paul-collins Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 2. Any bid is going to be joke and the money spent will just be sending folks on junkets to expensive hotels. Sign me up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrus Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I really think that Canada's odds of getting a World Cup, as it stands right now are slim. We really don't have any competitive advantage over competing bids. In particular, the USA would have no incentive to share a bid with us. Mexico might, but given the political issues right now between our two countries, I don't see us cooperating on a joint bid. However, I would certainly see us being a clear front-runner if we ever put in a bid for an IRB Rugby World Cup -- North American exposure for a game that has a minimal footprint right now in the USA. If we run a successful rugby tournament, and show that CFL stadiums are easily converted to grass, and the tournament is a huge success, that could easily pave the way for a successful run at the big one, the FIFA World Cup. That's the only scenario I see as doable. Unless conditions change and Mexico or the USA see us as valuable in a joint bid scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob.notenboom Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Totally agree, change is inevitable in such a long period of time which is what I've been trying to say to the people here who seem to think we'd be playing games at 60 year old, 2010 model artificial turf, unrefurbished MacMahon stadium. Agree with everything except calling artificial turf, turf. Turf is grass hence the term artificial turf. My pet peeve, sorry. Same with people saying loose instead of lose. Rant over. Chuckle ... pet peeves ... no worries here. I have a million of them too ... 'irregardless' was one that popped up on another thread yesterday ... forgot who from. It's the teacher in me ... More to the point however, if the development of the new stadium in Regina goes ahead and is a decent enough size, the next stumbling block is the number of hotel rooms. This is always an issue when we host the Grey Cup. However, the way the population is growing in the city, by 2026 there could be 300,000 people and more than enough hotels. This is the problem with prognostication ... the status quo isn't. Regardless (see what I did there) for soccer supporters, there is a lot of up side to a bid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 Such as? For one, MLS eventually becoming a top league in the world down the road. I'm not saying it will happen by 2026, but there is a good chance Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver all will probably need new arenas when it does. BMO will eventually become TFC's version of Maple Leaf Gardens. The team can only make so much revenue out of a bare-bones stadium like that. Alright, I lied. This is just one scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 The thing about this World Cup is that it is almost guaranteed to be in the Americas. It is too soon for Europe or Asia after the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, I really can't see them giving it to Africa again just because there isn't really another country with the infrastructure to host it leaving North or South America. There are a few potential South American bids (Columbia, Argentina), but considering none of those countries bid for the 2014 World Cup I don't for-see a serious bid from either of those countries leaving only CONCACAF, the federation that's gone the longest without hosting a World Cup. Obviously there are only three countries that could possibly host it in 2026: ourselves, Mexico or the USA. With Mexico's crime troubles I really can't see FIFA awarding it to them leaving it up to either Canada or the USA. FIFA is all about this legacy thing right now and they'll see what 1994 did to the USA and hopefully take a real good look at Canada. Plus just from a general infrastructure sense of upgrading transportation, accessibility etc. I can see a lot of the big municipalities getting behind hosting an event like this (without having to build nearly as many later-to-be-useless facilities than the Olympics requires). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califax Posted July 10, 2012 Share Posted July 10, 2012 I really can't see FIFA awarding it to them leaving it up to either Canada or the USA. FIFA is all about this legacy thing right now and they'll see what 1994 did to the USA and hopefully take a real good look at Canada. Plus just from a general infrastructure sense of upgrading transportation, accessibility etc. I can see a lot of the big municipalities getting behind hosting an event like this (without having to build nearly as many later-to-be-useless facilities than the Olympics requires). Yup. First off the Harper Gov will give money towards stadiums as long as it's not solely for pro sports teams. Second, the harper gov will likely not be around at that point rendering my first point meaningless. And third, and more importantly, FIFA knows the states will come to us. Americans all over that country will pack up their **** and drive north of the border to see these games. Fifa knows that, we know that. I think we have the edge over the yanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Announcement concerning new Regina stadium expected today before Rider game at Mosaic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Perhaps some of you folks would like to read some wiki information on bids... start with Australia and then carve that into your though process, they have better arenas.... etc and only got nine votes .... and spent.... mulitiple milliions on preparation and bribes, and do not doubt the CSA will have to decide up front .... 1. Do we offer bribes to win the bid ? 