ArmchairQB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 875
- Likes
- 1,849
Just did some fun googling. Fox originally got the contract for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups for $425 million (Fox, Telemundo get US World Cup rights | FOX Sports). By comparison, CBS just ponied up $350 million to plug a Big 10 game of the week in where its SEC game used to be (Report: CBS' yearly price tag for Big Ten afternoon matchup revealed). So Fox got a World Cup for less than CBS paid for a Big 10 football game.On one hand they are correct, and on the other I think they are kind of unreasonable and too hard on them.
Of course Fox is going to present the sport in a way so that it connects with an American audience. Given that soccer is not super popular here, they are also going to do it in a way that probably seems hokey or contrived to a European. I would not expect a Brit to be enthralled with how an American TV channel covers the tournament, just like I wouldn't expect an American NFL fan to be impressed with how the BBC covers the Super Bowl.
As for the critique of everything in the broadcast having a sponsor, I find that a little rich given that soccer for years has used the player's jerseys as billboards, well before any American sports did and to a much greater extent. The BBC is also funded with the TV licensing fee that all TV owners in the UK have to pay. I imagine they don't run ads in the same way because they don't have to, and it allows them to act all holier-than-thou, as though they aren't commercially minded as well.
He's right about Donovan though. He has the charisma of a damp rag.
But, in the spirit of "wait, it gets better"... FIFA also gave Fox the 2026 World Cup, with no new bidding. (FIFA surprisingly awards 2026 World Cup broadcast rights to FOX, Telemundo without any bidding)
I can see where Fox might carry FIFA's water over Qatar, considering, and not jump on the condemnation bandwagon.