The Yanks had those rules in place long before the need for excessive commercial breaks. And I think using the Canadian rules, with only 3 downs, would probably mean turning the ball over and more opportunity for commercial breaks.

It means a more wide open passing game. 4 downs aren't necessary with the wider field-- the games are actually higher scoring despite the longer field and less downs. so actually there are less turnover on downs. what you dont see is the 3 yards and a cloud of dust strategy. situations like 2nd and 6 or 2nd and 7 are almost always passing down in cis or cfl but in the nfl, it seems like those are more often (or at least equally likely to be) running downs.

the advantage of the cfl is that you have a lot of cool offensive sets because they often go with 6 wide receivers (12 men on each side). and there are a lot of fast, shifty guys who are too short to play receiver or too small to play rb in the nfl.

Also there are more punts because of the fewer downs coupled with no fair catches and the rouge (point for kicking it into the endzone) mean that there are more punt returns which are very exciting.

@DJ
I think interest in the MLS is growing---it's kind of hard for any new sport in America to establish itself because of the sheer number of options that Americans have when it comes to sport. Our media bombards us year around with nonstop coverage. In addition to the NFL which most people seem to point as the reason for soccer's lack of popularity, there is basketball, baseball, hockey, as well as an immense following for college basketball and college football. Then there is also nascar, PGA, olympic sports---the MLS has a lot of competition in terms of marketing itself. Despite all of that, the league has survived and is growing in popularity.

And it's not that Americans don't like soccer---you see regular sell outs of 60-80,000 fans when Europe's big boys come and play. Americans follow a winner, I guarantee you if team USA has a successful World Cup and makes to even the Quarterfinals, MLS's popularity will go up. Unlike nearly every other country, people have a lot of options for sports so for something to stand out it needs to prove itself first.

"situations like 2nd and 6 or 2nd and 7 are almost always passing down in cis or cfl but in the nfl, it seems like those are more often (or at least equally likely to be) running downs. "

I'm from Philly. We don't believe in 'running downs'. LOL.

haha true. you think vick has a chance to start over kolb?

First of all, calling American football "football" is a horrible misnomer and I would hate it just for that if I didn't already loathe it for so many other reasons. Punts + FGs is not enough to put foot in the title.

Re: Soccer is boring.
I find golf, baseball, and american football all tremendously more boring than soccer. If >50% of the time in your sport is spent planning a play or just standing waiting for something to happen, I don't have time for you. I will admit that some soccer games do get boring depending on the sides skill and strategy, but at least something is happening.

Being a European soccer fan in the US is a mixed bag. If you don't get a soccer channel, you have to wait a few days for matches sometimes. On the flip side, no one is going to ruin the score for you and you probably won't find out accidentally. Also, from what I've heard the European media is saturated with soccer news, rumors, tabloids, etc. US fans get to miss all that.

After watching Barclays and Champions League, I just can't get into MLS. Some of our better players (Dempsey, Altidore, Donovan) are moving to Barclays, too. So, I might as well watch them there.

I think I might just subscribe to Arsenal TV next year online - does anyone have any experience with that?

well thats your mistake right there because Chelsea is obviously the better choice to subscribe to

I think the other codes have the right to call themselves football. Some people believe that soccer was the original footbal, but this not is true. Rugby football is just as old, and this the game from which Aussie Rules, American Football etc are derived.

Sorry spyman, you're wrong. Football is football, Rugby is Rugby. Rugby is not as old. The story of W.W. Ellis may not be true, but the RFU was formed after the FA by Blackheath members who refused to accept no handling allowed as this was thought to "..turning us into Frenchies!!" The names themselves show the varients. Football, then Football with a varient from Rugby school, an Australian varient etc.

Chealsea better than Arsenal? I would agree to that but only in the short term. Manchester United beats them both though. : )

As to the topic of American football, it is one of the dullest games I've ever played. Most of the time spent is planning out strategies. At least in 'soccer' the ball is played much more fluently and strategies are usually made on the fly, which gives soccer it's stunning flair and surprises at the last second.

I don't think you should view the FA as the start of football though. The FA was 1863. Even Australian Rules Football has an earlier start than that. The Melbourne Football Club was started in 1859 followed by several other teams in the same yea. And the first trophy was the Challenge Cup in 1861.
As for Rugby Football - the Dublin University Football Club (Rugby) started in 1854 and then the Blackheath Rugby in 1858.

I think American rugby would be a more appropriate name for American football. Rugby fans might take issue with that, I'm not sure.

I didn't claim Arsenal was the best in the league, but they are my favorites because they the most players that I like. Unfortunately, a lot of them are hurt right now. I certainly still enjoy watching Chelsea and ManU when I get the chance. Chelsea more so.

The one thing I dislike about both American football and baseball are the INCESSANT pauses in the game. American football has at most a couple of seconds of continuous play before you hear a whistle being blown. Baseball is like a freaking marathon with bursts of activity whenever a batter hits the ball. The waiting in between is really boring. I fear that it suits short attention spans TOO well.

Soccer, basketball, hockey, etc. at least share the virtue of durations of uninterrupted play.

I second the "American rugby" suggestion but then how many varieties of "ruggers" would that make? :-P

@ StevenC.
American football is what you would get if you reduced a sport to only set pieces because that's all it is. Soccer players are independent thinkers when it comes to playmaking to a far greater extent than their football counterparts.

I think the MLS makes people shy away from being a fan of soccer in the US. the level of soccer in the MLS is disgusting I was watching a game two days ago on espn2 cause it was supposed to be a big game, and i turned it off after 10 min. just sloppy play. now granted i'm a huge soccer fan but of the good stuff. La LIga, Barclays and of course UEFA cup is amazing.
I don't know if the US will ever come to love the sport which means i'll have to move abroad so i can actually talk to people about it without getting really weird looks as to why i was up at 6 in the morning on a saturday to watch Man U play Man City.

@steven C not this year =) chelsea is on top of the league.

my favortie time to watch the MLS is when the European clubs come and play the MLS teams for rpre season practice. i like seeing how they fare

Toronto FC truly is huge in Toronto. They actually had to expand BMO Field just to accommodate the amount of season ticket requests. The fan atmosphere is 2nd to none and it is doing a huge deal to help make soccer explode in popularity. Now if only we could make the playoffs.

Also, Montreal and Vancouver are vying to be next in line for an MLS franchise. Both cities want one badly and both have committed soccer specific stadiums to draw the league in. The two cities also have teams in the USSF (the Montreal Impact and Vancouver Whitecaps FC).

Vancouver is an extention team next year actually along with Portland