Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Mercator

The World Cups to come.....

Recommended Posts

The USA maybe in 2050... Firstly other countries want to repeat (like the USA does with the Games: repeat and repeat): England, Chile, Brazil, Spain, Argentina... And of course China and Australia want to make their debut so... :suspect:

Mikel, out of those 7 nations you mentioned, 4 are south of the equator.  After 2010 and 2014, I don't think you're going to see another WC in the south again after 20 years.  

I am going to print all your posts re the US hosting again, and we shall see.  I still say 2018; or if NYC gets 2016, then maybe 2022 for the next US WC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexico doesn't have the security or finance, Canada doesn't have the popularity of the game, and the lowly rated national team.

You are wrong, im not going to discuss this, but you are saying something about you are not sure.

Mexico can host (im not saying that we are going to host), we have the money, and the infrestructure.

If I'm right in reading the FIFA rankings correctly, the hosting of the 2010 World Cup in South Africa will have the host team with the "lowest-ranking" one so far to host one. Of course, that will depend on how the SA team does, before the 2010 tournament begins. Right now, it is at 39th. place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The USA maybe in 2050... Firstly other countries want to repeat (like the USA does with the Games: repeat and repeat): England, Chile, Brazil, Spain, Argentina... And of course China and Australia want to make their debut so... :suspect:

Mikel, out of those 7 nations you mentioned, 4 are south of the equator.  After 2010 and 2014, I don't think you're going to see another WC in the south again after 20 years.  

I am going to print all your posts re the US hosting again, and we shall see.  I still say 2018; or if NYC gets 2016, then maybe 2022 for the next US WC.

Emm England is waiting to host since 2006 and they are better playing football than the USA so... 2018 will be for them :sleepy:

And a lot of "nations of the South" like you have said are also better than the USA and should repeat hosting before the USA :rolleyes:  :suspect:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At 22 and such an 'expert'?   You have a long way to go, Mikel.  :rolleyes:

Like you baroncete, like you...

You aren't an 'expert'...

I only see that REAL FOOTBALL in only played in Europe and Southamerica: no in the USA!!! So it's not fair to give the USA 2 WC in 20 years!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At 22 and such an 'expert'?   You have a long way to go, Mikel.  :rolleyes:

Like you baroncete, like you...

You aren't an 'expert'...

I only see that REAL FOOTBALL in only played in Europe and Southamerica: no in the USA!!! So it's not fair to give the USA 2 WC in 20 years!!!!

Baron, you can hardly claim to be an expert either when you asked us to explain the differences between Euro 2004 and the Champions League in another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At 22 and such an 'expert'?   You have a long way to go, Mikel.  :rolleyes:

Like you baroncete, like you...

You aren't an 'expert'...

I only see that REAL FOOTBALL in only played in Europe and Southamerica: no in the USA!!! So it's not fair to give the USA 2 WC in 20 years!!!!

Baron, you can hardly claim to be an expert either when you asked us to explain the differences between Euro 2004 and the Champions League in another thread.

i have to agree with Robert ,Baron The WC and FIFA is diferent from olympic bussiness, theres a lot historic importance, the FIFA has more mellancollic and familiar ambient, they are not so radical as Jaques Rogge :laugh:

So USA is never going to be a power in soccer, the soccer power nations are:

-CONMEBOL (even if they feell they are the best, they have certain space in FIFA´S heart)

--Europe (Including UEFA tournaments, the most important tournaments in the world, you can ignore the legacy and the historic importance of England, France, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So USA is never going to be a power in soccer

I don't agree with this. I think given ten or twenty years the USA could have one of the best national teams in the world. It has a big enough population and is obviously a very wealthy country. The progress it has made over the past decade is great.

The US, because of its wealth and population is, IMHO, probably the only country in the world capable of sustaining a world class national team in a sport which is otherwise not "mainstream" or very widely followed. I really wouldn't be surprised to see the USA seriously challenging for world cups in the future. I hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was talking in a sentimental way, in tradition, USA wont be a power as england or brazil.

USA is like the Asian soccer, they have improved a lot, but they dont have the passion, the sentimentall tradition, and the fifa love like england, france, mexico, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was talking in a sentimental way, in tradition, USA wont be a power as england or brazil.

USA is like the Asian soccer, they have improved a lot, but they dont have the passion, the sentimentall tradition, and the fifa love like england, france, mexico, etc.

Ah, I agree with you on that point. That's why I said

"the US, because of its wealth and population is, IMHO, probably the only country in the world capable of sustaining a world class national team in a sport which is otherwise not "mainstream" or very widely followed"

For those who follow it in the US I'm sure it's as important to them as it is to an English or Italian fan. I'm not comparing individuals here. But football is so much more than a sport in its traditional pastures - and I can't see it being anything more than an also-ran in the US behind baseball, basketball etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

Its hard to  see why the FIFA takes the WC to places like south africa, when Europe has all the passion.

