FIFA WC USA-Mexico-Canada 2026

[gotosy]

Morocco 2026 unveil bid team and logo with just over four months until FIFA select World Cup host

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1060510/morocco-2026-unveil-bid-team-and-logo-with-just-over-four-months-until-fifa-select-world-cup-host

[anthonyliberatori]

My top 16 would be:

 

Seattle- Century Link

San Francisco/Bay Area- Levi's Stadium

Los Angeles- Inglewood/Hollywood Park

Los Angeles- Rose Bowl (Possible final game again?)

Las Vegas- Las Vegas Stadium

Phoenix: Glendale Stadium

Denver: Stadium at Mile High

Dallas- At&T Stadium

Houston- NRG Stadium

Miami- Hard Rock Stadium

Atlanta- Merecedes Benz Stadium

Washington DC/Baltimore- FedEx Stadium

Philadelphia- Lincoln Financial Field

New York- MetLife Stadium

Boston/Providence: Gillette Stadium (Alumni Stadium is an option if Gillette is too far)

Chicago- Soldier Field

[BTHarner]

Came across this article in a soccer-related forum.

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/3400487/united-states-led-2026-world-cup-bid-in-jeopardy-to-morocco-sources

[anthonyliberatori]

After the white elephants of Brazil 2014, the "I don't know yet but after Sochi 2014, something" from Russia 2018, the EXORBITANT cost of Qatar 2022, if the US/Canada/Mexico bid is not awarded the 2026 FIFA World Cup and loses out to Morocco, the FIFA World Cup will be over as we know it. After the negative legacy Qatar is going to leave for prospective host countries about how much they have to spend, and the need for brand new stadiums for the Morocco 2026 bid, it is very unlikely anybody that's economically feasible would want to step forward for 2030. FIFA is on a doomed path, one similar to what the Winter Olympics will be on if a North American or Europe host is not awarded 2026. But FIFA will end as we know it if Morocco is chosen over a joint bid from the US-Canada-Mexico. Especially considering the jump to 48 teams with the North American bid having to build literally no stadiums, that will be the straw that broke the camel's back. 

[stryker]

13 hours ago, BTHarner said:

Came across this article in a soccer-related forum.

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/3400487/united-states-led-2026-world-cup-bid-in-jeopardy-to-morocco-sources

When I came across this the first thing that came to mind was the 2006 race for the WOGs, the race where Sion was an overwhelming favorite but lost out to Turin and many pointed at Marc Hodler who played the whistleblower role in the 2002 scandal for Sion's defeat. Could history repeat itself? FIFA has gone through a muck raking especially with the Garcia report which more or less implicates FIFA accepting bribes to give the 2022 WC to Qatar. Might FIFA still be stung from that and in retaliation, give the 2026 WC to Morocco? It wouldn't shock me at all.

[BTHarner]

It wouldn't surprise me either.

[yoshi]

Knowing what FIFA are like, it wouldn't just not surprise me - I'd be amazed if we're not off to Morocco in 2026. 

[Ikarus360]

FIFA has officially dug their grave if they pick Morocco. Nevermind the whistleblowing thing, not picking someone much more prepared after the mess which will be Qatar will be plain stupid. 

What a joke of an organization, to be honest....no matter how crooked the IOC seem to us, there will always be FIFA to remind us you can always fall lower.

[baron-pierreIV]

Should they vote for Morocco, I can just see 4 years away (by 2023), Morocco will be given a 3-month warning before they rescind the award.  

[Durban Sandshark]

Quite a shock that Chicago and Vancouver ended up getting dropped from the cities roster for the USA-led 2026 World Cup bid. Chicago is the headquarters for US Soccer and of course hosted the opening Germany-Bolivia 1994 game at Soldier Field. 2015 Women's World Cup Final host Vancouver certainly is capable of hosting games in a city embracing soccer for decades, but the BC provincial government grew concerned over the potentially increasing costs of the city hosting and residents shouldering the huge and potentially risky and unpredictable costs like covering a portion of the cost for things such as security, parking, and modifications to the provincially-owned BC Place's artificial playing surface there. It's why Chicago pulled out now. Minneapolis refuse to meet FIFA's inflexible demands involving US Bank Stadium for similar reasons. Do wish FIFA would be more fair and willing in negotiating with the cities with respect to the demands;

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/3421045/united-states-led-world-cup-bid-reduces-list-of-potential-host-cities-to-23

https://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/world-cup-fifa-2026-joint-bid-vancouver-bc-mexico-united-states-soccer-concacaf/

[FYI]

Chicago didn’t get dropped. They decided against it bcuz of FIFA’s inflexible demands (kinda what many accuse the IOC of). Minneapolis (& to a lesser extent - Vancouver) also decided not to be part of it for the same reasons.

https://www.sltrib.com/sports/2018/03/15/salt-lake-not-a-finalist-city-for-2026-world-cup-bid/

[intoronto]

I hope Morocco wins!

