Connect with us


United States Loses 2022 World Cup Bid


By now you have likely heard that the United States lost its bid to host the 2022 World Cup to Qatar, a country with a population smaller than Latvia but who promised FIFA a truly revolutionary and peace-bringing World Cup.

What you may not know is the vote was not even remotely close.  The United States stood at the precipice of losing in every round:

Round 1: Qatar 11, South Korea/Japan/U.S. 3 each, Australia 1

Round 2: Qatar 10, U.S./South Korea 5, Japan 2

Round 3: Qatar 11, U.S. 6, South Korea 5

Round 4: Qatar 14, U.S. 8

So after all the talk of our infrastructure, money, promise, and government support, we were closer to being eliminated every round than to winning the World Cup.  There will be analysis and reaction on MLS Talk I suspect for the next few days, but for now sound off: what do you think of the U.S. losing the 2022 World Cup to Qatar?

P.S.  It could have been worse, we could have suffered England’s fate.

200+ Channels With Sports & News
  • Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
  • Watch Premier League, World Cup, Euro 2024 & more
  • Includes NBC, USA, FOX, ESPN, CBSSN & more
Live & On Demand TV Streaming
  • Price: $35/mo. for Sling Blue
  • Watch Premier League, World Cup & MLS
  • Includes USA, NBC, FOX, FS1 + more
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
  • Price: $6.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
  • Features Bundesliga, LaLiga, Championship, & more
  • Also includes daily ESPN FC news & highlights show
2,000+ soccer games per year
  • Price: $4.99/mo
  • Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & NWSL
  • Includes CBS, Star Trek & CBS Sports HQ
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
  • Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
  • Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
  • Includes Premier League TV channel plus movies, TV shows & more



  1. Joseph Webster

    April 18, 2011 at 7:46 am


    Its Hamad Not Hamas??? WTF!?

  2. Roger

    December 4, 2010 at 1:54 pm

    We do not deserve to host a World Cup! Look the joke of a league we have 16 years after we hosted one!

    Here is an example why we do not deserve it.The Montreal Impact,the Puerto rico Islanders and the Rochester Rhinos play on ther same league.The Impact can qualify to our Confederation’s Club tournament because the are canadians;the PR Islanders can qualify to the same tournament because they are based on a caribean Island.However,the Rochester Rhinos DO NOT have the same chance because ther are based on “the land of oportunity”.

    We don’t even give our own clubs the chance to be a part of the club soccer world! And we want to host a WORLD CUP ????????????

    We have not even manage to have a meaningfull US Open Cup. Did you notice that the USOP have one game eliminations instead of home and away, like it is the NFL. And we want to host a WORLD CUP ?????????

  3. joejoe

    December 2, 2010 at 11:44 pm

    Qatar is the worst pick ever. What has this so called nation done to deserve this? Nothing but bribery and anti-American sentiment. Some dudes with billions made from our progress buttered FIFA members to do this. There’s absolutely nothing in the middle east worth showcasing. Nothing at all.

    • Joe

      December 3, 2010 at 10:15 am

      Thanks joejoe. You should give CNN, NYTimes, and Al Jazeera a call since you’re such an expert on the middle east and all that is not worth showcasing there.

      • joejoe

        December 4, 2010 at 11:27 pm

        Thanks Joe. Al Jazeera… good one. Let me tell you and anybody else, what you can find in Qatar. Some fancy hotels, sand, oil, sand, a dictatorship, sand, bad body odor, sand, Al Jazeera, terrorist, sand, and on top of that more sand.

        • Joe

          December 4, 2010 at 11:49 pm

          Thanks joejoe. Let me tell you and anybody else what you can find in joejoe’s comments. Idiocy, assumptions, racism, idiocy, grammar mistakes, racism, and on top of that, more idiocy.

          Save your future remarks for Glenn Beck.

          • joejoe

            December 5, 2010 at 2:34 am

            Oh Joe, you uninformed guy. It’s a fact that Qatar is ruled by an Emir, which is basically a dictator. It’s a fact that Qatar broke relations with Israel in favor of Hamas. Qatar is also friendly to Hizbullah. The US considers Hamas and Hizbullah terrorist organizations. It’s a fact that terrorist in that region not only want Israelis dead, but also a lot of Americans as well. You don’t have to go to the middle east to know that lots of people from that region don’t use deodorant. Ever been on a cab. My city passed an ordinance to deal with that issue (bad body odor from middle eastern cabbies). No doubt there are fancy hotels, Al Jazera, oil, and lots, and lots of sand. But of course, none of that matters to FIFA members. It’s all about the money.

          • Joe

            December 5, 2010 at 8:02 pm

            Hizbollah? It’s Hezbollah.

