FIFA WC USA-Mexico-Canada 2026

[zekekelso]

2 hours ago, Rob. said:

That said, I don't know what state it's in or how much renovation it would need for a world cup.

The stadium is in decent shape. It just had a round of renovations forced upon it by - of all entities - the NFL. So it has fancy scoreboards, luxury areas, wireless internet etc.

But it's still a 50-year old stadium and much of the infrastructure (ramps, walls, lights) are original. 

[baron-pierreIV]

Nah.  That's how it was done in 1994, so they're switching things around for 2026.  Opening in the West Coast; and finals in NY/NJ.  

Other thoughts: if 60 games are slated for the US, with at least 12 cities, then that averages to 5 games per city -- altho of course, only the bigger venues will be used as the game progresses.  Team USA will therefore probably play in at least the 4 largest markets (so count on LA, NYC, SF Bay Area, then either Chicago /Florida or Texas for their 4th and 5th games.    

Edited April 10, 2017 by baron-pierreIV

[rio2016man]

1994 World Cup, 2016 Copa America highest attendances in history By 2026 soccer can peak here  

[baron-pierreIV]

4 minutes ago, rio2016man said:

1994 World Cup, 2016 Copa America highest attendances in history By 2026 soccer can peak here  

Absolutely!!  I can see attendance records of 40 million paid tickets -- averaging 500,000 paid spectators per game!! 

[Roger87]

3 hours ago, intoronto said:

60 games in the usa, 10 each in Canada and Mexico.

LMFAO.

[Nacre]

On 4/8/2017 at 9:56 AM, intoronto said:

Spoken like a true American! 

As a Canadian do you want Canada to be treated as a junior partner? There is simply no way to satisfy all three of Canada, Mexico and the USA.

1. Split the matches equally between the three countries and it is too much travel for players and fans and a paltry return for the US sponsors and fans who will kick in most of the money.
2. Split the matches unequally between the three countries and the USA is treating Canada and Mexico unfairly.

It is a no win situation. Canada and Mexico are both large enough to host the World Cup on their own.

[zekekelso]

2 hours ago, Roger87 said:

LMFAO.

Already discussing bands for the opening ceremony?

[baron-pierreIV]

USA Soccer page reports says that as of now, "USA will host all games from Quarterfinals to the Finals."

https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2017/04/10/18/35/20170410-feat-five-things-to-know-us-soccer-canada-mexico-unified-2026-world-cup-bid 

So Stadio Azteca will probably NOT be used unless it's a Mexico game, but because of the Altitude, it would be unfair to the other team.  Unless it's Bolivia or Nepal.  

[Mack_king]

Some people here needs to get over themselves here. Most likely, the Canadian Association and Mexican federations got a bigger piece of the profit pie in return for them to have accepted this. I assure you that backstage, the USSF is saying "thank you" to both Canada and Mexico because without them, the US was projected to lose 2026. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block and with Mexico, Canada and the US competing against one another, anything could have happened, especially with the global climate and with what's being decided in Washington D.C. It's no secret that Americans aren't very liked within FIFA.

So don't be "sour winners" and be thankful that you have neighbors willing to help you when you need it the most, because, other parts of the world aren't that lucky. 

@Americans: Congratulations in hosting your 2nd world Cup in 32 years by 2026 which will be during your 250th anniversary. Be gracious in victory and thankful for the help you're neighbors gave you.

@Canada: 10 games is a start. No need for disappointment. Just focus on making them memorable by showing the world what you're capable off. Use this as the foundation of your new Division1 league that will start soon and next time it's CONCACAF's turn to host, you'll have enough infrastructure and a stronger program to host on your own (2042 or 2046)

@Mexico: You hosted twice already, be grateful that you were included at all as a US-Canada bid made more sense to most people.

[Mack_king]

4 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

USA Soccer page reports says that as of now, "USA will host all games from Quarterfinals to the Finals."

https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2017/04/10/18/35/20170410-feat-five-things-to-know-us-soccer-canada-mexico-unified-2026-world-cup-bid 

So Stadio Azteca will probably NOT be used unless it's a Mexico game, but because of the Altitude, it would be unfair to the other team.  Unless it's Bolivia or Nepal.  

