Jump to content

Worry for Canada's 2026 World Cup Bid?


VinceA
 Share

Recommended Posts

By the way, FIFA has stated that they will be choosing 16 of the 23 applicant cities.
These applicants include 17 US, 3 Mexico, 3 (now 2) Canada.

I wonder if it might anyway have been too much to expect that all three of Montreal, Toronto, and Edmonton got chosen, and Montreal withdrawing just simplifies FIFA's options for Canadian cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, spinrack said:

By the way, FIFA has stated that they will be choosing 16 of the 23 applicant cities.
These applicants include 17 US, 3 Mexico, 3 (now 2) Canada.

I wonder if it might anyway have been too much to expect that all three of Montreal, Toronto, and Edmonton got chosen, and Montreal withdrawing just simplifies FIFA's options for Canadian cities.

Either way that is 22 cities altogether now that Montreal has pulled out, so now what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, TGAA_Star said:

Either way that is 22 cities altogether now that Montreal has pulled out, so now what?

As far as we know, FIFA is still committed to 10 matches (of 80 total) in Canada, and it's hard to believe that CSA/Canada won't try to hold them to that as a condition of the original bid.  Although Montreal withdrawing may change that equation, which would be highly unfortunate.
And it is unlikely in the extreme that only one Canadian city would be chosen and then host all 10 matches.
So given that the list of applicant cities is finalized, barring some unforeseen circumstance Toronto and Edmonton will both get chosen and split the 10 games (my guess would be either 5-5 or 6-4 in favour of Toronto).

Edited by spinrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JamboAl said:

The North stand at TD Place stadium (and the arena adjacent) is recommended to be torn down by the City of Ottawa as it is in need of desperate repair/upgrade.  It would never be in good enough shape to host WC matches as is.

What the hell? Why didn't they do that during the recent renovations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RS said:

What the hell? Why didn't they do that during the recent renovations?

Cause it was somewhat structurally sound at the time.  It still is but everything is leaking after a rainfall and the corridors inside the stands feel like it’s the 1960s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Cheeta said:

Academic but I've be wondering for a while now, if the Big Owe had been bulldozed 10 years ago would there be something else on the site by now?  A revenue generating something that might include a more reasonably sized stadia?

Sometimes stuff just had to go to move forward.

What I have always heard is that the costs to buldoze it would too astonomical.  😄  .  honnestly,  thats the truth.  So refurbishments are really done to save money.  
 

 

Edit.:  here is your answer.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/big-o-montreal-olympic-stadium-roof-1.4396721

 

In November 2017 the Quebec government approved a new roof, estimated to cost $250 million. The Olympic Installations Board has estimated the cost of demolishing the stadium would be between $500 and $700 million, though this figure is based on a preliminary two-month study and thus has a high margin of error”

Edited by Free kick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

From the Sports Business guy in Vancouver: 

 

FIFA is already starting to visit candidate cities cities as of this month, so they probably cannot wait to see the results of cities hosting the Octagon.  The only information they will have is the list of cities that the CSA has chosen for those 7 matches.

Any change of plans will be solely due to negotiations between FIFA and the governments of BC and Vancouver.  And honestly I don't see FIFA backing down on the BC and Vancouver financial demands (re: policing, etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, spinrack said:

FIFA is already starting to visit candidate cities cities as of this month, so they probably cannot wait to see the results of cities hosting the Octagon.  The only information they will have is the list of cities that the CSA has chosen for those 7 matches.

Any change of plans will be solely due to negotiations between FIFA and the governments of BC and Vancouver.  And honestly I don't see FIFA backing down on the BC and Vancouver financial demands (re: policing, etc).

He means that if you suddenly see more Octo games being held at BC Place, it probably means they're already quietly discussing Vancouver being a host. It wouldn't be a test/demonstration to FIFA.

Tom and Jon Furlong (who headed the Olympics for Vancouver) have always said that once selected as a host, there's a ton of flexibility on some of the demands. I mean, Qatar doesn't have any "outdoor air conditioned stadiums" the way they promised in their bid. The real shift will have to be from the provincial government. They're the ones who said no the first time, but they're now hunting around for a major event to host in the next decade. Would 3-5 games be enough for them to get back in? No clue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

From the Sports Business guy in Vancouver: 

 

Watch for how Canada Soccer handles hosting of upcoming 2022 CONCACAF Octagon?

As in watch to see whether Vancouver will host games? How Vancouver games are run and attended? Both? Neither? 

