This is Tough. I would go: Canada: Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton Mexico: Mexico City, Monterrey, Guadalajara *right now the Bid says both Canada + Mexico get 3 (perhaps this is altered), so USA gets 10 USA Yes: NY, LA, DAL, MIA, DC, ATL USA Maybes (in order): WSH, HOU, PHI, SEA, DEN (would be hard to leave off any of these) USA Nos: SF, Boston, KC, Nashville, Baltimore, Orlando, Cincinnati
I don’t think the middle of the country is completely shutout. Chicago would’ve been the sure thing but I’d expect at least 1 of KC, Nashville and Cincinnati to host games
If they’re doing 3 opening day games then sure, let them have the head liner. If they needed to choose just one I’d say let Canada have the opener but then you know they’d want the Azteca for the closer.
Yea its going to be some tough calls. Which one of those do you think gets that nod and which city misses out in replace of?
Feel like with the soccer culture in Seattle, there’s no way they’re left off. Praying Miami gets some decent games. USMNT stays far away from Miami with good reason for qualifying.
Will Denver be frowned upon because of the elevation? Isnt there a rule a qualifier or cup game can’t be over ~8000ish feet (obviously Denver’s under that but still)
Wasnt Denver considered based on field size the perfect stadium in the bid? Thought I read that the other day which was surprising to me.
Believe Azteca is higher elevation than Denver. Would be a lot easier to sort this out if USA had 16 venues to choose from rather than 10.
Miami’s Joe Robbie (now Hard Rock stadium) was actually built with soccer in mind back in the 80s. With Steven Ross the owner of the Dolphins and the head organizer of the ICC tournament, I’d expect Miami to definitely be a main site.
Oh yeah the renovation was with the World Cup in mind. Have to think Florida gets Miami but not Orlando as hosts.
The renovation has been absolutely incredible. Completely different stadium. With the roof on it the sound level is insane. Went to the UM/ND game last year and could barely think. The roof keeps all of the sound in.
It is. It’s 7300 plus the smog. Estadio Chivas is right around a mile high and the smog isnt as bad. Monterrey isn’t up in the mountains.
Hope to get down there in December. I went to the Orange Bowl right before they did the renovation. Liked the layout then but if you could trap the noise in that place it would sound like an 80k+ stadium.
10x the place it was. If a stadium roof can make UM fans sound loud, lord help us if 80k have vuvuzelas in that stadium.
NFL owners make so much fucking money with their bullshit cba, we should have 10+ Dallas/Atlanta stadiums by then.
Cincy, Balt, Nash, and KC all got a strong stadium score. KC and Nash fell way behind on accommodation score while Cincy and Balt did well there.But in transportation Cincy, KC, Balt, and Nash are 4 of the 5 lowest (SF the other). They are all also the smallest airports in the report. KC and Balt seem very out. Nashville might need to change their recent vote against light rail to have a shot. So much will change in the next few years with facilities and plans for logistics but right now I'd go: Locks - NY, LA, Dal, ATL, Sea, Mia, DC Maybe (in order of likelihood) - Denver, Philly, Hou, Orl, Bos, Cincy Nope - KC, Balt, Nash
I just hope one of Cincy, KC or Nashville get to host. Obviously of that group I hope Cincy gets it but it would be bullshit if the entire middle of the country got shut out. Denver isn't exactly middle of the country but I could see them claiming it as so if they don't give a spot to any of the above three.
From the report: Three potential ‘clusters’ of cross-border cities have been identified by FIFA for the purposes of this analysis, comprising the following: • Eastern cluster (12 host cities), made up of ten cities in the USA and two in Canada • Central-South cluster (seven host cities), made up of four cities in the USA and three in Mexico • Western cluster (four host cities), made up of three cities in the USA and one in Canada Depending on the final selection decisions, it would be possible to have a hosting concept based on two of these clusters, or a wider spread, encompassing cities from all three clusters. Orange are major airports that handle more than 25 mil passengers and it seems very possible no one with a smaller airport outside DC gets chosen. I think Seattle is safe but Denver being an island might be a problem for their bid. Cities having high speed rail connecting them on top of airports are probably in good shape.
KC will have a new airport by then. They would still need to solve public transport from the stadium to downtown though.
Would Europeans push for using some indoor stadiums? They treat 85 degree weather like it's the Sahara desert.
Don’t want to bump the 18 tread to further the 32 v 48 discussion but 2 comments. 1, I heard somewhere that FIFA is dropping its ranking system for an Elo-Chess based formula. No clue how that will affect the rankings/seeding/pots/etc for the future draws. And 2, I bet really soon we hear an announcement that they expand to 48 for ‘22. More teams. More games. More money. FIFA logic says it’ll happen.
At the FIFA congress they decided that they would push the discussion/decision of 22 until later. Also anything different than the current rankings is an improvement
https://www.eloratings.net Doesn't seem awful (except for the Dutch) Then again this will probably defer from the final formula
Schalke has a retractable roof and the pitch is brought in similar to Glendale and the new Spurs stadium. I'm surprised Glendale (PHX) isn't going to be a location. Not sure what the reasoning is behind them not being a part of the options.
I get that Phoenix didn't bid, I'm not sure the reasoning behind it. They would have been chosen IMO.
They bid. They were cut in this last round. Although apparently they "voluntarily pulled out" after the United Bid had already made their selections.
Also, all the candidate cities have an MLS team/planned MLS teams near them. I'm sure that there was no collusion at all between US Soccer and MLS to make that happen. Fuck Don Garber and US Soccer Execs.
You don’t say? Just a dumb thing to get heated over. Out of the top 35 biggest media markets all but 10 already have MLS squads. Out of those 5 (Phoenix, Detroit, San Antonio, San Diego, Sacramento) are on the short list for the next round of expansion. And those that remain? Tampa isn’t getting chosen over Miami. Pittsburg isn’t chosen over Philly. Were left with Raleigh, Charlotte, St Louis? Sorry, none of those would get picked either.
I don’t think they would have been picked over LA, Santa Clara and Seattle. This is why they didn’t bid: https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix...ix-and-some-other-big-cities-aren-t-part.html
you dont look at a map of where Glendale is in relation to Phoenix and come away with even the slightest reasoning as to potential hurdles with regard to hosting the World Cup? Those issues seem to be a priority in the bid book.
Ahhh I see now. "my city got picked so everything is great. US Soccer is absolved." Fuck off. They pick places that will line the pockets of their owners and improve soccer infrastructure in places that don't need it as badly as those cities that have teams in lower divisions. It's an obvious play to concentrate resources in those teams that are already established. Don't be dense.
What a reach. Clearly Glendale has shown that they can't host large events. Are you kidding? How about Foxborough? Oh, right. Bob Kraft.