Or, its simply a different way to achieve things ;). US teams actually don’t do all that bad in CONCACAF Champions League - they just tend to not be as good as Mexican teams (you would expect that, LigaMX has had a far longer and more storied history). In addition, Canada doesn’t have its own teams - MLS is US and Canada. Last year, 3 MLS teams reached the Quarterfinals (this season there are 2 in the QFs). Back in 2012-13, the MLS had 2 teams in the Semifinals - but we defeated by LigaMX teams.
Honduras doesn’t get as far as MLS teams. Mexico is still the top of the heap, but MLS teams are getting better.
As mentioned above, the hierarchy of the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL are that they are the top league in their sport and will always remain so. Other leagues only serve to feed them players. MLS doesn’t follow that model, since they know they can’t compete with the best leagues. Maybe someday, but they seem content at this point to work within the skill limitations they have, at least in the short term. Their goal is to build a sustainable league that makes money.
There have been attempts at jumpstarting soccer leagues with massive injections of money, like in Saudi Arabia, but they’ve mostly failed to traditional European and South American dominance. I was hopeful that the United States could pull off something better, but evidently the American Revolution stopped at monarchy and didn’t make it as far as soccer. You see, soccer can only benefit from an expansion of its world. Americans would likely develop their unique style, their soccer way of life. And frankly, things can get pretty boring when one soccer kingdom dominates for too long - everybody rejoiced when Spain, tiki-taka and Barcelona FC were steamrolled by the Netherlands in the last World Cup after eight years of undisputed superiority. I think it applies to American sports too: but while there this renewal of sorts is induced by parity mechanisms, in soccer it’s left to the natural evolution of the game.
But probably it’s too much to ask right now that the L.A. Galaxy challenge on an equal foot Chelsea or Bayern Munich. Some day they may, though. It would really be pleasant.
The L.A. Galaxy have only been in existence for 20 years. And have a much smaller payroll than Chelsea or Bayern (like, much, much, much smaller) due to the salary cap (another thing that is very American). You are going to have to wait a while for Americans to develop their unique style - so far all we’ve really got is a never-say-die attitude and fantastic goalkeepers. We’ve really only developed one great soccer talent so far, Landon Donovan, but there are some interesting folks on the horizon.
They support the major city team that they are closest to geographically?
I mean I grew up like 80 miles from NYC. I was a fan of NYC teams (somewhat).
The Atlanta Braves MLB team has big fans from Mississippi to Charlotte (and beyond). When there are such vast distances between cities, you pick the ones closest in geography and no one sees that as a problem.
Generally speaking, people attach to the nearest team, the one that covers their media market. There are some very remote parts of the country where it gets a little more complex, but that’s really a relatively small number of people.
However, once you have signed on to the concept of being part of a particular team’s community, the next-nearest teams become your hated rivals.
If the Green Bay Packers are dropped from the NFL or moved to Los Angeles, say, their fans are going to hate the idea of becoming Minnesota Vikings or Chicago Bears fans, for example.
When the Raiders and the Rams abandoned Los Angeles, Angelenos didn’t become fans of the San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, or Oakland Raiders. To the extent that football has a loyal following in L.A., it’s for its two big college teams—the UCLA Bruins and the USC Trojans
The only sure way to split off a fan base is to create a team that’s even closer.
For example, until the 1960s, most of the American south was loyal to the St. Louis Cardinals, because that was the southern-most Major League Baseball team and had an extensive radio network covering the area.
Putting brand new teams in the region—Houston Astros, Atlanta Braves, Texas Rangers, Miami Marlins, Tampa Bay Rays—was able to carve the more distant localities away from the St. Louis sphere.
To add, my girlfriend’s family lives in Western Montana. The family is divided in NFL fandom between the Denver Broncos and Seattle Seahawks, and some of the family is absolutely diehard for their team. They are 900 miles from Denver and 500 miles from Seattle - but those are “their” teams because they are the closest professional teams.
Many European fans actually support teams without looking at the geographical factor. I support Juventus even though it’s based in Turin and I live near Bari; I don’t even know the current squad of Bari, which plays in Serie B. This is the normality. Some people even support foreign teams.
Why support a particular team? That’s a question that it’s impossible to answer rationally. It’s more of a thing of heart. I fell in love of Juventus because my grandfather, when I was a child, held me on his knees and told me of Omar Sivori, the first Italian-based Golden Ball winner, and his astonishing feats.
I know that American teams, of any league, can be moved from a city to another with relative ease if the owner wishes.
I think this is bad, especially for a romantic sport like soccer, because it suffocates that tradition, history, soul and identity that mark each team as unique. If I asked what makes the Portland Timbers different from the Orlando City SC, what would you answer? I believe that, with sufficient time, American fans will choose too with other factors aside from just regionalism.
I don’t know if this will warrant a relegation/promotion system but it will develop the tipical mysticism.
(It appears I picked the wrong example as Orlando City SC seems to be yet to be founded. What I meant is that, for various reasons, US soccer must still develop a unique essence and sufficient differentiation between franchises)
Geography has always been important to the character of American professional sports. That’s not going to change.
It might be relative ease, compared to European sports, but it’s not easy. And the NFL and MLB in particular like to avoid it. Moving a team causes a huge social wound and resentment among fans that can last for generations.
There are still people alive today who haven’t gotten over the Dodgers leaving Brooklyn, and that happened 57 years ago.
When the Colts left Baltimore and the Browns left Cleveland, the relocated teams became huge rivals when the psychic gaps were eventually refilled.
There is minority of people who will choose a team for some other reason, but broadly speaking, you’re wrong about this.
Americans don’t want to be forced to give up local loyalties when it comes to sports and any league that tries relegation will suffer a huge public relations and economic loss.
And you speak of romanticism—that’s a huge part of American loyalties too. It’s the romantic story of a team that has had ups and downs—and maybe a lot of downs—but it’s still there, telling it’s story.
To an American, if a team is relegated to a lower league, the story is over, the same way it is for relocation. A team in a lower league is not the same team. It simply is not.
The old team is just gone, the story is over, and because of economic realities, a relegated team will never be able to recover. It will lose do much money that it will have to shut down.
From an economic and historical and romantic perspective There’s no good reason to even suggest relegation in American sports.
Perhaps it’s hard to understand how important geography is to American sports (and American culture in general).
When people become attached to sports usually as children, they want to be able to form affinities with their friends and family, to watch games together, to attend games together, to wear team colors, to celebrate in the streets.
I tried toke my nephew a Cincinnati Reds fan, but it didn’t work. And my brother changed his loyalty to the local team because he wants to bond with his son.
The thing about the NFL is that the teams are within range of each other. Even the Jaguars and the Raiders and the Jets are very, very good teams that could be able to compete on a top-tier level in a year or two. Often, a 2-14 record is at least partly an indication of a luck problem that could have translated in five or six more wins on a bounce or two of the ball. For the NFL, relegation is a pretty nonsensical idea.
Well, it could happen, but it’d be difficult and require bankruptcy…
As for the ‘military’ aspect of the NFL, that’s much more prevalent in the playoffs and especially the Super Bowl than most broadcast games. The opening ceremonies for the regular season are much shorter on TV than the playoffs.