Jump to content

FIFA World Cup 2026


Kenadian
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think Colombia is exploring a potential Bid aswell. These are the Stadium's I would use:

New National Stadium, Cali (80,000 Seats) - Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches (Including Opening Match) - Brand New - Downscaled to 40,000 after the World Cup.

Stadium Olympic Pascual Guerrero, Cali (50,000 Seats) - Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches - Renovated and Expanded - Permanent Capacity.

New Stadium, Medellin (68,000 Seats) - Semi-Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches - Brand New - Downscaled to 50,000 after the World Cup.

New Stadium, Barranquilla (62,000 Seats) - Semi-Final, Quarter-Final, Round of 16 and Group Matches - Brand New - Downscaled to 40,000 after the World Cup.

Stadium Palogrande, Manizales (56,000 Seats) - Round of 16 and Group Matches - Renovated and Expanded - Permanent Capacity.

Stadium El Campin, Bogota (54,000 Seats) - Round of 16 and Group Matches - Renovated and Expanded - Permanent Capacity.

New Stadium, Pereira (50,000 Seats) - Round of 16 and Group Matches - Brand New - Downscaled to 25,000 after the World Cup.

New Stadium, Ibague (46,000 Seats) - Round of 16 and Group Matches - Brand New - Downscaled to 30,000 after the World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I'm not predicting. I'm dreaming and suggesting. If I were to predict I would say that the USA gets it in 2026. Tough I see no reason to why they should. The USA should be out of the question until at least 2050. Five countries has hosted the WC twice so far. Mexico got their second tournament after 16 years. Though we all know they stepped in when Colombia had to back out. Italy got their second tournament after 56 years. France got their second tournament after 60 years. Germany their second after 32 years. Though a reunited Germany hosting the second one. While Brazil waited 64 years for their second tournament. Why should the USA get a second tournament only 32 years after their first? Why should the USA get a second tournament before big football nations like England or Spain? Or before the Netherlands gets its first? It makes no sense. And that's why the USA should be ruled out until at least 2050.
Second, FIFA operated with an "Americas" for 40 years from the first host distribution agreement in 1956, to the election of Japan and South Korea in 1996. The original agreement said every second tournament in Europe, and every second in the Americas. Which also was the case until Japan and South Korea.
20 years is a really long time mate. Go back to 1990 and say that in 20 years, South Africa will be hosting the World Cup. People would laugh at you. By 20 years, Nigeria is expected to be the 21st largest economy in the world. And should have no problems hosting a World Cup.

Except it doesn't work like that. Organizations like FIFA and the IOC don't think the way some people here do where they look at the next 100 years and try to plot out decades worth of hosts. That's all well and good for us to speculate about if you really want, but like you said, who knows how things will shake out.

That all said, FIFA chooses their World Cup host 1 at a time (except for the one time they did 2 at once and look how that turned out). Let's assume FIFA sticks to their current rules for 2026 that says that both CAF and UEFA are ineligible. That leaves us with North America (United States, Canada, and Mexico all potentially submitting bids), South America (Colombia has shown interest, and who knows what Argentina and/or Uruguay are thinking), Africa (is anyone else ready to bid following South Africa?), and Oceania who probably won't figure in. Those are the options. FIFA can only work with what's in front of them, so they're going to choose by whatever logic they use, who the best host for them is. With regard to the United States, you have 2 confederations that will have hosted in the previous 20 years versus North America having not hosted in more than 30. And 1 of those other North American options is Mexico who has already hosted twice. So suddenly the United States looks a lot more appealing.

With FIFA now more global than they were in the 20th century, we're going to start seeing a scenario where there are a lot of potential host countries in Europe, but not so much in other continents. Certainly Europe will get, at the very least, every 3rd World Cup. And while the United States isn't as lucrative a market to FIFA as it is to the IOC, there is still a great financial interest in putting a World Cup here than there is in many other countries. If the United States is the most appealing bid among the options FIFA has for 2026, they'll win. You can't disqualify them out of some sort of fairness to other countries. You can't rule them out simply because you're projecting the next 8 decades of World Cup hosts and a USA 2026 World Cup doesn't fit conveniently into that plan. That's the reality of how this process works. If the United States can present a better case to host the 2026 World Cup than the other countries who are bidding (and I'm not trying to make a prediction, but I could easily see that being the case), they are going to win it, and "should" is not an argument you can make against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think Canada looks interesting and appealing for most of us. They got experience hosting, good stadia, geographically eligible, growing female soccer culture, never hosted the WC in CONCACAF region. I just wonder if Canada bids and wins, will Uruguay-Argentina 2030 be affected??

No World Cup in the CONCACAF Region? America 1994?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but the continent is split into 2 federations, so for most of people from all over the world could see it as a two in a row WC in the same continent. Then I'd rather see Australia bidding even if it belongs to AFC and Qatar hosts in 2022.

America and Canada are in the same Continent though, both in Football and Geographic Terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be fake, but that's a pretty good concept. The 1 change I'd make would be to axe Toronto 2 & replace it with Quebec City. I think Quebecers would be much happier with a 3-2 ratio with Ontario, rather than 4-1. I also prefer 1 city, 1 venue, spreads the Cup better. A stadium would help QC too, could get them an MLS team.