Has nothing to do with altitude. On the contrary, footballers around the world sees it an exciting challenge. Everyone knows about Azteca here

[Roger87]

13 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

USA Soccer page reports says that as of now, "USA will host all games from Quarterfinals to the Finals."

https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2017/04/10/18/35/20170410-feat-five-things-to-know-us-soccer-canada-mexico-unified-2026-world-cup-bid 

So Stadio Azteca will probably NOT be used unless it's a Mexico game, but because of the Altitude, it would be unfair to the other team.  Unless it's Bolivia or Nepal.  

And anyone was thinking that bid will start as a field day? Unless it's TRuff and co in a full delusion.

[baron-pierreIV]

20 minutes ago, Mack_king said:

 It's no secret that Americans aren't very liked within FIFA.

Indeed; but I think with the way it's shaping up, and Argentina and Uruguay already declaring first dibs on 2030, CONCACAF and CONMEBOL will have each other's back for the 2026 and 2030 selections.  (And with 48 teams, Arg-Uru 2030 will certainly have to bring in Chile as well).  So China will just have to wait its turn for 2034.  

[nykfan845]

34 minutes ago, Mack_king said:

Some people here needs to get over themselves here. Most likely, the Canadian Association and Mexican federations got a bigger piece of the profit pie in return for them to have accepted this. I assure you that backstage, the USSF is saying "thank you" to both Canada and Mexico because without them, the US was projected to lose 2026. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block and with Mexico, Canada and the US competing against one another, anything could have happened, especially with the global climate and with what's being decided in Washington D.C. It's no secret that Americans aren't very liked within FIFA.

So don't be "sour winners" and be thankful that you have neighbors willing to help you when you need it the most, because, other parts of the world aren't that lucky. 

@Americans: Congratulations in hosting your 2nd world Cup in 32 years by 2026 which will be during your 250th anniversary. Be gracious in victory and thankful for the help you're neighbors gave you.

@Canada: 10 games is a start. No need for disappointment. Just focus on making them memorable by showing the world what you're capable off. Use this as the foundation of your new Division1 league that will start soon and next time it's CONCACAF's turn to host, you'll have enough infrastructure and a stronger program to host on your own (2042 or 2046)

@Mexico: You hosted twice already, be grateful that you were included at all as a US-Canada bid made more sense to most people.

Yup. Two posts.

[Quaker2001]

57 minutes ago, Mack_king said:

Some people here needs to get over themselves here. Most likely, the Canadian Association and Mexican federations got a bigger piece of the profit pie in return for them to have accepted this. I assure you that backstage, the USSF is saying "thank you" to both Canada and Mexico because without them, the US was projected to lose 2026. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block and with Mexico, Canada and the US competing against one another, anything could have happened, especially with the global climate and with what's being decided in Washington D.C. It's no secret that Americans aren't very liked within FIFA.

So don't be "sour winners" and be thankful that you have neighbors willing to help you when you need it the most, because, other parts of the world aren't that lucky. 

@Americans: Congratulations in hosting your 2nd world Cup in 32 years by 2026 which will be during your 250th anniversary. Be gracious in victory and thankful for the help you're neighbors gave you.

@Canada: 10 games is a start. No need for disappointment. Just focus on making them memorable by showing the world what you're capable off. Use this as the foundation of your new Division1 league that will start soon and next time it's CONCACAF's turn to host, you'll have enough infrastructure and a stronger program to host on your own (2042 or 2046)

@Mexico: You hosted twice already, be grateful that you were included at all as a US-Canada bid made more sense to most people.

The US was projected to lose 2026?  Who exactly was projected to win then?

We don't know (and we'll probably never know) how much of this was influenced by the elections or what went down behind the scenes.  I would have liked to see the US bid solo and take their chances against either Canada or Mexico.  Moot point now, of course.

Either way, this is clearly the United States' World Cup with some assistance from Canada and Mexico.  Don't think it's being a sour winner to acknowledge the particulars of this deal.  Did the United States *need* help from other countries to make this happen?  That's debatable.  But they made a choice and if the end result is 3/4 of an expanded World Cup winds up in the United States in 2026, I'm certainly not going to complain.

