BRAZIL - FIFA World Cup 2014

[KiwiBrit]

Originally Posted by jamesinclair

People in the US fly, as in Brazil. A rail network is not required

So does Brazil have 10 cities with 10 airports which can cater for up to 60,000 people arriving possibly ONE DAY before a big game?

Let's hope so

[KiwiBrit]

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

The thing is they either want to expand out of europe and hold on to interest in south america or they dont . It is as simple as that.

Trust me Jonesy if Brazil didn't host the 2014 WC, football would still "hold on to interest" in S. America.

If Fifa is sincere about football in the americas they have to adapt to the infrastructure that is in brazil , columbia and the rest of the americas. It is not to say bring your standards down so low it is to say your standards may be a little high for the americas to reach.

One of FIFA's requirements to host a WC is a rail network. A guy from Brazil has said on this forum that there is NO proper rail system there. How do you propose FIFA alter their requirements.

I don't wish to sound negative, I would love to see Brazil host a WC. but they have to meet certain requirements like any nation would. I just want to see a level playing field for all countries bidding.

[Jonestowncultinpicto]

Originally Posted by KiwiBrit

Trust me Jonesy if Brazil didn't host the 2014 WC, football would still "hold on to interest" in S. America.



One of FIFA's requirements to host a WC is a rail network. A guy from Brazil has said on this forum that there is NO proper rail system there. How do you propose FIFA alter their requirements.

I don't wish to sound negative, I would love to see Brazil host a WC. but they have to meet certain requirements like any nation would. I just want to see a level playing field for all countries bidding.

and what type of rail system does the united states have ????
or canada for that matter. Even if you have a TVG in north america the distances are so vast. Like I said if Fifa wants to come to the americas they have to make compromises other wise they can keep it in europe or asia. I personally think australia is going to butt in the rotation and that is what the entire thing is all about with the noises coming out of Fifa.

Hey be our guests because I can see where people in the north america will be up at 3am to watch world cup from melbourne. That will certainly make for some interesting TV deals in north america where there will be absolutely no value for advisors or worldwide sponsors like a Visa credit card for the american market which is the one they devote the most attention to. This year had some great sponsorship deals for fifa even in canada with some heavy hitters getting involved. going to asia or australia would kill what progress they made here.

With South America either Colombia or Brazil they are in the general time zones that are useful for both european and america commercial interests

I really love how europeans can get so hung up on telling the rest of the world how to run others continential affairs when for centuries a generation would hardly go by in europe that was not touched by a major continential war. The last century it seemed to me it was north americans and others who had to intervene and rebuild europe. If it wasnt for atomic weapons and the economic might of the united states the nazi or the soviets would have swallowed up europe and the western europe would be that far behind.

The only requirement that the US meets for fifa or the IOC in the Color of their vast amounts of money and the golden goose formula one , Fifa and the IOC are always fixated on American Network TV. Here in north america We dont get the interest in a sport that you usually end up with a tie or no scoring until two thirds of the game is finished LOL. That is the divide between europe and the americas. Formula one I love to watch but hey how many passes do they make on the track after the first lap for the lead ??? not many even in the stretch of five year with Michael Schumaker , Fernando Alonso or Mika Hakkinen winning chammpionships back to back. With auto racing here you can see one of a dozen guys win a race and take home the championship.

the US passanger train system Amtrak believe me is no Eurostar even with the Acela train from washington to boston which I have taken . You dont have dedicated passanger only lines in north america and you never will . It is a car culture here and an interstate freeway system is your major mode of travel in the States. Brazil is much the same . The thing is a world cup is not much of a world championship is it doesnt travel outside the confines of europe, asia or africa and 64 years between hostings for the country that has won it the most Brazil seems a bit much .

I would love to see brazil do it but not with a gun to their heads for a european body that is not sincere in their words or have a hinden agenda to suit their own needs of selling Brazil High Speed Trains LOL. This crap about trains and fifa certainly didnt effect the united states from hosting and wouldnt in the future. You can go east-west and some north south by train in america but you could miss a game or two trying to do that if you had to go from chicago to miami to houston to los angeles and to new york.

The US says they want to host FIFA would dig up their dead grandmothers and steal the jewelry off the dead bodies to get to america and the opporunity of American coverage LOL.
Oh and by the way I am saying the game loses attention in the americas. I have seen that over the years of traveling in the carribbean . It used to be you would see football club shirts and hardly any national baseball association shirts in shops in the carribbean . Now it is the very opposite.
The British Virgin Islands put up a indoor basketball gym in Roadtown within the last couple of years with a soccer pitch in bad repair beside it.

