woohooitsme83 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Athensfan - China Baron - Canada Both nations have a strong youth following. Both nations are capable of hosting. Both members think that the sport is dead (or will be) in the nation. Both members think there is little interest in the nation. Both members think the national team sucks (but did ya ever consider how the World Cup could act as motivation?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) Yeah Baron shut up. Canada has one of the largest youth programs in the world, and the women's team is one of the top teams in the entire world. The sport is alive and well in Canada and will only continue to spike upward. O, shut up yourself. You only have 35 million people vs. 314 million for the US, right now. Your numbers pale in comparison. Of the 19 MLS teams, how many Canadians are there? 2. What the F*ck are u guys talking about? U're 1st and foremost a hockey nation. Who're u kidding? Edited July 19, 2014 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Don't always count on TV viewership. Youngsters today have today have discovered more than one way to watch. Maybe people in Canada like having football/soccer match party/get-togethers. How are companies suppose to count that? Besides, you can't blame the Canadians, would most Americans still be watching if the USMNT didn't make it to the WC? nvm. read your post incorrectly But still, were ALL of those 314 million watching? Are they ALL interested? Are they old enough to understand? *are they all old enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) But still, were ALL of those 314 million watching? Are they ALL interested? Are they old enough to understand? *are they all old enough Who said anything about 314 million watching?? Read my post again. That is just like all your baseless accusations against me. I really should stop posting on this site. Sigh. Edited July 19, 2014 by baron-pierreIV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Well, I'm sorry for reading your post before your edit What I read: O, shut up yourself. You only have 35 million people vs. 314 million for the US, right now. Your numbers pale in comparison. What I read + the added part from your edit: O, shut up yourself. You only have 35 million people vs. 314 million for the US, right now. Your numbers pale in comparison. Of the 19 MLS teams, how many Canadians are there? 2. What the F*ck are u guys talking about? U're 1st and foremost a hockey nation. Who're u kidding? Adding that section changes the meaning of your post entirely. And I am heavily against the stereotypical American philosophy of bigger (or more in this case) is better. Bigger/More does not always mean better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 And I am heavily against the stereotypical American philosophy of bigger (or more in this case) is better. Bigger/More does not always mean better. I agree. But in the eyes of FIFA: bigger stadiums = more tickets, and more tickets = more money for FIFA. FIFA collects all the ticket revenue, sponsorship funds and television rights fees from the World Cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 FIFA went to Qatar. Against all logical reason and argumentation. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistercorporate Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 There are plenty of Canadians in the MLS even though league rules penalize Canadians playing in the USA as "foreign players" and thusa bigger hit on their salary cap. There's even US teams coached and led by Canadians. Each of the 3 Canadian teams has around a dozen Canadian players on their payroll including multiple starters. The all time leading goal scorer in MLS still playing is a Canadian, your post is extremely poorly informed... I wont rub salt into the wound but the bigger means you must get everything theory goes against the results of history and i know that most Americans are a lot smarter than you are and arent drinking that koolaid I should know I'm a dual citizen lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 FIFA went to Qatar. Against all logical reason and argumentation. Qatar offered the biggest bribes. Totally understandable logic in that choice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacre Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 FIFA went to Qatar. Against all logical reason and argumentation. Because of bribery. Canada likely won't do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athensfan Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Athensfan - China Baron - Canada Both nations have a strong youth following. Both nations are capable of hosting. Both members think that the sport is dead (or will be) in the nation. Both members think there is little interest in the nation. Both members think the national team sucks (but did ya ever consider how the World Cup could act as motivation?) That is an incorrect and grossly over- simplified characterization. I resent being coupled with Baron as our views on this topic are not the same. In the wake of Russia and Qatar I don't know that it makes much sense