Jump to content

2026 WC Bid?


munseahawk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

ESPN releases a sensationalistic story that Morocco has more than 104 votes in their pocket to win the 2026 WC. The response is that if you do the math there are 54 African members, 10 CONMEBOL and 47 in AFC with enough asian countries backing CANAMEX to sway the vote in our favour.

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-world-cup/story/3400487/united-states-led-2026-world-cup-bid-in-jeopardy-to-morocco-sources

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Well they aren't fooling anyone, it's a US bid with some games being shared with Mexico and Canada. The best way to switch this around is to:

  • More Canada & Mexico in promotion
  • Games being share more evenly

 

Yeah, i think the Americans are actually hurting the strength of the bid. If we'd had the balls to go it on our own we may have had a legit. shot at winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Well they aren't fooling anyone, it's a US bid with some games being shared with Mexico and Canada. The best way to switch this around is to:

  • More Canada & Mexico in promotion
  • Games being share more evenly

 

Agree! A good way to temper some of the anti American feelings would be to give Canada and Mexico more matches which would increase their profile in this bid, the way it is now if the bid is lost due to the US at least it's only 10 games which quite frankly is ridiculous in a "joint bid"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jpg75 said:

Yeah, i think the Americans are actually hurting the strength of the bid. If we'd had the balls to go it on our own we may have had a legit. shot at winning.

It's actually not too late but we're polite un-ambitious Canadians so it won't happen. I'd at least talk to the Mexicans to see if we could dump the US

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its funny how to some we are un-ambitious, but then to another segment of the board we are reaching too far/too positive with the CPL.  And acting like starry eyed teenagers thinking anything has changed with soccer in the last 25 years.  When i see all the space age new stadiums that were built for Brazil and South africa etc, I dont think we should go with a solo bid..and that 10 games isnt alot, but its something we can probably handle and do a good job at.  As much as I hate to tie ourselves up anymore with american soccer, at least this would get us an auto bid.  And along with maybe taking a bigger chunk of future Gold cups, it might help with a cultural shift to more mainstream soccer interest.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it went to Morocco how long would it be before we could realistically apply again. 2034? or 2042. Damn I don't know I will make it that far!

If it's not to far away it might be in our favour that the joint bid failed and we bid solo 2034. As much as I think we should break and bid ourselves, it is certainly too soon infrastructure wise right now to have too many games than we already have under the united bid. Leaning ALOT on whether the CPL succeeds by 2034 we should be in a much better place to host. That said, hosting even a handful of games in 2026 could really boost CPL at a point where the magic of the first 6/7 seasons might be wearing or worn off. It could push the CPL to another level all round. But then you are probably looking at 2058 before we are even considered again to host solo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Gian-Luca said:

Molinaro piece also suggesting that all is doomed and that it's all the fault of Trump and Blatter:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/soccer/donald-trump-sepp-blatter-fifa-2026-world-cup-peter-montopoli-canada-usa-mexico/

 

I thought he was going to blame Blatter for enabling all the corruption that led to US prosecutors taking down all the corrupt officials and hence making the US bid a target for revenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/1/2018 at 6:44 PM, dsqpr said:

"In the past two months, there have been a number of reports – including in the New York Times, Washington Post and L.A. Times – about how Trump’s toxic presidency has led to a general decline in U.S. popularity around the world, thus tainting the joint bid.

I posted this long ago when people were saying that a US bid would be a shoo-in.  All it would take would be for the US to go through one of its stages of world unpopularity to kill a bid.  Don't know why people can't seem to grasp that the "best bid" doesn't always win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jpg75 said:

Way more toxicity from the US AG busting the FIFA corruption. Why do you think CONMEBOL are solidly behind Morocco?

It would strike a new low for my cynicism if Conmebol sides vote Morocco.  If its even in the slightest bit about serving your constituency (ie.: yes, we know that this is naive) then the south american sides would be the ones who go totally against their best interest. 

The north american WC would be in the same time zones as south america. Hence, better south american viewing public, better for the performance of teams themselves as it has been proven historically,  and better for your sponsors / corporate partners.  For south american countries, what is gained by voting for Morocco?

It would be interesting to see how future cooperation between concacaf and conmebol pans out if this happens.  Remember copa centenario being held in the US and all the talk of merging the confederations tournament like gold cup and copa america.  Forget about all that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Free kick said:

It would strike a new low for my cynicism if Conmebol sides vote Morocco.  If its even in the slightest bit about serving your constituency (ie.: yes, we know that this is naive) then the south american sides would be the ones who go totally against their best interest. 

The north american WC would be in the same time zones as south america. Hence, better south american viewing public, better for the performance of teams themselves as it has been proven historically,  and better for your sponsors / corporate partners.  For south american countries, what is gained by voting for Morocco?

It would be interesting to see how future cooperation between concacaf and conmebol pans out if this happens.  Remember copa centenario being held in the US and all the talk of merging the confederations tournament like gold cup and copa america.  Forget about all that.  

The cynic/realist in me says that these delegates are in it to maximize their personal financial gain. And if the person who has been helping them to line their pockets tells them to vote for Morocco then that is what they will do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have to come down to those 10 votes to be relevant anyway. We might get more soundly beaten, remember CONCACAF will be missing the non-FIFA teams and the bidding 3 nations can't vote. Meanwhile CAF is like 50 votes guaranteed for Morocco (likely plus 8 or so west Asian countries).

Europe (time zones/travel factor favour Morocco) and East Asia will decide it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Free kick said:

It would strike a new low for my cynicism if Conmebol sides vote Morocco.  If its even in the slightest bit about serving your constituency (ie.: yes, we know that this is naive) then the south american sides would be the ones who go totally against their best interest. 

The north american WC would be in the same time zones as south america. Hence, better south american viewing public, better for the performance of teams themselves as it has been proven historically,  and better for your sponsors / corporate partners.  For south american countries, what is gained by voting for Morocco?

It would be interesting to see how future cooperation between concacaf and conmebol pans out if this happens.  Remember copa centenario being held in the US and all the talk of merging the confederations tournament like gold cup and copa america.  Forget about all that.  

On the BBC World Football Phone-In, Tim Vickery discussed this.  He said CONMEBOL's reasoning for supporting Morocco is to protect the interests of the joint Argentina/Uruguay/Paraguay bid for the 2030 centenary World Cup.  The first World Cup in 1930 was in Uruguay and CONMEBOL desperately wants the 100 year anniversary back where it all began.  Back to back tournaments (2026 and 2030) in the Americas would be highly unlikely.  

Further to this, although not mentioned by Vickery, is the vote trading element.  CONMEBOL would likely hope for CAF to scratch their back for 2030 if CONMEBOL scratches CAF's back for 2026.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gian-Luca said:

So what has happened to the notion of rotating the World Cups per region? Did they throw that out just in time when it finally became our region’s turn?

In the world of FIFA, outside Oceania, we're the joke (CONCACAF)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the SI Planet Futbol podcast from last night/today Grant Wahl and Brian Straus suggested that the game distribution could be changed to further reflect the diversity of the bid and combat the Morocco threat.  They thought it might go to 50-15-15.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...