2026 WC Bid?

[mpg_29]

5 minutes ago, Fort York Redcoat1555362293 said:

That blows your mind? Fun timing of this post when a Canadian team is competing so well with Mexican teams. The respect for this game grows every year in this country at club level. It will keep growing  but its always going to be a bigger sports landscape here than Mexico. I loved recently visiting Monterrey and watching nothing but futbol in public. 

I knew Canada had lots of participation at the youth/recreation level but did not think Mexico's was that low.

[Fort York Redcoat1555362293]

9 minutes ago, mpg_29 said:

I knew Canada had lots of participation at the youth/recreation level but did not think Mexico's was that low.

Here's a thought: A lot of the participation here is paid babysitting. I would hazard there or more unregistered participants down there. It's just the difference between the two countries use of sports and $$$ towards it.

 

I think its the root of our Countries development problem but at the heart of it I'm agreeing with you. We throw a lot of money at the game that isn't true development at the early levels. 

But it is slowly getting better.

[kacbru]

3 hours ago, Fort York Redcoat1555362293 said:

Here's a thought: A lot of the participation here is paid babysitting. I would hazard there or more unregistered participants down there. It's just the difference between the two countries use of sports and $$$ towards it.

 

I think its the root of our Countries development problem but at the heart of it I'm agreeing with you. We throw a lot of money at the game that isn't true development at the early levels. 

But it is slowly getting better.

And probably the flip side to this is there is lots more youth participation in Mexico that doesn't get accounted for because it is just people playing in streets, fields, etc. and not with sanctioned clubs.  I would guess that it is only the top youth that get brought into club-type situation.

[Kent]

3 hours ago, mpg_29 said:

Mind-blowing stats I stumbled on in that doc:

General Participation:
Can: 818,940 Mex: 260,291 USA: 4,424,186
Youth Participation: 
Can: 671,488 Mex: 126,877 USA: 3,990,998
Pro Clubs(Men): 
Can: 3 Mex: 313 USA: 52

We have 3X more people playing soccer than Mexico (not even taking into account population differences which would make it more extreme)... they have 100X the pro clubs.

Kinda confirms the belief that this sport is viewed as a kids/recreational sport here and not a professional one.

There are 23 MLS teams and 33 USL teams. So that means they aren't counting one of the Canadian teams as either Canadian or American, and they are counting a Canadian team as American (probably TFC )

[jpg75]

2 hours ago, kacbru said:

And probably the flip side to this is there is lots more youth participation in Mexico that doesn't get accounted for because it is just people playing in streets, fields, etc. and not with sanctioned clubs.  I would guess that it is only the top youth that get brought into club-type situation.

This. What you describe is the norm in alot of countries around the world. I looked up the bio of a French U21 player a few years back and the guy hadn't joined a club (it was a small local one) until age 11.

[red card]

On 3/26/2018 at 12:04 PM, Fort York Redcoat1555362293 said:

Here's a thought: A lot of the participation here is paid babysitting. I would hazard there or more unregistered participants down there. It's just the difference between the two countries use of sports and $$$ towards it.

 

I think its the root of our Countries development problem but at the heart of it I'm agreeing with you. We throw a lot of money at the game that isn't true development at the early levels. 

But it is slowly getting better.

A buddy mentioned he was watching his young kids play soccer over the weekend. His takeaway was that all the kids just chase after the ball. 

I asked if the coach had some qualifications. No, he was a volunteer parent. Does the club have some program to get him some basic courses or a technical director. Nope. Isn't he mad he's not getting value for his money. Not really, it's $200/kid and he just wants them to be active. They don't need upscale or elite training.

So good that parents are more aware kids need to be active. But 2 generations ago, kids were active on their own. Now, it is all organized play or cheap babysitting.

[Guest]

[Guest]

Deleted.

[Guest]

Deleted.

[Free kick]

12 hours ago, mpg_29 said:

Mind-blowing stats I stumbled on in that doc:

General Participation:
Can: 818,940 Mex: 260,291 USA: 4,424,186
Youth Participation: 
Can: 671,488 Mex: 126,877 USA: 3,990,998
Pro Clubs(Men): 
Can: 3 Mex: 313 USA: 52

We have 3X more people playing soccer than Mexico (not even taking into account population differences which would make it more extreme)... they have 100X the pro clubs.

Kinda confirms the belief that this sport is viewed as a kids/recreational sport here and not a professional one.

I dont know for sure but the reason might be that in mexico you are considered or counted as soccer player if you play in some recognized club system or academy of a pro system. Where in canada, maybe we count everybody who is playing.  Even those that play in some receational leagues as long as their league is sanctioned. 

