other slipped out of the view of the public? Is it so much more exciting to watch heavily armored guys crash into each other? Maybe it is true that only sports with plenty of time for ads are interesting enough to be shown on TV. And as we all know - only what is being shown on TV is good. So there you have it. It is not the sport itself - it's the TV networks and plain old money grabbing. One interesting fact is that American football has its origin in rugby. So how did it happen that the one gained in popularity and the other slipped out of the view of the public? Is it so much more exciting to watch heavily armored guys crash into each other?

Maybe it is true that only sports with plenty of time for ads are interesting enough to be shown on TV. And as we all know – only what is being shown on TV is good.

So there you have it. It is not the sport itself – it’s the TV networks and plain old money grabbing.

]]> By: Cait http://frogparade.com/2007/09/139/comment-page-1/#comment-35 Cait Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:55:23 +0000 http://frogparade.com/?p=139#comment-35 I'm guessing one of the reasons rugby did not catch on in the US is because football and baseball are so popular. The same goes for soccer, although it is gaining in popularity. There are just so many professional sports in this country, and they were entrenched before others had a chance to take hold. I mean, think about it. We have the big 3, football, basketball, and baseball. Then we have less popular, but still big, sports like rodeo, bowling (!), softball, track & field, racing (all kinds, including horse racing, NASCAR, etc.), and on and on. I guess there just aren't enough fans to go around for any more sports. I’m guessing one of the reasons rugby did not catch on in the US is because football and baseball are so popular. The same goes for soccer, although it is gaining in popularity. There are just so many professional sports in this country, and they were entrenched before others had a chance to take hold. I mean, think about it. We have the big 3, football, basketball, and baseball. Then we have less popular, but still big, sports like rodeo, bowling (!), softball, track & field, racing (all kinds, including horse racing, NASCAR, etc.), and on and on. I guess there just aren’t enough fans to go around for any more sports.

]]>