[TheOtherRob]

On 3/1/2018 at 4:03 AM, anthonyliberatori said:

After the white elephants of Brazil 2014, the "I don't know yet but after Sochi 2014, something" from Russia 2018, the EXORBITANT cost of Qatar 2022, if the US/Canada/Mexico bid is not awarded the 2026 FIFA World Cup and loses out to Morocco, the FIFA World Cup will be over as we know it. After the negative legacy Qatar is going to leave for prospective host countries about how much they have to spend, and the need for brand new stadiums for the Morocco 2026 bid, it is very unlikely anybody that's economically feasible would want to step forward for 2030. FIFA is on a doomed path, one similar to what the Winter Olympics will be on if a North American or Europe host is not awarded 2026. But FIFA will end as we know it if Morocco is chosen over a joint bid from the US-Canada-Mexico. Especially considering the jump to 48 teams with the North American bid having to build literally no stadiums, that will be the straw that broke the camel's back. 

Nah, FIFA is never going to find itself in a similar position to the IOC with the Winter Olympics. Morocco would likely be another wasteful World Cup and might prove a huge headache for FIFA, but I can't see it putting off any 2030 bidders. It's just not the same gamble as hosting a Winter Games. Countries who know they have the stadiums will keep bidding unless something quite extraordinary happens

England is lining up a bid for 2030, so is Uruguay/Argentina/Paraguay, and it wouldn't actually surprise me if the US bids again - it's not like they've got anything to lose. Spain always seems a reliable bidder and if all else really does fail, FIFA can go cap in hand to a country like France or Germany or even Brazil with recently completed, World Cup standard stadiums. Unless we see a repeat of everything that brought Blatter and his cronies down, I think FIFA will be happily accepting bids from a decent selection of countries for many cycles to come.

 

 

[gotosy]

2026 FIFA World Cup bid books now available 

 

In line with the approved timeline for the bidding process of the 2026 FIFA World Cup™, FIFA has received the following bid books, which are available on FIFA.com along with their respective executive summaries:

Joint submission by the Canadian Soccer Association, the Mexican Football Association and the United States Soccer Federation

• Bid book
• Executive summary of bid book (English, Spanish, French and German)

Submission by the Moroccan Football Association

• Bid book
• Executive summary of bid book (English, Spanish, French and German)

The 2026 Bid Evaluation Task Force will now carry out an assessment process, including visits to the respective member associations. The dates of these visits will be communicated in due course, and the resulting bid evaluation reports, like each step of the bidding process, will be made public.

“I have been dealing with the evaluation of bids for over 20 years, in several different capacities, and I challenge anyone to point out an organisation that conducts a bidding process as fair, objective and transparent as the one that FIFA is carrying out for the 2026 FIFA World Cup,” says FIFA President Gianni Infantino.

“FIFA has been heavily criticised for how it conducted the selection of hosts in the past; it was our obligation to learn from this and leave no room for any doubt or subjectivity. This is why the rules of this process have been clear and objective from the beginning, and they include the highest standards in terms of ethical conduct, participation and commitment to sustainability and human rights. In this context, the role of the 2026 Bid Evaluation Task Force and the principle of ensuring that the bidder(s) retained meet the eligibility criteria to host the biggest single-sport event in the world is a natural consequence of the enhanced process. These are necessary steps to ensure that we never go back to the ‘old ways’.”

A thorough overview of the bidding process and its key principles is available in the Guide to the Bidding Process for the 2026 FIFA World Cup™.

Evaluation of bids
Under the bidding regulations that were approved by the FIFA Council in October 2017, FIFA established a bid evaluation model comprising three components:

• Bid compliance assessment
• Overall risk assessment
• Technical evaluation

The “technical evaluation” aspect of this bid evaluation model adopts an objective scoring system to rate and attribute a weight to each of the nine infrastructural and revenue-related criteria set out in clause 3.5 of the Bidding Registration, which is appended to the bidding regulations.