for FIFA to seek out countries with comparatively less interest in football as a means of "motivating" them. But then FIFA rarely chooses the wise option. Yes, China and Canada could conceivably host though both have weak teams that failed to qualify and both have less popular support relative to many other nations. Does that make either one of them the best pick for 2026? Not in my estimation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) Because of bribery. Canada likely won't do that. There has always been rumors of the shady things Vancouver did to get support. Not bribery but still.... From a Canadian perspective it is actually more beneficial for the Americans to host because it would be cheaper for us to travel to the matches. A flight from Toronto to Vancouver is usually around 800 dollars this time of year, to LA is usually around 600. More hotels mean US cities are generally cheaper to stay in (not New York) and most Canadians live within a reasonable drive to an American airport where flights are even cheaper. Edited July 19, 2014 by Faster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 There has always been rumors of the shady things Vancouver did to get support. Not bribery but still.... From a Canadian perspective it is actually more beneficial for the Americans to host because it would be cheaper for us to travel to the matches. A flight from Toronto to Vancouver is usually around 800 dollars this time of year, to LA is usually around 600. More hotels mean US cities are generally cheaper to stay in (not New York) and most Canadians live within a reasonable drive to an American airport where flights are even cheaper. 1 of the criticisms against the United States in 1994 was that travel between cities is not easy or inexpensive in this country. And compound that by the fact you're talking about thousands of spectators trying to move from site to site. As you noted, air travel in Canada doesn't make that issue any simpler. Probably why the organizers for the Women's World Cup next year have attempted to minimize travel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 In the wake of Russia and Qatar I don't know that it makes much sense for FIFA to seek out countries with comparatively less interest in football as a means of "motivating" them. But then FIFA rarely chooses the wise option. Yes, China and Canada could conceivably host though both have weak teams that failed to qualify and both have less popular support relative to many other nations. Does that make either one of them the best pick for 2026? Not in my estimation. Relative to what other nations? Are we talking the blue bloods of Europe and South America or others? And in terms of FIFA awarding a World Cup to a country to motivate them, look at past performances.. Before the United States was awarded the `94 World Cup, they hadn't qualified for a WC in decades. Since then, they've been in every tournament and the results speak for themselves. Similarly, South Korea had never won a World Cup match before 2002. They finished 4th that year and have had modest success since. And Japan had never qualified for a World Cup before they were awarded the co-host role in 2002. Since then, they've won 3 of the last 4 Asian Cup titles. The point being.. it would be just like FIFA to award a World Cup to a nation like that. Past failure to qualify would prevent future hosting, not if FIFA sees an opportunity. And if you're talking about support, the attendance numbers from the last major tournament hosted in China (2004 Asian Cup) show that there is plenty of support for soccer in China. They averaged well over 30,000 people per game for that tournament. Combine that with an infrastructure that, like the United States, already has several large scale stadiums, China would make for a fairly good choice as a host. You said earlier you'd like to see them invest more in the sport before they get awarded a World Cup. Well, look at what 1994 kickstarted here, because a lot of that investment here didn't come until afterwards. 20 years later, hard to argue with the results. As for 2026 though, it's moot because China would not be eligible unless FIFA changed their rotation policy (which they could) or something happens with Qatar 2022 (who knows what happens then). If we're talking "best pick for 2026," for me that's the United States by a landslide. But then again, I said that about 2022 and look what happened. I had thought FIFA's best course of action would be to go USA 2022 and China 2026. Of course, as we noted, this is FIFA. They rarely choose the best course of action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 The US has - to its credit - become the safe pick in bid races where major European nations aren't involved with 94 as an example to show what it can do, and a growing market for the game. But that's just it, it's the safe pick, nothing more than that. England or Spain were the safe picks for 2018, and both lost to a big country that hadn't hosted before with lots of potential but some risks. If FIFA choose China for 2026 over the US - and setting aside the usual issues of human rights and