A profile of the latest ventures of former footballer Gerard Piqué ends with this:

That, perhaps, is the point that all those critics who dismissed the Kings League have missed. It may well be a circus. But Piqué might respond that there is nothing wrong with being a circus. Circuses are popular. They draw a crowd, they hold the gaze, because nobody is ever quite sure what is coming next.

While the circus itself has passed peak popularity in the United States, the argument above appears to have some merit: the average resident of society today is presented with a vast array of circuses. Some are free, some are not. They come through various media forms. They all promise to try to entertain or engross you. Novelty and spectacle are key. The speed at which it all happens is new as is the number of options.

What does this do to the potential viewers? Does it enhance their lives in the long run? Do people want their lives dominated by circuses or would they rather invest in longer-term pursuits, relationships, and community life?

The example above presents a modified form of soccer/football with its own twists. Fans of the regular game plus others interested in a fast-moving and entertaining time can tune in or attend. How long does this last?