The game is waning in attention in the carribean and baseball is making inroads in northern south america. If I was in soccer I would not take south america for granted at all . Ignoring Brazil especially with the history of João Havelange would really be like saying the World Championships of Ice Hockey could not be held in Canada unless they have TVG system from Vancouver to Toronto. We get the same crap from the world ice hockey association and we know where the world best in ice hockey is north america in the NHL. The Stanley Cup is the world championship for all intense purposes.

People after a while say screw it . It happens in europe we have our own world which is much bigger . To me the world cup could bypass north america but it is a slap in the face to me as the brother of my fellow south,central and north americans when some in the rest of the world take the view of shutting brazil out of hosting. 250 miles from San Paulo to Rio and about the same Rio To Belo Horizonte. There are more people in those three cities then the boston-washington corridor and more of them are soccer fanatics. Everyone from the rest of the world could stay away from the WC brazil in 2014 and the stadia would be packed with people willing to take the lucky ones seats.

[KiwiBrit]

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

and what type of rail system does the united states have ????
or canada for that matter. Even if you have a TVG in north america the distances are so vast. Like I said if Fifa wants to come to the americas they have to make compromises other wise they can keep it in europe or asia. I personally think australia is going to butt in the rotation and that is what the entire thing is all about with the noises coming out of Fifa.

Hey be our guests because I can see where people in the north america will be up at 3am to watch world cup from melbourne. That will certainly make for some interesting TV deals in north america where there will be absolutely no value for advisors or worldwide sponsors like a Visa credit card for the american market which is the one they devote the most attention to. This year had some great sponsorship deals for fifa even in canada with some heavy hitters getting involved. going to asia or australia would kill what progress they made here.

With South America either Colombia or Brazil they are in the general time zones that are useful for both european and america commercial interests

I really love how europeans can get so hung up on telling the rest of the world how to run others continential affairs when for centuries a generation would hardly go by in europe that was not touched by a major continential war. The last century it seemed to me it was north americans and others who had to intervene and rebuild europe. If it wasnt for atomic weapons and the economic might of the united states the nazi or the soviets would have swallowed up europe and the western europe would be that far behind.

The only requirement that the US meets for fifa or the IOC in the Color of their vast amounts of money and the golden goose formula one , Fifa and the IOC are always fixated on American Network TV. Here in north america We dont get the interest in a sport that you usually end up with a tie or no scoring until two thirds of the game is finished LOL. That is the divide between europe and the americas. Formula one I love to watch but hey how many passes do they make on the track after the first lap for the lead ??? not many even in the stretch of five year with Michael Schumaker , Fernando Alonso or Mika Hakkinen winning chammpionships back to back. With auto racing here you can see one of a dozen guys win a race and take home the championship.

the US passanger train system Amtrak believe me is no Eurostar even with the Acela train from washington to boston which I have taken . You dont have dedicated passanger only lines in north america and you never will . It is a car culture here and an interstate freeway system is your major mode of travel in the States. Brazil is much the same . The thing is a world cup is not much of a world championship is it doesnt travel outside the confines of europe, asia or africa and 64 years between hostings for the country that has won it the most Brazil seems a bit much .

I would love to see brazil do it but not with a gun to their heads for a european body that is not sincere in their words or have a hinden agenda to suit their own needs of selling Brazil High Speed Trains LOL. This crap about trains and fifa certainly didnt effect the united states from hosting and wouldnt in the future. You can go east-west and some north south by train in america but you could miss a game or two trying to do that if you had to go from chicago to miami to houston to los angeles and to new york.

The US says they want to host FIFA would dig up their dead grandmothers and steal the jewelry off the dead bodies to get to america and the opporunity of American coverage LOL.

Have you finished your rant?

1:Regardless if FIFA want to be up the USA's arse, I couldn't give a toss about American money in football. It was around long before the states showed the slightest interest in 'the beautiful game' and will be long after, even when you lot fail to convert it into some kind of yearly World Series with the good 'ol USA having sole hosting rights (and are one of only two teams allowed to play in it!).

