intoronto Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 Investing money into the Olympic Stadium makes no sense at all. There are no tenants there and that is unlikely to change in the forseeable future. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofan Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 Good for Coderre. There is no way Montreal would host the final. I can't see the World Cup bid not focusing around Toronto, quite frankly. Montreal will be a plan b if anything, depending on if the CSA can't get a Toronto stadium deal in place over the next few years. But it's been well documented that MLSE are in the process of looking at potential sites for an NFL style stadium. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoshi Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 If they had the money after Toronto, it'd be a great chance for Montreal to bite the bullet - convert Olympic Stadium into a museum or something & build a proper outdoor stadium that the city will actually use. Could hold the opener &/or a semi at the WC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 (edited) Good for Coderre. There is no way Montreal would host the final. I can't see the World Cup bid not focusing around Toronto, quite frankly. Montreal will be a plan b if anything, depending on if the CSA can't get a Toronto stadium deal in place over the next few years. But it's been well documented that MLSE are in the process of looking at potential sites for an NFL style stadium. While I think the Bills moving to Toronto is plausible, it's unlikely to happen without significant government involvement in funding. The NFL is able to extort hundreds of millions from US cities to get its stadiums: Minneapolis kicked in $500 million of government funds for their new stadium. Compared to the NFL the IOC is a charity organization. If Toronto and Canada are willing to kick in $600 million CAD to a Stade de France style stadium for the Bills, World Cup and the Olympics, then it might happen. But there's no chance that any NFL team is going to move to Toronto for free. Edited March 22, 2015 by Nacre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofan Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 While I think the Bills moving to Toronto is plausible, it's unlikely to happen without significant government involvement in funding. The NFL is able to extort hundreds of millions from US cities to get its stadiums: Minneapolis kicked in $500 million of government funds for their new stadium. Compared to the NFL the IOC is a charity organization. If Toronto and Canada are willing to kick in $600 million CAD to a Stade de France style stadium for the Bills, World Cup and the Olympics, then it might happen. But there's no chance that any NFL team is going to move to Toronto for free. There's also the option for the stadium to be converted for the Argos of the CFL. The Bills will be staying in Buffalo now that they have been purchased by a local owner. The only thing that might bring them here is if a stadium deal falls through in New York. There's still a chance for the less profitable franchises in places like Jacksonville and Saint Louis (although they look set to be heading to LA) to make the move here, and possible future expansion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted March 22, 2015 Report Share Posted March 22, 2015 If they had the money after Toronto, it'd be a great chance for Montreal to bite the bullet - convert Olympic Stadium into a museum or something & build a proper outdoor stadium that the city will actually use. Could hold the opener &/or a semi at the WC. Montreal does have a proper outdoor stadium, right beside the Olympic Stadium (though it only seats about 20k). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTHarner Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Except football in France is the No1 sport by far ... in the US, football is a minor sport so could easily be overwhelmed by such a major culture event. The US played Brazil on July 4, 1994 and drew one of the largest TV audiences for a soccer match up until that time (though about half of what some US games drew last summer). You obviously are oblivious to how big an event the World Cup has become in the USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatinXTC Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Except Denis Coderre, Mayor of Montreal is pushing for Montreal to be 'the capital' of such a bid, and there is an existing stadium which can be adapted. Talk of a NFL team being in Toronto based on the poor attendance of the Bills games came from people who don't know what they are talking about. Well no one gives a s**t what the mayor of the 2nd most populated city in Canada has to say, there is no way it will upstage Toronto in trying to take the role of the center city for the world cup. And yes, let's use that embarrassment of an Olympic Stadium that the city has invested over a billion dollars and that no one wants to use! I bet the spectators would love to try and squint just to barely be able to see the players since the field is far too big for a soccer/football game! There's also the option for the stadium to be converted for the Argos of the CFL. The Bills will be staying in Buffalo now that they have been purchased by a local owner. The only thing that might bring them here is if a stadium deal falls through in New York. There's still a chance for the less profitable franchises in places like Jacksonville and Saint Louis (although they look set to be heading to LA) to make the move here, and possible future expansion. I hope that any plans in place for a new stadium for the Bufallo Bills will be for an indoor stadium. Anything else would be a waste of time considering how much snow the city gets, as this past season showed they had to relocate one of their games to Detroit because of the snowstorms. And let's not make it an ugly generic football stadium, let's hope it's something that's attractive and rivals that of stadiums around the world. Except football in France is the No1 sport by far ... in the US, football is a minor sport so could easily be overwhelmed by such a major culture event. The US played Brazil on July 4, 1994 and drew one of the largest TV audiences for a soccer match up until that time (though about half of what some US games drew last summer). You obviously are oblivious to how big an event the World Cup has become in the USA. Not only that, the 1994 World Cup in the US still holds the record for the most tickets sold for a world cup, and this is even after the amount of teams playing in the tournament increased from 24 to 32. So if you think the US has little to no interest in the World Cup just because it's behind Baseball, Basketball, and American Football in popularity, you are SO wrong! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) There's also the option for the stadium to be converted for the Argos of the CFL. That still requires government funding, though. The Argonauts don't really need a 70,000 capacity stadium, so there's no reason for them to build one. Whichever way you slice it, Toronto doesn't have a stadium suitable for a World Cup finals, and would need a government funding to construct one. With both an anchor tenant to pay the maintenance costs and contribute a (small) share of the construction costs, that would at least be a defensible plan for Canada and would leave a decent legacy behind. And Canada could use the stadium for the World Cup, Olympics, several Grey Cups and maybe a Super Bowl. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it would not be nearly as bad as the stadiums of South Africa, Brazil, China, etc. Edited March 23, 2015 by Nacre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 That still requires government funding, though. The Argonauts don't really need a 70,000 capacity stadium, so there's no reason for them to build one. Whichever way you slice it, Toronto doesn't have a stadium suitable for a World Cup finals, and would need a government funding to construct one. With both an anchor tenant to pay the maintenance costs and contribute a (small) share of the construction costs, that would at least be a defensible plan for Canada and would leave a decent legacy behind. And Canada could use the stadium for the World Cup, Olympics, several Grey Cups and maybe a Super Bowl. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it would not be nearly as bad as the stadiums of South Africa, Brazil, China, etc. BMO Field is being upgraded with the World Cup as part of the plans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 BMO Field is being upgraded with the World Cup as part of the plans. I thought it could only be expanded to 40,000? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofan Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 I thought it could only be expanded to 40,000? Yes. That meets World Cup capacity requirements. It would be a second Toronto stadium to supplement a proposed 80,000 plus seater centrepiece. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 I thought it could only be expanded to 40,000? Last I checked 40,000 is allowed by FIFA... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Another issue that will need to be considered if the USA bids/wins is 4th July 2026 .... the 250th anniversary. Is the 5th sport in the USA not going to take a backseat to nationwide celebrations? the falls around the date of the Quarter Finals/Semi Finals of the last 3 World Cups so will be something that the USA will need to confront. Except football in France is the No1 sport by far ... in the US, football is a minor sport so could easily be overwhelmed by such a major culture event. Bastille day anniversary would fall on '89, not such a momentous date as the 250th anniversary. As for Qatar, well they had no option considering the nonsense of them being a host Yes, football is a minor sport in the United States. The World Cup, however, has become a major event. Viewing parties pop up all over the place. A lot of people stop what they're doing to tune in. I saw that like I've never seen it before for the Round of 16 USA-Belgium match. Oh, and relative to other popular events in the United States.. U.S. soccer ratings top NBA Finals World Cup 2014: Record U.S. TV ratings sure sign of soccer's rapid growth here Please tell us more about how a World Cup in the United States would take a backseat to anything. As noted, the `94 World Cup (with fewer games than every edition since) still holds the attendance record. So stadiums full of fans are a given (and we have some big ones.. if the 2022 bid is any indication, there probably won't be a venue selection with a capacity less than 65,000). And unlike in 1994, there is an established soccer league in this country, not to mention cable channels full of coverage of other leagues around the world. So soccer certainly has a presence. Americans will never embrace the game the same way as in Europe and South America. It may never reach the popularity level of football or baseball or basketball. But the World Cup is a very big deal in this country. And if it returned here given the growth of soccer in this country in the past 20 years, the event would be a huge success. Major cultural event? Yea, the nation's 250th birthday is a big event, but the World Cup will not be overshadowed by it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Last I checked 40,000 is allowed by FIFA... Yes, but not for the finals stadium. That needs to have at least 70,000 capacity. So that still leaves Toronto with the problem of funding a large new stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reindeer Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 It isn't difficult to get around. Just expensive. To me expensive and time consuming pretty much equals difficult with regards to practicality and availability for most people (the 'general public'). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reindeer Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 I find this post slightly offensive. Canada is not a "backwater" for the sport. We have one of the top ranked women's teams in the world, three of the most popular franchises in Major League Soccer, held the most attended U20 FIFA World Cup in history, and soccer is considered one of the top five most popular sports in the country. Canada is an immigrant nation, and with such a diverse population not only would a World Cup in Canada be sold out, but it would provide one of the better atmosphere's for any tournament in FIFA history. Just look at the previous FIFA events here and the Olympics in 2010. I find it laughable that you would even considering comparing Qatar, which is a disease not only to sport but to the region it's in, with a highly developed nation like Canada. Yes, you are right, Canada isn't like Qatar by any means, although I wasn't making direct comparisons between them. Still I would expect the men's national team to improve a bit before awarding the WC there. What I really wanted to say was that I would hope a better balance between new territories and the traditional powers as hosts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gromit Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Firstly if stadia capacity was the main driver, Russia would never have beaten England, Qatar the USA. Most revenue in a World Cup is not driven by direct ticket sales. The reason organisations.such as the IOC, FIFA etc get upset is they do not want any other non-annual event raining on their parade. Remember what the USA was like in the last big anniversary 1976. With regard to Latin's comment re: the Olympic stadium is like in a number of European stadia with poor sightlines due to a running track, they dig down building a new tier at the lower level and thus improving the view or do what they did with the Juventus Stadium or Leipzig