[News] Flames/Stamps New Arena Part Of World Cup Bid in 2026..

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by scotty2hotty

And how much was that MLS game marketed to the entire nation the way curling events are?

People will tend to watch whatever the stations hype as the next 'must watch' event.

TSN has been hyping the ever loving crap out of TFC all winter. And not without reason given the signings. I would feel extremely confident in asserting that TFC's home opener/season received far more marketing and hype than the "Grand Slam of Curling" did.

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

MLS isn't even in the top 20 professional soccer leagues in the world. (heck not even top 30 imo)
MLS is great for a live experience, but outside of the localized audience, there hasn't been any grab, because the talent is quite lacking, outside of a few former top level Euro's that are brought over nearing the end of their careers.

A better comparison would be Champions League.
Let's check the TV ratings of the final 4 Champions League's games, to get an idea of what the World Cup ratings are --- especially as TSN is ramping up their soccer coverage more than any other sport right now.
(loss of NHL coverage, and need to diversify)

No, that is not a better comparison, actually. The argument being made here is that the exposure soccer would receive from our hosting a World Cup would play into something tangible within Canada. Arguing that a few people might become more interested in European soccer doesn't benefit Canada or the CSA. Getting people interested in MLS would.

Or, as far as people dreaming of a major team for Calgary, and given how unrealistic it is to think that MLS has any desire to spread into midsized Canadian markets, you would want to see a World Cup prompt the formation of a new Canadian Soccer League.

[Suave]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

MLS isn't even in the top 20 professional soccer leagues in the world. (heck not even top 30 imo)
MLS is great for a live experience, but outside of the localized audience, there hasn't been any grab, because the talent is quite lacking, outside of a few former top level Euro's that are brought over nearing the end of their careers.

A better comparison would be Champions League.
Let's check the TV ratings of the final 4 Champions League's games, to get an idea of what the World Cup ratings are --- especially as TSN is ramping up their soccer coverage more than any other sport right now.
(loss of NHL coverage, and need to diversify)



Qatar - 104th
Canada - 111th (as high as in the 40's)

2010 world cup final had a rating of 5.8 million viewers with a peak of over 7 million in Canada. And that is with poor TV times for the games, expect those numbers to be a lot higher with Brasil and prime time games.

Opening Round CBC Television Average Audience -956,000

Round of 16 CBC Television Average Audience - 1.490 million

Quarter-Finals CBC Television Average Audience - 1.892 million

Semi-Finals CBC Television Average Audience - 2.254 million

Overall Tournament CBC Television Average Audience (includes live and encore) - 1.265 million

CBCSports.ca Total Live Streams - 8.485 million

http://www.cbc.ca/revenuegroup/mobil...cup-final.html

[Barnes]

The best thing about soccer is the orange slices. If we do this, there better be orange slices.

[hummdeedoo]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Going to have to say slopitch far outnumbers soccer for co-ed adults and even by their individual genders.

I really doubt this is true for individual teams

For 2013 Outdoor season
Calgary Men's soccer has 23 divisions that's over 225 teams
Women's soccer has 12 divisions and over 120 teams

That's just in Calgary where soccer is not as popular as it is in BC and Ontario.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

TSN has been hyping the ever loving crap out of TFC all winter. And not without reason given the signings. I would feel extremely confident in asserting that TFC's home opener/season received far more marketing and hype than the "Grand Slam of Curling" did.



No, that is not a better comparison, actually. The argument being made here is that the exposure soccer would receive from our hosting a World Cup would play into something tangible within Canada. Arguing that a few people might become more interested in European soccer doesn't benefit Canada or the CSA. Getting people interested in MLS would.

Or, as far as people dreaming of a major team for Calgary, and given how unrealistic it is to think that MLS has any desire to spread into midsized Canadian markets, you would want to see a World Cup prompt the formation of a new Canadian Soccer League.