2. Do we do the bid pure and clean with no illegal payments to fixers ? If we say yes to number one we sell out our soul ( and wont get it in any case ). If we say yes to number two, we on past track records will not win the bid. So where is the logic in spending between two to five million on a bid ? Far better off for the growth of the game in Canada for the CSA to develop a four nations cup competition to run every two years and host in Toronto and Montreal with a Canada B team and two teams from CONCACAF and one special invitee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Perhaps you can tell me how we won three Olympic bids when we are such a loser country. Was there massive bribery because if there was I think an ambitious investigative reporter would have uncovered it by now as they did with Salt Lake City. It seems to me there are three or four people on this site who are diametrically opposed to anything the CSA might undertake now matter what it is. Thanks be to Allah the country was already built when they arrived here because if it wasn't we'd still be living in sod huts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 <sarcasm mode on>Here's what sitting on yer arse, being negative, and doing nothing brings you <sarcasm mode off> Deal signed for new stadium in Regina by 2017 $12 facility fee will pay for $100 million loan as part of funding mix CBC News Jul 14, 2012 A new stadium, costing $278 million, will be built in Regina in time for the 2017 football season, government officials and the Saskatchewan Roughriders announced Saturday. Funding for the facility will come from the province of Saskatchewan, the city of Regina and contributions from the Roughriders. A loan of $100 million will also be part of the funding mix, with officials noting that money would be repaid through a $12 fee tacked onto tickets for football games and other events held at the new stadium. A memorandum of understanding was signed by the three parties. Regina city council will also have to approve the deal. Meetings are set for later in July to consider the deal. At the announcement, officials said the new stadium would be built on the city's exhibition grounds, known as Evraz Place. The facility will be open-air and seat 33,000, although capacity may be temporarily expanded. There is also a plan to ensure a roof could be added at a later date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califax Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Perhaps you can tell me how we won three Olympic bids when we are such a loser country. Was there massive bribery because if there was I think an ambitious investigative reporter would have uncovered it by now as they did with Salt Lake City. It seems to me there are three or four people on this site who are diametrically opposed to anything the CSA might undertake now matter what it is. Thanks be to Allah the country was already built when they arrived here because if it wasn't we'd still be living in sod huts. +1. I don't know if it's possible to get a "post crush" but I have a real raging one right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 I really don't want to promote those who I used to call the CSA "Legion of Doom" who add nothing to the debate, so let's talk about the great news for Regina. Now imagine, they are going to spend 88 million more than the fantastic new Winnipeg stadium. Gonna be cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Christina Stalteri gave us a little reminder of what being a Canadian fan is about now here's Brad Wall and Pat Fiacco showing what the can-do attitude will get you. Naysayers beware, positivity abounds! Brad Wall quote "Canada's team deserves a world class stadium and we're gonna get that done" And that's how I feel about our NTs - JM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger miller Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 And the surface for the Riders stadium will be what? Thats the question we need to ask before we even consider this story as in any ways soccer related. http://www.torontofc.ca/video/2012/07/14/k...ry-july-14-2012 Last night, another player likely lost for the season due to injury as result of playing on turf. In this case is the team's scorer. Earlier in the season, Frings was lost for six weeks following a turf injury. Last year, the reigning league MVP was lost for the year as a result of playing a game on the plastic. The four MLS stadiums that are on turf, probably account for 80% of the league's serious injuries. Hell, even baseball free agent players wont sign with teams than of turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redcoatsforever Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 There's a simple fix that's been pointed out to you elsewhere that you keep ignoring: In 1994, the USA had most of the World Cup played on Astroturf with dirt and sod laid over top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 And the surface for the Riders stadium will be what? Thats the question we need to ask before we even consider this story as in any ways soccer related. Last night, another player likely lost for the season due to injury as result of playing on turf. In this case is the team's scorer. Earlier in the season, Frings was lost for six weeks following a turf injury. Last year, the reigning league MVP was lost for the year as a result of playing a game on the plastic. The four MLS stadiums that are on turf, probably account for 80% of the league's serious injuries. Hell, even baseball free agent players wont sign with teams than of turf. Another poster said you were whining before and you denied it, well you're sure whining now. It's pretty likely the new Rider stadium will have an artificial surface. We are talking about a World Cup bid not some newbie's vendetta about the merits of artificial turf. First, you don't even know that the word turf means grass so you are saying people are getting hurt on grass. Second, you are whining about something 20 years down the road. If artificial turf technology does not get better in that time, a World Cup would be played on grass. There are many ways around the issue. What do you think the Americans were going to do if they won the 2022 bid? Proposed venues Cowboys Stadium, MetLife Stadium, Gillette Stadium, Husky Stadium, Georgia Dome, M&T Bank Stadium, CenturyLink Field, Lucas Oil Stadium all have artificial surfaces. Why can't you seem to understand it doesn't matter what surface they presently have. It will either be changed in time for the WC or it won't (FIFA will allow AT). Simple! If you want to whine against the WC bid expect a rough time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger miller Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 There's a simple fix that's been pointed out to you elsewhere that you keep ignoring: In 1994, the USA had most of the World Cup played on Astroturf with