stadium, build a new stadium within an existing external structure. This offsets all issues around planning, accessibility and thisextra expense as it is already there. The stadium could then carry on as it is used today .... Grey Cup, CFL playoffs, big Impact games. Toronto would have no need a major stadium. The Bills are now owned by Terry Petulant who spent $1.4bn to keep them in Buffalo. The City of Toronto have said there will be no public money for a new NFL stadium, so why would they spend money on a WC final stadium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Yes, football is a minor sport in the United States. The World Cup, however, has become a major event. Viewing parties pop up all over the place. A lot of people stop what they're doing to tune in. I saw that like I've never seen it before for the Round of 16 USA-Belgium match. Oh, and relative to other popular events in the United States.. And unlike in 1994, there is an established soccer league in this country, not to mention cable channels full of coverage of other leagues around the world. So soccer certainly has a presence. Am attending 1 or 2 Play-reading scene nights in Berkeley and SF (where writers have 10-minute scenes of their work read) ; and there was this one mousey-looking housewife at the Berkeley night whose one character was an Arsenal fan even though that fact was NOT central to the action of her scene and only muddled its clarity. And this was an American woman and she said that she only included that little backstory because Arsenal was her favorite team!! So, right there is another unquantified testament to the hidden depth of soccer's popularity in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Yes, you are right, Canada isn't like Qatar by any means, although I wasn't making direct comparisons between them. Still I would expect the men's national team to improve a bit before awarding the WC there. What I really wanted to say was that I would hope a better balance between new territories and the traditional powers as hosts. Yea the men's team needs to improve but with the awarding of 2026 before 2018 qualifiers are possibly known (this would make hard for Canada to make a case). To me expensive and time consuming pretty much equals difficult with regards to practicality and availability for most people (the 'general public'). Venue clusters would be the way to go. West would have: Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina and Winnipeg East would have: Torontox2, Ottawa, Montreal, Hamilton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 But between a nation of 30 mil and another one of 310 mil, what political and economic points would anyone make by going with the smaller nation whose soccer teams don't even have a League of their own but are hangers-on to MLS? And don't even say Qatar, because that was a political move and mistake more than anything else. The idea of staging a men's WC in Canada is romantic more than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofan Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Yea the men's team needs to improve but with the awarding of 2026 before 2018 qualifiers are possibly known (this would make hard for Canada to make a case). Venue clusters would be the way to go. West would have: Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina and Winnipeg East would have: Torontox2, Ottawa, Montreal, Hamilton I think 3 stadiums in the GTA is too many. I'd rather see them expose the Eastern provinces too, with a new build in Moncton, Halifax or Quebec City, possibly to attract a CFL team there, as opposed to using Hamilton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
intoronto Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think 3 stadiums in the GTA is too many. I'd rather see them expose the Eastern provinces too, with a new build in Moncton, Halifax or Quebec City, possibly to attract a CFL team there, as opposed to using Hamilton. I would as well, but Hamilton has an existing stadium and is closer to the other sites then the East Coast. But between a nation of 30 mil and another one of 310 mil, what political and economic points would anyone make by going with the smaller nation whose soccer teams don't even have a League of their own but are hangers-on to MLS? And don't even say Qatar, because that was a political move and mistake more than anything else. The idea of staging a men's WC in Canada is romantic more than anything else. "what political and economic points would anyone make by going with the smaller nation whose soccer teams don't even have a League of their own but are hangers-on to MLS?" One of the reasons the USA was awarded 1994 is because they didn't have a league, and the World Cup would be a springboard into creating one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 Firstly if stadia capacity was the main driver, Russia would never have beaten England, Qatar the USA. Most revenue in a World Cup is not driven by direct ticket sales. The reason organisations.such as the IOC, FIFA etc get upset is they do not want any other non-annual event raining on their parade. Remember what the USA was like in the last big anniversary 1976. Didn't stop the IOC from awarding the 1976 Winter Olympics to Denver. And it's not like their dropping out had anything to do with being upstaged. Whatever July 4th celebrations go on that year will be a big event, but it's not like it's a year-long celebration. It's going to be confined to that one weekend and that's probably it. It's a small concern for FIFA, but not something where I could see many voters using it as an excuse not to vote for the United States if they want them as the host Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted March 23, 2015 Report Share Posted March 23, 2015 "what political and economic points would anyone make by going with the smaller nation whose soccer teams don't even have a League of their own but are hangers-on to MLS?" One of the reasons the USA was awarded 1994 is because they didn't have a league, and the World Cup would be a springboard into creating one. Yes, and look what it did for the profile of the sport here in the country, not to mention the popularity of the World Cup. But are they going to see similar effects by awarding a World Cup to Canada? Particular where, as noted, their 3 most prominent cities already have franchises in the US-based league. Not sure what FIFA would gain from having a World Cup in Canada. The Women's World Cup makes a ton of sense there. It's a smaller event, but the women's team has had success in the sport. And on the men's side, that's not to say that Canada needs to have more success before they should be considered as host. Much as we talk about with the Summer Olympics, the problem is that they're next door to the United States, so if the 2 are in the running together, to me that's a no-brainer whom FIFA would prefer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.