Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
Hey now, they also have the Olympics votes to sell, Whaling Commission votes to sell, basically anything they don't give a drat about. And if they ever got super desperate they could always agree to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia- thats big bucks.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
Probably not very much unless you count the whole "well we'd like to put a game in Chicago but we can't unless the stadium is upgraded..." type of talk. And since that isn't criminal here there's no problem with that. And even beyond that that would be more of a USSF and CONCACAF thing than a FIFA thing.


edit: You'd be much more likely to have them involved with those Russian mobsters.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax

Toplowtech posted:

And you know Mitt Romney and the Mormons and the South Lake City games. Then there is also the whole cold war madness, so you can be sure there are probably some crazy blackmail and skullduggery stories to tell about the LA and Moscow games.

Actually, LA was pretty much alone when it bid for its' games. This was immediately after the financial disaster in Montreal and wet fart in Moscow- the Olympics were seen as a huge boondoggle and practically nobody wanted them so LA got in with a cheapo bid. Of course LA then went on to be a massive success and the race was on for other cities to follow up.

Nintendo Kid posted:

To be fair the US has hosted the most Olympic Games of any country during the period of the modern Olympics, 4 summer and 4 winter. The next most is France with 2 summer and 3 winter, and then Japan with 2 of each.
The Olympics are not a national event like a World Cup, they are a city based event. Many huge American cities have yet to have had even a single one. Unless I am forgetting something, none of the major northeastern cities have had one, Chicago hasn't had one and actually had one stolen from it, Detroit came second in bidding something like three or four times but never got to host, there's never been one in Texas or Florida, etc. Its great the the distribution of games has become increasingly spread out but they've historically done a much better job of it than the World Cup has so there was no reason to have 28 years of no American games like there was when they did the "every conference gets a World Cup" rotation in FIFA. Remember, they first gave a games away to non-America/Europe (Tokyo won the right to host) in 1940, though they had to be cancelled due to war. Melbourne had them in the fifties, Mexico City in the sixties, Seoul in the eighties. I'd much rather see the IOC put limits on having cities rehosting than try to spread the games out more between nations.


FuriousxGeorge posted:

Wouldn't an Olympic stadium be too big for a permanent MLS home? Would they build it with a planned downgrade in size later on? It would make more sense to move the Patriots out of Foxboro but that doesn't make sense either.

They turned the Atlanta's into a goddamn baseball stadium, which involved tearing half of it down immediately after the games and then building in new stands closer to the opposing wall. Turning it into a football or soccer stadium (which would involve just having a temporary outer bowl, as opposed to Atlanta's vertical slices) should be much easier to do.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
An Olympics could actually be pretty good for a city, provided that they have spare land to develop and a federal government (or a couple of private businesses which really need stadiums) to foot the bill for them. Ironically Doha would probably benefit greatly from having an Olympics, even if the Olympics would not benefit from having Doha.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax

etalian posted:

well most of it due to how most places don't have huge stadiums.


The 1994 world cup at the US didn't have to build new stuff but on the flip side it meant teams had to travel all over the country for the games.
They typically do that anyway, as a way of having the whole country able to watch matches. While that might be a sizable difference when comparing 94 to, say, 2006, its not really that much bigger than having a Cup in Brazil or Russia. A bigger problem, if I remember correctly, was that a lot of the stadiums' sidelines were very cramped since a soccer field is bigger than an American football field.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
You people are reading too much into the college football stadium sizes issue. There's a few reasons that have a lot more to do with it than the complaining JO was on about. The first is that there are only twelve games a year (so something like 8 home games and 4 away for the big teams because they can rent out lovely teams to come over and lose to them) and if there's only 12 times a year to see your team then people are going to show up at a greater rate than in other leagues. People forget that despite college football having the biggest stadiums around, annual attendance at the Big House or Beav is a lot lower than annual attendance for those areas' NFL teams. Thats what having over twice as many games will do for someone.

Furthermore, the stadiums aren't actually all that much bigger, physically. They are just 85% bleacher seating with the fans packed in like sardines. If they actually gave people chairbacks like in the NFL the seat disparity would probably be eliminated entirely.

Someone else said that college teams get treated as pro-teams by areas without an NFL franchise and that's too true. What he didn't say was that geographically the US is so large that there are a ton of areas without NFL teams. Even areas that do have pro-teams will often have gotten them in the 90s or late eighties, while having college teams with loyal fanbases which stretch back decades. The lack of pro/rel makes it so that the divide between the NFL and whatever competitors it has is super large as well. Like if I wanted to support my local minor league football team, fine I guess but 95% of my neighbors wouldn't even be able to tell you who they are (or they'd gently caress the question up and say Penn State.) If you want to support football based in central PA you don't really get a choice, you can go Penn State or you can go gently caress it and cheer for the Eagles or Steelers who aren't in central PA.

People tend to forget that historically college football was actually even bigger (compared to pro-football) than it is now. The NFL used to be a bunch of nobodies playing in smaller mid-western towns. The Big Ten/Notre Dame and Ivy League were the equivalents of the majors. Though, of course, baseball and boxing dwarfed them both back then.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
To be fair, if Allen also rents that thing out for concerts they could actually make money off of it just like pro arenas do. Provided it weren't literally falling apart, of course.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax

FuriousxGeorge posted:

It depends entirely on what place you are talking about. Philadelphia has a college football team in (hahahaha) Temple but the cult of the Eagles is the biggest in town and as crazy as any college fanbase in most ways. Same thing in Pittsburgh, Steelers rule that town.

Even worse, Pitt actually has a pretty good college football history, though not a good history of having fans actually attend games.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
To be fair, the way I heard the story, Integrity in Sport was an anti-match fixing program and FIFA does have an interest in making sure that no-one but them is fixing any matches.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
I disagree with most of these posts. I think that Qatar's cup is a big target, but that the people targeting it are worried FIFA execs trying to cut a deal. The feds will take what they can get, but its the people who have been put under pressure who are giving these deals away. As we saw with the Morocco 98 and 2010 stuff and SA 2010 stuff it doesn't have to be obvious to outsiders to be drug up as part of this investigation. The only limit is that these things have to have involved transactions from US banks or US companies (or other countries which are running parallel investigations.)

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
I question how much organized criminality goes on in the NCAA, NFL and other big American leagues. There's tons of disorganized criminality by teams/schools, players and coaches, sure, but thats not what RICO was made for. Like do you think that they go around rigging the Superbowl sites or accepting bribes for advertising contracts? Maybe in individual sports, boxing/tennis/golf and the like, but not in the big four or college sports world.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
Yeah, at least in F1's case the lovely races in places nobody likes are openly buying their way in.

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax

Evil Fluffy posted:

I can absolutely see this happening with the BCS games. If there isn't a bunch of shady poo poo going on with that I'd be stunned.

Well the same cities host that every year and its the traditional ones that had been hosting big bowls for fifty plus years. Unless they changed it up to not just be some of the default big bowl games?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cliff Racer
Mar 24, 2007

by Lowtax
They chose the loving Peach Bowl over the Citrus Bowl? Well, I guess the CB lost any cache it had after it renamed itself after an insurance company.

  • Locked thread