2: Even if the rail system in the states is crap, at least you have one to fall back on. And you have International airports in every major city, plus your road network is okay. Brazil has no rail system, does not have an International airport in every major city and, as stated by a Brazilian on this forum the roads are poor. Maybe with this infrastructure in mind you can advise us how large groups of supporters are going to get around the country in a short time span. Oh I remember your thoughts. Let FIFA lower their standards...great solution.

The thing is a world cup is not much of a world championship is it doesnt travel outside the confines of europe, asia or africa

3: Lets see, since 1994 it has been to N. America, Europe, Asia, is next in Africa and we are now discussing S. America hosting the next one. Maybe you can tell us which continent has been neglected. Oh of course Antarctica!

I really love how europeans can get so hung up on telling the rest of the world how to run others continential affairs

4:You are American right. Kettle calling the pot black kinda springs to mind.

If it wasnt for atomic weapons and the economic might of the united states the nazi or the soviets would have swallowed up europe and the western europe would be that far behind.

5: Thanks for the history lesson oh most powerful one. Although what the hell this has to do with staging a WC I have no idea.

I send my apologies to all posters that this has gone way off topic, and lets hope we can get back to constructive discussions without people turning it into a 'Billy 2 poo's' forum!

[rantanamo]

You can ignore the money all you want, but:

- As an organization, they have to have themselves and their games look the best possible. Otherwise they wouldn't create such incredible requirements.

- They claim they want to spread the game, so they have to spread it, and spread it with a great presentation. They don't have to have American money, but it helps their goals. Otherwise, as the poster said, you have the possibility of losing interest to baseball, rugby and hockey.

- I'm with those who want the WC to be played all over the world. At the same time, if its not reasonable feasible, I don't want to put soccer or any sport above true need. If a South America can't reach some of the over-ridiculous FIFA requirements, then just send it to England. I understand that people around the world don't want it in the US and that's fine. Reward the soccer loving nations of the world.(I'd still like to see it in the US, but that's me personally. I know that most don't want it here)

[KiwiBrit]

Your post makes a lot of sense rantanamo, and I agree the WC should be spread around the globe. To all tense and purposes I think it is now.

Personally, I'd love for Brazil to host 2014. I've seen some of the stadium constructions advancing and they are looking good. But there is more to being a host than simply great stadiums.

[The Game Is Up]

It would be great if the final was held during the day before Ash Wednesday.

[Mo Rush]

Originally Posted by KiwiBrit

Have you finished your rant?

1:Regardless if FIFA want to be up the USA's arse, I couldn't give a toss about American money in football. It was around long before the states showed the slightest interest in 'the beautiful game' and will be long after, even when you lot fail to convert it into some kind of yearly World Series with the good 'ol USA having sole hosting rights (and are one of only two teams allowed to play in it!).

2: Even if the rail system in the states is crap, at least you have one to fall back on. And you have International airports in every major city, plus your road network is okay. Brazil has no rail system, does not have an International airport in every major city and, as stated by a Brazilian on this forum the roads are poor. Maybe with this infrastructure in mind you can advise us how large groups of supporters are going to get around the country in a short time span. Oh I remember your thoughts. Let FIFA lower their standards...great solution.



3: Lets see, since 1994 it has been to N. America, Europe, Asia, is next in Africa and we are now discussing S. America hosting the next one. Maybe you can tell us which continent has been neglected. Oh of course Antarctica!



4:You are American right. Kettle calling the pot black kinda springs to mind.



5: Thanks for the history lesson oh most powerful one. Although what the hell this has to do with staging a WC I have no idea.

I send my apologies to all posters that this has gone way off topic, and lets hope we can get back to constructive discussions without people turning it into a 'Billy 2 poo's' forum!

well said

[AcesHigh]

Originally Posted by KiwiBrit

2: Even if the rail system in the states is crap, at least you have one to fall back on. And you have International airports in every major city, plus your road network is okay. Brazil has no rail system, does not have an International airport in every major city and, as stated by a Brazilian on this forum the roads are poor. Maybe with this infrastructure in mind you can advise us how large groups of supporters are going to get around the country in a short time span. Oh I remember your thoughts. Let FIFA lower their standards...great solution.

Hmm?? Brazil does not have international airports in its major cities??? Let me see... Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Porto Alegre, Belo Horizonte, Salvador, Recife, Fortaleza and Brasilia all have international airports...

Roads??? Hmmm... some are poor... others are excellent. Just like in USA, nobody will travel from one city to the other in roads! At least not from São Paulo to Salvador! Too distant.

