Journalists are supposed to be skeptical. Actually, all of us should be skeptical but not cynical. Big difference. A cynic dismisses ideas and arguments as a reflex. A skeptic checks them out.

So when the USA bids to host the World Cup, a bit of skepticism is healthy. It’s just due diligence. People have a right to ask how much the whole thing is going to cost.

University of Maryland-Baltimore County professor Dennis Coates wants to encourage people to ask these questions. He has produced a study claiming that the economic impact of a World Cup is either negligible or negative. Check the full PDF report or his op-eds. He is similarly skeptical of other sports development such as Baltimore ballpark Camden Yards.

Soccer fans may be naturally defensive upon hearing such things. We’re all prepared to spend some money on tickets if the World Cup doesn’t require a passport, long flight and awkward housing searches. So we should admit up front that we’re hardly disinterested parties. (Frankly, though, the BigSoccer discussion has been fairly reasonable.)

That said, from a purely logical perspective, I found myself with a lot of questions after reading the study. I asked Dr. Coates, and he was kind enough to respond.

I have a few comments in response, so what you’ll see here is my question in bold, his response in italic and my comments in plain text. It’s fair to say I find his argument unsatisfactory, but I shouldn’t have the last word — Dr. Coates is invited to leave comments here. And so are you.

On we go …

Continue reading →