            Ever been in a cab. No question mark on that one huh?

            Thanks for telling us that you live in a city that enacts racially motivated legislation. It comes as no surprise given everything you’ve said so far.

  4. sergio lima

    December 2, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    What FIFA did today it was surprisingly bold. They showed the world that they are looking for new markets in ANY country interested in offer the right infrastructure and pay the super high price to have the cup. Well, that is a problem for a lot of other countries who believed in the “traditions of the sport”, the so called football establishment. FIFA kick the establishment in the mouth today when literally shut the door on England’s face AGAIN. And people probably don’t know but FIFA major generals had practically guaranteed the cup for the Brits after they lost to Germany years ago in exchange of silent about the voting process that end up defeating England at that time and now FIFA turned its back on them again.

    For everything the Premier league represents to every real soccer fan in the world and for the progress that England made since the violent eighties but above all, for those FANTASTIC fans, England should never be denied the right to have the world cup in 2018.

    I am from Brazil and we love soccer there, but when I had the chance to watch Manchester United against Liverpool at the Old Trafford I had the same kind of emotions I had when I was young watching my team in Brazil. It is something I won’t forget for the rest of my life, the English fans are very special fans.

    I became an instant fan and my love for those fans and for that country and those teams never stopped and today I am felling a little stabbed in the back myself. I just can’t understand how the delegates had the guts to betrayed those fans, that tradition and the game itself.

    With all due respect to all other nations but Brazil and England should be getting a world cup every now and then. Not because of the teams, leagues or even the countries, is just because deep love must be rewarded always and sadly in England today FIFA broke millions of hearts and just for money they don’t really need anymore.

    • Joe

      December 2, 2010 at 9:55 pm

      I do agree that it is strange that England hasn’t had a chance to host in so many years, but your last paragraph rubs me the wrong way. Yes, FIFA broke millions of hearts today. Do you know what? If they had not chosen Russia or Qatar, millions of hearts in Eastern Europe and the Middle East would also be broken. You can scoff all you want about the limited football history and passion in those places, but the fact is that they are passionate about the sport, and FIFA is interested in ratcheting up that passion to continue globalizing the game. For you to argue that England’s love for soccer is deeper than the love fans in those places have for the game…I know you don’t mean it this way, but it reeks of imperialism.

      • Bolacuadrada

        December 3, 2010 at 12:33 am

        “and FIFA is interested in ratcheting up that passion to continue globalizing the game.” Are you serious? If you believe that please start over. FIFA people do not know what fair game is. It is all about personal gain, believe me.

      • sergio lima

        December 3, 2010 at 9:18 am

        Joe, have you been in games in Brazil or England? If not, you should. Then you go to any other nation’s game and tell me if the sentiment is even close. There is love for the game in every country, but some nations are just made to love that game. You can’t argue that if you did not have the chance to see it and fell it. You are arguing against something you don’t even know. Please, go and fell for yourself.

        • Joe

          December 3, 2010 at 10:13 am

          And yet, you lost. Go “fell” for yourself.

          • Joe

            December 3, 2010 at 10:17 am

            And can you please point to me where I argued against the passion of fans in England or Brazil? Obviously they love the game. Does that mean every world cup should be in England or Brazil? Good luck growing the sport that way.

          • sergio lima

            December 3, 2010 at 12:20 pm

            Did I say always? My God, how sensitive some people are. it is just my opinion. You don’t have to agree but don’t have to get so crazy about it.

          • Joe

            December 3, 2010 at 3:22 pm

            And yet you’re the one arguing against other locations getting the Cup because they aren’t as passionate.

          • sergio lima

            December 3, 2010 at 7:15 pm

            I never said that. Read it again.

          • Joe

            December 3, 2010 at 7:32 pm

            Your argument is that England should have gotten the World Cup instead of Russia because they’re clearly more passionate.

            Anything else?

          • sergio lima

            December 4, 2010 at 8:47 am

            No, Joe. I said “For everything the Premier league represents to every real soccer fan in the world and for the progress that England made since the violent eighties but above all, for those FANTASTIC fans, England should never be denied the right to have the world cup in 2018.”
            But I know, I already realized you have “hard time” understanding other people’s opinions. You are…What Americans call…an Idiot.
            Cheers, pal. And if you are planning to get ugly do it direct to me, if you have that kind of guts, of course, right to me directly,

          • sergio lima

            December 4, 2010 at 11:42 am

            Write to me.

          • Joe

            December 4, 2010 at 7:48 pm

            Damn FIFA! How could you not recognize England’s inalienable RIGHT to host the 2018 World Cup!?!? How can you possibly seek to make more money on an untapped market?!?!