Dont worry, Brazil has a GDP of over 1 trillion dollars. (GDP PPP is over 2 trillion). While it isnt enough to provide wealth to all inhabitants or to fix the entire country, its more than enough to fix everything needed for a FIFA World Cup.

Brazil already hosted a wonderful Cup in 1950, including the largest stadium in the world at the time. We can do it again.

As for rails, the brazilian rail system suffered from the same fate as american rail system... the automotive industry bought and then dismantled rail!

But there is a long time talk of rebuilding Brazilian rail. And no doubt, a World Cup would be an incentive for the government and private companies to invest on it again. At least, completely linking São Paulo-Rio-Belo Horizonte-Curitiba and another compeltely linked system connecting Recife-Fortaleza-Salvador.

[AcesHigh]

Originally Posted by The Game Is Up

It would be great if the final was held during the day before Ash Wednesday.

when in South America, the Cup was always realized in the winter (june/july)

[AcesHigh]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

What is the main road from Rio to Petrópolis? On my visit to Brasil we drove in a bad rain storm at night with crazy buses and trucks leaving no room to spare. I was worried I was going to fall right off the dark cliffs.

dont worry, Petropolis wont host a World Cup game. And its a mountain road, so no wonder it is like that.

[AcesHigh]

Originally Posted by KiwiBrit

So will they budget a small fortune on these improvements along with the stadiums?

You dont need to have autobahns to have a good world cup. Decent and safe roads are enough. And yes, we will budget a small fortune on roads. There is money for that. Also, some roads can be privatized and receive tolls stations.


Most stadiums will be privately build also. The government will invest mostly only on infrastructure.

[Bahnsteig4]

tolls stations

Exactly what you don't need when there are thousands of cars on the way to a venue.

[nomarandlee]

Even if Brasil couldn't meet FIFA rigid expectations in terms of stadiums or infrastructure I think they are good enough to host the event. Considering football madness in Brasil and just how much Brasilians and the country have done for the game I think overpassing the country for not having a TGV like train system, world class airports, or having the most modern stadiums would be unfortunate. As long as the logistics make it possiable as opposed to what FIFA would "most like" I think Brasil should get its shot. Mexico and South Africa don't exactley have the best infrastructure imangiable but they are both getting shots in the modern era (if you consider the 80's to be the modern cut era) and neithers soccer history can come close to that of Brasil's.

[AcesHigh]

Originally Posted by davidkunz/VIE

Exactly what you don't need when there are thousands of cars on the way to a venue.

in Brazil, specially in São Paulo and Porto Alegre, people have houses and apartments on the beach cities (POA and Sampa are not beach cities, but are about 100km from the beaches). In the summer, people go to the beaches on weekends... millions of people... and through tolled highways. I know in Vienna that is not common, but in Brazil, tolls are fast and are used to a MUCH LARGER traffic demand than 60 thousand people... how about 1 million people moving from the cities to the beaches at friday and back at sunday??


Anyway, tolls dont need to work during the World Cup. Duh!

[Mo Rush]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

Even if Brasil couldn't meet FIFA rigid expectations in terms of stadiums or infrastructure I think they are good enough to host the event. Considering football madness in Brasil and just how much Brasilians and the country have done for the game I think overpassing the country for not having a TGV like train system, world class airports, or having the most modern stadiums would be unfortunate. As long as the logistics make it possiable as opposed to what FIFA would "most like" I think Brasil should get its shot. Mexico and South Africa don't exactley have the best infrastructure imangiable but they are both getting shots in the modern era (if you consider the 80's to be the modern cut era) and neithers soccer history can come close to that of Brasil's.

I understand what you are saying and I agree with most parts. FIFA does not expect perfect infrastructure. South Africa does not have the best infrastructure, but improvements made up until 2010 will be more than adequate and top notch. FIFA is worried that in Brazil's case infrastructure won't be adequate between cities at all. FIFA would love to give Brazil a shot, but the minimum requirements have to be met. Logistics enough won't impress FIFA. I would love a world cup in Brazil but if it has to wait till 2018 to meet FIFA requirements then so be it.

[Calvin W]

So the rest of the civilized world doesn't think Brazil can handle a bunch of soccer games. To be honest who cares what anyone else thinks. When it is time to put the official bid in it will be up to Brazil to do so, then the decision process is out of their hands.