It's obvious you're not a fan, but your argument isn't comparing similar talent levels.

My point was, that the amount of people that will watch Champions League is vastly larger than MLS, and will identify that there is in fact a large audience for a top quality soccer event. MLS is not top quality, in comparison.
The audience is already here, not that it would require the W.C to get it, as much as facilitate in expediting necessary stadiums. Move past the "few people" rhetoric.

Further, the awarding of the 1994 USA World Cup, laid the ground work for the MSL. The USA committed to a Div 1 league, if they won the bid.

Canada would only need to build off of their 3 MSL teams, and the already existing stadium infrastructure that would need minor upgrades to most, and in the case of Calgary, a new stadium. To confirm, yes, MSL will never happen in Calgary, without a new facility.

[hummdeedoo]

Originally Posted by RyZ

Its the most played sport because it is dirt cheap for kids to play and the feild the kids play at is ususlly down the street. You can play a whole childhood worth of soccer for the price of a single hockey season. Once the kids hit club soccer (after community) the number of kids continuing falls dramatically. Once you hit 16 its almost non existant.

If all you needed to play hockey was a pair of shoes and a modest registration fee the number of kids playing would be off the charts.

Soccer is the most accessable sport for parents to put small children in but its clearly nowhere near the most popular.

Probably one of the worst posts I've ever read on here - There's very little of what you wrote that is true. Not sure if your poorly thought out and horribly misspelled rant was just about the local soccer scene or not. But I'll assume you are talking about Calgary.

Your assertion that you can play a whole childhood worth of soccer for 1 hockey season might be true if they only played community soccer. What you need to compare is club soccer to playing Calgary Minor hockey. My son plays both and costs are roughly the same.

There are hundred's of minor soccer club teams in Calgary- registration does not fall of "dramatically" after kids finish community soccer.

Both Hockey and Soccer registrations numbers fall off after the age 14. For Soccer playing boys and girls over the age of 15 in the City of Calgary there are about 20 divisions of teams with about 10 teams per division that's over 200 teams - almost non existant. -You're kidding right?

There are plenty of kids registered in both hockey and soccer in Calgary. Not sure how you draw any conclusion about one being clearly more popular than the other.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Muta

Well, South Africa, as I recall, was ranked below Canada in the international rankings leading up to 2010, so I don't think the quality of the national team matters as much as you think it does.

That said, I want a quality team too... one that could atleast have a chance to pull out a tie with some of the bigger name teams.

Going by memory, but if I recall correctly, SA was ranked 107 or thereabouts and Canada, at the time, was in the 70s or 80s.

[getbak]

2026 is 12 years away. I don't know what the average age of a World Cup player is, but I assume it's similar to hockey where players reach their peak in their mid-20s. That would mean that anyone who would be part of Team Canada in 2026 is a teenager or younger now.

Could something like the "Own the Podium" program work to elevate Canada's standing to the point where the team could be competitive by 2026?


Even if Canada were beaten in every game they played, hosting a World Cup would still be an inspiration to the younger generation of the day (kids who won't even be born for another 5 or 6 years).


How many young Canadians watched the Calgary Olympics and realized that they had options beyond hockey or figure skating, even though Canada wasn't competitive in those other sports at the time?

[FireGilbert]

I'm pretty sure this thread is a big troll since it's based on a sun article but I'll weigh in anyways.

Sure Canada can definitely get the World Cup! All we need is to secretly give a bunch of oil money to the CSA which they can use to bribe FIFA. If Canada's world cup bid also included building 10 new grass stadiums it would win for sure! They wouldn't actually need to build all the stadiums they could just get permission to play on artificial grass after the cup was awarded. That would never happen...

Seriously though, the Flames are going to need another way to pay for their new arena. Australia got 1 vote for their world cup bid and they already had most of the required stadiums existing. How many votes is a Canadian bid going to get?