    • Bolacuadrada

      December 3, 2010 at 12:43 am

      What is up with Southamerica not supporting the USA even though it is the same continent. I know Southamericans will not do any favors to Central and North America but what about the large immigrant community from those 10 countries who reside in the USA? It is hard to believe it.

      • sergio lima

        December 3, 2010 at 9:11 am

        Same continent? Really? Large Immigrant community? Where? Tell me where to find large communities from Argentine, Chile, Equador, Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay? The only country with large community and is not even that large are the Brazilians, just because you are talking about a gigantic nation of almost two hundred million people. There are lots more Irish, Scottish and Germans than South Americans living in USA and they won’t cast their votes to USA either unless is going to be good for them in the future. And let’s not talk about the Chinese or Israeli communities who are way larger than any South American community and won’t help you cause too. But let’s put your argument into perspective here. In your view, because of the two hundred thousand Brazilians who live here in US, and are considered by the Brazilian government citizens with two citizenship, the entire country of one hundred and ninety million people should vote for that country. Let me ask, how Brazil should vote or influence the continent vote if has other two hundred thousand living in Japan and another two hundred thousand living in Canada? Please.
        Now, if you ask every South American living here, they will tell you that they are as disappointed as you are but let’s not mix stuff.

        • Dave C

          December 3, 2010 at 11:46 pm

          Sergio, I don’t know what part of the US you’re from, but there are huge numbers of Ecuadorians, Peruvians, Colombians, Bolivians etc in NYC, and I imagine a significant number in other major metropolises (not that I think that should have any baring on who casts votes for whom in the WC).

          And it’s definitely not true that there are more Germans, Scots and Irishmen living in the US than South Americans (unless you mean people who’s ancestors are from Germany/Scotland/Ireland, and that’s totally different). I’ve lived in NYC for 4 years and I don’t think I’ve ever heard a single Scottish or German accent in that time. There are a sizeable number of Irish immigrants, but it’s nothing compared to any of the South American immigrant communties.

          • sergio lima

            December 4, 2010 at 8:52 am

            Go to SENSUS and check it out. New York is just one city. United States has entire portions of states with people speaking German. The Europeans move here to farm and New York is not the kind of place to do that.
            But, I want somebody to show me more than 3 to 5 thousand people on each of those communities you are talking about it. That is nothing. With all due respect.

          • Dave C

            December 4, 2010 at 6:05 pm

            Sergio, again I’m not sure of the relevance of any of this to anything, but each of those countries I mentioned (Ecuador, Bolivia) have WAY more than 3-5 thousand people in NYC alone. Hell, any given neighborhood of Queens probably has more than 3-5 thousand of them.

            I know that there are some German-speaking people in the US (eg in the Amish parts of Pennsylvania, etc), but they’re very few in number. I would find it very hard that these people represent even a fraction of the number of Ecuadorians, Peruvians, Guatamalans, Bolivians etc etc.

          • sergio lima

            December 4, 2010 at 7:39 pm

            Dave, I even called a friend of mine from the Brazilian community there and agrees with me. But 3 or 5 thousand doesn’t make that big. But you may be right, But I am not talking about new immigrants only. I still believe we have a lot more Irish people here.

      • Joe

        December 4, 2010 at 8:27 am

        Don’t you get it Bolacuadrada? BRIBERY! It was BRIBERY! The knee-jerk response to the US not getting their way is always BRIBERY!

  5. Lets be honest

    December 2, 2010 at 7:42 pm

    No country is hosting two World Cups in such short interval as 1994 and 2018. Not even Brazil, Argentina, France, Italy or Germany. Brazil got to wait 64 years for their second tournament. The US might be eligible for the 2060 World Cup or something like that.

    • Ben

      December 4, 2010 at 11:38 am

      2060 is an Olympics year. Maybe 2058? Then your math would be right.

  6. James

    December 2, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    Both Cups will now simply be used to line the pockets of the rich and corrupt in Qatar, Russia and FIFA. Much easier for FIFA execs to get kickbacks from those countries as there’s a greater culture of corruption in both.

    Big business would have locked shit down in the US.

  7. Bolacuadrada

    December 2, 2010 at 3:58 pm

    The FIFA cartel did it. They got mad at England because they have the only press that questions how corrupt they are. They awarded the world cup to Qatar also? Having followed soccer for so long I expected it. Some day the mafiosos Grondona, Blatter, Warner, Blazer, Leoz, etc will be gone. Maybe some day change will come to the sport. Let’s make the MLS better so we do not have to depend on corrupt people to watch great soccer.