You have to agree with me robert that for Europeans and Americans(Mexicans, south-american), soccer is part of our lives, we grow up watching soccer, soccer players become part of the public life, soccer is everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i was talking in a sentimental way, in tradition, USA wont be a power as england or brazil.

USA is like the Asian soccer, they have improved a lot, but they dont have the passion, the sentimentall tradition, and the fifa love like england, france, mexico, etc.

it's a question of time.. the childrens which are starting play soccer in US will play in american teams.. US will become the new frontier for many great soccer player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the WC was to ever come back to the US, here's a potential list of venues that could host the next US World Cup:

Philadelphia (Lincoln Financial Field - 68,500)

lincolnfinancial2.jpg

Foxborough (Gillete Stadium - 68,000)

gillettestadium1.jpg

Washington DC (FedEx Field - 80,000)

fedex1.jpg

Chicago (Soldier Field - 61,000)

soldierfield2.jpg

New York (Giants Stadium - 80,200)

giants2.jpg

Houston (Reliant Stadium - 69,500)

reliantstadium1.jpg

Seattle (Qwest Stadium - 67,000)

qwestfield3.jpg

Orlando (Citrus Bowl - 70,000)

citrus.jpg

Glendale (New Cardinals Stadium (2006) - 63,000)

cardinalsnew3.jpg

Pasadena (Rose Bowl - 120,000)

Rosebowl1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i was talking in a sentimental way, in tradition, USA wont be a power as england or brazil.

USA is like the Asian soccer, they have improved a lot, but they dont have the passion, the sentimentall tradition, and the fifa love like england, france, mexico, etc.

Remember what happened to Mexico vs the USA, in the round of 16 games in WC 2002? ???  :unclesam:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All over the minimum (I think it's) 45,000 for the qualifying venues.  And they're all in place by 2006.  They don't have to be planned and built.  

Plus, ThrillosAG, thanks for posting those, there is the other soccer only field at the Home Depot Center in Carson, CA - used in the 2003 Women's FIFA World Cup Finals.  And there will also be either the new Stanford Stadium or the new 49er Stadium for the Bay Area.  

And I wonder why David Beckham has launched his new soccer-related business in the U.S.?  Because they are all hicks who know nothing about the game?  Why it's only #10 in the world with 193 other nations following it?  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So USA is never going to be a power in soccer

I don't agree with this. I think given ten or twenty years the USA could have one of the best national teams in the world. It has a big enough population and is obviously a very wealthy country. The progress it has made over the past decade is great.

The US, because of its wealth and population is, IMHO, probably the only country in the world capable of sustaining a world class national team in a sport which is otherwise not "mainstream" or very widely followed. I really wouldn't be surprised to see the USA seriously challenging for world cups in the future. I hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised.  :)

Agreed, Robert.  As a matter of fact before FIFA announced that they might assign the succeeding WC hosts by rotation, the USoccer did target 2018 to get the WC back and have the US team be the finalist.  But 2018 is still up for grabs.

You guys do recall that the USOC exceeded its medal goals for the 2002 Winter Games by I think, 1 extra silver and 1 extra bronze.

US-style football will always be #1 in the US because it is more exciting to watch and is a home-grown game.  (I personally don't watch or understand the game.)  But with a large enough migrant population and certainly awareness of what else is happening in the world, traditional style-football will gain a sizeable enough following in the US.  I'm surprised the women's game has been phenomenal.  

And they just added one more team to the MLS, oddly enough, Chivas Salt Lake City.  And Beckham has hinted he may want to play here as well.  Most tickets to the 1994 matches were sold out a year in advance - like 85% I think.  Can you imagine what the next one will be like?  

Also, the 1984 men's soccer finals at the LA OLympics, between France and Brazil, I believe holds the record of the highest paid attendance for an actual Olympic competition event at -- will have to check my book at home -- nearly 100,000 attendees.  And the US wasn't even in that game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckham said that he will retire in Real Madrid, keep dreaming about MLS baron, i have watched some games and is not the half of exciting of Champions League or Mexican league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the point is there is the infrastructure (and pretty much everything else) in place for the next World Cup in the US whenever FIFA deigns to assign it.  THat's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All over the minimum (I think it's) 45,000 for the qualifying venues.  And they're all in place by 2006.  They don't have to be planned and built.  

Plus, ThrillosAG, thanks for posting those, there is the other soccer only field at the Home Depot Center in Carson, CA - used in the 2003 Women's FIFA World Cup Finals.  And there will also be either the new Stanford Stadium or the new 49er Stadium for the Bay Area.  