[Quaker2001]

45 minutes ago, baron-pierreIV said:

Indeed; but I think with the way it's shaping up, and Argentina and Uruguay already declaring first dibs on 2030, CONCACAF and CONMEBOL will have each other's back for the 2026 and 2030 selections.  (And with 48 teams, Arg-Uru 2030 will certainly have to bring in Chile as well).  So China will just have to wait its turn for 2034.  

Sooo.. Europe is no longer interested in hosting the World Cup?  Or you just don't project them winning in 2030 or 2034?

I know there's a line of thinking that Uruguay should host the Centennial World Cup.  Because that worked out so well with Greece and the Olympics.  If there's a 3-country South American bid, I'd like to see them go up against a bid or 2 from Europe and see how much that CONCACAF-CONMEBOL back scratching will help.  All it would take IMO is 1 solid European bid for 2030 and Argentina/Uruguay don't stand a chance.  Plus, with China, don't forget that Qatar is AFC.  So if FIFA keeps their current rules on hosting (which I'm sure they won't), then Asia will not be considered for 2030 unless no other confederation puts forth a bid.

[LDOG]

10 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Sooo.. Europe is no longer interested in hosting the World Cup?  Or you just don't project them winning in 2030 or 2034?

I know there's a line of thinking that Uruguay should host the Centennial World Cup.  Because that worked out so well with Greece and the Olympics.  If there's a 3-country South American bid, I'd like to see them go up against a bid or 2 from Europe and see how much that CONCACAF-CONMEBOL back scratching will help.  All it would take IMO is 1 solid European bid for 2030 and Argentina/Uruguay don't stand a chance.  Plus, with China, don't forget that Qatar is AFC.  So if FIFA keeps their current rules on hosting (which I'm sure they won't), then Asia will not be considered for 2030 unless no other confederation puts forth a bid.

I see a possible China bid as the biggest threat for Argentina-Uruguay-¿Chile? 2030. About Europe... you shouldn't understimate the hate the other confederations (and the FIFA organization) have for UEFA.

[Quaker2001]

1 minute ago, LDOG said:

I see a possible China bid as the biggest threat for Argentina-Uruguay-¿Chile? 2030. About Europe... you shouldn't understimate the hate the other confederations (and the FIFA organization) have for UEFA.

So I take it you're assuming that FIFA will in fact change the rules again to allow for an AFC bid in 2030 after they'll have hosted 2022?  I'd like to say FIFA isn't completely stupid, but well.. Qatar.  The know where their biggest base of sponsorship and TV dollars come from.  As much corruption as there was surrounding Qatar's win, at least there's an element of that decision where they saw money in Qatar and thought it would be a place to grow the game.  China without question falls under that category.  Argentina and Uruguay, not so much.  I don't think we'd even be talking about them if not for the centennial, and I'm still very skeptical that's going to mean anything worthwhile.

[intoronto]

45 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

The US was projected to lose 2026?  Who exactly was projected to win then?

We don't know (and we'll probably never know) how much of this was influenced by the elections or what went down behind the scenes.  I would have liked to see the US bid solo and take their chances against either Canada or Mexico.  Moot point now, of course.

Either way, this is clearly the United States' World Cup with some assistance from Canada and Mexico.  Don't think it's being a sour winner to acknowledge the particulars of this deal.  Did the United States *need* help from other countries to make this happen?  That's debatable.  But they made a choice and if the end result is 3/4 of an expanded World Cup winds up in the United States in 2026, I'm certainly not going to complain.

This was apparently being planned for quite a while, pre Trump.

Anyways, if all three went individually its likely that Morocco would have came in and won the bid. With the 3 CONCACAF nations vote splitting. Morocco on the other hand would have had the support from most of Africa (the biggest confederation) and the Arab World.

Pooling the resources for the 3, in hindsight, appears the right thing to do, as now all 3 have a shot of hosting.

[Mack_king]

33 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

The US was projected to lose 2026?  Who exactly was projected to win then?