  8. Kasey in Oz

    December 2, 2010 at 3:04 pm

    Okay, so the initial feelings of devastation are subsiding. In comes the anger. F*CK YOU FIFA. SO OPENLY CORRUPT. 1.5 million people, 1 city, no drinking, inequality to women. No freedom of religion or speech. Never made the world cup before. ABSOLUTE DISGRACE!

    • Ben

      December 2, 2010 at 11:46 pm


      Did you just sh1t your pants?

  9. Kasey in Oz

    December 2, 2010 at 3:03 pm

    Once again FIFA (MAFIFA) show their true colours. they had 2 chances to be true to the spirit of the game…bring the cup ‘home’ to the outstanding candidate for 2018 (England) and then to expand the games footprint by choosing Australia for 2022 giving the game a huge shot in the arm in what is surely the last unconquered territory for the world game, in both instances they went with the money,,,And if we look back, are we really surprised?? FIFA are the most 2-faced sporting organisation on the planet. Remember back to when the Socceroos went through all kinds of shenanigans just to try to even qualify for the cup for-crying out loud; After winning Oceania and then beating Canada(CONCACAF) we had to try to beat Argentina(COMNEBOL & world #2) just to qualify for the 1994 World Cup. then in 2003 OFC were given direct qualification, only to be taken away. We (like the USA are a footballing minnow) and without the huge amounts of dollars to throw at FIFA both America and us were odds-on to fail:(
    I cannot describe just how angry I am right now. I will not travel to Qatar for the 2022 World cup. I might go to Russia for 18 and I’m already saving for Brazil in 2014. At least I’ll save money. But seriously, how could you have a World up with no dancing in the streets, no beer, no women, in 50+ degree weather. corrupt pieces of sh*t FIFA:( this thread is over, the dream is over.

    • AdamEdg

      December 2, 2010 at 3:16 pm

      As much as I would have enjoyed 2022 in the US, I firmly believed Australia had this one. Everything about having the WC Down Under makes perfect sense. The Aussies need a major soccer boost, just like we did nearly 20 years ago. Plus it would have brought the Cup to the Oceania region, even if Australia is now part of the Asian fed.

    • Joe

      December 2, 2010 at 4:20 pm

      As far as I understand, for Qatar to get the WC they had to accept some major changes for the duration of the tournament to accommodate the drinking and crowds that come with the territory. I have not seen this in writing, but let’s not assume we’re talking about a “dry” World Cup just yet…

      • Tom

        December 2, 2010 at 6:17 pm

        I hear they might even let women show their faces!

        • Ben

          December 2, 2010 at 11:45 pm


  10. Miami Ultra

    December 2, 2010 at 2:52 pm

    Disappointing but not the end of the world. Much like the ’94 Cup here in the US, 2018 and 2022 could do good things for the game in Russia and Qatar.

    I would like to see the USA play a game in my town, and considering that they would never intentionally play a game in South Florida as it would surely be an “away” game, the only shot would be a World Cup knockout game. Oh well. Fingers crossed for 2026.

    • yeah

      December 3, 2010 at 12:44 am

      Russia yes.

      But what the hell could it possibly do for Qatar? They will continue to build themselves up on the backs of slave labor with natural gas money. It is a tiny nation with no significance whatsoever.

  11. Robert

    December 2, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    Maybe USA will get the Cup once we take the sport a little bit more seriously. We got the Cup in 1994 and our domestic league can’t even figure out how to crown a champion and is still tinkering with the playoffs. Don Garbage you cost the USA big time.

    • Seriously

      December 2, 2010 at 5:27 pm

      If you actually believe these words you should probably get off of your mothers computer and go back to the basement room where you belong.

    • Joe

      December 3, 2010 at 12:10 pm

      Robert, something tells me the FIFA committee weren’t sitting in a room saying, “we’d give it to the US, if only they didn’t have that damn MLS Cup!”. Just a hunch…

  12. eplnfl

    December 2, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    When we everyone learn that presentation means nothing and influence means everything. These things would be no brainers otherwise.

  13. jim

    December 2, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    The “rules” don’t matter. Enough money in the right pockets and the “rules” will be changed.

  14. Dan

    December 2, 2010 at 2:08 pm

    Money, oil and corruption

    thats how russia and qatar got it

    • Ben

      December 2, 2010 at 11:42 pm

      And the U.S lost


      • Joe

        December 3, 2010 at 12:08 pm

        It is the height of irony that fans of America, the country that started an entire REGIONAL WAR with a thinly veiled excuse for oil, are now complaining about countries winning a sports tournament because of oil.

        The US has a right to all international tournaments into addition to all the oil that fuels our drive-one-mile-to-the-McDonalds-drive-thru lifestyle.


