Germany = OU

[KantoSooner]

Badg, you do understand that floating any material is the cheapest way to transport it, don't you? Even if they had an environmentally irresponsible highway to Manaus, it'd still be cheaper to barge the materials in.
And I'm just guessing that maybe a city of 2 million might figure out something to do in a stadium.
Or maybe not.
I guess they could tear down their opera house, too, and put in a day care center.

Consider that we built a gambling mecca in the middle of the crappiest hunk of desert on the planet....and our capitol in a malarial cess pool.

[badger]

Badg, you do understand that floating any material is the cheapest way to transport it

Soccer isn't worth arguing over, but if $300 million is the cheapest they could build their Amazon atrocity for, I worry what the cost would have been otherwise, considering they were already billions over budget on the cup stadiums overall.

I think we can both agree that time will tell whether these stadiums were worth the investment. I'll give 'em till the 2016 Olympics for final verdict, by which time they will have probably spent billions more on sporting venues

viva corrupt sporting overlords!

[jkjsooner]

I think the world needs to get over the expectation that with the World Cup or Olympics there has to be entirely new infrastructure for almost every venue. That model wasn't good for Montreal or Athens and I'm sure there are others.

The US seems to be the exception. I don't think we built a single stadium for the '94 World Cup. I know RFK, the Cotton Bowl, and the Rose Bowl were used. Maybe one or two smaller MLS stadiums were built?

For the '96 Olympics the Olympic stadium was new but it was designed so that a good portion of it could be turned into Turner Field.

At the minimum I don't think we shift a lot (or any?) federal funds towards these things. Maybe that's why they hated us so much after Atlanta.

[KantoSooner]

Hell Badg, we can't even bowl in the South end of our stadium for $300 million. Brazil built a semi-domed one for that! Cheap at the price. Heh. We'll see if it's worth it as time goes by.
What did Brazil ever do to you?
Was it too many mojito's? Caprinha? String bikinis? Perhaps the concept of 'The Brazilian' that, ahem, chafes a bit? The emphasis on booty over bust? That band trip and an unforgettable night in Rio, followed by the heartbreak of a poorly written farewell letter and the faint lingering note of cigar smoke on the warm morning breeze? HOW DID THEY GET UP YOUR NOSE?
Inquiring minds and all that.....

[badger]

Hell Badg, we can't even bowl in the South end of our stadium for $300 million. Brazil built a semi-domed one for that! Cheap at the price. Heh. We'll see if it's worth it as time goes by.
What did Brazil ever do to you?

lol, we both know that they're doing more than south endzone bowling for the next OU stadium upgrade, but it won't involve allowing fans to bring in bottled water

I've never been to Brazil, nor spoken any word or phrase in Portuguese. I think my misplaced-at-Brazil anger is just the idea that sports could be a positive and they're taking away with it by being greedy grubby governmentalists. Russia was guilty of the same thing during the last winter games, and if I'm not mistaken, Qatar's future World Cup is the worst of all on so. many. fronts.

So, no hate for Brazil, just disgust for what could have been something good coming to a head with the 7-1 knockout yesterday. If you're going to divert billions to buy FIFA and build stadiums everywhere regardless of how expensive it is, at least don't lose in such embarrassing fashion in the final four.

[KantoSooner]

Ah, the crux of the biscuit: They're losers.

All right. I can get behind that.

[badger]

Ah, the crux of the biscuit: They're losers.

All right. I can get behind that.

It has merit. OSU eminent domained millions in properties around its campus for athletic facilities and what has it gotten them in football? One gooner win in the past decade, and a coach that keeps threatening to leave unless they pay him more every offseason. Tee hee.

At least when China and Russia built their Olympic woo hoo they defeated the world at their host games. OSU rids themselves of Rustoleum and... they're still not as good as OU.

[8timechamps]

I think the world needs to get over the expectation that with the World Cup or Olympics there has to be entirely new infrastructure for almost every venue. That model wasn't good for Montreal or Athens and I'm sure there are others.

The US seems to be the exception. I don't think we built a single stadium for the '94 World Cup. I know RFK, the Cotton Bowl, and the Rose Bowl were used. Maybe one or two smaller MLS stadiums were built?

For the '96 Olympics the Olympic stadium was new but it was designed so that a good portion of it could be turned into Turner Field.

At the minimum I don't think we shift a lot (or any?) federal funds towards these things. Maybe that's why they hated us so much after Atlanta.

