Jump to content

England still going for 2018 WC?!


Recommended Posts

I see 2018 being played in Boston, Chicago, New York/NJ, Philadelphia, the DC area, Columbus, Dallas, Miami or Tampa, San Francisco and Los Angeles.

The finals will either be at the Rose Bowl again (nearly 93,000) or the new 80,000 Giants stadium in the Meadowlands, NJ.  

Attendance will top the the RECORD-BREAKING 1994 attendance of 3,577,000+ - still unbroken by any succeeding World Cup!

:unclesam:

Dreeeeeaam! Dream! Dream! Dream!

Dream is free, then continue dreaming! :upside:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The United States should stick to its baseball, softball and other American sports. Soccer will never be a 'big' sport in the states. The 1994 WC did nothing to enhance soccers reputation in the states.

The U.S. may be ~6 in the world in the FIFA rankings, but that is based on games played against 'their' opposition... the United States opposition in the North America region isn't exactly quality teams. Put the U.S. against any of the major European teams, even Belgium, and they would struggle. These rankings are misleading.

Football's home is Europe, it is played there with passion & enthusiasm, the same cant be said for the U.S. of 'we want every sports tournament... because we are the USA". Uhh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The United States should stick to its baseball, softball and other American sports. Soccer will never be a 'big' sport in the states. The 1994 WC did nothing to enhance soccers reputation in the states.

The U.S. may be ~6 in the world in the FIFA rankings, but that is based on games played against 'their' opposition... the United States opposition in the North America region isn't exactly quality teams. Put the U.S. against any of the major European teams, even Belgium, and they would struggle. These rankings are misleading.

Football's home is Europe, it is played there with passion & enthusiasm, the same cant be said for the U.S. of 'we want every sports tournament... because we are the USA". Uhh.

Exactly, baron! Read it! :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

The United States should stick to its baseball, softball and other American sports. Soccer will never be a 'big' sport in the states. The 1994 WC did nothing to enhance soccers reputation in the states.

The U.S. may be ~6 in the world in the FIFA rankings, but that is based on games played against 'their' opposition... the United States opposition in the North America region isn't exactly quality teams. Put the U.S. against any of the major European teams, even Belgium, and they would struggle. These rankings are misleading.

Football's home is Europe, it is played there with passion & enthusiasm, the same cant be said for the U.S. of 'we want every sports tournament... because we are the USA". Uhh.

That is one of the most absurd things I ever heard from you, Michelle.  

Then why did FIFA place 2 successive Women's WORLD CUPS in the US - 1999 and 2003?  

Going by your and Rob's thinking, then, let's pick a few sports at random:  

- Figure Skating should always be split:  women's in the US, pairs & dance in Russia, and the men's can be given to whichever country is ahead.

- Bocce should never leave Italy;

Parcheesi should never leave Persia or Iran; Snookers should never be played outside India;

- Ski jumping should always stay in Finland.

- Swimming should always stay in the U.S., etc., etc...

The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community; of being one world.  But hey, if that's not your idea of making this a better one -- then please, don't let me stop you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The United States should stick to its baseball, softball and other American sports. Soccer will never be a 'big' sport in the states. The 1994 WC did nothing to enhance soccers reputation in the states.

The U.S. may be ~6 in the world in the FIFA rankings, but that is based on games played against 'their' opposition... the United States opposition in the North America region isn't exactly quality teams. Put the U.S. against any of the major European teams, even Belgium, and they would struggle. These rankings are misleading.

Football's home is Europe, it is played there with passion & enthusiasm, the same cant be said for the U.S. of 'we want every sports tournament... because we are the USA". Uhh.

That is one of the most absurd things I ever heard from you, Michelle.  

Then why did FIFA place 2 successive Women's WORLD CUPS in the US - 1999 and 2003?  

Going by your and Rob's thinking, then, let's pick a few sports at random:  

- Figure Skating should always be split:  women's in the US, pairs & dance in Russia, and the men's can be given to whichever country is ahead.

- Bocce should never leave Italy;

Parcheesi should never leave Persia or Iran; Snookers should never be played outside India;

- Ski jumping should always stay in Finland.

- Swimming should always stay in the U.S., etc., etc...

The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community; of being one world.  But hey, if that's not your idea of making this a better one -- then please, don't let me stop you.

Started supporting Canada 2018 have we Baron?

Also, your comparisons with other sports are ridiculous, and you know it! Nobody is saying the world cup should "always" be in Europe as your comparisons suggest.

Many of us, however, are saying it shouldn't frequently go to the US as there are more deserving countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of us, however, are saying it shouldn't frequently go to the US as there are more deserving countries.