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

Seriously though, the Flames are going to need another way to pay for their new arena. Australia got 1 vote for their world cup bid and they already had most of the required stadiums existing. How many votes is a Canadian bid going to get?

Such a good point - 1 vote for a credible bid, by an established, prosperous western nation. FIFA is unbelievably corrupt.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

My point was, that the amount of people that will watch Champions League is vastly larger than MLS, and will identify that there is in fact a large audience for a top quality soccer event. MLS is not top quality, in comparison.
The audience is already here, not that it would require the W.C to get it, as much as facilitate in expediting necessary stadiums. Move past the "few people" rhetoric.

No, I understood your point, but it was not responding to my point. The question is what benefit hosting a World Cup would create in Canada. How does it help Canadian soccer? Getting a few people interested in European leagues and tournaments doesn't offer a great ROI for something that would cost several billion dollars just for infrastructure. If people are just going to get interested in something they can watch on TV, then they might as well just watch a WC on TV as hosted somewhere else.

Also, for clarification, I'm not necessarily opposed to it (god knows, we need a new facility...). I was drawn in more by the arguments about popularity of youth soccer, and simply pointed out that having a high number of players hasn't translated into a high number of fans.

Canada would only need to build off of their 3 MSL teams, and the already existing stadium infrastructure that would need minor upgrades to most, and in the case of Calgary, a new stadium. To confirm, yes, MSL will never happen in Calgary, without a new facility.

To be perfectly blunt, MLS will never happen in Calgary in our lifetimes, period. It is not logical to expect an American-based organization to be interested in putting teams in mid-sized Canadian markets when there are numerous such markets in the US they could go to first. It would only have been feasible if we had already demonstrated a solid history of support for the sport.

However, at the same time, MLS creates a significant issue on two fronts. First, I am not sure if FIFA would consider MLS to be a "domestic league" in Canada, and if you apply the same thinking for a 2026 bid with the one for the US in 1994, that would create pressure on the CSA to create a home league. But the three markets that would drive the league already play in MLS. Puts markets like Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, etc., into a catch-22.

The ideal (but unlikely) solution would be the formation of a new CSL that incorporates the existing teams in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, but which also plays an interlocking schedule with MLS - otherwise there's no chance of those three teams supporting a home league, and therefore no chance of anything approaching major-calibre soccer elsewhere in Canada.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

No, I understood your point, but it was not responding to my point. The question is what benefit hosting a World Cup would create in Canada. How does it help Canadian soccer? Getting a few people interested in European leagues and tournaments doesn't offer a great ROI for something that would cost several billion dollars just for infrastructure. If people are just going to get interested in something they can watch on TV, then they might as well just watch a WC on TV as hosted somewhere else.

Also, for clarification, I'm not necessarily opposed to it (god knows, we need a new facility...). I was drawn in more by the arguments about popularity of youth soccer, and simply pointed out that having a high number of players hasn't translated into a high number of fans.



To be perfectly blunt, MLS will never happen in Calgary in our lifetimes, period. It is not logical to expect an American-based organization to be interested in putting teams in mid-sized Canadian markets when there are numerous such markets in the US they could go to first. It would only have been feasible if we had already demonstrated a solid history of support for the sport.

However, at the same time, MLS creates a significant issue on two fronts. First, I am not sure if FIFA would consider MLS to be a "domestic league" in Canada, and if you apply the same thinking for a 2026 bid with the one for the US in 1994, that would create pressure on the CSA to create a home league. But the three markets that would drive the league already play in MLS. Puts markets like Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, etc., into a catch-22.

The ideal (but unlikely) solution would be the formation of a new CSL that incorporates the existing teams in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, but which also plays an interlocking schedule with MLS - otherwise there's no chance of those three teams supporting a home league, and therefore no chance of anything approaching major-calibre soccer elsewhere in Canada.

As evidenced by the South African & Qatari? Qataran? winning bids, a strong grassroots & professional league aren't necessary.

