If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sports Illustrated)   FIFA in 2010: Nah, don't worry about the World Cup being in Qatar in summer, it'll be fine. FIFA in 2013: Of course we're moving the 2022 World Cup to winter, it would be nuts to play soccer in Qatar in summer   (sportsillustrated.cnn.com) divider line 155
    More: Fail, Fifa, Qatar World Cup, Sepp Blatter, Qatar  
•       •       •

1457 clicks; posted to Sports » on 26 Aug 2013 at 11:13 AM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



155 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-26 10:06:29 AM
By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?
 
2013-08-26 10:29:21 AM
Relocate to the US.

Send Qatar a Hallmark card, "Sorry Qatar, but really, it was a stupid idea".
 
2013-08-26 10:34:36 AM
FIFA can't move it to another country until they scrub all evidence of the bribes; that's going to take a while.
 
2013-08-26 10:55:57 AM

Langston: FIFA can't move it to another country until they scrub all evidence of the bribes; that's going to take a while.


The evidence of the bribes being "They decided to hold it in Qatar."

Didn't Blatter get indicted for something? Maybe they'll wait for that and then move it to the US, blaming the whole thing on him.
 
2013-08-26 11:17:18 AM

Langston: FIFA can't move it to another country until they scrub all evidence of the bribes; that's going to take a while.


You mean to tell me FIFA didn't have the foresight to hire somebody from the International Olympic Committee to handle the bribes?
 
2013-08-26 11:21:33 AM

Rev.K: Relocate to the US.

Send Qatar a Hallmark card, "Sorry Qatar, but really, it was a stupid idea".


Better include the refund.
 
2013-08-26 11:24:46 AM
FIFA has officially entered ther realm of organizations so corrupt that they dont even bother to hide it anymore, a realm once exclusive to the IOC and Chicago politics. The only thing that amazes me anymore with them is how nobody has made an attempt to kill Sepp Blatter (yet). I figure there has to be a hooligan out there somewhere in the world that is pissed off enough to try, but yet, the beat goes on with that wretched, farking scumbag.
 
2013-08-26 11:27:08 AM

Langston: FIFA can't move it to another country until they scrub all evidence of the bribes; that's going to take a while.


I like how the media's focusing on England.  Who they should be focusing is on UEFA:  It's gonna take A LOT of money for FIFA to convince UEFA to interrupt the Champions League group stage in order for a World Cup to take place, and even FIFA's money may not be enough.  The moment Platini (or whoever is president of UEFA at the time) says no, FIFA's farked.  UEFA can go forward without FIFA, not the other way around.
 
2013-08-26 11:30:10 AM

Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?


The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.
 
2013-08-26 11:31:23 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.


They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.
 
2013-08-26 11:32:17 AM

Rwa2play: Langston: FIFA can't move it to another country until they scrub all evidence of the bribes; that's going to take a while.

I like how the media's focusing on England.  Who they should be focusing is on UEFA:  It's gonna take A LOT of money for FIFA to convince UEFA to interrupt the Champions League group stage in order for a World Cup to take place, and even FIFA's money may not be enough.  The moment Platini (or whoever is president of UEFA at the time) says no, FIFA's farked.  UEFA can go forward without FIFA, not the other way around.


This one, right here.
 
2013-08-26 11:33:53 AM
Look, just because a Winter World Cup would piss off UEFA, the EPL, La Liga, the Bundesliga, and Seria A, that doesn't mean it's a bad idea, per se.

You'd still have MLS OK with it. And maybe the Mexican Primera Division, too, depending on when in the winter you play. That's totally cool, right?
 
2013-08-26 11:34:19 AM
Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

In the summer a World Cup competes with reruns and summer baseball.

In the fall you have a panoply of standard TV, the World Series, the NFL (now on 3 nights a week every week), college football, and possibly Hockey.

Exactly who is going to be interested in shelling out for the TV rights? Not NBC (football), CBS (football), Fox (football), TBS (World Series), or ESPN (football).

ABC? That's a small market to target.
 
2013-08-26 11:35:43 AM

Dick Gozinya: FIFA has officially entered ther realm of organizations so corrupt that they dont even bother to hide it anymore, a realm once exclusive to the IOC and Chicago politics.


If Chicago politics was as corrupt as the IOC, they would have chosen Chicago over Rio.
 
2013-08-26 11:36:20 AM

Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

In the summer a World Cup competes with reruns and summer baseball.

In the fall you have a panoply of standard TV, the World Series, the NFL (now on 3 nights a week every week), college football, and possibly Hockey.

Exactly who is going to be interested in shelling out for the TV rights? Not NBC (football), CBS (football), Fox (football), TBS (World Series), or ESPN (football).

