Another Dumb Soccer Idea

It's been a few months since the Super League debacle, so soccer's Powers-That-Be decided it was time to make another stupid announcement that only proves how greedy they are.  This time it was FIFA, which is "exploring" the idea of holding the World Cup every two years instead of every four.  Some countries apparently support this idea.  All of UEFA doesn't.  Because it's dumb.  Very, very dumb.

To be clear, it seems FIFA is only entertaining this idea because Saudi Arabia's all for it, and they don't want to piss off Saudi Arabia.  But there's nothing about the idea of an annual World Cup (with men's in even years and women's in odd) that makes any sense or would add any value.  In fact, it would result in just the opposite.  World Cup fatigue.

There are so many reasons why it would never work logistically either.  Let's start with the most obvious one--you need a host.  And that host needs to be able to afford hosting the tournament.  After next year's edition, the World Cup is expanding to 48 teams.  The number of countries that can handle that financially is limited to begin with.  Now you're asking those countries to host the World Cup twice as often?

And what about qualifying?  There are 200-something countries that are a part of FIFA.  Qualification for next year's World Cup started in June 2019.  Yes, that's a long time.  But it gives every nation a chance to qualify, as unrealistic as that may be for many.  I'm not sure if there's even a way to cram all of those qualifying matches into what would basically have to be an 18-month window while still giving everyone a fair chance.

Not to mention the fact that all of these countries would still have their continental tournaments, as well.  They'd need to qualify for and play in those, too.  And, according to this proposed new calendar, the continental tournaments would also be every two years in the odd year, meaning players would have no time off at all!

That's a point the organization representing the players was sure to make.  They want them to play a month-long international tournament every summer?  While also fulfilling their other National Team duties, and playing a full club and Champions League (or equivalent competition) season?  With essentially no break!  Are they trying to kill these guys?!

UEFA's opposition is based more on how much it would dilute the product.  They're very much in the "less is more" camp.  European teams already have a major competition every other year, with the Euro and World Cup alternating.  They think having one or the other every year isn't just overkill, it would dilute both products.  So, would it even be worth it then?

Another concern with the biennial World Cup is a major one that can't be ignored.  When the first World Cup was scheduled, they deliberately put it in the even year between Olympics.  That, frankly, has helped the World Cup become the second-biggest sporting event in the world.  It's held in the same year as the Winter Olympics, but it's played in the summer, so there's no conflict.

Moving it to a biennial schedule, however, would put the World Cup and Olympics up against each other head-to-head in Olympic years.  And, even if they scheduled around each other, it would still be quite a burden for broadcasters to be covering two major events within weeks of each other.  Would sponsors be willing to fork over the advertising dollars for both marquee events in the same summer?  (And would there be as much value in the World Cup if it was every two years instead of every four?)

Needless to say, if FIFA were to do this, the IOC would not be very happy.  The men's Olympic tournament is a U-23 event that a lot of observers don't take seriously, but that doesn't matter to the IOC.  Especially since FIFA would be deliberately scheduling its marquee tournament in the same summer as the Olympics, something that, while not expressly forbidden, is strongly discouraged.  For obvious reasons.

I haven't even mentioned what this would mean for the Women's World Cup yet.  (Considering the idea originally came from Saudi Arabia, I'm fairly certain they don't actually care about the implications on the Women's World Cup.)  But, having a major men's tournament every year would render the Women's World Cup irrelevant in a lot of people's minds.  And that's definitely not something FIFA wants.

With the current schedule, the Women's World Cup is held a year after the men's, when there's no other major international soccer tournament scheduled.  That gives the women the stage all to themselves.  These women deserve that stage, and they put on quite a show, too.  The last two Women's World Cups have been incredible!

The 2023 Women's World Cup figures to be just as incredible.  It'll also be the first to feature 32 teams.  More importantly, it'll feature twice as much prize money.  FIFA expanded the tournament for a number of reasons, which included showing its commitment to the growth of the women's game internationally.  How would it look, then, to relegate the Women's World Cup to a secondary event?

Playing the men's World Cup in every even year would also mean playing the Women's World Cup in every odd year.  But, the Euro, Copa America and all the other men's continental tournaments would also move to every odd year.  And those tournaments wouldn't just be played in the same summer as the Women's World Cup.  They'd be played literally at the same time.  Which tournament are fans more likely to follow?  (I'll give you a hint, it's not the Women's World Cup.)

Frankly, I can't think of any reasons to play the World Cup every other year that I'd actually consider good.  There are plenty of reasons why it's a bad idea, though.  Hopefully the higher-ups at FIFA realize that and the idea of a biennial World Cup goes the way of the Super League.

Almost immediately, people saw the Super League for what it was.  A money grab.  That's all this is, too.  A very obvious one at that.  And, just like the Super League, it's not a very smart one, either.