I did not make any argument. Someone posted, "Not sure what the reasoning is behind [Phoenix] not being a part of the options"...so I gave a plausible reasoning. You neglected to acknowledge that, then opted to retort with Foxboro as if all other variables between that situation and Phoenix's are facsimiles; or that its impossible for both Foxboro & Phoenix to be similarly flawed. (Has anyone itt even propped up Foxboro as a great host choice?). Also, a Super Bowl =/= a World Cup. Your agenda in this thread is transparent enough, you've made your point that you don't want to have to go through an airport to attend a World Cup match 8 years from now. Jmo but quit spamming the thread, no one is carrying water for USSF or MLS.
For what it's worth, what I thought was especially tin foil-ly about your post was the idea that they're doing this to concentrate "resources" in established soccer cities, to their benefit and to the detriment of lower level cities. I'd love it if you could expand some more on that.
yes, people have made that argument because boston is great sports town and has so many people. Your reasoning is flawed because Phoenix is really no different than Dallas, and foxborough is an even more egregious example. that's the only point i made about your reasoning, it was flawed. just because i post things you don't like doesn't mean its spam. i understand that it can be difficult to read different viewpoints.
you could read this from US Soccer to start, to see how host cities/regions benefit from hosting world cup games. https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/20...-5-billion-in-economic-activity-north-america such benefits pooled in MLS cities further concentrates resources (money, infrastructure, enthusiasm, etc.) and makes it more difficult for cities/regions without MLS teams to compete in the soccer landscape. Federations are typically supposed to provide an egalitarian framework for the sports that they govern, but this is really just the haves and the have-nots. US Soccer definitely doesn't want anything that upsets the status quo, or a league made up of non-MLS cities that could contend for division 1 sanction or more pressure for an open system (pro/rel). They are trying to protect their early and mid-stage investors. Which is an admirable thing for MLS to do, but not for the federation. But it's easy to see from the executive committee of US Soccer, who they take their marching orders from.
This is a fair point. Also I think my wife may have been poisoning me at that time but had to stop after RoyalShocker had caught on to her plan
Also Midwest doesn't deserve games with their voting patterns. They would lose their shit if 50k Iranians showed up.
also this whole argument is just a continuation of a theme. this was posted on here after we failed to qualify last fall: https://www.topdrawersoccer.com/world-cup-articles/us-soccer-failures-has-an-easy-fix_aid43012 protecting the closed system is paramount for US Soccer. It's the reason they won't support training/solidarity payments. The 2026 World Cup is just another coat of paint on a rotting structure.
So not having a World Cup host within driving distance to you is just another manifestation of the closed system. I do appreciate the transparency of your confounded argument. That's nice at least.
that's not my argument. do i think the Midwest should be better represented? probably. Detroit and Cincinnati would be fine, but whatever. My argument is that US Soccer chose cities/regions to host because of their relationship/proximity to MLS teams and their feeders. Maybe not the sole reason, but I do think it was a key contributor.
Excited to hear Thoros thoughts on how Des Moines will produce two Messi class players in a 10 year period if only for Pro/Rel.
Can't wait for the January 2023 apology from FIFA saying they are sorry for putting on a shit tier WC.
no Chicago in 2026 confirmed. Same for Vancouver. https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2020...-world-cup-host-city-list-remains-unfinalized
Would definitely have been on my short list. I'd have to guess these 10 as of today - New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Miami, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Seattle, San Francisco and LA.
Cincinnati and Kansas City aren't getting picked, with Chicago out maybe Philly is swapped out for Denver?
One of KC/Den will get picked. KC will for sure be a teams host city (probably for US) because of its central location and the fact it currently has the worlds greatest soccer training facility.
Found this interesting. I assume Vegas, along with some others, would be doing the same since I remember them saying in the Gold Cup Final that the field was smaller than the Fifa minimum
Ha. Vegas is in the same boat I believe. The idiots build multibillion dollar stadiums but don’t bother to look up the size of the worlds most popular sport’s field, https://frontofficesports.com/fifa-officials-sofi-stadiums-dimensions-are-too-narrow/