Everyone here keeps harping about all the rules and regulations that have to be followed to host the WC. You can't honestly tell me that they have never bent or broken a rule before and if it happens again so be it.

I would love to see what Brazil can do for the WC and would honestly say they can put on as good a show as anyone else.

[Benjuk]

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

Hey be our guests because I can see where people in the north america will be up at 3am to watch world cup from melbourne. That will certainly make for some interesting TV deals in north america where there will be absolutely no value for advisors or worldwide sponsors like a Visa credit card for the american market which is the one they devote the most attention to.

Was actually MasterCard not Visa (I'm being pedantic today, sorry).
TV money from the USA is relatively small in football terms. US network tv simply isn't interested in a game which goes 45 minutes without a break for ads.

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

I really love how europeans can get so hung up on telling the rest of the world how to run others continential affairs when for centuries a generation would hardly go by in europe that was not touched by a major continential war. The last century it seemed to me it was north americans and others who had to intervene and rebuild europe. If it wasnt for atomic weapons and the economic might of the united states the nazi or the soviets would have swallowed up europe and the western europe would be that far behind.

Forgive me for not bowing down before the American who so graciously saved Europe from itself... Fact is - if it wasn't for the stupidity of Japan the Americans wouldn't have joined World War II. Had the Americans sat out another 2 or 3 years (on top of the 2 they delayed for), they would have been dealing with (not fighting with) the Nazi state, and make no mistake, the ultimate decision to join WWII was to the US's economic and long term benefit. If you boys had stayed out, and the Nazi's had won the war - they would have controlled the Middle East and you boys would have had no oil. They would have kept hold of their scientists, and America would have lost the atomic and space races.

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

The game is waning in attention in the carribean and baseball is making inroads in northern south america.

Baseball and basketball are both making huge inroads into the Carribean's interest in cricket. Football, on the other hand, is still growing in teh Carribean (this would be the main reason that Jamaica, and most recently Trinidad, qualified ahead of that other minor North American nation, Canada)

Originally Posted by Jonestowncultinpicto

The Stanley Cup is the world championship for all intense purposes.

Says it all really. You condemn FIFA for the way they, a European based organisation, run their competition. Then go out and say this.

FIFA (love 'em or hate 'em) make things very simple - a set of minimum conditions that they expect each nation to live up to in order that each successive finals tournament is bigger and better than the last. On top of that they make a genuine attempt to spread the finals around the world and to give various confederations the best chance to get as many of their nations into the finals as possible. A quick look at the current (and quite bizarre) FIFA world rankings shows that 19 of the top 32 nations are from Europe, yet only 13 spots for the finals are open to European teams (compare this to Asia, who first enter the table with Iran at 38, yet have 3 1/2 spots at the finals).

[rantanamo]

Originally Posted by Benjuk

Was actually MasterCard not Visa (I'm being pedantic today, sorry).
TV money from the USA is relatively small in football terms. US network tv simply isn't interested in a game which goes 45 minutes without a break for ads.

ABC\ESPN, Univision pay record $425 million for men's, women's Cups through 2014.
By Robert Wagman
SoccerTimes

(Wednesday, November 2, 2005) -- Calling it "the biggest TV deal in a single country in FIFA's history," world governing body FIFA announced a $425 million deal for World Cup television rights in the United States from 2007 to 2014.

Under the agreement, the 2010 and 2014 World Cups, the 2007 and 2011 Women's World Cups, and the 2009 and 2013 Confederations Cups will be broadcast in English in the U.S. by the Walt Disney Company-owned ABC and ESPN networks, and in Spanish by Univision.

In a joint bid, ABC\ESPN paid $100 million for the rights package for the broadcast rights in English, while Univision paid $325 million for the Spanish-language rights.

According to the FIFA press release, "the two networks (ABC\ESPN and Univision) have been awarded the TV rights to all FIFA events for the U.S. territory from 2007 to 2014, including the two FIFA World Cup final competitions within this period. This impressive new agreement covers a wide range of media categories, including multimedia broadband internet and mobile telephony."

ABC\ESPN, which already will broadcast all the 64 World Cup matches from the 2006 Germany next summer live -- and in high definition -- has indicated that it will broadcast all games in 2010 and 2014.

Next year's World Cup in Germany will be played from June 9 through July 9. ABC\ESPN will announce its broadcast schedule after the World Cup draw December 9 in Leipzig, Germany.