dirt and sod laid over top. I am not going to ignore it, i just dont see proof, someone give a link stating that a majority of games Were played on grass laid over a turf. I am not 100% sure yet that people got their facts straight. That wouldnt be the first time here that people post things as facts that are only half truths or not telling the whole story. I know that they did this at the Silverdome, but i do recall the 1994 WC (unlike some of the people here) and i do not recall temporary makeshift surfaces other than at the Silverdome. I know that the Silverdome became the story because it was indded a makeshift or retrofit. But the others, there was no story. Yes, they played at many facilitites that now have turf ( such as Giants stadium). But places like Soldier field and all that i know and recall were natural surfaces and not makeshifts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger miller Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 There's a simple fix that's been pointed out to you elsewhere that you keep ignoring: In 1994, the USA had most of the World Cup played on Astroturf with dirt and sod laid over top. The more i am thinking about it, here is a thought: Could it be, that all the facilities used USA 94, were actually grass only stadiums at the time of the world cup? Except for the Silverdome. Lets think about that for second. And, could it be, that they installed artificial turf in many or some of those facilities after 1994? Lets think about that as well for second. As i said, i recall the 1994 WC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzAndSting Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The more i am thinking about it, here is a thought: Could it be, that all the facilities used USA 94, were actually grass only stadiums at the time of the world cup? Except for the Silverdome. Lets think about that for second. And, could it be, that they installed turf in many or some of those facilities after 1994? Lets think about that as well for second. As i said, i recall the 1994 WC. All the stadiums had real grass. You can find that out by doing a simple Google search. Apparently there were 5 stadiums with a Bermuda grass blend and 4 with a Kentucky Bluegrass blend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 As far as I know, they were all permanent turf installations except for the Silverdome. I'm not sure why arguing this point is pertinent. It's like asking whether Oswald wore brown or black shoes. It has nothing to do with the bid. Artificial surfaces are replaceable if they have to be. Whether a new full turf installation, sod rolls (unlikely), turf tray system or a new more resilient super grass that will allow for the pounding of both soccer and football. Who cares? It doesn't matter. It's one guy's vendetta against AT clouding up the debate over a WC bid. We need at least 10 suitable buildings. The surface is a changeable/fixable issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger miller Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Ahhhhhhhh, to mserson and Joe M, thank you my most esteemed gentlemen for setting the record straight. As Don Cherry would say: "Now let this be lesson for all you kids out there, never quote incorrect facts". "and never stick a knife inside an electrical socket" Now that i got that out of the way, Yes, thats what i thought. They were all natural surface stadia except for the Silverdome. The reason i know is because the Silverdome and its possible problems became one of the stories of that WC. It was the first time that they ever did that (ie.: lay sod, over an artificial surface) and play indoors. It was met with mixed results. Basically, laying sod over a natural surface is very cost prohibitive and can only be counted on a one off event. Such as the champions world series, where they play one game on it at max or maybe a few such as at Gillette stadium for he Gold Cup which by the way was heavily criticized by the players as being awfull. New england players hated it even more than the field turf. Some players said that it felt like they were playing soccer on a mattress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 ^ All very true but not pertinent. We need to worry about buildings first. Surfaces can be changed. Once again here are the possible scenarios. (1) Artificial turf (AT) improved to the point of approval (2) Stadiums time the EOL (end of life) for AT and replace with turf for WC and one or more seasons of football and revert back to AT. (3) New "Supergrass" developed that needs less sun, water, fertilizer and maintenance and can withstand multi-sport pounding permanently installed in all stadiums (4) Temporary turf installation over AT for duration of WC (turf trays) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger miller Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Well, to repeat what I said earlier about the CFL stadia: The 1994 world cup was played mostly in NFL stadiums that shipped in grass surfaces to be layed over the artificial turf. ? You get a yellow card for that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe MacCarthy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 And you get a yellow card for trying to deflect the issue about whether we can bid for/host a WC or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macksam Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Perhaps you can tell me how we won three Olympic bids when we are such a loser country. Was there massive bribery because if there was I think an ambitious investigative reporter would have uncovered it by now as they did with Salt Lake City. It seems to me there are three or four people on this site who are diametrically opposed to anything the CSA might undertake now matter what it is. Thanks be to Allah the country was already built when they arrived here because if it wasn't we'd still be living in sod huts. lulz, well Jurri Kurri, who was apart of the IOC when Vancouver was awarded its 2010 games, did give Gretzky, who was apart of Canada's bid commitee, a wink just before Canada was announced the winner. Something shady went on there. Judging by some of the comments from the CBC site regarding the Regina stadium, people don't seem too happy about it. Hopefully it will not get shot down when Fiacco gets replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.