#1 - OK, other countries.  But can they afford this extravaganza?   Short of the last 2 host countries and France, who can finance this in a sane manner?  The US has all the suitable sites and will have a few new venues coming up in the next few years.  

#2 - Timing and apportionment-wise, 2018 seems the opportune time to bring it around to North America again.  Let me remind you of the rotation again so far:

1990 - EUROPE (Italy)

1994 - No. AMERICA (USA)

1998 - EUROPE (France)

2002 - ASIA (Korea/Japan)

2006 - EUROPE (Germany)

2010 - AFRICA (RSA)

2014 - supposedly So. AMERICA

-- so why not NO. AMERICA again?  THe last time was, from 2018,  24 years ago!  That is time enough to bring it back.

[Canada is NOT a viable host.  If you speak of quality of soccer, let's not even GO there.  #2 - We can nitpick again, if you want -- but I don't believe there are at least 9 large enough cities to host the World Cup events -- if the WC even just stays at 32 teams.]

I just feel that 2018 is time again for a continent/region where there is such great promise -- and if you don't bring it back here, then the sport will never take hold.  So, in other words, for your (Euro) own selfish reasons, you just want to keep it 'at home.'

I guess we will argue this until 2011,  I can go on if you want...  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not?

I speak of the US/No. America v. UK/Europe as a grouping.  Is it our fault that from I have told you, that the US is the most suitable host; and that there are only 3 possible but NOT realistically viable hosts in CONCACAF vs. so many countries crammed (of which maybe the big 5 + Russia, can host) into your Euro division?

Remember, those are FIFA's own world break-ups; not mine.

Also, I just did a count of FIFA's OFFICIAL Partners on their webpage.  Right now, there are 15 Official Partners.  I don't know where Adidas is based, and which "Continental" they call an Official Partner (it doesn't appear to be Continental Airlines); but of the 15, 7 are definitely US.  (Avaya Communications, Budweiser, Coca-Cola, Gilette (now swallowed up by P&G), MasterCard, McDonald's and Yahoo!)  There's also Deutsche Telecomm, Fuji Film, Toshiba, Phillips, Hyundai and the other aforementioned 2.  So Japan and Germany are 2 a piece (counting Adidas as a German corporation), and one each from Korea and the Netherlands.  But there isn't a SINGLE British Official Partner there.

I don't know if that will change in the coming years, but that I believe plays an important role in the choice of the prospective host, too.  Do a little arithmetic there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not?

I speak of the US/No. America v. UK/Europe as a grouping.  Is it our fault that from I have told you, that the US is the most suitable host; and that there are only 3 possible but NOT realistically viable hosts in CONCACAF vs. so many countries crammed (of which maybe the big 5 + Russia, can host) into your Euro division?

Remember, those are FIFA's own world break-ups; not mine.

I speak of the US/No. America v. UK/Europe as a grouping.  Is it our fault that from I have told you, that the US is the most suitable host; and that there are only 3 possible but NOT realistically viable hosts in CONCACAF vs. so many countries crammed (of which maybe the big 5 + Russia, can host) into your Euro division?

Exactly my point. It's not your (the USA's) fault obviously and the USA should bid if they want it again. I'm not saying they shouldn't. But it is up to FIFA to correct this imbalance in their rotation system. My suggestion is to give Europe every third world cup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But see -- you see it as 1 of many countries in your division trying to break out of your Group.  I see the hosting honors as a continental rotation as they are trying to do and have so indicated.   I mean, Blatter 6 years ago already wanted to give 2006 to So. Africa until the "generous" New Zealander threw it Germany's way.  But he gets the FIFA Executive Board to narrow the 2010 choices to Africa; and very strongly hints now that Brazil will get 2014 -- and maybe deservedly so.  So why not keep going?

See, I don't buy the double-speak of both FIFA and the IOC about "no continental rotation."  I believe they just say this -- or this is what their PR doctors have told them to say -- just so their backs aren't up against the wall, there is the element of uncertainty, and it lets the various NOCs and FIFA states in a constant state of conflict (the "divide and conquer" rule), exactly as we are doing.  But it's all doublespeak.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community.

Your interpretation of this 'global village sharing' idea is about giving the U.S. its "fair share" ... when the United States already has and always will have its fair share regarding sports tournaments.

I just think its a lot to ask, for FIFA to award the 2018 WC to the United States, 24 years after they already hosted. No other country on the planet would have the audacity to think like this, so why should the U.S.?

