Well the bids have been finalized and the USA has put its bid in for the 2018/2022 World Cup. (Well they will try for the 2022 World Cup as Europe. i am sure, will win the 2018 edition) That means the USA will be up against, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Qatar, Indonesia, Egypt, and Mexico. England, Spain/Portugal, Russia and BENELUX. After the Success of USA '94, no one will doubt that the USA would once again provide the biggest tournament ever staged. Crowd numbers would, again, set records and more money would be made than ever before. USA 94 left the legacy of MLS and another world cup, as Sunil Gulati put it, would finish the job. However, do the USA deserve it, seeing how soccer is still regarded as a non-mainstream sport to the majority of Americans and media attention lags well behind other sports. Im not saying it does or not but I would like to hear from the people of the US some thoughts on this subject, in particular on how far soccer has come from 1994, and what it would mean for the future. Also how would media and the mainstream americans attention fare? Discuss.
You are right that Media attention lags behind other sports, but remember, the American Media gushes over big tournaments held on American soil- They did in 1994, the Olympics in Atlanta and SLC, and certainly the 1999 WWC. The 2003 WWC also had a strong media presence, although honestly it was a backup venue so the event couldn't pan out the way the Media wanted it. Even better is that in 1994 many people picked the US to not advance from their group. By 2018, the US would be able to field a side actually able to win a World Cup, considering our forward progress in the sport. You can expect the country to rally around this team far more than the 1994 version, much to Marcelo Balboa's chagrin. Furthermore, 1994 was a moneymaking phenomenon. Now that the US definitely has a footballing culture, you can expect even higher returns here. Even better, the US will have far more SSS's than in 1994, and modern American Football stadiums are usually built with the possibility of Soccer games in mind (Such as LP field in Nashville). As such, it would be easier for the US to adapt to the infrastructure of the World Cup than in 1994, allowing for even more profit. Lastly, this may be sad but while the US economy is still stable (Especially when you consider South Africa), the US dollar is weak. The economy will rebound but the US Dollar won't be at the same value as 1994. In other words, it would be cheaper for fans to travel from overseas. Staying a week in a hotel here in Nashville is nowhere near as expensive as staying in Vienna or Berlin. If fans think that the US provides a good value it will encourage travel, and not be the failure than 2010 looks like it's going to be.
As with most any topic that includes the word "deserves," there's really no correct answer to this question. And so I can already guarantee you this thread will just keep going around in circles, with no satisfying conclusion, until it just kind of peters out. Unless I just unwittingly nipped it in the bud with this very post.
This will sound very biased, but I really can't look past England. - One of the powers of the game, not some backwater like Qatar - It has been a long, long time since we had the World Cup. - The country is football mad. USA is nothing in comparison. - Great climate for summer football. It is simply too hot in places like Cairo and Los Angeles for good football. - Infrastructure already here. Trains, bars and hotels. - No need to build a lot of stadiums. Old Trafford, Emirates, New Anfield, Wembley, St. James', Tottenham's New One and a few more bound to be built in the next few years anyway. We could even use the Rugby stadium Twickenham if necessary. - Short travelling distances. The United States can't offer this, and is very, very important. - It's in Europe too, making it easy for the Euro fans to come along. -
The USA will get the world cup again but not in 2018 / 2022. Do they deserve it at the moment I don't know but I don't think it worth them wasting there money on a bid when I see no change of them hosting a another world cup so soon after they hosted it in 1994. Mexico has already hosted it twice so I would think that would nearly rule them out just for that. England only have hosted it once and that was around 50 years ago so they would have to be in for a good chance. As Australia (for most of you) has a bad time zone I could see that happening they have hosted other world cups including rugby union, rugby league, cricket, and both olympics and commonwealth games and its know to be able to put on a show and deliver. My tip is 2018 England 2022 Australia
Good point. What exactly does it take for a country to "deserve" it? Trying to be objective about it, the only downside I can see is that the games are spread out across the country, making it hard (and expensive) to catch many for alot of people. Thats an obvious negative, and really the only one. As far as solid venues, we obviously have that already. Even more so I would argue than last time around. As far as "deserving" meaning whether or not USA fans should have the "priviledge" (for whatever reason) thats just nonsense. They deserve to host it just as much as any other country.
