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.
Seattle has a decent chance. I was just calling out why arguing their stadium isn't a good point.
Heck, if anything, I'd even say that having an MLS specific stadium would be a benefit. It just doesn't make sense to rank MLS team stadiums that play in NFL stadiums versus teams that play in MLS specific stadiums. But in general, factoring the MLS isn't a good argument overall regardless which people seem to pay too much of an emphasis on.
To the cluster point, yes Seattle and Vancouver can form well on top of LA and SF being on the West Coast. FIFA would like this. The one place that gets hurt by being "too far out from everything" is Denver.
Wonder if the committee will be lenient on allowing a MLS stadium. Sporting KC's field was literally made for the purpose of eventually hosting a world cup game.
Sporting's stadium is nice but it can't host a WC game. It doesn't get anywhere close to meeting FIFA requirements. The folks who built probably knew that (or at least SHOULD HAVE). Their objective was to boost soccer's profile in KC (winning titles, selling out MLS games, make money, and eventually hosting a WC in Arrowhead). It's all about making money.
Okay and good luck. Chicago dropped out back in 2018, so did some other cities around the U.S. If they had it to do all over again, they probably wouldn't have dropped out. These games should be a boost to the local economy.
I can tell you a good amount of people I work with in the city are still bitter at the decision, but unfortunately that's what happens when you have a nationalist government in place. It would've been a huge economic boost for the city and a rare opportunity to host the games, and they blew it. Typical
I can tell you a good amount of people I work with in the city are still bitter at the decision, but unfortunately that's what happens when you have a nationalist government in place. It would've been a huge economic boost for the city and a rare opportunity to host the games, and they blew it. Typical
Yeah it’s a bummer Chicago isn’t in. But even more of a bummer that Vegas isn’t.
Yes it would be but I'm strictly speaking of within the US. Much easier for folks in the same country to travel around, especially if Canada has strict requirements. This is why I didn't include Monterrey with the Texas group.
“ It is unfathomable, most experts agree, for FIFA to bypass New York or Los Angeles, or the soccer-crazed areas of Seattle and Miami. They’re all-but guaranteed four of the 10 U.S. spots.
Dallas and Atlanta, with expansive indoor stadiums and proximity to Mexico (with accommodating airports) give them an edge. San Francisco is considered a favorite as well…. After that, it gets a little hairier. .”
Weird. Houston meets this criteria as well. I mean, it's even closer to Mexico than Dallas and Atlanta if he used that reasoning.
Wasn’t this announcement supposed to come yesterday?
Edit: Oh wait. It’s today isn’t it? Exciting!
Yes around 5pm EST. There are watch parties scheduled in certain cities, makes me wonder if there is secret intel.
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.