The methodology and application of this scoring system are specified in the document below:

• Overview of Scoring System for the Technical Evaluation of Bids

Following the assessment by the 2026 Bid Evaluation Task Force ­– and provided the FIFA Council submits a designation – the decision on whether to select one of the above bidders to host the 2026 FIFA World Cup will be taken by the 68th FIFA Congress, which will convene in Moscow on 13 June.

The following document, approved by the FIFA Council on 16 March 2018, provides the details of how the 68th FIFA Congress will vote on the matter:

• Voting Procedure for the Designation of the Host Country for the 2026 FIFA World Cup™ Final Competition

“We are now entering a key stage of this bidding procedure and, as we have always made clear, transparency is of paramount importance. This is why every single step is documented and open to the public: from the submission of the bid books through each round of assessment to the decision-making process,” says FIFA Secretary General Fatma Samoura.

 

http://www.fifa.com/about-fifa/news/y=2018/m=3/news=2026-fifa-world-cup-bid-books-now-available.html

[BTHarner]

They sure love to throw that transparent word around. The more they say it, the less I believe it.

[TheOtherRob]

I'm a bit surprised Vegas has been cut. I've been looking at their new stadium today, with retractable grass field and demountable seats to get the pitch to FIFA's standard width, and it looks like it could be a lot better than many NFL stadiums at hosting soccer. It also doesn't have that thing loads of modern NFL Stadiums have where the seats are broken up into 5 or 6 tiers (e.g. new Rams Stadium); it looks like a good, consistent seating bowl.

[baron-pierreIV]

Am surprised that LA is only offering the Rose Bowl, i.e., they are staying away from LA.  Also, no San Diego; so only LA,SF Bay Area and Seattle are the only West Coast projected sites.  

[olympiaki-agones]

I guess LA wants to be part of the elite cities such as London and Paris for hosting 9 Olympic editions only those three cities. No need to worry for the WC. Just like Atlanta did during the 94-96 hosting awards. 

My favourite is still Morocco, but we all know that the 48 teams championship experiment split into the 3 countries may have none or lower risks if such huge amount of teams and matches to be played could succeed. To beging with, Mexico became the forst country to host the Olympic and the FIFA WC in a row, and the first one to host the WC twice with a 16 years gap, plus the striving and reinventing attitude of the USA and the new frontier and female foot-ball power of Canada make this candidate the most suitable for the event.

[olympiaki-agones]

By the way, I liked the concept of United 2026, even the name. After all, two of the tripartite joint countries are officially named after the adjectiv of "United" and they are geograpghicaly, culturally and historically bonded and the three of them speak the most spoken and studied languages in the world.

[anthonyliberatori]

What is killing United 2026 is the distance. I hope they decide to clump cities together based on region, allowing for certain groups to stay in a certain part of the country, and then having all of the playoff matches in the big stadiums around the three countries. But it is going to be so hard for German, Japanese, South African, etc fans to catch a game in Edmonton, Miami, New York, and San Francisco during Group Stage. 

 

A successful United 2026 could pave the way for an England, Spain, France, Italy or Germany WC, which is what FIFA needs. Also, the regional concept opens up other powerhouse areas, such as Uraguay-Paraguay-Argentina, Australia/New Zealand, another split Asian bid between Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore or something, or even a Pan-Europe bid so small countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, etc could host. However, I fear a Morocco 2026 WC, after following behind Russia and Qatar, could be potentially dangerous to the longevity of FIFA. 

[olympiaki-agones]

On 17/4/2018 at 4:11 PM, anthonyliberatori said:

What is killing United 2026 is the distance. I hope they decide to clump cities together based on region, allowing for certain groups to stay in a certain part of the country, and then having all of the playoff matches in the big stadiums around the three countries. But it is going to be so hard for German, Japanese, South African, etc fans to catch a game in Edmonton, Miami, New York, and San Francisco during Group Stage. 

 

A successful United 2026 could pave the way for an England, Spain, France, Italy or Germany WC, which is what FIFA needs. Also, the regional concept opens up other powerhouse areas, such as Uraguay-Paraguay-Argentina, Australia/New Zealand, another split Asian bid between Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore or something, or even a Pan-Europe bid so small countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, etc could host. However, I fear a Morocco 2026 WC, after following behind Russia and Qatar, could be potentially dangerous to the longevity of FIFA. 

I don't think distances could be a problem. Fans are likely to see the three host countries at once, with plenty flight connections among the three countries. i wouldn't see myself distances as a problem if I attended the events. Actually, with all those all-included tours to be offered in a region where every single international sport and non-sport events have been hosted.