ABC? That's a small market to target.


ABC, who owns ESPN, you mean?

At this point you're down to Sci-Fi, excuse me, ScFy
 
2013-08-26 11:37:18 AM

Rwa2play: Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.

They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.


And despite the naysayers, there will be quite a few butts in those seats, soccer-specific or not.

/just not Houston's soccer stadium
//seriously, it's called 'The Oven' for a reason
 
2013-08-26 11:38:21 AM

Klivian: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

In the summer a World Cup competes with reruns and summer baseball.

In the fall you have a panoply of standard TV, the World Series, the NFL (now on 3 nights a week every week), college football, and possibly Hockey.

Exactly who is going to be interested in shelling out for the TV rights? Not NBC (football), CBS (football), Fox (football), TBS (World Series), or ESPN (football).

ABC? That's a small market to target.

ABC, who owns ESPN, you mean?

At this point you're down to Sci-Fi, excuse me, ScFy


Yes, but ABC proper shows limited sports programming (because of ESPN), but could be interested for something of this magnitude.
 
2013-08-26 11:38:25 AM

Dick Gozinya: FIFA has officially entered ther realm of organizations so corrupt that they dont even bother to hide it anymore, a realm once exclusive to the IOC and Chicago politics.


I share the same thoughts.

FIFA might as well say "Yep, we're corrupt as crap and there's nothing you can do about it. Now who wants to host the 2026 World Cup? Hookers and briefcases of cash can be sent to FIFA headquarters in Zurich starting next Monday. Bribes must be in Euros and the hookers must be top shelf with C cups or better."
 
2013-08-26 11:39:10 AM

Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.


Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.
 
2013-08-26 11:39:40 AM

Zik-Zak: Rwa2play: Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.

They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.

And despite the naysayers, there will be quite a few butts in those seats, soccer-specific or not.


They're still naysayers in 2013 about hosting a WC here? Really?  They must've thought 1994 was a mirage or something.
 
2013-08-26 11:39:46 AM

Rwa2play: Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.

They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.


We were discussing this in the EPL thread yesterday. Basically, to host a Summer World Cup, the only real reason the US would need any sort of lead time is so the staffing levels at the venues and hospitality infrastructure could be set. Gotta be able to give the guests places to eat, drink, and sleep.

Other than that, it's basically plug-and-play.
 
2013-08-26 11:40:40 AM
I'm guessing the pro leagues will have no problem with this.
 
2013-08-26 11:41:16 AM
Soccernub here... Won't the pro leagues have a bit of a problem with a winter WC?
 
2013-08-26 11:43:04 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.


Depending on timing you could also compete with the start of the basketball and hockey seasons, or the World Series.

College bowl games if you try to sneak it in late but before the Olympics.
 
2013-08-26 11:45:05 AM

Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.


Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.
 
2013-08-26 11:47:07 AM

Gonz: Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.

Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.


If worse came to worse, FIFA would ask Germany, France, England, Brazil, Argentina, Japan, China or possibly South Africa to host a WC on short notice (year, six months tops).
 
2013-08-26 11:49:58 AM

Gonz: Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.


Fox paid FIFA $425M for the rights to broadcast the 2018 and 2022 World Cup.  I assure you, FIFA certainly cares about US TV viewers for the purposes of future rights negotiations.
 
2013-08-26 11:51:18 AM

Rwa2play: Zik-Zak: Rwa2play: Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.

They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.

And despite the naysayers, there will be quite a few butts in those seats, soccer-specific or not.

They're still naysayers in 2013 about hosting a WC here? Really?  They must've thought 1994 was a mirage or something.


They're usually American football types. I don't think all American football fans are against the idea, but the ones that are tend to go that way.
 
2013-08-26 11:54:09 AM

Gonz: Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.

Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.


Money is money. The US is obviously not a high level contributor in viewership numbers - but it is still a pretty high dollar per viewer market.

It's not likely a deciding factor, but to say its not even a thought is silly.
 
2013-08-26 12:02:51 PM

Deneb81: Gonz: Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.

Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.

Money is money. The US is obviously not a high level contributor in viewership numbers - but it is still a pretty high dollar per viewer market.

It's not likely a deciding factor, but to say its not even a thought is silly.


OK, I phrased that more absolutely than I should have.

In comparison to the backlash FIFA would receive from every major professional soccer league in the world, as well as UEFA, the US TV market is a negligible consideration.
 
2013-08-26 12:05:16 PM

Rwa2play: They're still naysayers in 2013 about hosting a WC here? Really? They must've thought 1994 was a mirage or something.