No one knows but insiders stated that a solo US bid would have had a very hard time winning the bid. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block with 100 votes while CONCACAF and CONMEBOL would have most likely sided with Mexico or Canada. US best bet would be some UEFA vote and AFC but CAF would have snubbed a solo bid. You know...politics. The division of the vote could have allowed Canada to sllip through the cracks as they are the only G7 nation that never hosted the tournament. The US could have still won off course but it seems the USSF wanted to be 100% sure to win, hence co-bidding with Canada and Mexico ensured that. 100% chance of victory is better than 50%, wouldn't you agree?

40 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

We don't know (and we'll probably never know) how much of this was influenced by the elections or what went down behind the scenes.  I would have liked to see the US bid solo and take their chances against either Canada or Mexico.  Moot point now, of course.

You're mistaken to think that FIFA forgot what the US department of justice did to them. Politics played a heavy hand in damaging the solo bid. CONMEBOL, AFC and CAF aren't pro Americans while easily half of the UEFA don't take the US seriously. Canada and Mexico partnering with the US made the bid untouchable. Deny it all you want, Canada and Mexico are a big reason why the US are getting the 2026 WC, you should be happy and thankful instead of "rubbing it in"

44 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Either way, this is clearly the United States' World Cup with some assistance from Canada and Mexico.  Don't think it's being a sour winner to acknowledge the particulars of this deal.

Everyone knows that that and it was made clear during the press conference. By sour winners, you shouldn't feel targeted personally, only those who mocks Mexico and Canada for only getting 10 days. All I'm saying, they deserve the US gratitude, because they also saved the USSF millions of dollars since they won't need to go through the costly bidding process. USSF just asked FIFA to expedite it. That's money the USSF gets to reinvest in amateur football in America instead of making FIFA bureacrats richer.

47 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Did the United States *need* help from other countries to make this happen?  That's debatable. 

Right now, you'd be the only one to think otherwise, assuming you understand the world of football. Anyone knowing how FIFA works, Canada and Mexico handed that world cup to America 

[Mack_king]

49 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

The US was projected to lose 2026?  Who exactly was projected to win then?

No one knows but insiders stated that a solo US bid would have had a very hard time winning the bid. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block with 100 votes while CONCACAF and CONMEBOL would have most likely sided with Mexico or Canada. US best bet would be some UEFA vote and AFC but CAF would have snubbed a solo bid. You know...politics. The division of the vote could have allowed Canada to sllip through the cracks as they are the only G7 nation that never hosted the tournament. The US could have still won off course but it seems the USSF wanted to be 100% sure to win, hence co-bidding with Canada and Mexico ensured that. 100% chance of victory is better than 50%, wouldn't you agree?

49 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

We don't know (and we'll probably never know) how much of this was influenced by the elections or what went down behind the scenes.  I would have liked to see the US bid solo and take their chances against either Canada or Mexico.  Moot point now, of course.

You're mistaken to think that FIFA forgot what the US department of justice did to them. Politics played a heavy hand in damaging the solo bid. CONMEBOL, AFC and CAF aren't pro Americans while easily half of the UEFA don't take the US seriously. Canada and Mexico partnering with the US made the bid untouchable. Deny it all you want, Canada and Mexico are a big reason why the US are getting the 2026 WC, you should be happy and thankful instead of "rubbing it in"

49 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Either way, this is clearly the United States' World Cup with some assistance from Canada and Mexico.  Don't think it's being a sour winner to acknowledge the particulars of this deal.

Everyone knows that that and it was made clear during the press conference. By sour winners, you shouldn't feel targeted personally, only those who mocks Mexico and Canada for only getting 10 days. All I'm saying, they deserve the US gratitude, because they also saved the USSF millions of dollars since they won't need to go through the costly bidding process. USSF just asked FIFA to expedite it. That's money the USSF gets to reinvest in amateur football in America instead of making FIFA bureacrats richer.

49 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Did the United States *need* help from other countries to make this happen?  That's debatable. 

Right now, you'd be the only one to think otherwise, assuming you understand the world of football. Anyone knowing how FIFA works, Canada and Mexico handed that world cup to America by ensuring that hostile nation would back a unified bid.

51 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

But they made a choice and if the end result is 3/4 of an expanded World Cup winds up in the United States in 2026, I'm certainly not going to complain.