It takes four hours to fly from Montreal to Mexico City,  also direct flights from Guadalajara to NYC or from Houston to Edmonton. Actually that's nothing in comparison to the UEFA Euro 2020. Don't forget that eleven countries are involved and Bielorussia might not be as simple as the NAFTA region. Real challenges are trips from Baku to Dublin, from Bilbao to St. Petersburg or from Bucharest to Glasgow.

[anthonyliberatori]

5 hours ago, olympiaki-agones said:

It takes four hours to fly from Montreal to Mexico City,  also direct flights from Guadalajara to NYC or from Houston to Edmonton. Actually that's nothing in comparison to the UEFA Euro 2020. Don't forget that eleven countries are involved and Bielorussia might not be as simple as the NAFTA region. Real challenges are trips from Baku to Dublin, from Bilbao to St. Petersburg or from Bucharest to Glasgow.

This is false. Both the flight times from Glasgow-Bucharest and Bilbao-St.Petersburg are under 4 hours, with the Dublin-Baku flight being about 5 hours 30 minutes. A flight from Boston or New York to Los Angeles is  usually about 6 hours and 20 minutes. Also, a flight from Montreal to Mexico City is over 5 hours.  And, with the exception of the few host cities not in the open border area, All of the travelers going between Mexico and the USA and Canada and Mexico will need to clear immigration, flights from the USA to Canada can get pre-cleared, but not always. We also do not have the established rail network or lowcost airline assortment, so it will be very costly for someone trying to see their team when their group is based in Los Angeles, Baltimore, Guadalajara, and Edmonton

 

But furthermore, the Euro 2020 Group Stages were established, and here they are (http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro-2020/news/newsid=2525102.html)

 

Group A: Rome and Baku
Group B: Saint Petersburg and Copenhagen
Group C: Amsterdam and Bucharest 
Group D: London and Glasgow
Group E: Bilbao and Dublin
Group F: Munich and Budapest 

 

This means that none of those long flights you mentioned will happen by someone trying to follow the same team, or same group. The distance between Rome and Baku is rather far, being about 4 hours by plane. But, that is the only real long journey a fan would have to make. Once we get into the  quarterfinals, the distance gets even more slim, with the cities being Munich, St.Petersburg, Baku and Rome. The semi finals and final are all in London. So, while the group stage was ordered, the playoff matches and final matches were coordinated quite well. I was saying the US should try and do the same thing, just not random groups.

[Nacre]

1. Madrid-Moscow: 3,426 km
2. London-Cairo: 3,536 km
3. Los Angeles-New York: 3,983 km

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=LAX-JFK,+MAD-SVO,+LHR-CAI&DU=km

[olympiaki-agones]

I meant to be inaccurate with the flight time.  The relevant part is that such huge territory for the WC may not have connecting flights among cities.

[olympiaki-agones]

21 hours ago, anthonyliberatori said:

This is false. Both the flight times from Glasgow-Bucharest and Bilbao-St.Petersburg are under 4 hours, with the Dublin-Baku flight being about 5 hours 30 minutes. A flight from Boston or New York to Los Angeles is  usually about 6 hours and 20 minutes. Also, a flight from Montreal to Mexico City is over 5 hours.  And, with the exception of the few host cities not in the open border area, All of the travelers going between Mexico and the USA and Canada and Mexico will need to clear immigration, flights from the USA to Canada can get pre-cleared, but not always. We also do not have the established rail network or lowcost airline assortment, so it will be very costly for someone trying to see their team when their group is based in Los Angeles, Baltimore, Guadalajara, and Edmonton

 

But furthermore, the Euro 2020 Group Stages were established, and here they are (http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro-2020/news/newsid=2525102.html)

 

Group A: Rome and Baku
Group B: Saint Petersburg and Copenhagen
Group C: Amsterdam and Bucharest 
Group D: London and Glasgow
Group E: Bilbao and Dublin
Group F: Munich and Budapest 

 

This means that none of those long flights you mentioned will happen by someone trying to follow the same team, or same group. The distance between Rome and Baku is rather far, being about 4 hours by plane. But, that is the only real long journey a fan would have to make. Once we get into the  quarterfinals, the distance gets even more slim, with the cities being Munich, St.Petersburg, Baku and Rome. The semi finals and final are all in London. So, while the group stage was ordered, the playoff matches and final matches were coordinated quite well. I was saying the US should try and do the same thing, just not random groups.

By the way, thank you for this data.