I know when Salt Lake City hosted the winter games, they had to renovate/upgrade the infrastructure around the city, but it was probably past time to do that anyway. Other than additional media buildings, I think the US could host just about any event with the existing infrastructure/stadiums/lodging on relatively short notice. Of course, if we went the route Russia just did, and decided to host the Olympics in some remote city, we'd certainly have to spend big bucks. But, I don't think that would happen.

I recently read an opinion piece somewhere that said there is a real chance Qatar could lose the next world cup (because of the scandals), and that the US would be the only country that could be prepared in time to host the event.

[KantoSooner]

There are even a group of good hearted, though utterly insane, boosters who keep delusionally trying to get Tulsa to make a run at the Olympics.

[jkjsooner]

There are even a group of good hearted, though utterly insane, boosters who keep delusionally trying to get Tulsa to make a run at the Olympics.

Moscow, LA, Seoul, Barcelona, Atlanta, Sidney, Athens, Beijing, London... Yep, Tulsa fits right in.

[badger]

the US would be the only country that could be prepared in time to host the event.

Fingers crossed, not just because NP and would totally go wherever to see just one game, even if it wasn't a U.S. game, but also because if Qatar hosts, at least one player will die of heat stroke, let alone the builders that have already died building the venues.

Moscow, LA, Seoul, Barcelona, Atlanta, Sidney, Athens, Beijing, London... Yep, Tulsa fits right in.

It was a pipe dream by a few individuals that were not in leadership positions, who cited Atlanta's little rise to host in '96. They neglected the "Coke" factor, where Coke is a major Olympics sponsor and Coke's home is Atlanta. I would be happy if we could host a U.S. qualifying event every so often.

[KantoSooner]

They also neglected the fact that metro Atlanta has:

1. 5-10 times Tulsa's population
2. Major sports facilities already built
3. Public transportation
4. An airport
5. Hotels and restaurants capable of housing and feeding the numbers of visitors
6. and so forth

It was about as viable a concept as suggesting that OSU can maintain high level football for longer than a spasmodic season or two in a row.

[EatLeadCommie]

Badj,
Manaus, the city of which you speak, has a population of 2 million, was founded in 1693, has an international airport, an ocean port (1,000 miles from the mouth of the Amazon) and is the 7th largest city in Brazil. To not build a stadium and hold games there if you're hosting the world cup would have been lunacy.
Does Brazil suffer corruption? Of course, and lots of gun violence, too. Chicago, anyone? How about New Orleans? How about Washington D.C.? The economy sucks in Brazil right now, but, until recently, they'd managed to float above the US/Europe centered 'Great Recession'. Would I want to live there? I'm pretty happy with where I am right now, thanks. But that's no reason to slam Brazil. They're not doing that badly considering the path other nations are walking (like Argentina or Venezuela locally, or Russia, Turkey, Thailand or Ukraine for some other comparables).
The favelas (slums) are noxious, but better, I'd say, than US 'housing projects'. And the people who live in our projects sound no different when foreign reporters jam microphones in their faces. Listening to an Indonesian news cast, for instance, interviewing the denizens of bad areas in Detroit, you'd think it was torches and pitchforks time in America. They are not the entire population. In either country. Nor are they the entire story of either.

The level of poverty in Brazil is ridiculous. The level of poverty we see in the US doesn't even approach what they have there. Brazil is on the rise, for sure (or was, until they elected their commie President), but it has a long, long way to go.

[KantoSooner]

To be sure, ELC, but let's go a bit deeper: my point regarding the favelas is not that they're resort communities but that they are, in fact, communities. Poor, but integrated; with their own businesses, residences, street life, the whole schemer. Our housing projects, by contrast, are urban wastelands that operate as nothing more than 'people warehouses'. As P. J. O'Rourke commented, "We tore down a perfectly good slum to build this?"

Brazil's poverty is actually about middle of the road for developing nations. You want destitution? Go check out Lagos, Nigeria. Or Mumbai, India or any of a dozen other places that you or I could name. And Brazilian poverty is not that far removed from the worse pockets in this country. Don't believe me? Let me introduce you to portions of New Orleans or Houston or South Central LA, for example. Brazil just has a far higher proportion of their citizenry living in such conditions.

Finally, which commie President? Lula the socialist.....under who the economy exploded into one of the fastest growing in the world? Or the current one who's presided over a downturn? Frankly, Brazil has had presidents of various flavors over the years and their Euro-lefties of late have been quite business friendly and have seen good economic growth. Far better, say, than the nonsense in Venezuela next door. and far better than the military led crony capitalism that characterized the two generations post WWII.