Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No I actually mean Dallas because that's what the site says
Well sorry to burst your bubble, but if the World Cup were held there it would be at the new Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas which is 20 miles west of Dallas where Six Flags & all of those other entertainment venues are located. Its closer to Fort Worth than Dallas, but Dallas likes to claim it as theirs when its the tax payers of Arlington who footed the bill for Jerry World.
"The U.S. Bid includes 18 candidate host cities: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville, New York, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa and Washington, D.C."
Geographically west to east:
1. Los Angeles
2. San Diego (San Francisco instead if it were an option)
3. Seattle
4. Denver (Chicago instead if it were an option)
5. Dallas
6. Kansas City
7. Nashville
8. Miami
9. Washington D.C.
10. Baltimore
11. Philadelphia
12. New York
I would pick cities that make practical sense. I choose L.A. and San Diego so people would be able to make an easy drive between the two to see games. Same goes for Baltimore-D.C. and Philly-New York. I left Boston off because I see no reason why all 5 major northeastern cities should be represented while other regions like the west and midwest have notable exclusions. Miami because its sexy, and Denver-Dallas-KC-Nashville because I think people should see the interior of the country.
When the World Cup was here in '94 Detroit and KC hosted games, so there is a history of Midwest cities hosting. Furthermore, both the Silverdome and Giants Stadium had astroturf fields at the time, but they planted natural grass fields just for the World Cup. So, I would anticipate the same thing happening at any candidate site with fieldturf currently. Finally, it really doesn't matter where the games are played, and how "diverse" those cities are. People will come. It's the World Cup.
With all of that in mind, I'm pulling for Indy. I'm biased, of course, since I live there. It would be great for the city, and we'd be a great host.
When the World Cup was here in '94 Detroit and KC hosted games, so there is a history of Midwest cities hosting. Furthermore, both the Silverdome and Giants Stadium had astroturf fields at the time, but they planted natural grass fields just for the World Cup. So, I would anticipate the same thing happening at any candidate site with fieldturf currently. Finally, it really doesn't matter where the games are played, and how "diverse" those cities are. People will come. It's the World Cup.
With all of that in mind, I'm pulling for Indy. I'm biased, of course, since I live there. It would be great for the city, and we'd be a great host.
I don't get why people would pick San Francisco! I am so freaking happy it isn't one of the cities they are considering! Finally give another city the spotlight! Yes, San Francisco is World Class but why not give another city a chance at rising up and becoming a star to the nation and the whole world?!?!? This is a great opportunity for cities such as San Diego and Phoenix to rise up and become even more recognizable among the World. I don't get it. it's like this selfish facade like "that city has and is first class, so it should always be!" WRONG. Cities will not grow reputationally without their fair share of the spotlight. Open your eyes and accept this as a fact.
You got me. Why did I think KC hosted. Maybe I confused KC with Dallas. Still, another city in the middle of country not known for having a huge soccer base.
I don't get why people would pick San Francisco! I am so freaking happy it isn't one of the cities they are considering! Finally give another city the spotlight! Yes, San Francisco is World Class but why not give another city a chance at rising up and becoming a star to the nation and the whole world?!?!? This is a great opportunity for cities such as San Diego and Phoenix to rise up and become even more recognizable among the World. I don't get it. it's like this selfish facade like "that city has and is first class, so it should always be!" WRONG. Cities will not grow reputationally without their fair share of the spotlight. Open your eyes and accept this as a fact.
You got me. Why did I think KC hosted. Maybe I confused KC with Dallas. Still, another city in the middle of country not known for having a huge soccer base.
I hope KC gets it this time around. I think it would be a fab host destination.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