  15. Liam

    December 2, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Under current rules the 2026 World Cup cannot go to a UEFA or AFC host nation, so it can’t go to China.

  16. Cavan

    December 2, 2010 at 1:53 pm

    It’s not as big of a deal is the internets will make it today. If the Qatari royal family wants to spend untold billions in petro-dollars on what is essentially a vanity project, let them.

    The U.S. had the best bid but we knew that it was possible that the ExCo wouldn’t consider bids on merit. Remember that the ExCo is comprised of corrupt old men who probably won’t be around in 12 years and don’t really care either way. This process was about politics, both dirty and clean. FIFA deserves what’s coming to it in 2022 for this decision. Or, maybe it’ll be a success like South Africa. Who knows?

    Regardless, MLS will continue to grow and our National Team will continue to get better and better.

  17. adam

    December 2, 2010 at 1:35 pm

    Also, Mexico isn’t competition, Canada is. Mexico has already hosted it twice and Canada is a growing soccer country.

    • yeah

      December 3, 2010 at 12:34 am

      Canada/US joint bid. Just replace three of the US cities on the 2022 bid with Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. We’re already playing in a league together. We might as well do a bid together.

  18. adam

    December 2, 2010 at 1:35 pm

    Shan, 2026 is going to China. Our hopes lie in 2030.

    • xcwaterboy

      December 2, 2010 at 1:46 pm

      fifa would have to change rules for this i.e. look even more corrupt than they do today. my money’s on it happening, fail.

  19. Shan

    December 2, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    I also heard that our presentation wasnt the best.. Morgan Freeman messed up his lines and bubba was going on a and on… Why didn’t we just bribe the voters like Russia and Qatar did?

    • Ben

      December 2, 2010 at 11:42 pm

      Why don’t you stop hating? Qatar deserved the win.

      • Scottie

        December 3, 2010 at 1:38 am

        Why? Because they had tons of cash?

  20. Shan

    December 2, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    It really hurts, but the good news is who could compete with us for 2026?… No bid from Europe & Asia… Mexico is our greatest obstacle

    • xcwaterboy

      December 2, 2010 at 1:45 pm

      there will certainly be European competition. rules only say non-consecutive. south america will probably back in game by then too.

      • AdamEdg

        December 2, 2010 at 2:12 pm

        They changed the hosting rules. The latest is that Europe cannot bid until 2030. Since Asia got 2022, then 2026 should be between CONCACAF, CAF, and OFC.
        As the only country in the OFC area is now part of the Asian federation, they are pretty much eliminated.
        With South Africa this year and a Middle East WC in 2022, it is hard to imagine 2026 being in Africa. The Middle East is just too close to Africa to have another WC that soon.
        So it comes down to CONCACAF. While we should be the favorites, Canada may put a bid together and Mexico most likely will too. I could see Costa Rica, Honduras, Panama, and some combination of islands putting in bids as well. With the bizarro decisions made by FIFA, I could see us being the first knocked out. Then again, financial failures in 2014-2022 could return us to the forefront. But I doubt it.
        My other thought is that we are capable to be a back up host should Qatar’s stadium & hotel construction fall apart. Or if the Middle East gets that much more voliatal. Or if the whole thing blows up somehow. It is not outside the realm of possibility; FIFA knows we could host the WC tomorrow if needed. We did it with the 2003 Womens WC…
        If you see how the final votes came out, there is very little surprise other than all three South America reps voting for Qatar. The Asian fed, the African fed, Turkey, Cyprus, and Spain all voted for Qatar – let’s see: Qatar’s fed, the closest fed in proximity, two Middle Eastern UEFA members, and the country they allegedly colluded with… Plus Blatter
        The US got CONCACAF, the Western Europe votes, and Russia.

        • Robert Hay

          December 3, 2010 at 3:30 pm

          Adam – Check out the blog tomorrow afternoon. I think you are missing some potential landmines…….

  21. soccerreform

    December 2, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Close enough for an unsimulated move to promotion, relegation and a winter season to have made all the difference.

    • Cavan

      December 2, 2010 at 1:46 pm

      We’ve already heard your schtick enough.

      This bid had nothing to do with our game and was purely due to internal FIFA ExCo politics. Nothing more. It has little to do with our league or the merits of our bid. Remember that Qatar was ranked lowest by the FIFA staff report.

      • soccerreform

        December 2, 2010 at 4:26 pm

        So, Don Garber was sniffing glue when he was babbling about pro/rel and season shift at halftime of MLS Cup? Weird, I give him more credit than you. Seemed to me that might have been an attempt, however botched, to curry favor with the voters.

