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.
Then again you elect the politicians and city leaders, who have obviously worked with The Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football in order to launch such a bid.
In terms of stadia, the US, Mexico and Canada will already have decent stadiums in place, just as the US had in 1994.
In terms of disruption the event is spread out over three countries so disruption will be minimal, and posssible no worse than a normal city sporting events.
You seem confused; The people didnt vote for the games the politicians did.
And easy to say its a minor inconvenience when you aren't on the hook for it.
They held it in 94! England (a football mad country hasn't had it since 66) and the Netherlands (another football mad country) have NEVER held the tournament!
I think its fair given that when it's 2026 that 1994 (Last time the US has hosted the World Cup) will have been 32 years ago and 1986 (Last time Mexico hosted the World Cup) 40 years ago. Shame about England though but to be fair London had the Olympics in 2012. England will have its chance in 2030 if they submit a bid in time as they were not allowed to bid for the 2026 World Cup...
Last edited by yankeefan93; 06-13-2018 at 10:17 AM..
A lot more sensible than Qatar and other ccorrupt FIFA decision making under Blatter.
FIFA is incredibly corrupt, but let's not kid ourselves, so is the USSF. Look no further than its previous president (who also chaired this bid) and the voting process that occurred to replaced him a few months back. I wish that hosting the World Cup would help grow the game here, but I'm not sure that the money will be spent wisely. I do, however, know that the USSF brass will be sure to get their share.
They held it in 94! England (a football mad country hasn't had it since 66) and the Netherlands (another football mad country) have NEVER held the tournament!
Europe has hosted the tournament more than any other continent and also compare Europe to North America. North America has 2 countries that could host the tournament - the United States and Mexico. Europe has several - Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and England. Point being England has more competition than say the US does within their own continent. Now that FIFA has made the foolish decision to expand the field to 48 teams (a clear money grab and in the process watering down the tournament), you will see more joint bids going forward. Thanks for the NFL and college football, the US blows every other country out of the water when it comes to stadium infrastructure and could easily host the tournament over night without the need to build new stadiums or expand the ones they have. Now that FIFA is saying 16 more teams and 16 more games will be happening, that's going to put a lot of pressure on future host nations.
I love soccer!
I live in LA...and I couldn't be happier.
Last WC in 1994, I was just a kid. My dad ended up crashing that day during the final game held at the Rose Bowl because of all the crazy fans that the event brought in.
Yet, I couldn't be happier!!!
There's always good and bad consequences to everything.
It's going to be a terrible World Cup in '26 with the expansion but I'll take it.
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.