Again,  i dont know for sure.  But it would seem plausible that in other parts of the world they just dont bother counting some players that play in certain structures that are not deemed part of some santioned competive format.   This would also explain why in canada there is such a scarcity of pro prospects relative to mexico in the age group of late teens and early 20’s.  

[Free kick]

4 hours ago, red card said:

A person at work mentioned he was watching his young kids play soccer over the weekend in Brampton. His takeaway was that all the kids just chase after the ball. 

I asked if the coach had some qualifications. No, he was a volunteer parent. Does the club have some program to get him some basic courses or a technical director. Nope. Isn't he mad he's not getting value for his money. Not really, it's $200/kid and he just wants them to be active. They don't need upscale or elite training.

So good that parents are more aware kids need to be active. But 2 generations ago, kids were active on their own. Now, it is all organized play or cheap babysitting.

Yes, i have heard lots of stories similar to this. I am not involved at all in youth soccer (and never have been) but i have heard from people who told me that they coach their kids soccer team and when you talk to them about it, you quickly learn that they dont know too much more about the game other than that objective was to put the ball in opponents net.  

These levels of competition is probably what we count in our registered numbers.  Having a high profiles profesional games with good following and exposure will help turn these things around in the long run. That because it helps create role models and standards.  

[Free kick]

Interesting thing from the bid book section on Stadiums (page 145).  It lists BMO field capacity at 45,500.

[Ansem]

Seems like the USSF got a bit less greedy as the fear that Morocco could win increases

Opening day would see 3 matches with 1 match in each countries

 

[The Ref]

Nicely done letter to FIFA.  Excellent points and clarity.  Perhaps I would have added a few words about triple revenue from simultaneous games, after all FIFA seeks the most money.

 

[Ansem]

13 minutes ago, The Ref said:

Nicely done letter to FIFA.  Excellent points and clarity.  Perhaps I would have added a few words about triple revenue from simultaneous games, after all FIFA seeks the most money.

 

It's not about FIFA. Every members gets one vote and I doubt Africa and parts of Asia cares after the muslim bans and being called a "shithole". Also, CONMEBOL nations won't care either since they have their eyes on 2030 World Cup for the 100th anniversary.

[Kent]

42 minutes ago, The Ref said:

Nicely done letter to FIFA.  Excellent points and clarity.  Perhaps I would have added a few words about triple revenue from simultaneous games, after all FIFA seeks the most money.

 

I didn't see explicit mention of simultaneous games, unless I missed something? I think it just says 3 opening day games.

[The Ref]

19 minutes ago, Kent said:

I didn't see explicit mention of simultaneous games, unless I missed something? I think it just says 3 opening day games.

You may be correct.

 

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, Kent said:

I didn't see explicit mention of simultaneous games, unless I missed something? I think it just says 3 opening day games.

Which would still be the most spectacular opening in World Cup history! Three teams playing at home on opening day. Wonder where the first one will be...!  

[Kent]

11 minutes ago, dsqpr said:

Which would still be the most spectacular opening in World Cup history! Three teams playing at home on opening day. Wonder where the first one will be...!  

Yeah, pretty easy to guess who gets to go first. I think opening day is usually on a weekday. I just confirmed that was the case for 2014 and 2010. So I'm guessing it would be something like this.

7pm EST, 4pm Pacific, midnight GMT - USA game
9pm EST, 6pm Pacific, 2 am GMT - Mexico game
11pm EST, 8pm Pacific, 4 am GMT - Canada game

Make it so most are asleep for the game in Canada (I guess with a start time like that it would be Edmonton to host).

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

They could always use Los Angeles for the American game to get a huge capacity stadium in on the opening trio. Think the Big Owe in Montreal might be in with a shout of the opening game under that scenario given Mexico City falls in between in timezone terms. Getting the tournament opener would be consolation for having nothing after the round of 32. I'm somewhat skeptical that we will get more than two hosting cities given each extra venue beyond twelve cuts into FIFA's profit margin. 

[Kent]

2 minutes ago, BringBackTheBlizzard said:

They could always use Los Angeles for the American game to get a huge capacity stadium in on the opening trio. Think the Big Owe in Montreal might be in with a shout of the opening game under that scenario given Mexico City falls in between in timezone terms. Getting the tournament opener would be consolation for having nothing after the round of 32. I'm somewhat skeptical that we will get more than two hosting cities given each extra venue beyond twelve cuts into FIFA's profit margin. 

Another scenario I thought of for a moment would be that if Canada were to get the first game it would probably be a weekday afternoon. But then I thought that might be too coveted because a 2pm Eastern start time although it would suck for us in Canada in terms of watching the game, it would be good in terms of exposure from European TV on prime time.