What exactly am I watching for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

He means that if you suddenly see more Octo games being held at BC Place, it probably means they're already quietly discussing Vancouver being a host. It wouldn't be a test/demonstration to FIFA.

Tom and Jon Furlong (who headed the Olympics for Vancouver) have always said that once selected as a host, there's a ton of flexibility on some of the demands. I mean, Qatar doesn't have any "outdoor air conditioned stadiums" the way they promised in their bid. The real shift will have to be from the provincial government. They're the ones who said no the first time, but they're now hunting around for a major event to host in the next decade. Would 3-5 games be enough for them to get back in? No clue.

Thanks for the clarification, but why would this be so?

To me it seems like a big leap to assume they are quietly discussing Vancouver IF our games are being played there.

I guess we can say if games AREN'T being played there chances are it's not being discussed, but I am not sure that works the same way in reverse.

For starters, winter weather was always likely to make Vancouver a prime location later on in the Ocho, regardless of the world cup bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The question is whether FIFA was intending to select 2 or 3 cities from Canada.

If only 2, then it is unlikely that CSA will put forth a last-minute host candidate, since Toronto and Edmonton would be enough (assuming that FIFA finds them acceptable).

If there was a possibility of 3, then there will be a much stronger case for adding a replacement for Montreal.

And honestly the only realistic last-minute candidate is Vancouver, unless some other city can make a short-notice commitment to massive stadium and infrastructure changes.

Edited by spinrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, spinrack said:

The question is whether FIFA was intending to select 2 or 3 cities from Canada.

If only 2, then it is unlikely that CSA will put forth a last-minute host candidate, since Toronto and Edmonton would be enough (assuming that FIFA finds them acceptable).

If there was a possibility of 3, then there will be a much stronger case for adding a replacement for Montreal.

And honestly the only realistic last-minute candidate is Vancouver, unless some other city can make a short-notice commitment to massive stadium and infrastructure changes.

Possibly dumb question; but why wouldn't the stadiums in Toronto, Winnipeg, or Hamilton do? Infracture is fine right? Stadiums not big enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Free kick said:

What I have always heard is that the costs to buldoze it would too astonomical.  😄  .  honnestly,  thats the truth.  So refurbishments are really done to save money.  
 

 

Edit.:  here is your answer.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/big-o-montreal-olympic-stadium-roof-1.4396721

 

In November 2017 the Quebec government approved a new roof, estimated to cost $250 million. The Olympic Installations Board has estimated the cost of demolishing the stadium would be between $500 and $700 million, though this figure is based on a preliminary two-month study and thus has a high margin of error”

People are often surprised what demolition costs.  It's easy to forget it isn't just knocking something down, it disposal of materials and "restoration" of the property.  It's really, really involved.

No idea what it's costing to keep that pile going but if you start adding up all the costs year after year, and I mean real costs balanced against potential use it can also be really surprising now quickly expensive demolition doesn't seem so expensive.  Nothing is happening in a vacuum.

Just saying.  Keeping the thing up feels more politically convient than the alternative.  Spending millions of taxpayers money to make a field some future politician will get the benefit of creating something in probably doesn't hold much appeal to the incumbents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, narduch said:

That's exactly it. There is a least 3-4 days between matches. So BMO Field could never host 10 matches. The tournament isn't long enough.

Tournament is scheduled over 34 days.

You could put in 10 games at one stadium, if they did 5 group-stage matches, one round of 32, two round of 16, on quarter-final, and one semi, and still keep 3-4 days between matches.

But it won't happen. More likely that they'd use two venues in Toronto, or reduce the number of games in Canada to 7-8.

 

9 hours ago, narduch said:

One city could probably only do 4-5 games at most.

In the 2026 bid book, USA is putting 60 games in 10 only stadiums. Most stadiums got 6 games. One gets 7 (with no semis nor final).

And in Qatar, Lusail Stadium IS getting 10 games, despite the tournament only being 28 days, compared to the 34 days for 2026. And there's three 4-day gaps in there!

 

17 hours ago, CanadianSoccerFan said:

If the Jays get a new stadium near East Harbour station (the quayside alternate in that article) , I'd be surprised if it's done by 2026 - especially as the subway won't open until 2030 or so.

But if they do, it could be ideal, as you could put grass in the Skydome earlier and for longer ... before imploding the entire structure.

 

Edited by nfitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

Thanks for the clarification, but why would this be so?

To me it seems like a big leap to assume they are quietly discussing Vancouver IF our games are being played there.