Canada has better than both. Canada brings a nice safe sporting environment, a contrast to SA, Qatar, and Brasil.

[Resolute 14]

I doubt you are that naive cam_wmh. Canada is not going to base its bid on massive bribery.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I doubt you are that naive cam_wmh. Canada is not going to base its bid on massive bribery.

Nope, instead it'll be a coming of face for FIFA after the scandals of the last awarded W.C hosting nations .

[powderjunkie]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_...FIFA_World_Cup

I imagine this may have already been posted, but we participated once.

We have never even scored a goal.

We are ranked 112th. I don't think it would be fun to watch if we hosted.

New Caledonia (not even a country, with 250k people) is 118th.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Nope, instead it'll be a coming of face for FIFA after the scandals of the last awarded W.C hosting nations .

Okay, maybe you are that naive.

[jammies]

Canada is simply not corrupt enough. FIFA has discarded whatever vestigial sense of shame it had as an organization and the World Cup for the forseeable future will be awarded to whoever is willing to pony up the most obscene amount of cash. Therefore, discussions of whether or not public money would be available, what infrastructure needed, and the like are as relevant as wondering on which street the Edmonton Oilers next Stanley Cup parade could be held.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Okay, maybe you are that naive.

Needed it greened eh?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Vancouver Olympics had construction budgeted in at $603 million.

For that much money you could easily build three new buildings from scratch. That doesn't include any private investments into new buildings in the cities.

In the end, the Vancouver Olympics cost more than seven billion.

And you are talking about three cut-rate stadiums there. The Skydome alone cost 650 million and that was 25 years ago. Now a WC wouldn't need eight Skydomes, but it would need a lot more than three new cheap stadiums.

I'd be fascinated to see who these private investors would be. The richest people in the country won't even build a rink for their own hockey team.

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

The arguments against considering hosting the World Cup, or thinking it's a pipe dream have more to do with an individual not liking soccer than the numbers as the stats are there.

The Negative Nellies in Brazil are raising a stink about the growing costs of their (now 11 billion dollar) celebration. Next time, they should pick a country that actually likes soccer.

I wonder if the stats were there.

[Simanium]

Originally Posted by jammies

Canada is simply not corrupt enough. FIFA has discarded whatever vestigial sense of shame it had as an organization and the World Cup for the forseeable future will be awarded to whoever is willing to pony up the most obscene amount of cash. .

This may have been the case for Qatar, but that is really the exception. Brazil, South Africa, Germany, Japan/South Korea, France and the USA were all scandal free selections.

That being said, I think Canada is actually probably one of the favourites to host the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Other than Oceania, the North American soccer confederation (CONCACEF) has waited longer than any other continent to host the game. By the time 2026 comes along it would have been 32 years since the World Cup was in North America and the only countries really capable of hosting it are Canada, USA and Mexico.

There will also be very limited competition from major countries for 2026, as neither members of the European and Asian soccer confederations are permitted to bid on 2026 as they would have hosted the previous two World Cups. That only leaves countries from Africa, South America and North America, however all signs indicate that Uruguay and Argentina jointly plan on bidding for 2030 to host the 100th anniversary of the World Cup in the same place the first one was held, so it doesn't look like any serious bids from South America would be forthcoming. As for Africa, South Africa hosted fairly recently and I have a hard time believing they would give another WC to Africa when North America has waited over 30 years.

That basically would leave it between Mexico, USA and Canada. Mexico has already hosted the tournament twice and if they got it again it's third time hosting would be more than any other nation. Also Canada was actually runner-up (to Mexico) to host in 1986 which would work in our favour. FIFA has also been pushing the agenda of placing the game in places where it wishes to grow the game, this started in USA 94 and continued with South Korea/Japan 02, South Africa 10 and Qatar 22. Canada would fit this criteria and I think that if we invest in the stadiums, our bid would be preferable to many than the US bid.