Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Considering the EPL is FAR more popular than the NFL and how they probably sell much more merch, I figured they would make more revenue
You underestimate the Power of the nfl and American media. The same way the premier League sells out I north america. The same happens when the nfl goes to England they will be going this year I don't expect to see anything but success with that endeavor.
But if you mean soccer is more popular that football. I'd have to say obviously. Football is really just a north American thing. It's just American spend A LOT on their football. And a lot of American states prefer to watch ncaa over nfl. Heck I thikn other than the circus that is the super bowl I'd dare to say college football is more beloved in america than the nfl.
Take a look at the largest stadia in the world, and the top of the list is dominated by US Colleges.
The other thing is population. The UK has 65 Million or so, the US has nearly 400M. The US is only marginally smaller than all of Western Europe.
Yeah. The NFL is the richest sports league in the world.
The Americans are *more* nuts about the NFL than any Europeans are about their soccer leagues (including the EPL in England), and there are more of them (Americans), so there you go...
Well that's true but in Toronto there aren't as many anglo looking girls as there used to be.. Lets just say she's a girl to be found in English Canada
I am reviving this old thread. I watched the second half of the Grey Cup between the Argonauts and the Blue Bombers this past Sunday and posted comments about it in the Pro Football forum though predictably, hardly anyone in that forum apparently cares about the CFL. It has been a while since I last watched CFL football but I ought to watch more. It's only one game but so far I found Canadian football to be entertaining, the audience, though noticeably smaller, was just as in it as any NFL game. What I'd like to keep note of are the different rules and terminology. What does "No Yards" mean? How does an offense conduct itself when there are only 3 downs, not four? How come the end zone looks different than the American version? I did not get to see one in the game but I'd like to find out how a team scores just one point with a "single" or rouge, which does not exist in American Football. The game is similar and yet different, almost like spending Canadian currency (e.g. Canadian $1 and $2 coins), writing "program" as programme, or following the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There's no reason to put down Canadian football, it's not worse than the American counterpart, only a bit different that's all .
I am reviving this old thread. I watched the second half of the Grey Cup between the Argonauts and the Blue Bombers this past Sunday and posted comments about it in the Pro Football forum though predictably, hardly anyone in that forum apparently cares about the CFL. It has been a while since I last watched CFL football but I ought to watch more. It's only one game but so far I found Canadian football to be entertaining, the audience, though noticeably smaller, was just as in it as any NFL game. What I'd like to keep note of are the different rules and terminology. What does "No Yards" mean? How does an offense conduct itself when there are only 3 downs, not four? How come the end zone looks different than the American version? I did not get to see one in the game but I'd like to find out how a team scores just one point with a "single" or rouge, which does not exist in American Football. The game is similar and yet different, almost like spending Canadian currency (e.g. Canadian $1 and $2 coins), writing "program" as programme, or following the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There's no reason to put down Canadian football, it's not worse than the American counterpart, only a bit different that's all .
"No yards": the kick/punt receiver has a five-yard zone around him, into which opponents may not intrude until he catches the ball. Once he catches it, he's fair game. But until then, he is safe from being attacked. "No yards" basically means that his safety zone was violated, and a penalty ensues. Note that there is no "fair catch" rule in CFL; every kick/punt caught must be run back.
"Three downs, not four": That's easy--you do a lot of passing plays. You need a quarterback who can target a receiver downfield, put the ball to where the receiver will be, and a receiver who can get to where the football is going to be. Doug Flutie, Joe Theismann, and Warren Moon were masters of this, and all played in the CFL. Joe Montana must have studied the CFL, because he did the same thing. At any rate, if you're trying to get the ball downfield, and you've only got three downs to do so, you don't waste your time on an experimental play trying to rush the ball. You throw it.
"End zone": It's deeper, that's all. Note that the goal posts are on the goal line, not at the rear of the end zone, so players have to avoid the pylon that is actually in the end zone.
"Rouge": the single point. It's complicated, but very nicely explained here, I think:
"No yards": the kick/punt receiver has a five-yard zone around him, into which opponents may not intrude until he catches the ball. Once he catches it, he's fair game. But until then, he is safe from being attacked. "No yards" basically means that his safety zone was violated, and a penalty ensues. Note that there is no "fair catch" rule in CFL; every kick/punt caught must be run back.
"Three downs, not four": That's easy--you do a lot of passing plays. You need a quarterback who can target a receiver downfield, put the ball to where the receiver will be, and a receiver who can get to where the football is going to be. Doug Flutie, Joe Theismann, and Warren Moon were masters of this, and all played in the CFL. Joe Montana must have studied the CFL, because he did the same thing. At any rate, if you're trying to get the ball downfield, and you've only got three downs to do so, you don't waste your time on an experimental play trying to rush the ball. You throw it.
"End zone": It's deeper, that's all. Note that the goal posts are on the goal line, not at the rear of the end zone, so players have to avoid the pylon that is actually in the end zone.
"Rouge": the single point. It's complicated, but very nicely explained here, I think:
In English, mainly yes, but don't forget about French speaking Canada where " programme " is used, and where the UK got it from...kind of like " aubergine "
I will point out another CFL oddity... The drop kick. Kicker drops the ball to the ground, and then kicks it as it bounces off the ground, to try to get it through the goal posts. Another one, the underhand ( or shovel pass ) from the QB to an end, who is standing on the scrimmage line at the sidelines , after "apperaring to leave the field ". A trick play not seen very much. The CFL used to have a limit on how many "import players " could be on a team's roster. I think it was six Americans back in the 50's and 60's.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Watched the first Grey Cup in many years
.