"During the 2010 and 2014 FIFA World Cups, ABC Sports will air at least 10 matches live, including the Final," an ESPN press release said. "All remaining matches will be aired live on ESPN or ESPN2. Every match will be available in high definition and ESPN will feature a nightly FIFA World Cup highlight show throughout the month-long tournament."

The 2010 men's World Cup will be played in South Africa and the 2014 quadrennial tournament will be hosted by a South American nation, with Brazil the favorite to be the host. The 2007 Women's World Cup will be contested in China.

Only four years ago, there was a real possibility that only Spanish-language broadcasts of the 2002 World Cup would be available in the U.S. Then, Soccer United Marketing, Major League Soccer's marketing arm, owned by a some league and outside investors, paid $40 million for the U.S. English rights to the 2002 World Cup in Japan and South Korea, next year's World Cup in Germany and the 2003 Women's World Cup, originally scheduled for China but moved to the U.S.

In the existing pact, SUM was essentially allowed to air its games for free on ABC\ESPN while covering productions costs. Both sides would provide marketing and sell advertising with revenues split by an unspecified formula.

SUM actually bought the rights from German media giant Kirch, which was near bankruptcy when the deal was struck. SUM then entered into the revenue-sharing agreement with ABC\ESPN to assure the games of those three events would be broadcast in English in the U.S.

The new contract represents a huge increase from the last U.S. broadcasting contract for both English and Spanish-language telecasts. Univision holds the Spanish-language U.S. rights for 2002-06 for which it paid $125 million.

"This deal shows to the American public how valuable this property is finally being recognized as," U.S. Soccer Federation director of communications Jim Moorhouse told SoccerTimes. "The fact that there was a bidding war and an increase in rights fees show how committed ABC\ESPN is to this property."

Among other elements of the new deal, ESPN plans to re-air matches in their entirety or in cut-down versions through ESPN on Demand. ESPN The Magazine will contribute to ESPN's FIFA World Cup coverage with dedicated preview issues, features and other editorial.

"ABC\ESPN and Univision came to us with a comprehensive package that will not only guarantee coverage of the FIFA World Cup in 2010 and 2014 and all other FIFA tournaments in the men's and women's games, but also promote football and the FIFA brand even at those times when no tournaments are taking place," FIFA president Joseph S. Blatter said in his organization's press release. "With these two well-known companies, we have ensured that images of our events will be seen by the widest possible audience across the USA's steadily growing football market. I am extremely happy with this momentous deal. It is a major milestone in our new TV approach."

FIFA's new media approach is to sell rights on a country by country (or regional) basis, rather than world-wide rights which were sold to Kirch for 2002-2006. "We are moving from a global (World Cup) TV offer to a continental offer," Jerome Valcke, FIFA's director of TV and marketing told a recent soccer marketing convention held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

At the time, Valcke said it was FIFA's hope that World Cup matches would continue to be shown on free (or cable) TV around the world, but said that "free-to-air viewing will be the cornerstone, but we will also be selling packages combining free with pay-TV."

FIFA's bid packages for the 2010 Men's World Cup sought to guarantee that at least 22 of the 64 matches will be on free TV along with a daily free highlights package.

"ESPN and ABC Sports will immerse fans in the drama and pageantry of the FIFA World Cup for another eight years, bringing them closer to the worlds premier sporting event with cutting-edge technology and our collection of leading multimedia assets," ESPN executive vice president for content John Skipper said in his comoany's release. "We will also grow the FIFA Womens World Cup with unprecedented coverage across all of our content outlets."

It appears that SUM did not bid for the new broadcast rights; rather, it assisted and participated in the negotiations in part because MLS is in the process of reaching a new agreement with ABC\ESPN to carry its league matches in the future. MLS is hopeful that, for the first time, the new league contract will carry rights fees.

"In the immediate and long-term future, today's news will prove to be a historical turning point for the sport," MLS commissioner Don Garber said in a statement released by e-mail. "These recent developments further solidify soccer's standing and value as a major television property in the United States with even greater future potential."

ABC\ESPN televised live 58 of the 64 matches of the 2002 World Cup with the title game on ABC, 16 on ESPN and the rest on ESPN2. Because of the 13-hour time difference between the Cup venues and the U.S. East Coast, games were shown during the early a.m. hours.

