Gopherbashi Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 1 minute ago, matty said: Looking at comments on various sites, looks like most people don't want us even co-hosting this because they'd rather the money be spent on vets and the enviroment rather than a FIFA event lol sawker. so boring! There, I saved you the trouble of going to the CBC comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Just now, Gopherbashi said: lol sawker. so boring! There, I saved you the trouble of going to the CBC comments. Actually no one said that. They were all like "waste of money" and "FIFA are corrupt" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 1 minute ago, matty said: Actually no one said that. They were all like "waste of money" and "FIFA are corrupt" Well, sounds like that's a great reason to give us fewer games in fewer stadiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete Homer Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 I'm usually very unfriendly to the idea of public funds for stadiums... But this is about as economical as this will ever get. Probably only upgrades to existing stadiums and the associated costs like security and some infrastructure upgrades. Might even make a profit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ansem Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 1 minute ago, Complete Homer said: I'm usually very unfriendly to the idea of public funds for stadiums... But this is about as economical as this will ever get. Probably only upgrades to existing stadiums and the associated costs like security and some infrastructure upgrades. Might even make a profit You might be on to something here regarding economics. They must have promised tp share a bigger amount of the profits to quiet Mexico and Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, matty said: While disappoint I gotta say: I FUCKING TOLD YOU AZTECA WASN'T GETTING THE FINAL My money's on the new LA NFL stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Just now, RS said: My money's on the new LA NFL stadium. I'm picking ATnT cause it'll be slightly bigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xabuep2 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 This bid has Canada and Mexico as two other states of USA , as Alabama, or California...... So the Bid´s name should be USA2026 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 FIFA only should have a say on the number of spots each confederation gets, not how each confederation chooses to do its qualification process. If Concacaf deems that their 3 hosts get an automatic spot for the 2026 World Cup that should be the end of the matter. If they allow shit like Australia getting to qualify out of Asia, then they shouldn't be stepping in to interfere here. To have a nation host a World Cup but not qualify for it would send a very negative precedent and would run counter to the purpose of hosting. Although a part of me hopes that FIFA says "if you want to have three co-host qualifiers, then distribute the games 50-15-15 at the very least and give Canada the final since unlike the US & Mexico, they've never hosted one before". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heepster Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 39 minutes ago, canta15 said: Us getting automatic qualification could home down to whether we make the hex in the next world cup cycle As much as I don't like pointing it out, it's difficult to argue that a country routinely ranked below 100 in recent years would deserve to make the tournament without having to qualify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 54 minutes ago, lazlo_80 said: Am I the only one who is fine with this bid? Not dumping money into a bunch of white elephants, getting some infrastructure in our biggest markets that will be used after the tourny leaves, getting kids excited about soccer, and (probably) getting our team in a world cup? I wouldn't want to build a crap ton of new stadiums to host this thing solo, what a waste! I mean, sure, in a perfect world it would've been nice to host say, 15 games or so. But yeah, I'm fine with this. Mexico should be PISSSSSSED. I bet you CSA went to federal govt and asked for money to improve and build some new stadiums. Feds asked how much and balked at the number. And asked CSA what's the plan for using the newly built stadiums after WC and CSA said we don't know. BMO Field got fed govt funding only after MLSE said they will use it for TFC. And that took a lot of political effort to squeeze some money out of govt. There's no appetite to spend public money on soccer stadiums, and the feds have bigger priorities to spent money on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Complete Homer Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 https://mobile.twitter.com/KurtLarSUN/status/851535893798297600 Minimum 2 Canadian venues So... BMO and grass installed at BC place? Can't see them justifying renovating the big O for a split of 10 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazlo_80 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Heepster said: As much as I don't like pointing it out, it's difficult to argue that a country routinely ranked below 100 in recent years would deserve to make the tournament without having to qualify. I don't agree with this. Look at South Africa and Dubai. There's never been a precedent that lower seed teams weren't invited to their own party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xabuep2 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 I can not understand if 3 nations organize the World Cup, Why the quarter of finals, semifinals and final must be played in only one of these nations. Imagine the Korea-Japan WC , if the finals games would have been played only in Korea ! It seems that CONCACAF always works with tricks, Remember the "draws" of the Gold Cup Sunil Gulati looked like the boss of Montagliani and Decio di Maria....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopherbashi Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 6 minutes ago, Complete Homer said: https://mobile.twitter.com/KurtLarSUN/status/851535893798297600 Minimum 2 Canadian venues So... BMO and grass installed at BC place? Can't see them justifying renovating the big O for a split of 10 games Big difference between two and six host cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 The strongest CONCACAF bid comes from marketing POV. FIFA isn't going to be interested in a bid that's not going to maximize US's attractiveness to sponsors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shermanator Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 1 hour ago, lazlo_80 said: Am I the only one who is fine with this bid? Not dumping money into a bunch of white elephants, getting some infrastructure in our biggest markets that will be used after the tourny leaves, getting kids excited about soccer, and (probably) getting our team in a world cup? I wouldn't want to build a crap ton of new stadiums to host this thing solo, what a waste! I mean, sure, in a perfect world it would've been nice to host say, 15 games or so. But yeah, I'm fine with this. Mexico should be PISSSSSSED. Nope, I'm totally okay with it as well. Anyone thinking that the public would be okay with dumping billions into massive stadiums for an event run by an incredibly corrupt group like FIFA is kidding themselves. I want to grow the game in this country as well, but we have to be realistic about it. A dozen 40-80K seat stadiums isn't going to do that. Now if a solo world cup bid would come with a few dozen indoor full sized FIFA training pitches spread throughout each province, I think that's a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackTheBlizzard Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 17 minutes ago, Gopherbashi said: Big difference between two and six host cities. Six venues for 10 games? Who is he trying to kid with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floortom Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 I get the heavy weighting towards US - makes sense. Just surprised it's THAT drastic. Splitting 25% of the matches between Canada and Mexico is ridiculous IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyFromToronto23 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Now that we only have 10 games I think venues will be Toronto will get 4 games Vancouver will get 3 games Montreal will get 2 games Edmonton will only get 1 game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyFromToronto23 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Just now, DannyFromToronto23 said: Now that we only have 10 games I think venues will be Toronto will get 4 games Vancouver will get 3 games Montreal will get 3 games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackTheBlizzard Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Extra venues cost FIFA money in terms of their profit margin. It will almost certainly be two. Montagliani is just being a politician about it as per usual and is trying to get people to think he is doing his bit to get their province some games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpg_29 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Well there a couple of things to look at...on a per capita basis we are getting the most games per person. Mexico is getting the worst of it in that aspect. But on the other hand Mexico already hosted twice, US once, Canada 0...so maybe it is ultimately fair. Only thing I don't like is that USA is getting all the quarters/semis/final. I think Canada and Mexico should have 1 quarter game each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 14 minutes ago, Floortom said: I get the heavy weighting towards US - makes sense. Just surprised it's THAT drastic. Splitting 25% of the matches between Canada and Mexico is ridiculous IMO. Honestly I don't see the point in Mexico and Canada being involved. Should at least be a 20, 20, 40 split. Or 15, 25, 40. Its like the US is just using Canada and Mexico because it doesn't think it would win the bid alone. Even just a joint US/Canada bid makes more sense. Just weird all round. Absolutely no chance automatic places would be given to Mexico and Canada on that basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinrack Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 30 minutes ago, DannyFromToronto23 said: Now that we only have 10 games I think venues will be Toronto will get 4 games Vancouver will get 3 games Montreal will get 2 games Edmonton will only get 1 game Unless Olympic Stadium gets a major overhaul, it will be a 50/50 split between Vancouver and Toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.