And I wonder why David Beckham has launched his new soccer-related business in the U.S.?  Because they are all hicks who know nothing about the game?  Why it's only #10 in the world with 193 other nations following it?  :rolleyes:

Yeah I knew about Stanford Stadium & the stadium in Carson but I just simply forgot to post a pic for them.  As for the 49ers new stadium, I couldn't find a drawing/rendering for it (I don't suppose you might have one available  :;): ). There's tons of World Cup worthy stadiums in the US that could host a couple matches.  Its basically up to US Soccer as to which venues are going to host if and when the WC comes back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the point is there is the infrastructure (and pretty much everything else) in place for the next World Cup in the US whenever FIFA deigns to assign it.  THat's all.

Baron, yo didnt understand..FIFA is not about money, they already have the money, and of course they care about the venues but thats have been a problem in a WC.

Worl Cup bids are different from Olympic bids, FIFA has a lot of sentimental reasons, they are not just about money like the IOC.

From everything else, im sure that USA can host an incredible WC, but why are the sentimentall reasons to host!!.¿money?..every WC is redituable. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When FIFA came to the US in 1994, the event was so popular here that it spawned the MLS.  Now 10 years after and the MLS is thriving and starting to expand to other markets here in the US (Chivas & Salt Lake being two of the newest markets).  So one good reason for FIFA to bring the WC back would be to further broaden the popularity of the game here and strenghen the MLS investment made over 10 years ago.

Soccer/Football in terms of popularity is growing in leaps and bounds in the US basically because of World Cup 94.  To bring back the World Cup in the future would further push the popularity of the game here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the point is there is the infrastructure (and pretty much everything else) in place for the next World Cup in the US whenever FIFA deigns to assign it.  THat's all.

Baron, yo didnt understand..FIFA is not about money, they already have the money, and of course they care about the venues but thats have been a problem in a WC.

Worl Cup bids are different from Olympic bids, FIFA has a lot of sentimental reasons, they are not just about money like the IOC.

From everything else, im sure that USA can host an incredible WC, but why are the sentimentall reasons to host!!.¿money?..every WC is redituable. :)

well, mex,  FIFA sure didn't blink an eye when China could not keep its pledge to host the 2003 Women's World Cup a few months before the event; and so FIFA came running back to the athletically-impaired USA for a hastily-put-together meet?  I mean, the pangs of regret FIFA must've suffered in that decision.  

This sporting crap u & Mikel spout is just bullsh*t!!  The US is #10, for God's sakes.  There are 193 OTHER countries behind it; including Italy AND Greece.  South Africa, host for 2010, is #39.  So what are you babbling about?  

Enough w/ these minus-20 somethings!!  :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, the point is there is the infrastructure (and pretty much everything else) in place for the next World Cup in the US whenever FIFA deigns to assign it.  THat's all.

Baron, yo didnt understand..FIFA is not about money, they already have the money, and of course they care about the venues but thats have been a problem in a WC.

Worl Cup bids are different from Olympic bids, FIFA has a lot of sentimental reasons, they are not just about money like the IOC.

From everything else, im sure that USA can host an incredible WC, but why are the sentimentall reasons to host!!.¿money?..every WC is redituable. :)

well, mex,  FIFA sure didn't blink an eye when China could not keep its pledge to host the 2003 Women's World Cup a few months before the event; and so FIFA came running back to the athletically-impaired USA for a hastily-put-together meet?  I mean, the pangs of regret FIFA must've suffered in that decision.  

This sporting crap u & Mikel spout is just bullsh*t!!  The US is #10, for God's sakes.  There are 193 OTHER countries behind it; including Italy AND Greece.  South Africa, host for 2010, is #39.  So what are you babbling about?  

Enough w/ these minus-20 somethings!!  :angry:

well..Mexico is in 6th place in FIFA ranking!!.xD

Everyone knows that the FIFA ranking is not real, i mean Czech Republic #2?..cmon!!..and spain never wins nothing..so the ranking is not for been taken seriously.

cal down baron...this is just an internet board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When FIFA came to the US in 1994, the event was so popular here that it spawned the MLS

That argument doesn't hold any water Thrillos. FIFA gave the USA the world cup on the condition that that they'd set up a domestic league as before 1996, one didn't exist.

Link

After intensive lobbying by U.S. Soccer - FIFA awarded the 1994 World Cup to the United States on the condition that a 1st division professional league would be established - and on December 17, 1993 - to fulfill that promise, World Cup USA 1994 Chairman Alan I. Rothenberg, announced the formation of Major League Soccer.

So, MLS was the reason the world cup was awarded, not the other way around!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...