Take a minute and really think about this -- don't just hit a button reflexively. The US will likely host again in either 2014 or 2018. Will the continued development of our youth players and the enormous advantage for the home side result in a US victory?
If FIFA sticks with the rotation system, South America would be the next in line for the tournament, so this point is very valid. I would expect 2018.
After Africa in 2010 and South America in 2014, it will be time for Europe again in 2018. We'll be lucky to get it in 2022, because Asia, Canada, and Mexico will want it too. FIFA never did give any details to the rotation system they will use. Brazil, Italy, Mexico, and Spain all failed to win at home. Unlike '94 we will earn our seeding when we next host. In thinking about it, if we are too much of a threat, FIFA might vote for Canada or Mexico!
I doubt FIFA would want to have two World Cups back to back in the Americas. I know UEFA would not approve of it. Also Mexico will host it before the U.S
By that logic, IASocFan, South America may never host again since Argentina and Brazil are always threats to win. And frankly VS I'll be very surprised to see Mexico get WC number three before a few others get #2
If you look at this page which makes it easy to see all the cups in order, you will see there is no "rotation" for one thing. No rule holds true for the history of the cup. BTW: The cup has been in No. America 3 times with 2 of those being Mexico. Hardly seems likely they would choose Mexico again for a very long time. http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/en/pf/h/pwc/index.html
Just kidding, VS. That's actually an interesting question/point. Mexico could very well get it, but who ever said FIFA was fair? Based on the success of world-wide events here, especially in the last 15-20 years, the U.S. could likely get it anyways. I'm thinking specifically of the men's and women's World Cups, and the Olympics. And that doesn't just mean successful in terms of running the events successfully, it also means from a financial standpoint. It's bound to be a resounding financial success if we do it. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be extremely successful in Mexico. But as far as the ability to put on a successful event, I think the U.S. would rank favorably against Mexico. The biggest difficulty would be the huge hassles involved in connection with terrorism counter-measures that would have to be implemented, on top of what's already in place. It would make it really hard on visitors coming here. That would be a hassle for Mexico, too, but I doubt they would have to worry about it to the extent we would. But even if Mexico wanted it, they'd have to sell it to FIFA. If Mexico could offer a package comparable to what the U.S. could put together, then maybe they'd get it over the U.S.A. However, I really don't think Mexico could offer what the U.S. can.
True. It's almost like the US is gearing up for a serious run at a World Cup without even knowing it. Invesco in Denver, Gillette in Boston, Reliant in Houston, the new one in Seattle....all brand new, large, world-class stadiums that would be perfect for World Cup matches. And there are more coming within the next 10 years, I'm sure. I don't see Mexico or Canada offering what the US can in terms of infrastructure, stadia, transportation, etc.
It doesnt hurt to try The FMF is allready making deals to try and host another World Cup. As we speak three new Football Stadiums are beign built and the Jalisco along with the Azteca Stadium have been upgraded. The FMF even met with FIFA officials (Last Year) to discuss their intentions. Joseph S. Blatter was in Mexico last month to hear out the FMF's offer. Blatter confirmed that the 2010 was for Africa and the 2014 for South America, However he didnt discard the idea of Mexico beign Back up Host.
Re: Re: Will the US Win the World Cup the Next Time We Host Ding ding ding -- we have a winner. FIFA can't wait to get it back in the US where they know they'll make (another) fortune.
now come on, will it be that much difference if the WC is held in Canada? The banners will just have to say, "go USA, eh".
Yeah, FIFA has never used a rotation for one thing, but if you pulled your head out of your ass and read some articles now and then you'd realize that they just started rotating the Cup. BTW, do they rotate between continents, or conferences? I can't think of too many places where the difference would affect things, but i'm still curious.
Home field advantage is having support in the stands. However being the host is a greater advantage. The host gets calls. No host team has failed to make it to the second round. Look at the US in 94. Were we really good enough to make the second round. I dont think so. Will Korea achieve the second round in Germany. I dont think so . No knock on Korea.
If you pulled your head out of your ass and read some articles you wouldn't be asking this question. Just look at the bids if you want to understand the truth about this rotation "mysery" that you seem to think is now set in stone as a "rotation".
If MLS survives, we're going to be one of the darkhorses to win the whole thing in 2010. If we make the semis in 2006(not likely), we'll jump from darkhorse to one of the favorites for 2010. In conclusion, yes.
Africa will host in 2010 and 6 nations have bid. The continetal rotation is only solid if there is a bidder in the area who can show they can do all that is needed to host. Those who are looking to Europe again will have to wait an awfully long time and considering that Mexico has hosted twice already in the not too distant past, you can look for another WC in the US in the not too distant future. There has been some talk of another WC with co-hosts with Central American nations but that may just be talk and a hope. Not that bad an idea if Central America is ever to get their chance. Canada is not out of the question either, of course.
One of the better observations made... SA is in turmoil and from what I have heard there best proposal is a joint WC involving 4 nations (neither of which is Brazil or Argentina) I think it was Peru, Chile, Colombia, and Bolivia however I might be mistaken on the idenentitiy of the nations... So then there is a need for a Host Nation that can catere to the SA public, put on a good show, and make FIFA some dough and that is Mexico... We already have put on two of the better WC's in history, We are a pritty good tourist destination and we know how to handle them, and our economy is weaker than the american one but is not that far down so it can rake in a small fortune for FIFA. Then if FIFA want to really repay the SA people then maybe go with 2014 to the USA after all if you cant give SA a WC the next best thing to do is give them two in their own Hemisphere. But that would be a long shot considering that if both where to happen there could be a distinct possibilty of CONCACAF coming out of it with 2WC's. Another reason why Mexico might happen is Blatter might be just as ignorant as some other Euros and think Mexico is part of SA...
Hell, if Korea could make it to the Semis, then anythings possible. It's silly to ask, since the host should always be considered a contender or dark horse at the very least. But think about it this way...what's more likely to happen , US winning a world cup, or Brazil winning another one (or frankly, the "WC elite country club" - comprising of Germany, Italy, Argentina, and Brazil and who have won 13 of the 17 World Cups -winning the next 4 world cups)? The question has been asked soooooo many times already, anyway. I'd worry more about having a financially sound and entertaining domestic league than winning a world cup. (unless MLS wanted to cut to 8 teams ...so they would finally make a profit!?!)
That's not as crazy as you might think.. Look how they list CONCACAF's region on the Official Site for WC 2006 on the page on the slots.. http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com/en/021218/4/77.html