Shirtless Guy
Old Dirty Basterd
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Personally it seems like 2022 is USA or Australia
Personally it seems like 2022 is USA or Australia
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
- Thread starter WeWantMore
- Start date
- Status
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
The Aussies only dropped out of the 2018 bid, not 2022.
And yes, bids are based on Confederations.
The Aussies only dropped out of the 2018 bid, not 2022.
And yes, bids are based on Confederations.
Shirtless Guy
Old Dirty Basterd
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Australia dropped out of bidding for 2018, the whole continent thing is based on federation, not continent.
Australia dropped out of bidding for 2018, the whole continent thing is based on federation, not continent.
French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Well that was just a good play.
Well that was just a good play.
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Ya, seems pretty simple to me. UEFA gets the 2018 world cup and then CONCACAF in 2022.
What about Mexico? I figured they might put a bid in...
Ya, seems pretty simple to me. UEFA gets the 2018 world cup and then CONCACAF in 2022.
What about Mexico? I figured they might put a bid in...
MountieBoyOz
Eater of Worlds
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
I wouldn't mind seeing a Canadian bid for a World Cup, but they have a LOOOOONNNGGG way to go to get their team up to snuff so they wouldn't be embarassed.
I wouldn't mind seeing a Canadian bid for a World Cup, but they have a LOOOOONNNGGG way to go to get their team up to snuff so they wouldn't be embarassed.
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
I think they did, pulled out, and now support the US bid.
I think they did, pulled out, and now support the US bid.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
And you get exactly no sympathy from anyone on this side of the pond.
And you get exactly no sympathy from anyone on this side of the pond.
BoomGoestheDynamite
Registered User
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Considering the Mexican National Team even prefers to play its games here to make more money, I can't imagine FIFA not thinking along the same lines. LA is basically Mexico City but not a (complete) crap hole. Add into the fact that half the Mexican venues would be at 6000 + ft and they'd be the first 3 time host, I just don't see them as serious challengers. When they come back to CONCACAF, they'll come here.
Oh and nice second goal from Brazil. They still got it.
Considering the Mexican National Team even prefers to play its games here to make more money, I can't imagine FIFA not thinking along the same lines. LA is basically Mexico City but not a (complete) crap hole. Add into the fact that half the Mexican venues would be at 6000 + ft and they'd be the first 3 time host, I just don't see them as serious challengers. When they come back to CONCACAF, they'll come here.
Oh and nice second goal from Brazil. They still got it.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Well, to be fair, their second hosting of the WC was as a back-up when Colombia couldn't get all their ducks in a row. The behind-the-scenes rumblings were that the US could have filled that duty if South Africa was unable to get things ready for this current cup.
Well, to be fair, their second hosting of the WC was as a back-up when Colombia couldn't get all their ducks in a row. The behind-the-scenes rumblings were that the US could have filled that duty if South Africa was unable to get things ready for this current cup.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
I thought their fans were criticizing them for being "boring"? They don't look boring.
I thought their fans were criticizing them for being "boring"? They don't look boring.
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
I tend to agree - the other options being Japan, South Korea, and Qatar assuming that 2018 will be in Europe (which disqualifies the other Eurobids from 2022 under current FIFA rules, which apparently change whenever Blatter feels like it).
Japan and South Korea, of course, co-hosted in 2002 and I agree that it seems unlikely that FIFA would go back to either country before going back to the US, especially given their jones for spreading the hosts around by continent and North America, by 2014, will have gone the longest without it.
The US has a couple of definitive advantages over Australia - first and foremost, no domestic leagues have to be disrupted in the US (no baseball stadia among the host venues and only one MLS stadium which, for obvious reasons, can be worked around) whereas Australia has to deal with being in the middle of the AFL and rugby seasons which utilize some of the venues they've put forward. Second, as mentioned before, each and every American venue can be converted for soccer without any major renovations whatsoever, where Australia needs to add capacity to the majority of its venues and even build some from the ground up.
The latter, to some extent, could be viewed as a negative. The US, as the most developed and affluent nation on earth, is going to perpetually be at a disadvantage as long as FIFA (and the IOC for that matter) continues to be obsessed with "social justice" and events which "leave a lasting impact." The fact that we don't need to invest in our infrastructure in order to host actually turns into a disadvantage, which is quite frankly ridiculous as a business model. FIFA deserves every single moment of headache they have gotten from South Africa, especially the incredibly screwed up ticket situation. And you know what? At the end of the day, South Africa will have a handful of stadia that were built for a month-long tournament that will be very underused afterwards, built with money that certainly could have gone to other uses. That's "social justice?" That's a "lasting impact?"
That's why, as much as I loathe the "green movement" as being horribly self-centered and preachy, I suggest the USSF look at focusing on hosting a "green" World Cup - spending money on reducing the tournament's environmental impact rather than on upgrading infrastructure. It's the only card they have to play to butter up to FIFA's social justice warriors thanks to the somehow unfortunate situation of having adequate existing infrastructure to host the tournament.
Conversely, given the precedents of South Africa and Brazil (and a Qatari bid apparently being taken seriously), we should do what it takes to increase the frequency of petty crimes in our cities. Perhaps we should make Detroit the centerpiece of the bid?
I tend to agree - the other options being Japan, South Korea, and Qatar assuming that 2018 will be in Europe (which disqualifies the other Eurobids from 2022 under current FIFA rules, which apparently change whenever Blatter feels like it).
Japan and South Korea, of course, co-hosted in 2002 and I agree that it seems unlikely that FIFA would go back to either country before going back to the US, especially given their jones for spreading the hosts around by continent and North America, by 2014, will have gone the longest without it.