        Qatar a legacy choice. With Russia, they can build 40 new state of the art stadiums. First Cup in the middle east, in a progressive Arab nation. Far more preferable to Sepp than propping up a pariah league that wants to ride the FIFA coattails every thirty years.

      • soccerreform

        December 3, 2010 at 11:43 am

        I think Sepp would have loved to add to his memoirs that the US finally adopted a proper soccer league model under his watch. Perhaps enough to sway three votes in the final round. Chalk that up to wild fantasmic conjecture all you want.

    • AdamEdg

      December 2, 2010 at 2:17 pm

      Actually, I heard it was because FIFA wanted to help this idiot namned Ted Westervelt feel great about himself. They figured it would give him fuel to push his idiotic agenda that the MLS (and other domestic leagues) conform to his demands by mirroring the set up of leagues in countries where soccer is infinitely more popular and faces little to no competition from other sports.
      The FIFA execs all know that soccer is a fourth tier sport at best in the US and that making radical changes to MLS would kill it instantly. Of course that could be enough to keep us from bidding to host the WC which would go along way towards catering to the anti-American sentiment around the world.

      • soccerreform

        December 2, 2010 at 4:18 pm

        Great example of the anti pro/rel argument here. 100% sure that soccer is lame and permanently unpopular in the United States, the pro/rel detractor is quick to point out all possible deficiencies. They believe that optimism is fantasy, and that 99% of US World Cup viewers are either Eurosnobs or thought it was Fourth of July.

        Adam, why don’t you stop trying to homogenize the game for the rest of us? Believe it or not, more people than you understand soccer in the US. I know MLS doesn’t care if MLS is more popular, if they don’t stand to make more money off of it. Thank God the rest of the world doesn’t adopt your small view.

        • Seriously

          December 2, 2010 at 5:22 pm

          I find it funny you used the word homogenize to refer to a post that is in favor of keeping our league different than the rest of the world, while you are in favor of what the rest of the world does. Do you not know what the word homogenize means? Perhaps you should go learn a few things before you post again. Your comments are ludicrous enough as it is without your ignorant use of words.

          • soccerreform

            December 3, 2010 at 10:00 am

            Thanks for pointing out your confusion. In this context, “homogenize” refers to the way MLS is majority owner of every team, and imposes parity on – or homogenizes – each one via salary caps and squad rules.

            I know you’re terrified of some kind of european copycat invasion. The weird thing is, that euro invasion is called “the free market”.

            Hope that clears things up.