Like I pointed out earlier, they most likely got something in return. Ironically, if the Canadian Association gets a bigger piece of the profits, they will invest it in their new top league which is making noise all the way to London. The CPL is set to rival MLS in North America within 10 years. Mexico is the biggest loser in all of this. The US obviously win while Canada actually gained more than people realized.

[Mack_king]

50 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

Sooo.. Europe is no longer interested in hosting the World Cup?  Or you just don't project them winning in 2030 or 2034?

I know there's a line of thinking that Uruguay should host the Centennial World Cup.  Because that worked out so well with Greece and the Olympics.  If there's a 3-country South American bid, I'd like to see them go up against a bid or 2 from Europe and see how much that CONCACAF-CONMEBOL back scratching will help.  All it would take IMO is 1 solid European bid for 2030 and Argentina/Uruguay don't stand a chance.  Plus, with China, don't forget that Qatar is AFC.  So if FIFA keeps their current rules on hosting (which I'm sure they won't), then Asia will not be considered for 2030 unless no other confederation puts forth a bid.

2030 would logically go to Uruguay and Argentina

2034 should be Europe, most likely England (no co-host required)

2038 China

2042 Oceania or Africa

2046 CONCACAF --> Canada 

[Mack_king]

6 minutes ago, Mack_king said:

only getting 10 days

"game", hate night shift!

[baron-pierreIV]

1 hour ago, Mack_king said:

No one knows but insiders stated that a solo US bid would have had a very hard time winning the bid. Africa and Asia are FIFA's biggest voting block with 100 votes while CONCACAF and CONMEBOL would have most likely sided with Mexico or Canada. US best bet would be some UEFA vote and AFC but CAF would have snubbed a solo bid. You know...politics. The division of the vote could have allowed Canada to sllip through the cracks as they are the only G7 nation that never hosted the tournament. The US could have still won off course but it seems the USSF wanted to be 100% sure to win, hence co-bidding with Canada and Mexico ensured that. 100% chance of victory is better than 50%, wouldn't you agree?

You're mistaken to think that FIFA forgot what the US department of justice did to them. Politics played a heavy hand in damaging the solo bid. CONMEBOL, AFC and CAF aren't pro Americans while easily half of the UEFA don't take the US seriously. Canada and Mexico partnering with the US made the bid untouchable. Deny it all you want, Canada and Mexico are a big reason why the US are getting the 2026 WC, you should be happy and thankful instead of "rubbing it in"

Everyone knows that that and it was made clear during the press conference. By sour winners, you shouldn't feel targeted personally, only those who mocks Mexico and Canada for only getting 10 days. All I'm saying, they deserve the US gratitude, because they also saved the USSF millions of dollars since they won't need to go through the costly bidding process. USSF just asked FIFA to expedite it. That's money the USSF gets to reinvest in amateur football in America instead of making FIFA bureacrats richer.

Right now, you'd be the only one to think otherwise, assuming you understand the world of football. Anyone knowing how FIFA works, Canada and Mexico handed that world cup to America 

You make a lot of good and valid points (specially the bolded one) -- and more objectively than ansem.  Someday, perhaps if you have all the inside info, you should write a book about it.  Please PM me if you have future plans.  

[Faster]

I am still not a huge fan of this. So Canada/Mexico/USA would get half of CONCACAF's qualification spots. I can see the games of importance being staged exclusively in the USA. But I think that if this were to go through that Mexico should get the opener, USA the final and Canada the 3rd place. 

I'd rather see Canada/USA do a joint bid to host the 2027 Rugby World Cup.

 

[baron-pierreIV]

9 minutes ago, Faster said:

 But I think that if this were to go through that Mexico should get the opener, USA the final

and Canada the 3rd place. 

- which means Mexico will already be one team; and that would be horrid if they lost the Opener.

- The reason the games from Quaterfinals on to the Finals will be in the USA, is to make it easier and more affordable for the fans to follow their team all the way to the Finals.  Setting the 3rd place or Finals in either Canada or Mexico would incur additional int'l fees for the fans.  Whereas if it's all in the US, it would all be domestic flights or train rides.