The US has a couple of definitive advantages over Australia - first and foremost, no domestic leagues have to be disrupted in the US (no baseball stadia among the host venues and only one MLS stadium which, for obvious reasons, can be worked around) whereas Australia has to deal with being in the middle of the AFL and rugby seasons which utilize some of the venues they've put forward. Second, as mentioned before, each and every American venue can be converted for soccer without any major renovations whatsoever, where Australia needs to add capacity to the majority of its venues and even build some from the ground up.
The latter, to some extent, could be viewed as a negative. The US, as the most developed and affluent nation on earth, is going to perpetually be at a disadvantage as long as FIFA (and the IOC for that matter) continues to be obsessed with "social justice" and events which "leave a lasting impact." The fact that we don't need to invest in our infrastructure in order to host actually turns into a disadvantage, which is quite frankly ridiculous as a business model. FIFA deserves every single moment of headache they have gotten from South Africa, especially the incredibly screwed up ticket situation. And you know what? At the end of the day, South Africa will have a handful of stadia that were built for a month-long tournament that will be very underused afterwards, built with money that certainly could have gone to other uses. That's "social justice?" That's a "lasting impact?"
That's why, as much as I loathe the "green movement" as being horribly self-centered and preachy, I suggest the USSF look at focusing on hosting a "green" World Cup - spending money on reducing the tournament's environmental impact rather than on upgrading infrastructure. It's the only card they have to play to butter up to FIFA's social justice warriors thanks to the somehow unfortunate situation of having adequate existing infrastructure to host the tournament.
Conversely, given the precedents of South Africa and Brazil (and a Qatari bid apparently being taken seriously), we should do what it takes to increase the frequency of petty crimes in our cities. Perhaps we should make Detroit the centerpiece of the bid?
BoomGoestheDynamite
Registered User
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Today. They were pretty tough to watch against Portugal and only beating Dear Leader's XI by a goal wasn't exactly vintage Brazil.
Today. They were pretty tough to watch against Portugal and only beating Dear Leader's XI by a goal wasn't exactly vintage Brazil.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
We may also see the WC start pulling back from enormous, diamond-encrusted and highly expensive events that really don't do anybody any good. This supposedly is happening with future Olympics (though I'll believe it when I see it).
What do you really need at the end of the day? 7 or 8 pitches. The massive supporting infrastructures that have grown up around it are, as you point out, of no benefit to the host country. Hard to see who benefits, really. The TV rights will be as big whether 80k or 8k see each game.
We may also see the WC start pulling back from enormous, diamond-encrusted and highly expensive events that really don't do anybody any good. This supposedly is happening with future Olympics (though I'll believe it when I see it).
What do you really need at the end of the day? 7 or 8 pitches. The massive supporting infrastructures that have grown up around it are, as you point out, of no benefit to the host country. Hard to see who benefits, really. The TV rights will be as big whether 80k or 8k see each game.
Last edited:
BoomGoestheDynamite
Registered User
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Sweet run from Ramires capped off with a nice finish. 3-0.
Sweet run from Ramires capped off with a nice finish. 3-0.
jmh
win or lose, we booze
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
LA: WC at Rose Bowl or LA Coliseum; Galaxy and Chivas USA at the HDC
Dallas: WC at Cotton Bowl or Cowboys Stadium; FC Dallas at Pizza Hut Park
DC: WC at FedEx Field; DCU at RFK
NY/NJ: WC at New Meadowlands Stadium; RBNY at Red Bull Arena
Houston: WC at Reliant Stadium; Dynamo at Robertson Stadium
KC: WC at Arrowhead Stadium; Wizards at new SSS to open in 2011
Denver: WC at Mile High; Rapids at Dick's Sporting Goods Park
Seattle: WC at Husky Stadium; Sounders at Qwest Field
Philly: WC at Lincoln Financial Field; Union at PPL Park
It might be a nice selling point for fans who might potentially be traveling to the World Cup from other parts of the world to be able to take in an MLS game while they're here. Obviously it's not on par with the top European and South American leagues, but it seems to me that people who are the type of fans of the sport who would travel to another continent are the type who'd go to a game regardless.
I wonder whether the USSF might even be able to add, as a selling point (not an incredibly important one, but a minor one anyway), that MLS would be running concurrently, in many of the same cities but in different stadiums:
LA: WC at Rose Bowl or LA Coliseum; Galaxy and Chivas USA at the HDC
Dallas: WC at Cotton Bowl or Cowboys Stadium; FC Dallas at Pizza Hut Park
DC: WC at FedEx Field; DCU at RFK
NY/NJ: WC at New Meadowlands Stadium; RBNY at Red Bull Arena
Houston: WC at Reliant Stadium; Dynamo at Robertson Stadium
KC: WC at Arrowhead Stadium; Wizards at new SSS to open in 2011
Denver: WC at Mile High; Rapids at Dick's Sporting Goods Park
Seattle: WC at Husky Stadium; Sounders at Qwest Field
Philly: WC at Lincoln Financial Field; Union at PPL Park
It might be a nice selling point for fans who might potentially be traveling to the World Cup from other parts of the world to be able to take in an MLS game while they're here. Obviously it's not on par with the top European and South American leagues, but it seems to me that people who are the type of fans of the sport who would travel to another continent are the type who'd go to a game regardless.
French Rage
NICKERSON HAS [CENSORED]
Re: World Soccer XVI: The Sadness
Any chance we can get them to move BRA/NET to the late game Friday?
Any chance we can get them to move BRA/NET to the late game Friday?
- Status