Every game of the 1998 World Cup in France was broadcast live with ABC televising 14, ESPN 27 and ESPN2 23.

not here to make a pissing match, but the US is not irrelavent in FIFA's interest. Should the world and FIFA bow to the US? No. They should do whatever possible to host the games where they choose. Such money is hard to ignore though. Which is why I said earlier, they need to look within and tone things down before the WC becomes unhostable except for a handful of nations.

For those that don't know Univision, its a Spanish language channel out of LA with affiliates in each market just like any other network in the US. Our Spanish speaking population is growing at an enormous pace along with the popularity of soccer growing among the rest of the population, the deals could be enormous in the future. Especially for a Cup being played in the US. Again, WE should not get the games in 2014. I'm not advocating that.

[jimjones]

well as you have illustrated very well rantanamo the espn/abc contract is bigger then any other territory for coverage and actaully there is room to grow with that as well because theose numbers are nowheres near what NBC pays for the olympics at 500 million american plus for each games. I think Fifa is trying to use an excuse to go back to europe and that is probably to Italy or England.

I did some research into brazilian airports over the holidays and it seems brazil has extra capacity in some of their airports and their standards meet many international standards and in some cases go beyond international standards. Personally being to pretty much every major airport in america, marco polo international in venice italy,the santiago chile and panama's international airport I would say the airport in santiago is one of the better airports I have been in . places like miami, la guardia in new york and some others dont even compare to chile or canada for that matter.Marco Polo I was not the least impressed with. If brazil is like chile for airports then it should be more then fine. Rio with 12 million passengers a year could certainly handle a world cup as San Paulos international airport. And then you have some of brazil's major cities with two airports. One for domestic and one for international flights. Most of these airports in brazil have gone thru extensive renovation and upgrading in the 2000's. Renovation and upgrading projects are continueing. Some with upgrades to take 747-400 series planes with nw pre-stessed concrete runways. There is a flight taking from san paulo to rio every 15 minutes and the same is true from san paulo to Brasilia the capital. Brasilia is also the domestic hub for many Brazilian airlines. A 500 dollar pass is available for travel within Brazil for foriegn visitors.

The road network seems to be good and getting better with private companies taking over highways. You get some good european bus coaches from
San Paulo to Rio and you may have a better service then european rail as the Bus could pull right up to the stadia and go to the next stadia directly.
The new Pan Am Stadium in Rio is on the same commuter rail line as maracana
So an easy transfer to a station can have fans attending the games Held in those stadiums easily. Then you have San Paulo's commuter rail service. Not aware of location of stadiums in relation to subways or commuter trains but if Maracana was built for 1950 and it is beside a commuter railway and they are doing the same for João Havelange stadium for the Pan AM games their planning seems to be well though throught.
On top of that in both those cities you have subway systems.

As to stadiums they seem to be on a stadium construction and renovation curve. Looking at Uefa five star standards as a guidepost if they were to adopt those for renovation and consturction for 5 stadiums they would be 1 stadium better then the hosts in 2006 germany who had only 4 of the 12 stadia listed as UEFA five star stadiums . If it was to go to England and Brazil had 5 five star UEFA stadiums then Brazil would have 5 times the amount enlgand currently has with Old Trafford being the only five star UEFA in england. I am sure the new wembley stadium will get five stars but who knows .

The thing is Brazil will probably be raked over the coals for standards for other motivations beyond presentation or logistics. The rotation is a great gesture but is totally dishonest lip service really. The hub in the wheel is Europe and it would have to come back to europe . The pattern is the same with the olympics except the summer games may beat Fifa to the punch in RIO for 2016 if Fifa passes by Brazil for the promised rotation. Considering that germany has hosted twice since brazils lone hosting 57 years ago it is ashame the Brazilian fans have to put up with this type of crap. 5 time winners, A successful hoster and Brazilian João Havelange who served as Fifa President for 24 years and is honorary president should have a bit more respect paid to his country who are a great part of the game.

Basketball is coming on strong through out the world and Brazil, Argentina and
Africa are fielding players in the NBA. Pass BRazil by for lame excuses in 2014 and basketball gains more following. The reason Fifa went to america in 1994 was the soldout stadiums that the los angeles olympics had for soccer with stadiums up to 100,000 people attending.

I quess Brazil could have the last laff if Fifa was to play the game refuse Brazil hosting rights in favour of England or Italy and RIO hosted the summer olympics in 2016 with larger crowds then fifa 2014 .

Brazil could turn around and say told you so now we are not interested we just did the olympics and didn t have the hassle plus we made a ton of money
LOL.

jim jones