Maybe add Moncton too, to give 12 venues, like in 2006.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be fake, but that's a pretty good concept. The 1 change I'd make would be to axe Toronto 2 & replace it with Quebec City. I think Quebecers would be much happier with a 3-2 ratio with Ontario, rather than 4-1. I also prefer 1 city, 1 venue, spreads the Cup better. A stadium would help QC too, could get them an MLS team.

Maybe add Moncton too, to give 12 venues, like in 2006.

Toronto 2 is being expanded with the 2026 World cup in mind. If anything Quebec would be aiming for a CFL team and with that a stadium need does arise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having 2 Stadiums in 1 City and only 1 City is not a problem as far as I am concerned. Like if here in England Hosted, here in London would have Wembley and Emirates Stadium. Moscow will have 2 (Luzhniki and Spartak Stadium), Doha has 4 or 5 lol, Johannesburg had 2 (FNB Stadium and Ellis Park), Paris would have 2 (Stade de France and Park des Princes), Amsterdam would maybe have 2 (Olympic Stadium and Amsterdam Arena).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having 2 Stadiums in 1 City and only 1 City is not a problem as far as I am concerned. Like if here in England Hosted, here in London would have Wembley and Emirates Stadium. Moscow will have 2 (Luzhniki and Spartak Stadium), Doha has 4 or 5 lol, Johannesburg had 2 (FNB Stadium and Ellis Park), Paris would have 2 (Stade de France and Park des Princes), Amsterdam would maybe have 2 (Olympic Stadium and Amsterdam Arena).

You left out the "my" in front of England! WELL DONE!!!!! Sincerely!!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto 2 is being expanded with the 2026 World cup in mind. If anything Quebec would be aiming for a CFL team and with that a stadium need does arise.

Yeah, Quebec City is focused on reviving their former NHL franchise, they also have a strong Canadian Football tradition. I think they chose these stadiums to use existing facilities as much as possible. The only stadiums that would have to be built would be the 80,000 Toronto stadium (needed in the future if they end up with an NFL team and also because Toronto's the only Canadian city with the population/money to make such a facility feasible) and the smaller Halifax stadium (where there is a desperate need for a stadium to attract a CFL team). Calgary has a strong CFL tradition and bags of money so they'll be replacing their old stadium regardless before the 2026 World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And of course if Quebec or Calgary were to bid for the 2026 Winter Games, this would be a major stumbling block for a Canadian WC bid, no?

Theoretically, it might be a stumbling block for the US as well. The US could easily do a WC and WOG in the same year, but are there bidding rules that forbid this? None of the possible WOG cities would be likely to host WC matches. Is it the city that can't host two major events in one year or the country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, I think there's a one or two month window either side of the Games for other international sporting events in the city. I don't think an Olympics rules out the entire year.

Unless we're talking about FIFA's stipulations for World Cup hosts, in which case I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not saying it would be forbidden for Calgary/Quebec/Vancouver to host both WOG and parts of the WC in the same year, it seems however very unlikely to me that they would get both, as FIFA and the IOC surely want to have an air of exclusivity, if not written down, but in their heads.

That's a thing for both North American countries to consider, though while all potential Canadian WOG cities are also potential WC cities, in the US there's not really any kind of overlap, except maybe for Denver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not saying it would be forbidden for Calgary/Quebec/Vancouver to host both WOG and parts of the WC in the same year, it seems however very unlikely to me that they would get both, as FIFA and the IOC surely want to have an air of exclusivity, if not written down, but in their heads.

That's a thing for both North American countries to consider, though while all potential Canadian WOG cities are also potential WC cities, in the US there's not really any kind of overlap, except maybe for Denver.

Well look at the scenario with Istanbul's Bid for the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics and Turkey's Bid for the UEFA Euro 2020 (Before we knew about the across Europe Championships). The IOC said Istanbul can't Host the Olympics if Turkey get the Euro 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well look at the scenario with Istanbul's Bid for the 2020 Summer Olympics and Paralympics and Turkey's Bid for the UEFA Euro 2020 (Before we knew about the across Europe Championships). The IOC said Istanbul can't Host the Olympics if Turkey get the Euro 2020.

Well yes, that basically proves my point - UEFA was even quite outspoken about that. Though obviously, the time between EURO and Summer Games is much shorter and would have made things much more difficult even.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Canada would have a better chance Bidding with Toronto for the 2032 Summer Olympics. Canada could get the 2026 Fifa World Cup aswell. That's what I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding a possible Canadian bid, it appears to be highly excepted that a World Cup bid (not to mention a possible Olympic bid) would see construction of new stadium in Toronto that would then be home to an NFL team. I think that's not as likely as one might think. First of all, the NFL has put the brakes on future expansion. If Toronto wants an NFL team, it's going to have to be via relocation of a current franchise. Speculation over the years has focused on the Buffalo Bills and I expect that to resurface with the passing of team owner Ralph Wilson though potential owners are lining up to keep the team in Buffalo. The most likely candidates for relocation are the Jacksonville Jaguars and St. Louis Rams, but the city first in line for relocation is Los Angeles and the league has made it clear they want a team in the second largest media market in the U.S. After that, it appears London is next in line. Commissioner Roger Godell has made no secret about the possibility of a franchise in London. So while Toronto would get consideration, they seem to be second or third in line for NFL relocation. What would Toronto do with a 75-80,000 seat stadium with no NFL team? I suppose it could be the home of the Argonauts with Rogers Centre being configured permanently for baseball, but it's hard to see Toronto constructing a new stadium without a guarantee of it being the home for an NFL team after a World Cup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...