Its not even a global player on the soccer front. Maybe in womens soccer, but really, who cares about that in the grand scheme of things? Womens soccer cant be compared to mens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community.

Your interpretation of this 'global village sharing' idea is about giving the U.S. its "fair share" ... when the United States already has and always will have its fair share regarding sports tournaments.

I just think its a lot to ask, for FIFA to award the 2018 WC to the United States, 24 years after they already hosted. No other country on the planet would have the audacity to think like this, so why should the U.S.?

Its not even a global player on the soccer front. Maybe in womens soccer, but really, who cares about that in the grand scheme of things? Womens soccer cant be compared to mens.

Good post Michelle. No one of the European-footballer countries think in host every 24 years and the USA does?  :D Baron, continue dreaming until 2011... :upside:

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, Rob.  I gave you my thoughts re Canada.

Mexico, they've had it twice.  

Need I say more?

Well, the second Mexican hosting rights was an alternate choice then. I think Columbia was the intended host in 1986.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community.

Your interpretation of this 'global village sharing' idea is about giving the U.S. its "fair share" ... when the United States already has and always will have its fair share regarding sports tournaments.

I just think its a lot to ask, for FIFA to award the 2018 WC to the United States, 24 years after they already hosted. No other country on the planet would have the audacity to think like this, so why should the U.S.?

Its not even a global player on the soccer front. Maybe in womens soccer, but really, who cares about that in the grand scheme of things? Womens soccer cant be compared to mens.

Wow!  What a sexist remark!  Well, from your narrow POV, the women's game doesn't matter -- and for FIFA, it matters.  And see, we are more Equal Opporuntunity in the US, so the women get a fair shake here.  But if you're happy to be living in Belgium and Europe, then you deserve it, Michelle.

And no, it's not a lot to ask considering how big the US market is and the returns it brings to these tournaments.  So it's only proporionate returns for proportionate input.  

Let's see if even the 2010 Africa figures can top 1994 USA's statistics.  I already know Germany can't match the US attendance figures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is to SPREAD them around equitably so that the world...ever heard of something called the global village...so we have this sense of community.

Your interpretation of this 'global village sharing' idea is about giving the U.S. its "fair share" ... when the United States already has and always will have its fair share regarding sports tournaments.

I just think its a lot to ask, for FIFA to award the 2018 WC to the United States, 24 years after they already hosted. No other country on the planet would have the audacity to think like this, so why should the U.S.?

Its not even a global player on the soccer front. Maybe in womens soccer, but really, who cares about that in the grand scheme of things? Womens soccer cant be compared to mens.

Wow!  What a sexist remark!  Well, from your narrow POV, the women's game doesn't matter -- and for FIFA, it matters.  And see, we are more Equal Opporuntunity in the US, so the women get a fair shake here.  But if you're happy to be living in Belgium and Europe, then you deserve it, Michelle.

And no, it's not a lot to ask considering how big the US market is and the returns it brings to these tournaments.  So it's only proporionate returns for proportionate input.  

Let's see if even the 2010 Africa figures can top 1994 USA's statistics.  I already know Germany can't match the US attendance figures.

This has nothing to do with attendance figures. Is that how we evaluate whether something is a huge success? More people attended the Atlanta Games compared to the previous Games in Barcelona, did that make Atlanta a "success"?

And anyway, I think the people attending the World Cup in the United States confused soccer with American football. Only when the teams scored a goal they realised...

"Isn't that a touchdown?"

"omg, so they like Kick the ball into a net? Oh I get it now"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I am all for inclusivity in sport. But there are some sports, football being one of them, that women dont seem to excel or excite me to watch them. I have to be honest.

An example being the recent European championships in England. Playing in front of near empty stadia. Unfortunately football is bias towards men, but many would argue with good reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This has nothing to do with attendance figures. Is that how we evaluate whether something is a huge success? More people attended the Atlanta Games compared to the previous Games in Barcelona, did that make Atlanta a "success"?

And anyway, I think the people attending the World Cup in the United States confused soccer with American football. Only when the teams scored a goal they realised...

"Isn't that a touchdown?"

"omg, so they like Kick the ball into a net? Oh I get it now"

Of course, it does.  Atlanta was a success in my book.  Stupid, bitter, negative people think otherwise -- but I don't care, and I think they are stupid, bitter, negative poops.

About your condesceding remarks re football, please don't be even more stupid!

I see World Cup 2018 coming back to the U.S.  THe finals will either be in Los ANgeles again or in the New York area.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Who will compete against England?

I think we need to know that before judging Englands chances

Suposedly the USA and China. And maybe Spain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...