I thought that the marketing in 1994 was very clever, basing teams in cities where there was a natural affinity with Americans who like to think of themselves as being "from" a particular country despite being three or four generations removed. I suspect that attracted a lot of attention from people who didn't normally pay attention to soccer, but who would pay attention to anything with, say, "Poland" in the name.
 
2013-08-26 12:08:24 PM
UEFA's president is butt buddies with Blatter and usually goes along with whatever he wants.  Platini is just as corrupt as Blatter.
 
2013-08-26 12:08:39 PM
The games will be moved to Atlanta and the surrounding areas. The new Falcons stadium, an expanded Sanford Stadium in Athens, Birmingham, and you could venture out further like the 1996 Olympics and play in DC, Miami, whatever.

Gonz: The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.


The half a billion that Fox shelled out for the TV rights make it a factor.
 
2013-08-26 12:08:54 PM

czetie: Rwa2play: They're still naysayers in 2013 about hosting a WC here? Really? They must've thought 1994 was a mirage or something.

I thought that the marketing in 1994 was very clever, basing teams in cities where there was a natural affinity with Americans who like to think of themselves as being "from" a particular country despite being three or four generations removed. I suspect that attracted a lot of attention from people who didn't normally pay attention to soccer, but who would pay attention to anything with, say, "Poland" in the name.


Absolutely.  Italy vs. Ireland didn't end up at the Meadowlands by accident.
 
2013-08-26 12:09:26 PM

Gonz: Rwa2play: Yanks_RSJ: Donnchadha: By "winter" they do mean "another country", right? Wasn't the US preparing a "Come on, guys, seriously" bid for the relocation?

The US could host this thing on 5 minutes notice.

They did with the WWC in 2003 on six months notice; Give 'em a year's notice and you'd think the US had won the bid all along.

We were discussing this in the EPL thread yesterday. Basically, to host a Summer World Cup, the only real reason the US would need any sort of lead time is so the staffing levels at the venues and hospitality infrastructure could be set. Gotta be able to give the guests places to eat, drink, and sleep.

Other than that, it's basically plug-and-play.


The simple fact is the US wouldn't need to build/upgrade a single stadium. The only "issue" would be putting FIFA acceptable grass into possible venues like AT&T Stadium or Ford Field.

It's amazing clicking though the 2014, 2018 and 2022 World Cup Wikipedia pages and the sheer number of upgrades/new construction that must be completed for each host country.
 
2013-08-26 12:09:37 PM

Gonz: Deneb81: Gonz: Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.

Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.

Money is money. The US is obviously not a high level contributor in viewership numbers - but it is still a pretty high dollar per viewer market.

It's not likely a deciding factor, but to say its not even a thought is silly.

OK, I phrased that more absolutely than I should have.

In comparison to the backlash FIFA would receive from every major professional soccer league in the world, as well as UEFA, the US TV market is a negligible consideration.


I'd agree, but only if the leagues pitching a fit translated to actual dollars. I think FIFA wouldn't give two shiats if they thought they'd still get near the same draw without league support.

TV rights though... FIFA execs see things in $€£¥.
 
2013-08-26 12:10:09 PM

Gonz: Yanks_RSJ: Deneb81: Lets also add in the fact that the TV market in the US will be decidedly less lucrative in the fall.

Yeah, nothing like dropping the World Cup final onto an NFL Sunday in November.  Good luck with that.

Um, it's estimated that half the population of the freaking planet watched at least a minute of the 2010 WC Final.

The US TV market isn't really a factor. At all.


Don't be daft and dense. Nice and fancy that half the planet watched the last minute of the 2010. Now tell me why would American TV stations would care? That's what he's talking about. In order to host, you need TV contracts. American TV stations won't drop NFL, World Series, etc for football soccer. People in other countries would be watching from their own networks and watching their own advertising.
 
2013-08-26 12:11:34 PM

mjohnson71: The simple fact is the US wouldn't need to build/upgrade a single stadium. The only "issue" would be putting FIFA acceptable grass into possible venues like AT&T Stadium or Ford Field.


Sure, the only thing would be grass...but the US would still upgrade half a dozen stadiums.
 
2013-08-26 12:14:18 PM

bulldg4life: mjohnson71: The simple fact is the US wouldn't need to build/upgrade a single stadium. The only "issue" would be putting FIFA acceptable grass into possible venues like AT&T Stadium or Ford Field.

Sure, the only thing would be grass...but the US would still upgrade half a dozen stadiums.


What do you mean?
 
2013-08-26 12:20:07 PM
I highly doubt that half of the world has access to television, who came up with that number?
 