democracy which always creep up when China is mentioned - that would be more or less the same, and actually I do think China is in a very similar position to where the US was before '94 and I wouldn't be surprised if FIFA sees it that way too. It's when FIFA does something stupid and chooses Qatar over the US that the world wants to line up and slap Blatter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 You can call me bias, but the 2018 Fifa World Cup should of been a safe choice and come to England. The 2022 Fifa World Cup should of gone to Australia. Regardless, I think Canada should Host the 2026 Fifa World Cup, seeing as though European Countries can't Bid for it. Canada would be a successful Host for the Football World Cup. China can't Host the 2026 Fifa World Cup, because Asia (Qatar) has the 2022 Fifa World Cup. Again, the next Fifa World Cup Hosted by the Asian Football Confederation will most likely go to Australia, or should do. This is how it should be for next Hosts from each Continent: Europe: England 2018. Africa: Morocco. Asia: Australia. North, Central America and Caribbean: Canada. Oceania: New Zealand. South America: Chile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 You can call me bias, but the 2018 Fifa World Cup should of been a safe choice and come to England. The 2022 Fifa World Cup should of gone to Australia. Regardless, I think Canada should Host the 2026 Fifa World Cup, seeing as though European Countries can't Bid for it. Canada would be a successful Host for the Football World Cup. China can't Host the 2026 Fifa World Cup, because Asia (Qatar) has the 2022 Fifa World Cup. Again, the next Fifa World Cup Hosted by the Asian Football Confederation will most likely go to Australia, or should do. This is how it should be for next Hosts from each Continent: Europe: England 2018. Africa: Morocco. Asia: Australia. North, Central America and Caribbean: Canada. Oceania: New Zealand. South America: Chile. You are biased, Tony. That you even brought that up in the first place shows your bias. That you're still talking about England 2018 makes you sound like a sore loser. Again, give it a rest. England lost and there's not really a great argument why they should have won the 2018, especially when they were last in the voting. As was Australia for the 2022 vote. Why do you think Canada should host 2026? I'm not asking that to be argumentative. I'm curious to hear why you believe they should be the host for 2026 rather than just to see a list of countries to represent each confederation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob2012 Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 (edited) To be fair, I mentioned England 2018 in my post before his. I think he was just picking up on that. Edited July 19, 2014 by Rob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony E Loves Architecture Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 You are biased, Tony. That you even brought that up in the first place shows your bias. That you're still talking about England 2018 makes you sound like a sore loser. Again, give it a rest. England lost and there's not really a great argument why they should have won the 2018, especially when they were last in the voting. As was Australia for the 2022 vote. Why do you think Canada should host 2026? I'm not asking that to be argumentative. I'm curious to hear why you believe they should be the host for 2026 rather than just to see a list of countries to represent each confederation. And Your not? Like America keeps moaning about Qatar getting the 2022 Fifa World Cup? If America had lost to Russia, America would of moaned. Fact of the matter is, America Hosted last in 1994. England in 1966. Big difference. Also, with all due respect, England has by far offered more to Football than America has. As for Canada, if North America is going to Host, America and Mexico (Twice for Mexico) has already Hosted. Canada hasn't. I think England deserves a Fifa World Cup fairly soon. To also back up my argument, Russia should never of Hosted the 2018 Fifa World Cup. Also, if there is a safe SINGLE Bid like England, why bother with a Joint Bid of another Bid? Also, I wouldn't even take those Voting Numbers seriously, because the whole Voting process was corrupt. So, my reasons: Europe = England 2018. Because England is the Home of Football, England has contributed lots to Football and we haven't Hosted it recently. Africa = Morocco. Seeing as though South Africa Hosted it in 2010, Morocco would probably be Africa's strongest Contender in the Future, along with Nigeria. Asia = Australia. Safe option. North America, Central America and Caribbean = Canada. Because America and Mexico (Mexico Twice) has already Hosted. Oceania = New Zealand is Oceania's strongest Candidate. South America = Chile's Team is very good, so a World Cup for Chile next time South America Hosts is only fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zekekelso Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Tony, please understand. Americans don't "moan" the loss to Qatar, we mock it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Like