        • AdamEdg

          December 2, 2010 at 6:05 pm

          Teddy (Can I call you Teddy?),
          I am not completely against pro/rel, but I live in a place that I like to call “Reality.” In “Reality,” the US has several major sports leagues and very successful college sports programs. These sports leagues and college programs have existed for decades and have built a strong following over the years. While they have all had some missteps and even a few failures, they have endured for quite some time. They are deeply imbedded and ingrained in our culture. Multiple generations have grown up with these leagues and have embraced the teams and players participating within them. We call these leagues NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and NCAA (primarily the football and basketball components).
          Four (five if you split the NCAA into fb & bb)of these leagues play during the “fall/winter season.” Two of them are arguably the two of biggest in the world in terms of revenue, viewership, attendance, and fanbases. The other two also perform extremely well in those categories. Only one of these leagues (we’ll call it MLB, for arguments sake) plays during the summer when our country’s emerging soccer league (let’s refer to it as MLS, ok?) also plays. Financially speaking, you do not have to be Warren Buffett to figure out that competiting against one league for revenue, viewers, etc. is significantly easier than competing against four or five. Oh sure, you’ll have soccer “loyalists” that would support a top tier soccer league no matter what and above all else, but unfortunately there are really not that many of them in “Reality’s” US. Even worse, most of them will not support MLS for this, that, or the other reason. We affectionately refer to these people as “Eurosnobs” or “Mr. Westervelt.”
          These “Eurosnobs” that the good citizens of “Reality” deal with seem to think that there is only one way – the European way – to run a professional soccer league. They clamor for things like promotion & relagation and a winter league as loudly as possible, all the while truly believing that if they just MAKE ENOUGH NOISE the good citizens of “Reality” will follow suit. These “Eurosnobs” point to the failed leagues of the past and proudly exclaim “See! you’re methods are wrong! The European way is the ONLY way!” All the while they forget about the other factors that have caused the demise of these leagues. These poor souls seem to have a “build it (my way) and they will come” attitude. Unfortunately, “Reality” does not work that way.
          I will agree that promotion & relegation seem to work pretty well in Europe. However, soccer is the number one game in town in Europe and those leagues are as old as – if not older than – the other five leagues inhabiting “Reality’s” US. They have had promotion & relegation systems in place nearly from the start and those systems are ingrained in THEIR sporting culture. Unlike MLS, they are not building new top flight teams from scratch; they have existed for nearly a century or more.
          But I do have a couple of solutions for the Mr. Westervelts begrudgingly inhabiting “Reality” since they are so fixated on mandating promotion & relegation and the winter season. Either of these solutions create a win-win situation for every type of soccer fan in “Reality’s” US!
          1. Start your own teams and build your own league. Apply to the USSF and FIFA for sanctioning. As you said, FIFA wants the top flight US league to have these things. So there should be little trouble getting them to sanction your league! You can build stadiums, contract players, push snow off your fields, and promote & relegate to your heart’s content! It will be grand. Heck, if the tickets are competitively priced and the product is good, I’ll buy the first seat!
          2. Move to Europe. They have everything you want out of a professional soccer (oh, sorry! “football”) league already in place. Go nuts.
          If you knew anything about me, you would know that I have speculated on pro/rel countless times. I have come up with a dream scenario where it would actually work in the US. I would embrace it as my hometown PDL team has routinely defeated lower division pro teams higher up the pyramid.
          I have been a soccer fan for my entire life. I have spent time around many domestic soccer fans – natives, immigrants, MLS fans, Euro fans, casual fans, and diehard fans. Most of them could give a crap about pro/rel because they realize that it is not feasible any time soon in the US. And the winter season? Outside of a few Texans with viewpoints not too far removed from yours, very few people in the US are in favor of that because they know they’ll lose the bulk of the fans. Beleive it or not, most MLS fans watch other sports as well. Since the other sports have been around for their entire lives, as opposed to the young MLS, they will typically choose to watch them. Want proof? Find the ratings for European games aired on ESPN or FSC before and during College Football games. I love ManU, but if Michigan if playing they get my attention. Swap the teams and I gaurantee that the bulk of our soccer fans are the same way.
          And what is wrong with MLS making money? It is a business after all. Just like the EPL, La Liga, FIFA, and every other soccer organization in the world. Player salaries must be paid, stadiums must be kept, and investments must be realized. Do you honestly beleive that all of these people spend all of this time with the game out of the sheer goodness of their hearts?

          • soccerreform

            December 3, 2010 at 10:53 am

            Adam. You can call me whatever you like in an attempt to belittle my arguments and discredit my point of view.

            I might call you Dick Cheney, for the “love it or leave it” comment. I think that’s a great place to start.

            Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’ve pat MLS on the back before for running a tight ship, for seeking a profit, and running this whole MLS operation as the savvy business people that NASL executives weren’t. Yet, when facing criticism about this league and it’s unique practices, you run for a political “love it or leave it” argument. Of course, this is an argument only a monopoly can make. Andrew Carnegie and the Rail Barons tried the same one. Don’t buy our steel. Build your own smelter. Don’t take the train. Walk.

            MLS and the robber barons shared another core prinicipal: They made their money off of controlling the market, and depended on a permissive governing body to do it. They were certain they were growing their industries responsibly, and at the end of the day, if they closed, well we’d be left with no steel at all.

            Thing is, they never had to worry about quality, and never had to innovate to survive. Like MLS, they were stagnant, even though they expanded. Like MLS, they controlled labor. They controlled output. They controlled the market.

            Of course one difference between the steel mills and railroads of yesterday and MLS of today is the way they treat imported European labor, but that’s a conversation for another post.

            All of our top domestic pro sports league have one huge advantage over MLS: As the best and oldest leagues in their respective sports on the planet – they can set the agenda for their sports world wide. NFL and NBA can limit the quality of play of each team, without having any impact on the sport or the league. When MLS does it, it dumbs down soccer for the entire nation.

            NBA, NFL et al are living off legacies built when teams were less limited, when unlimited superclubs pushed the level of play for everyone else. MLS can’t build a legacy, because apart from the possible exception of DC United they never had anything like that.

            On top of that, these salary caps and limits are designed – appropriately, I would say – to mitigate the handicaps of a closed league system. Permanent cellar dwellers are a drag on the success of any closed league. See NASL.

            MLS is the result of our sports owners applying the lessons learned in closed, yet dominant, leagues in domestic sports onto soccer, which is neither domestic nor dominant.

            You look at open leagues, promotion, relegation and independent clubs as risky entropy, yet closed soccer leagues have at least an 80% failure rate. Open leagues 0% failure rate. Even when a country like India or South Korea or Qatar suspends pro/rel, the league doesn’t fail. You cite all of the competition from other sports. I challenge you to find an example of an open league failing because of competition from other sports, outside of India, where cricket dominates.