I guess we can say if games AREN'T being played there chances are it's not being discussed, but I am not sure that works the same way in reverse.

For starters, winter weather was always likely to make Vancouver a prime location later on in the Ocho, regardless of the world cup bid.

When Vancouver pulled out of the bid initially, games did not come to Vancouver for a bit. Weather is obviously a factor here, but if the Octo games are split a bit more between Vancouver and Toronto it could be an indication Vancouver is back in. Conversely, if Edmonton is hosting a number of Octo games it could indicate that city is being pushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, spinrack said:

If only 2, then it is unlikely that CSA will put forth a last-minute host candidate, since Toronto and Edmonton would be enough (assuming that FIFA finds them acceptable).

Edmonton is in because Edmonton owns the stadium, unlike with Vancouver. Last I saw, the Alberta government had said they were not planning to back the bid. Of course, that could change. But as it was, Edmonton did not have the financial ability to host it as the full cost would have to be covered by the city. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Watchmen said:

When Vancouver pulled out of the bid initially, games did not come to Vancouver for a bit. Weather is obviously a factor here, but if the Octo games are split a bit more between Vancouver and Toronto it could be an indication Vancouver is back in. Conversely, if Edmonton is hosting a number of Octo games it could indicate that city is being pushed.

Maybe that was just coincidence.

If games are split it could mean something, but it could mean nothing. The games were always likely to be split, because you can't play anywhere else in January, while November and March are not ideal and arguably would go to Vancouver regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Maybe that was just coincidence.

If games are split it could mean something, but it could mean nothing. The games were always likely to be split, because you can't play anywhere else in January, while November and March are not ideal and arguably would go to Vancouver regardless.

I have heard from people that would know that it was not coincidence. The CSA was mad.  They only started to come back because weather dictates it and you ultimately do have to move the team around a bit. They saturated the Toronto market with games after BMO was built and by the end attendance seemed to be down, because hosting a game wasn't special anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, nazzer said:

Possibly dumb question; but why wouldn't the stadiums in Toronto, Winnipeg, or Hamilton do? Infracture is fine right? Stadiums not big enough?

Infrastructure includes taking on extra policing costs, setting up exclusion zones around the stadiums, team training facilities, required tourism infrastructure such as hotel space and restaurants, etc etc etc.  Hosting the World Cup is a massive undertaking.,

As far as stadium size... FIFA requires minimum 40,000 capacity for World Cup venues.  In Canada, the only stadiums of that size are BC Place (Vancouver), Commonwealth Field (Edmonton) and Stade Olympique (Montreal).  BMO Field (Toronto) is in consideration only because they committed to a stadium expansion (their capacity is currently 30,000).  Plus the stadiums have to meet a certain level of quality.  Montreal is pulling out in part because the required renovations to Stade Olympique are prohibitively expensive, at least from the perspective of the Quebec provincial government.

Edited by spinrack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, spinrack said:

As far as we know, FIFA is still committed to 10 matches (of 80 total) in Canada, and it's hard to believe that CSA/Canada won't try to hold them to that as a condition of the original bid.  Although Montreal withdrawing may change that equation, which would be highly unfortunate.
And it is unlikely in the extreme that only one Canadian city would be chosen and then host all 10 matches.
So given that the list of applicant cities is finalized, barring some unforeseen circumstance Toronto and Edmonton will both get chosen and split the 10 games (my guess would be either 5-5 or 6-4 in favour of Toronto).

That is what I'm thinking I would do even split 5 games in Toronto 5 games in Edmonton for 2026

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, spinrack said:

Maybe not.  FIFA sets aside large blocks of tickets for fans from host cities.  Getting a ticket as a foreign fan is much more difficult unless you happen to be a citizen of one of the countries that is playing.

I would think they'll have a good number available for locals/general admission....at least they did in 1994 when I was a kid because my Dad got ahold of some at the Cotton Bowl.....I am hopeful I'll be able to wrangle my way into 4-6...might be nosebleeds but if we get in the building I'll be the best son-in-law ever lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, spinrack said:

In Canada, the only stadiums of that size are BC Place (Vancouver), Commonwealth Field (Edmonton) and Stade Olympique (Montreal).  BMO Field (Toronto) is in consideration only because they committed to a stadium expansion (their capacity is currently 30,000). 

And the Rogers Centre (Skydome) in Toronto. They've had 50,000 in there for soccer before. Would need new turf though ...

Edited by nfitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...