America keeps moaning about Qatar getting the 2022 Fifa World Cup? If America had lost to Russia, America would of moaned. bless your bruised British heart....truth is we really don't care that much about soccer still. i never heard much of a peep in America...certainly not a moan! it's not one of our our games, we just happened to host the biggest World Cup one time and it's a growing business opportunity more than a passion. I'd be perfectly happy to never host it again.....but I'm sure to your chagrin we will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reindeer Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 South America = Chile's Team is very good, so a World Cup for Chile next time South America Hosts is only fair. Chile is too small to host. It would make more sense for Colombia to host in SA as they, unlike Chileans, have never had the tournament. I don't need another fantasy list of suitable stadiums here either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quaker2001 Posted July 20, 2014 Report Share Posted July 20, 2014 And Your not? Like America keeps moaning about Qatar getting the 2022 Fifa World Cup? If America had lost to Russia, America would of moaned. Fact of the matter is, America Hosted last in 1994. England in 1966. Big difference. Also, with all due respect, England has by far offered more to Football than America has. As for Canada, if North America is going to Host, America and Mexico (Twice for Mexico) has already Hosted. Canada hasn't. I think England deserves a Fifa World Cup fairly soon. To also back up my argument, Russia should never of Hosted the 2018 Fifa World Cup. Also, if there is a safe SINGLE Bid like England, why bother with a Joint Bid of another Bid? Also, I wouldn't even take those Voting Numbers seriously, because the whole Voting process was corrupt. Tony, you keep talking about England 2018 as if the host country hasn't already been decided. Americans are not moaning about Qatar. We're merely pointing out (so is the rest of the world) that they shouldn't have been awarded the World Cup in the first place, for all the reasons you and others have brought up numerous times. And unlike you being bitter over 2018, at least Americans aren't making the case we should be the replacement host. At this point, whatever happens is what happens. That's a world of difference with you talking about England. And it's interesting how you're talking about how the United States has hosted more recently than England. Isn't that an argument for Russia and against England? Russia never hosted, so why does England get their second World Cup before Russia gets their first? Again, you are extremely biased towards England. I know it. You know it. Everyone here knows it. You're right the voting process is corrupt. Not the first time that's happened with an event like this. Fair or not fair, England lost the vote, just like the United States lost. It's not going to do you any good to continue whining about this for the next 4 years. Russia is going to host the World Cup in 2018. You haven't made an argument against them. You're just pissed off that your England didn't win. Accept it and move on. bless your bruised British heart....truth is we really don't care that much about soccer still. i never heard much of a peep in America...certainly not a moan! it's not one of our our games, we just happened to host the biggest World Cup one time and it's a growing business opportunity more than a passion. I'd be perfectly happy to never host it again.....but I'm sure to your chagrin we will. So.. you're saying the United States doesn't care about soccer and isn't passionate about the World Cup? You sure about that one? ETA: Just to add.. I know there are people in a lot of countries out there more passionate about soccer and the World Cup than we are here in the United States. But to say that we don't care about soccer and wouldn't be passionate about the World Cup is ridiculous. You're darn right we hosted the most attended World Cup of all time here. It is 1 of the biggest guarantees in sports that if we hosted again, we'd set the record again. I'd bet the farm on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted July 20, 2014 Report Share Posted July 20, 2014 So.. you're saying the United States doesn't care about soccer and isn't passionate about the World Cup? You sure about that one? Well, yes I guess I am saying that about US soccer in general. The WC attracted huge interest but it's likely more about patriotism, summer, something to watch while drinking, and competitiveness than a true interest in the sport. It's a huge event on the scale of the Olympics, you're gonna get peoples interest especially till the US drops out. How many US players can you name right now? I can name 1....wonder how many US players those "fans" could name? I guess it's still growing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woohooitsme83 Posted July 20, 2014 Report Share Posted July 20, 2014 Of course American's are into soccer. They've got all the facts straight and root for the right team nicely! 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.