If you want to get technical, U.S. Soccer's bid to host either the 2018 or 2022 FIFA World Cup is actually the organization's third attempt to secure the world's greatest sporting spectacle.
In 1983, the U.S. put forth a misguided effort of a bid to earn the right to host the cup after Colombia dropped out. Mexico was awarded the competition. The less said about that, the better. But it served a lesson on how to deal with FIFA.
In 1988, the U.S. Soccer Federation demonstrated that it learned from its mistakes and got it right as it was awarded the 1994 World Cup.
Since the USA delivered record crowds (3.6 million), innovation (the beautiful game played on grass in a domed stadium) and a memorable tournament and legacy from World Cup USA '94, the soccer landscape has changed dramatically in the past generation or so.
Before that, in 1987, the landscape, well, there was no or little landscape, it was so barren.
There was no professional league in which the U.S.'s best players could develop and move on.
The U.S. had failed to reach the World Cup in nine consecutive tries, dating back to 1950.
And like it or not, the game did not get respect from the media.
Hours after U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati announced the U.S.'s current quest on Monday, comparing what transpired a generation ago is night and day. MLS will kickoff its 14th season next month. The U.S. will continue its quest to clinch its sixth consecutive World Cup berth in week from Wednesday against Mexico in Columbus, Ohio. And the profile of the sport has never been higher (there are games -- domestic or international -- on TV just about every day).
On Monday, not only did Gulati officially tell the world of the USA's goal, he also started to assemble an impressive World Cup bidding committee, which included executive director David Downs, who recently stepped down from Univision, MLS Commissioner Don Garber, U.S. Soccer executive director Dan Flynn and Philip Murphy, an investor with Women's Professional Soccer, which will kick off its inaugural season in April.
For the next 15 months, it will be up to the committee to answer all of FIFA's inquiries and put together the best possible bid. In 1988, the U.S. spent $500,000 on two books that totalled 381 pages -- "two phone books" that knocked FIFA's collective socks off.
If the bid committee follows that comprehensive tact, it should be in good shape.
Come December 2010, we'll find out which two countries will emerge as the winners in FIFA's rather unusual bidding process. Instead of giving a host team six years to get its act together, the winners will have eight or 12 years to prepare.
"We're completely prepared," Gulati said during a conference call. "We're going to put in the best bid we can."
First of all, the fact the U.S. proved it could pull it off is worth one gold star.
The infrastructure is there from stadiums to transportation, hotels and communication.
There are more stadiums from which to choose. For example, the 1994 bid, which was sent to FIFA in 1987, did not even include Giants Stadium because its field size did not meet FIFA's World Cup specifications and because the process of placing grass over artificial turf had not been perfected yet. Within a few years, it had been and voila -- the Pontiac Silverdome in suburban Detroit hosted first-round games with grass.
Gulati said there would be 35-40 stadiums he could use on the bid. And between now and 2022 -- that's 13 years -- how many more state-of-the-art stadiums will be built, he noted.
"We haven't reached out to cities yet," he said. "We've had some reach out to us. We have 25, 30, 35, 40 venues in the country as well as some not built yet, and there's plenty of time.
"We'd need guarantees, but our bid would include anywhere between 25 and 35 cities with signed guarantees that we could present in the bid. We have a lot of options across the country."
And then there's the pro league. When it awarded the 1994 World Cup, FIFA stipulated that the U.S. Soccer Federation had to start a viable soccer league. It did -- in 1996.
"We are what we are because of the World Cup in '94," Garber said. "Without it, I don't think Major League Soccer exists. If we get the World Cup in '18 or '22 it will similarly impact ... [to the] benefit to the league in terms of growing the passion."
While soccer has taken a backseat to recent successful World Cup bids (South Africa, the 2010 host, could not even qualify for its own tournament, which also was used as a qualifying tournament for the African Nations Cup), it certainly doesn't hurt that the U.S. has gone from CONCACAF patsies to powerhouse in almost two decades.
Ultimately, it will be up to FIFA's executive committee to decide the fate. Also in the running are bids from England, Russia, Netherlands/Belgium/Luxembourg, Spain/Portugal from Europe, Mexico from CONCACAF, Australia, Tokyo, Qatar and Indonesia from Asia and Egypt from Africa.
Given the fact that Europe will not have hosted a World Cup since 2006 (South Africa in 2010 and Brazil in 2014), the logical choice would be the competition on the continent. This is the first time two consecutive World Cups were held away from Europe.
Let's say that happens, which would leave the CONCACAF and Asian countries for the 2022 competition.
Gulati likes the U.S.'s chances.
"What the U.S. bid will offer FIFA in the development of the game will be clear to FIFA over the next 20 months," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment