Oh really...let's review what was said: =============================== "MLS made a major blunder of not having stadiums built for the 1994 World Cup AND not getting the league up and running until 1996...that's two years after the tournament, losing some of the momentum generated, and when the baseball strike would have easily converted some of these fans into MLS spectators." =============================== Yes, it may seem crazy for stadiums to be built, but low and behold, South Korea and Japan did it, France did it, and Italy as well for their World Cups. Even lowly Portugal is building stadiums for Euro 2004, so tell me, how many stadiums were built for 1994??? None. Zilch. Nada. In a country whose GDP is still greater than Japan's, Korea's, Italy's, France's and Portugal's combined!!!...its amazing to even fathom that no one from Alan Rothenberg's camp thought that this would be a good investment ahead of the tournament. (no, they just wanted to take the money and run and not worry about the important infrastructure to the game). As far as the baseball fan comment, I most certainly stand by it. You seem to forget the outcry from fans about the strike, and since the summer is basically baseball 24-7, soccer would have most definately had the interest of some disheartened baseball fans at games. If MLB ever had a strike again, MLS now would certainly benefit. Do you question that? ============================== "The sad thing is that when the U.S. hosts the World Cup again, the NFL stadiums WILL BE the ones used since U.S. Soccer realizes more seats = more profit. Hell, even Fifa would want 70-100K seats being used than the 20-30K since that would go into their coffers too." ============================== Let me make this simple for you...you got Giants Stadium, which can hold 75K+, in the country's most important media market, and you have the proposed stadium that the Metrostars want to build that, optimistically speaking, won't go over 30K in number of seats. Which stadium do you think is going to make more money for Fifa? Same holds true for the Rose Bowl vs HDC, the Cotton Bowl vs the proposed Dallas project, and the New Soldier's Field vs the proposed Chicago Fire Stadium plans. Add Gillette Stadium, the Orange Bowl and Arrowhead and you basically have the list of stadium candidates for the next world cup. They all are in major media markets, so I highly doubt that they will not be used. The U.S.S.F has no direct links with MLS, so when it makes the bid for the World Cup, they are looking out for their own best interests, not necessarily MLS's. At times, it will work with the league in scheduling and in cup tournaments, but when it comes to money, that's when you truly see that they are two entirely separate businesses. That's the reality kid a.
When the Pats played Miami in Florida last Sunday the Dolphins used old fashion chalk to line the field because of the World Series. If chalk is good enough for an NFL team, it should be good enough for a high school....