They could also just buck with tradition a bit more (they are already proposing to do that anyways) and start on a weekend, then go with NFL style timing throughout the day.

[beachesl]

9 hours ago, Ansem said:

It's not about FIFA. Every members gets one vote and I doubt Africa and parts of Asia cares after the muslim bans and being called a "shithole". Also, CONMEBOL nations won't care either since they have their eyes on 2030 World Cup for the 100th anniversary.

No way Uruguay and Argentina get 2030, that is going to China (all of Africa and much of the Americas are essentially colonies of China now). 90% of the matches would have to be played in Argentina, and, as anyone familiar with this country knows, they cannot organize their way out of a wet paperbag. Copa America 2011(went to 12 of the matches)  was a complete disaster, even by  latinamerican standards. 

And FIFA money also means money for the National Associations and confederations, and the associations are more influenced by their comrades in FIFA than in politcal pressure from their countrymen. They can easily accept voting for the "Sh#thole" comentators by saying that was the only real choice. Money was the reason Qatar and Russia got the tournament, not because of political pressure.

[Ansem]

3 hours ago, beachesl said:

No way Uruguay and Argentina get 2030, that is going to China (all of Africa and much of the Americas are essentially colonies of China now). 90% of the matches would have to be played in Argentina, and, as anyone familiar with this country knows, they cannot organize their way out of a wet paperbag. Copa America 2011(went to 12 of the matches)  was a complete disaster, even by  latinamerican standards. 

And FIFA money also means money for the National Associations and confederations, and the associations are more influenced by their comrades in FIFA than in politcal pressure from their countrymen. They can easily accept voting for the "Sh#thole" comentators by saying that was the only real choice. Money was the reason Qatar and Russia got the tournament, not because of political pressure.

For the 2026 World Cup, Asia (2022) and Europe (2018) were forbidden  to bid.

Going with the same logic, for 2030, Asia would still be forbidden to bid (2022) and North America or Africa will be too.

So China aren't getting the tournament in 2030. Their best bet is 2034 or 2038.

2030 will be CONMEBOL (Argentina-Uruguay) or Europe (most likely United Kingdom or just England)

[Fort York Redcoat1555362293]

13 hours ago, Ansem said:

For the 2026 World Cup, Asia (2022) and Europe (2018) were forbidden  to bid.

Going with the same logic, for 2030, Asia would still be forbidden to bid (2022) and North America or Africa will be too.

So China aren't getting the tournament in 2030. Their best bet is 2034 or 2038.

2030 will be CONMEBOL (Argentina-Uruguay) or Europe (most likely United Kingdom or just England)

I thought FIFA stopped the regional merry-go-round they were trying out. And that "forbidden" language is strange. Wasn't it just a case of unlikelyhood FIFA would double up any regions hosting?

 

Do you have a link? I'd be curious to read about it..

thanks

[MrSabiondo]

On 3/26/2018 at 8:09 PM, red card said:

A person at work mentioned he was watching his young kids play soccer over the weekend in Brampton. His takeaway was that all the kids just chase after the ball. 

I asked if the coach had some qualifications. No, he was a volunteer parent. Does the club have some program to get him some basic courses or a technical director. Nope. Isn't he mad he's not getting value for his money. Not really, it's $200/kid and he just wants them to be active. They don't need upscale or elite training.

So good that parents are more aware kids need to be active. But 2 generations ago, kids were active on their own. Now, it is all organized play or cheap babysitting.

The funny thing is that many of those so called qualified coaches with the basic courses and technical directors are just as useless as the volunteer parent.  Hey at least the parent volunteering is having a blast and it only cause the fee for his kid to coach the team.

I say this is  because being from a South American country I saw lots of of volunteers for the local clubs coaching youth squads and though they don't get scammed do to these weekend courses they had a much richer knowledge on how to get kids playing as a team. 

The difference of course is culture where more than half the population feels qualified to coach the National team.  The other thing of course is most of the kids playing at the club level in football developed nations actually want to play and it's not at the parents insistence to become the next Messi or just to get him to blow off some steam.

I coached my kids house league team here for 1 season and I kept it pretty simple for the hour of training I managed to schedule.  I just had them scrimmage more than half of the time.  I let them set their own rules and tried not to interfere at all during their time of play.  Guess what it worked.  It developed some team play and pecking order within their little group.

Back home I used to play on an field, street, plaza whatever with friends of all size and ages.  You learn quickly how to beat an older kid one-on-one and sometimes you never do, but you keep trying, but then when somebody invites you to play for their club the coaches only job is to have you play as a team and not teach you how to pass or kick the ball.