Potential 2026 WC Hosts (Update: Morocco Sole Challenger to CONCACAF Bid)

Are large stadiums preferable? Of course. Should a number of countries with otherwise excellent infrastructure be locked out from hosting the World Cup? No.

I think a capacity requirement of 30,000 (like in the Euros) is just fine. Countries like Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Austria and Switzerland could stem 3-4 such venues in a joint bid.

 

I never implied that. Having smaller stadiums would be fine for group stages but once knock out starts larger stadiums are needed. A final in a 45k would be unacceptable.

 

It will always be preferable a fully packed 30,000 stadium, than a half empty, 60,000 stadium.

 

30K is still fine for the new Round-of-32 and perhaps even some R16 matches. Quarterfinals should be 40K, semis 50K and final 60K minimum.

 

Currently (or most recently) FIFA require two 60K+ stadiums for opening match and final, with the rest 40K+. I'm with you, in the expanded world cup we can use 30K+ stadiums for a lot of preliminary matches.

 

There is no thread about 2030 so I will post this here:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...as-hopes-of-hosting-2030-world-cup/101234480/

 

Good FIFA stuff in this one. To paraphrase, "we never codified the rule that a confederation that hosts a WC can't hosts the next two, we might want to actually codify that. But we might want to eliminate the rule because China is a rich autocratic state and we'd like them to bid for 2030."

 

Not sure what the reaction will be here to this news.

FWIW, US Soccer Has $100M Budget Surplus, Made Profit Of $46M Off 2016 Copa

I can't even imagine what a WC would do.

 

Heck, another Copa America type cup could make twice that much if it has better organization, better promotion and teams that could fill up the stands from Central America.

 

Probably true. How many times can they go to that well? Every four years indefinitely? Every two? Do we need Copas in South America anymore? Do players ever need a summer off? Or will B teams suffice?

Lastly, does US soccer need the money, do we care if they have it, what will they do with it? This the same organization that has lower meal allowance for the US Woman's team than the Men's.

 

The USWNT for about a year decided to play tough on negotiations. They went to the media and the courts to pressure the USSF with their view of facts. Some of it decidedly misleading. One was the above factoid. The truth is that the men negotiated a new deal and the women have taken their time negotiating theirs so they are stuck with the old rate. Any new deal could quite likely include a retroactive reimbursement. The courts weren't impressed. So the women have fired their old lawyers and are now negotiating like they should have from the very start.

 

A new CBA has been in place for a couple of months now.

 

Not surprised the Centenario made a lot of money. I do wonder if the USSF will get the exact same favorable terms of splitting the profit every time. They held all the cards this time with the added time pressure of getting the tournament off the ground after all the corruption scandals.

I can only shake my head at this point.

 

The USA's joint 2026 World Cup bid won't get an exclusive fast track after all. @GrantWahl on what it means https://t.co/kKLKv63NOB pic.twitter.com/UO3RsyOBEI

— SI Soccer (@si_soccer) May 9, 2017

The CONCACAF bid doesn't get confirmation but the timeline is moved up. So partial victory for them.

 

it's like a 90% victory. I think it's really doubtful a credible bid can be put together in 90 days, as it looks like it would have to come from Africa. It costs money to put a bid together too (never mind the bribes that would probably be required), and the US-MEX-CAN bid looks really formidable. My prediction is the 90 days will pass without a new bid coming out.

 

Correct, very little chance of a multi-country bid firming in three months.

 

That's fine. As long as there is some semblance of due process.

 

What is the incentive for FIFA officials for fast tracking?

 

The faster they get the deal done the faster they can bring in the Money from sponsors and advertisers.

Which seems to be even more relevant with the way Russia has been struggling along with Qatar.

A World Cup with USA, Canada and Mexico would help rake in the cash big time.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...s-to-369-million-on-mounting-costs-of-scandal

• 24 sponsorships slots still open for WC 2018!
• Problems securing $120m in TV broadcast money

Probably Qatar will be worse for sponsorships and local broadcast. Who wants to but a sponsorship slot for a tournament spread around such a small country? So really tight times for FIFA.

In contrast, a US/Mex/Can world cup has an incredible footprint. Every single game is guaranteed to be in a major metropolis. Americans love big events. Football now has a fanbase like never before and the children of today are just as likely to be a football fan as much as the local sports. The excitement will slowly ramp up a year before and then it will be World Cup 24/7. In addition, many Americans are fans of other national teams. Immigrants, of course. But many will be fans of a country for stylistic reasons or because of a player. It will be big, big, big. And worth a lot of money for sponsors and local TV of course.

 

Yeah, that makes sense.

 

If the U.S-led 2026 World Cup bid succeeds, which city hosts the final?

http://www.espnfc.us/blog/fifa/243/...sa-would-be-led-by-new-york-and-los-angelesIf

 

I think the article has it mostly right, it'll be New York (NJ actually) or LA with Dallas as a dark horse. I can't see Houston even being in the conversation. The extra 15,0000 seats in the reconfigured Dallas Stadium makes it a bit less of a dark horse, as more seats = more money and the powers in world soccer are obviously always looking for more money.

 

They would have to figure out a way to place grass in there though.
Part of the reason Dallas was snubbed for the Centenario in my opinion.

 

the Centenario final was played at MetLife Stadium which has an artificial surface. They covered it with grass for the final, right? At least half the stadiums used in the Centenario had artificial surfaces (Gillette, the Linc, NRG Houston, Orlando, MetLife).

It's not ideal but it seems they've gotten a lot better at it than when they first started doing it. I don't recall any issues at the Centenario. There's plenty of crappy grass field around the world too. For QC2026 I'm sure they'll do everything possible to make it a non-factor, whether that means installing it well in advance for it to stabilize or whatever. And as it's 9 years from now, they should be even better at laying grass over turf by then.