            If you’re going to use India, please acknowledge that our top flight soccer history and pro sports culture has much deeper and broader roots.

            You cite the fragility of the game in relation to our other sports. I cite a league that depends on a pity party of fragility to justify their single entity controls.

            I think the US pro sports market is stagnant. I think the first sport to embrace open leagues, independent clubs and promotion/relegation will have access to a new group of sports fans, tired of the scripted nature of our closed leagues, and the inane fan culture, who are ready to step back to the days when community support made or broke a team, not a massive profit sharing arrangement that handicaps top clubs in order that smaller clubs can survive.

            You sell soccer short by putting it in the same category as our domestic sports that depend on isolation from real international competition, dominance and domesticity.

            I have no problem with a profit motive. I have a problem when it ‘s executed by people who value control over quality, and who depend on the acquiescence of supporters who resort to “love it or leave it” rhetoric when confronted with the facts.

            Instead, I propose we obtain an independent governing body with courage to harness owner resources to push the level of play, instead of just protecting the entitlements of their bosses like Sunil Gulati understandably does.

            We need a Teddy Roosevelt, not a Sunil Gulati.

            We also need a soccer press corps that asks the tough questions. Today, those questions might revolve on the 1000 hints that Blatter dropped to everyone from Garber to Obam about the US instituting promotion and relegation – IN THE CONTEXT OF REWARDING US A WORLD CUP.

            Monopolies can’t survive without a client governing body and a compliant press.

            And no, just because my name rhymes with Roosevelt doesn’t mean you can call me Teddy.

        • AdamEdg

          December 2, 2010 at 7:13 pm

          I had another idea for you to make your winter season and pro/rel fantasies a reality. Call it the “Put up or Shut up Challenge.” Here you go:
          Get firm commitment letters from American soccer fans that wholeheartedly endorse these concepts for our domestic league(s). These fans should commit to purchasing season tickets and watching televised matches throughout the winter season.
          You probably need to include detailed information about how pro/rel can be implemented successfully, taking into consideration the investments already made in MLS and the need for the current owners to recoup their investment. Demonstrate to the owners how pro/rel will not only prevent them from losing their initial MLS investment and current profit potential, but will also increase overall profitability. Use real numbers and firm examples specific to the United States. Prove that it can and will work better than the current model. Prove that there is greater support for pro/rel than the current system. Explain where these lower division teams are and how they can perform better than the current MLS teams without breaking the bank.
          Keep in mind that your commitment letters must be of greater quantity than the current number of combined season MLS season ticket holders. These documents should then be presented to MLS, its owners, and for the sake of your credibility, to the press and general public for scrutiny. If you can firmly demonstrate that your view represents the majority of domestic soccer fans, then we will support you. Remember, it is YOU that is challenging the current system, so it is up YOU to prove that it is wrong, per the desires of the American audience.
          Do it successfully and I will offer my support. I imagine that many others will as well. If you see no purpose in taking this step, getting the FIRM commitments, then stop and do some self reflection in regards to pro soccer in the US.

          • CoconutMonkey

            December 2, 2010 at 10:45 pm

            Wow. That would be quite a project. To be honest, I would love to read something like that.

            But since we’re on the topic anyway, the Don mentioned “simulating promotion and relegation” in his MLS cup interview. I’m taking the comment with a grain of salt, but it’s still interesting to think about.

            Any thoughts as to what simulating pro/rel could mean?

          • Charles

            December 3, 2010 at 11:05 am

            It means one thing, the US told Don to say it might work to play games in the winter when only a pea-brain would think it would work.
            And the US told Don to say we might have owners who put up $50 million to buy a franchise, have a chance to be relagated replaced by some team that won a depleted Div 2

            It serves two purposes, one it appeases people that think it might work, because they want it that badly, two it helps the US bid marginally.

          • soccerreform

            December 3, 2010 at 11:11 am

            Here, you’re just depending on the apathy of the US soccer supporter, who is content to change the channel to EPL, instead of taking on the establishment.

            For the record, I don’t think MLS, in it’s current debilitated state, should venture into winter play. It will only do more harm to the image of soccer in the US, harm that MLS never seems to mind too much.

    • Scottie

      December 3, 2010 at 1:36 am

      My goodness! How delusional can one person be?

      Soccerreform, you need to find a hobby…or something.

      • soccerreform

        December 3, 2010 at 11:15 am

        Perhaps the delusion revolves around saddling MLS with an hypercontrolled version of the MLS business model. History will judge.

        • soccerreform

          December 3, 2010 at 11:18 am

          Freudian slip. I meant saddling MLS with a hypercontrolled version of the NFL business model…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

More in FIFA

Translate »