I say give one of them to England, they wholeheartedly deserve it. I can't give it to Mexico because of the current drug war climate It won't go to an AFC nation because of they would be jumping over Concacaf Going to Russia would bring plenty of questions in the press on how they got it. Belgium and Netherlands should make a bid for the Euro Cup Portual and Spain, England, and the USA are my favorites right now
I hope the US gets to host in 2022, with a European country in 2018. Think of what our national team will look like in '22, 13 years from now. And MLS? If it looks like this after 14 years, just imagine what it could grow to after another 14 years. That's doubling the league's lifetime right now. If MLS is still around after 28 years, then it better be in damn good shape. And if we do get that bid, it'll grow even more, and if the media hasn't already warmed up to soccer by then, with ESPN having their weekly Premiership games on, and highlights on Sportscenter with weekly MLS and Champions League games, then another World Cup will propel the game even further. USA hosting the World Cup in 2022 could possibly be a turning point for the sport in this country, if it hasn't already reached it by that time.
what i hate is everyone bitching about the time periods in a bias manner. europe needs 2018 because if they don't get it till 2022 it would be 16 years with out a cup in europe. i understand, they have the greatest and majority of supporters. then people say give it to australia. well that would most likely be 2022, that means in 20 years asia has had two cups. well what about concacaf. screw us? in 2022 it would be 28 years since concacaf got a cup. it should be england 2018, usa 2022. and a fair rotation would be like this: 2018 uefa 2022 concacaf 2026 afc 2030 uefa 2034 afc 2038 conmebol 2042 uefa and so on
I think England deserves it more than the United States right now because: 1. The United States hosted it in 1994. England last hosted it in 1966. 2. Soccer-loving immigrant/expat communities notwithstanding, the American public is by and large not in tune with soccer. English fans need no introduction to the sport - soccer, or football, is one of England's greatest contributions to humanity. Why is it that "Football's Coming Home" such a popular tune? IMO in part because it's so fitting - the beautiful, royal game returned to its birthplace. 3. England is one of Europe's and the world's most advanced and developed societies, and it already has pretty much most of the necessary infrastructure to host an event like the World Cup. So does the United States, of course - but England will have a strengthened infrastructure thanks to its upcoming hosting of the 2012 Summer Olympics. As I permanently reside in the United States, I would like the World Cup here again - I didn't watch any matches live in 1994 and regret it; I won't make the same mistake the next time the Cup comes to America. But right now, as much as the United States deserves the World Cup (I admit I say this in part for selfish reasons), I think England deserves it even more. I very much hope that the 2018 World Cup goes to England - may football come home again!
Crowds? Yes - due to stadium size. Money? I would say a European World Cup fetches higher valued TV rights (and that counts more than crowd numbers.)
How does the location of the tournament related to the value of the TV rights??? I am not seeing the correlation.
I don't care how often a confederation has hosted, I just thinks its not fair to give it to USA or Mexico because US held one as soon as 94 and Mexico has hosted 2 world cups. If there was another country in CONCACAF that could possibly host a world cup then I would support them. I just think in recent times US has had there turn as host, World Cups should be spread around and I think England deserves to host it before the US because they have not hosted one since 1966 and second I think there supports deserve it. Australia is a long way from Japan there not even in the same Hemisphere as I think the US holding a World Cup in 94 should work against the US more than what a Japan/S Korea hosting the world cup in 2002 would hurt Australia chances
I see your point, we're struggling so much at the moment. Imagine how much worse we'd do if we had to qualify from CONCACAF?
yeah but we claim to be the best in our region, and we proove it. yet the nglish claim to be the best and they are consistantly unconsistant
I was watching Sky sports Today about the England Bid I dont think its strong against the US on the venue side of things. Besides Wembly and Enirates, Old Trafford, what other Big stadia england got? Not to brag but USA got england beat when it comes to venues..... Politically England should have the advantage. they dont have to rely on another country to co host. And Its been Many Years since 1966..... USA has the win-win cause if USA does mot get the '18 it will get the '22. As for the Mainstream of things i think its not a problem, US Soccer will use its developed Latin card and expat card ..
There's no such thing as "Our USA venues are better because we have higher capacity than the English stadiums even though a lot of English stadium are well over 40k as well" It isn't an advantage at all...sure if English stadiums were per say...at 20k capacity...but that isn't the case.
when was a world cup game held at a 20thou stadia? in the last, i dont know 20 yrs? I think if Emgland gets it its because of not hosting it for so long and how are they gonna logisticall prepare after the 2012 olympics.