American football is a better sport than soccer

I accidentally deleted my whole argument, so I needed to re-write it. I believe American football is a better sport than soccer. Contrary to the popular image of soccer-hating Americans, I don't hate soccer - I've played it and I watch the USWNT in the Olympics and World Cup. However, I feel the game is lacking in comparison to football. My first point relates to gameplay style. Quite obviously soccer strategy is limited - you can't touch the ball with your hands except in a few circumstances, and there is only one method of scoring. In contrast, football is more complex - you can run with or throw the ball backwards or forwards, and there are three ways to score. This isn't to say complex things tend to be better than simple things, but in this I think football requires more thought than soccer. The broader range of football rules allows a much broader range of strategy that can be adapted to fit almost any circumstance; a small team might run a misdirection-oriented offense and an aggressive, turnover-oriented defense, while a larger team might run a power-running offense with a hard-hitting defense. The possibilities in football are limited only to the rules and to the imagination of the coach. In contrast, soccer has a rather predictable formula - if you have the ball, try to get it into the goal, and if you don't, try to get it. Strategy is certainly existent in soccer, but not to the extent of football, where it is paramount. To continue with strategy, in football game planning is paramount. Watching film of the other team is extremely important and executing the game plan is vital to success. Each play is a literal battle - teamwork is so important that if even one player fails his task, the other side will immediately exploit it. Teams have hundreds of pre-designed plays that the players have have to learn, and there is potential for many more if the quarterback calls an audible (changes the play before the snap). In close games, playcalling is a crucial element that lifts football into a game of wits. In contrast, soccer places emphasis on offensive players and goalies. Teamwork isn't nearly as vital, and one-on-one matchups such as striker on goalie are much more important. At the end of the game especially, soccer can devolve into a boring spectacle of the winning team kicking the ball away from the goal whenever they get it. In football, this never almost never happens due to the four-downs rule. Time is also managed better in football. Admittedly, football is slower than soccer but at least the clock stops. In soccer, 'stoppage time' is retroactively determined by the official - Manchester United, in particular, is given particularly favorable stoppage time. [1] This is clearly more subject to abuse than football, which stops the clock instead of giving time at the end of a quarter. Football also has a better method of of resolving ties. Football's two overtime methods (college and pro) are both superior to PKs, which are an absurd way to end a soccer game. PKs don't necessarily favor the best team, just like free throws don't always favor the best team in basketball. Soccer used to have the 'golden goal', but it was removed from the Laws of the Game due to concerns out fairness; however, which is more fair - deciding a game based on a single goal scored in actual play, or deciding it based on three goals from PKs? In football, you have a 15-minute overtime period. If the first team with the ball scores a touchdown, they win. If they kick a field goal, the other team gets the ball and can tie the game (in which case it goes to standard sudden death) or even win it with a touchdown. It is a very easy, fair system that rewards the best team. In soccer, however, ties in knockout games will ultimately be resolved by penalty kicks, a system as absurd as deciding a basketball game with free throws or a baseball game on a home-run contest. PKs don't reward the best team, they reward the best penalty-kicking team. Finally, we have the issue of fans. Fans of soccer and football are both passionate about their games, but soccer games all too often devolve into violence and hooliganism. The Cleveland Browns and Philadelphia Eagles both have reputations for rowdy fans, but even their worst moments rarely match up to the thuggery exhibited by some soccer fans. When was the last time you heard of a rogue Eagles fan shooting a flare at the other team? That happened, except it was in Greece and it was a soccer game. [2] Some instances have resulted in hooligan 'firms' combating each other with deadly weapons. [3] Football has 'Bottlegate', an incident where Browns fans showered the field with beer bottles after a controversial call, but incidents like 'Bottlegate' are quite rare in football, even from the rowdiest fans. In short, football offers greater excellence in gameplay, strategy, tie resolution, clock management, and fans. I look forward to my opponent's response. References: 1: . http://deadspin.com... 2: . http://www.holdoutsports.com... 3: . http://en.wikipedia.org...