2013-08-26 12:21:20 PM

Dick Gozinya: FIFA has officially entered ther realm of organizations so corrupt that they dont even bother to hide it anymore, a realm once exclusive to the IOC and Chicago politics. The only thing that amazes me anymore with them is how nobody has made an attempt to kill Sepp Blatter (yet). I figure there has to be a hooligan out there somewhere in the world that is pissed off enough to try, but yet, the beat goes on with that wretched, farking scumbag.


Formula One. That's all I have to say about that
 
2013-08-26 12:22:43 PM

mjohnson71: What do you mean?


I mean that the event would be used as a reason to upgrade the stadiums in cities hosting the event. The US wouldn't just re-sod the venues and not do any other physical improvements. Hundreds of millions would be spent on facility construction or expansions or whatever.
 
2013-08-26 12:39:12 PM

bulldg4life: mjohnson71: What do you mean?

I mean that the event would be used as a reason to upgrade the stadiums in cities hosting the event. The US wouldn't just re-sod the venues and not do any other physical improvements. Hundreds of millions would be spent on facility construction or expansions or whatever.


Expansions? American stadiums are already much larger than the venues being used. The 1994 World Cup blew away the previous attendance records.

Let's look at the 18 venues proposed in the final cut the US for 2022
Seattle
Los Angeles
San Diego

Phoenix
Denver
Kansas City
Dallas
Houston
Indianapolis
Nashville
Atlanta
Tampa
Miami

Baltimore
DC
Philadelphia
New York
Boston

Toss out San Diego and replace that with the brand new Levi's Stadium in the Bay Area. Plus by 2022 DC, Miami and Los Angeles might have new football venues that could be used. That leaves Tampa and Nashville as the only venues that would have to make major costly upgrades. And given the current NFL climate those are probably already on the books.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2013-08-26 12:44:12 PM

Deneb81: Yes, but ABC proper shows limited sports programming (because of ESPN), but could be interested for something of this magnitude.


ABC was barely interested in "Happy Endings", and that was at least somewhat entertaining.
 
2013-08-26 12:44:17 PM
As a note on TV revenue:

According to an ESPN article I found, the 2010 WC drew $2.4b in revenue from broadcast rights. Fox paid just about $.5b.

That means despite the lower per capita viewership, the US accounted fr over 20% of TOTAL broadcast right revenue.

Yeah, FIFA will care if the US rights-holders care.
 
2013-08-26 12:50:35 PM

ElwoodCuse: I highly doubt that half of the world has access to television, who came up with that number?


You're kinda out of touch with the world.  Small Chinese flat panels are ~$100 and older tube TVs are effectively free.  Most of the third world gets dozens of channels via free-to-air satellite reception, even where there are no cable systems or terrestrial broadcasters.  An FTA receiver and dish are also around $100.  You'll see FTA dishes outside tents in refugee camps.  There are about 1.5bn TV owners, but remember that the median age is under 18 in much of the third world.  If you count families and, in really rural places, a village-shared TV or two attached to a generator?  Most of the world can and does watch TV at this point.
 
2013-08-26 12:50:54 PM

mjohnson71: Dick Gozinya: FIFA has officially entered ther realm of organizations so corrupt that they dont even bother to hide it anymore, a realm once exclusive to the IOC and Chicago politics.

I share the same thoughts.

FIFA might as well say "Yep, we're corrupt as crap and there's nothing you can do about it. Now who wants to host the 2026 World Cup? Hookers and briefcases of cash can be sent to FIFA headquarters in Zurich starting next Monday. Bribes must be in Euros and the hookers must be top shelf with C cups or better."


This shiat right here is what pisses me off! People all think that just because the outcome fell the way it did, that the events leading up to it must have all been the same! I call horseshiat on this post. Some men actually like B cups!
 
2013-08-26 12:52:58 PM

Deneb81: Yeah, FIFA will care if the US rights-holders care.


Definitely, and I have to wonder about the terms of that deal in relation to when the event is held.  I somehow doubt Fox would have been as likely to spend that much money if they knew that they'd have to forfeit at least a couple NFL games if they want to air the WC on their broadcast network.  They definitely didn't buy the rights to bury the final on Fox Sports 1 at 2pm during NFL season, that's for sure, they bought them to put on Fox Network in late July up against nothing.
 
2013-08-26 12:52:58 PM
So instead of 9 years from now it will be 9 years and a few months from now. Why isnt that good?
 
2013-08-26 12:57:05 PM
I say we let Qatar have their World Cup but that we refuse to allow it to be moved to winter. After the first person dies we indict Blatter and his cartel for crimes. Problem solved.
 
Displayed 50 of 155 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report