Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

Hydration Breaks or Momentum Stoppers?

Posted on 6/17/26 at 11:42 am
Posted by Smokin Joe Dumas
Armchair QB
Member since Apr 2022
2219 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 11:42 am
I know a lot of the criticism about Hydration Breaks (HB) has been directed towards the way FIFA was able to introduce more advertising revenue.

However, I’ve wondered how it fits into the tactical strategy and what effects it has had on in-game performance. After all, unlike many sports in the US, there are no time outs and players are no allowed to go to the sidelines even if there is stoppage for an extended period.

I’ve only found one “study” of the effect and that was on ESPN. Frankly, I expected it to make more of a difference because you could adjust tactics that weren’t working during these breaks.

But, mainly seems to effect possession % after HB’s than goals scored according to the limited data from 5 matches they gave (see below)









Posted by GrimaceBallz
Member since Nov 2024
885 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 12:52 pm to
Oh look another thread about this.

It’s brought up in every game.

Just get used to it. It is what is by now.
Posted by ezride25
Constitutional Republic
Member since Nov 2008
26642 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 1:10 pm to
Ad revenue.
Posted by TexasTiger6777
Surrounded by Longhorns and Aggies
Member since Jan 2008
3135 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 2:05 pm to
Honestly, I think the graphs are pretty interesting. Clear momentum shifts before and after the hydration breaks.
Posted by dgnx6
Member since Feb 2006
90315 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 4:34 pm to
The ads were obviously going to happen.


But these drinks breaks have happened before. This is not new.

Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
63315 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 4:56 pm to
A 3 minute break that adds an opportunity for tactical changes is actually a positive thing, IMO.

This is something that bothers core soccer fans, doesn't bother new soccer fans, and won't be a complaint for long. I think the complaints will just disappear.
Posted by RemouladeSawce
Uranus
Member since Sep 2008
17998 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 5:01 pm to
quote:

A 3 minute break that adds an opportunity for tactical changes is actually a positive thing, IMO.
If it’s a good thing why only 3 minutes? Why not 30

No reason to half arse reward mediocre coaching unable to keep up with the game as it’s been for almost 130 years, let’s get even more retarded
This post was edited on 6/17/26 at 5:08 pm
Posted by Veritas
Member since Feb 2005
10925 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 5:47 pm to
Good. Continue to make threads about it. FIFA should hear non stop about how dumb it is.

All a sham to pretend it’s hotter than normal.
Posted by HagaDaga
Member since Oct 2020
8170 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 9:30 pm to
quote:

Ad revenue
Telemundo keeping it OG the best they can and not breaking to commercials like fox.
Posted by Bigdawgb
Member since Oct 2023
4315 posts
Posted on 6/17/26 at 11:39 pm to
quote:

If it’s a good thing why only 3 minutes? Why not 30


That's easy - it's because they're not trying to serve the same purpose as halftime. If you're trying to sell the breaks, they're a good thing because they're adding a brand-new chance for strategy, coaching, tactics etc. A chance for great coaching to separate & gain an advantage. It's expanding the game. And 9 figures of Ad revenue is the cherry on top that makes the execs jizz their suits.

On another note, why is there a break at all? Tradition.
Are the new breaks interfering with the purpose of the original break??

Change = bad is human nature, but once you get past that are the breaks truly diminishing the game or not??
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram