FIFA Rumored to want US/Canada to Replace Qatar as host venue for 2022 World Cup

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by rubecube

BC Place can accommodate 55k for the CFL. It drops to 21k for the Whitecaps, but I'm sure that's more to do with popularity, optics, etc. Olympic Stadium is old, but can accommodate 65k, and I know Skydome is close to 50k, so I think all of those would definitely be in the cards. Would Calgary consider expanding their new facility to try and hit the 50k mark? Hard to say, but unlikely.

I'm still waiting for this to come from a reputable source. All I've seen so far is one main source being regurgitated from multiple outlets.

They don't open the upper bowl for soccer games. Even for football, parts of the upper bowl are tarped off.

[Senator Clay Davis]

This isn't a true bid though, this is a replacement situation (and I still very much doubt it happens). FIFA isn't choosing 6 Canadian cities without guarantees (new/improved stadiums, grass stadiums etc..). The US can guarantee all those things without spending a cent. That's why I think it's unlikely Canada has more than two or three cities to co-host. If Canada has to spend billions to host, people here will be staunchly against it.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by SebC

If FIFA is looking to create "pods" that can easily be travelled between, the proximity to Seattle would be an advantage for Vancouver.

Vancouver, Seattle, Calgary, Edmonton sounds like a reasonable pod for travel

The longest flight would be two hours.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

This isn't a true bid though, this is a replacement situation (and I still very much doubt it happens). FIFA isn't choosing 6 Canadian cities without guarantees (new/improved stadiums, grass stadiums etc..). The US can guarantee all those things without spending a cent. That's why I think it's unlikely Canada has more than two or three cities to co-host. If Canada has to spend billions to host, people here will be staunchly against it.

Why even give it to Canada if that's the case?

Also why would would it cost billions of dollars? We already have stadiums or are in the process of building them. Converting turf to grass won't cost much ($100k per stadium as previously stated).

[Senator Clay Davis]

We have exactly 1 stadium that can host, Vancouver, and that needs the switch. Winnipeg is a horrible host city and fans would not want to travel there (besides games, all they could do is....wish they were in another city). Edmonton is meh but I guess that stadium is good enough. That leaves 4 more stadiums to be built or upgraded. That's going to be $1.5 billion at least

And more billions because of security. A cross border tournament with millions of fans...pretty much a terrorist dream. Brazil is spending over $1 billion on security, and this would face substantially higher terrorist threats. The G8 cost a billion for security, the Olympics were a billion, and this is an even bigger event. It's going to be expensive. So we'll see if taxpayers wanna foot the bill, but I already mentioned they barely have the stomach for NHL arenas, I sincerely doubt they will to host a soccer tournament.

[_Q_]

Why is Vancouver the only stadium that can host?

Honestly, not every stadium needs to hold more than 55,000 fans. Just look at the last 4 world cups for evidence.

The security angle I agree with you, but a lot of adequate stadiums are either existing or should be existing in 8 years.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Winnipeg is a horrible host city and fans would not want to travel there (besides games, all they could do is....wish they were in another city).

It's the World Cup. Those fans mostly need TV's and beer.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Winnipeg is a horrible host city and fans would not want to travel there (besides games, all they could do is....wish they were in another city).

Truer words have never been spoken

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

We have exactly 1 stadium that can host, Vancouver, and that needs the switch. Winnipeg is a horrible host city and fans would not want to travel there (besides games, all they could do is....wish they were in another city). Edmonton is meh but I guess that stadium is good enough. That leaves 4 more stadiums to be built or upgraded. That's going to be $1.5 billion at least

And more billions because of security. A cross border tournament with millions of fans...pretty much a terrorist dream. Brazil is spending over $1 billion on security, and this would face substantially higher terrorist threats. The G8 cost a billion for security, the Olympics were a billion, and this is an even bigger event. It's going to be expensive. So we'll see if taxpayers wanna foot the bill, but I already mentioned they barely have the stomach for NHL arenas, I sincerely doubt they will to host a soccer tournament.

I dislike soccer, but had to come to the defence of Winnipeg. During the winter you are correct it is a nightmare, a frozen white hell.

However, during the summer it comes alive. There are some nice areas. I would take The 'Peg over, Mulletville, Regina, Saskatoon.

[darklord700]

I don't think the size of stadium matters much as most revenues are generated from broadcasting and not seat sales. US can host it alone but Canada will be great as well.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I dislike soccer, but had to come to the defence of Winnipeg. During the winter you are correct it is a nightmare, a frozen white hell.

However, during the summer it comes alive. There are some nice areas. I would take The 'Peg over, Mulletville, Regina, Saskatoon.

Edmonton & Winnipeg are a wash.

The other don't even have a breath wasted in a conversation about venues.

[vennegoor of hesselink]

Originally Posted by darklord700

I don't think the size of stadium matters much as most revenues are generated from broadcasting and not seat sales. US can host it alone but Canada will be great as well.

Very true but they have to be able to hold a minimum of 40 000 seats and meet Fifa criteria to host World Cup matches.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

They don't open the upper bowl for soccer games. Even for football, parts of the upper bowl are tarped off.

just the ends

and they open it up for playoff games

its just to keep demand high

[d_phaneuf]

http://www.portal2014.org.br/en/news...+STADIUMS.html

requirements for stadiums

[seattleflamer]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I wonder if it's because the Seahawks refuse to remove the turf and the Mariners of course will still be playing.

FWIW, these are the stadiums being used for the Copa:



I'd be shocked if Stanford is still there once the 49ers get their new park built. And I'd also be shocked if Jerry Jones doesn't lobby for the final to be played at his playground.

I don't think the Copa venues have been officially announced. That list is very suspect with RFK on it.

As for Seattle venues, Husky Stadium is the nicest and most modern facility in the area with one of the most iconic views in college football. It holds 70K and brand new.

Spoiler!

[browna]

If this has any of thinnest chances of coming true, the CSA better be on the phone tomorrow to both FIFA to lobby for this further, and, to any and all sponsors of the Women's World Cup, and start lining up Canadian corporate sponsors for the Men's.

First, calls to the sponsors for the WWC, and to line up new ones, to get the funding right away to bring grass in and not play on turf for the WWC next year. That sort of initiative of bringing grass in would go a long way to show the commitment that the CSA has to put on a proper World Cup (yes, I know FIFA has already allowed it, and they're far from the most reasonable organization) and will do what it takes.

Next, to get more sponsors lined up for the Women's WC, and the Men's bid, to show FIFA that Canada would have a lot of backing and support. Smarter by the CSA would lock in new sponsors who want to the Men's World Cup sponsorship, to force them to commit to the Women's World Cup as well.

Canada having a few venues (two venues is fine, even more is gravy) would be great...but that's a means to an end, as the biggest benefit from a co-hosted WC would be that Canada would automatically qualify.

Canada automatically being in the WC would be the one of the biggest moments in Canadian sports. Obviously this would be the biggest event in this country since the 2010 Olympics. Canada being in the World Cup automatically means probably $30+ million to the CSA in their share of world wide TV rights.

Now, the CSA will piss away and mismanage that money within a few years, but it would be fantastic for soccer in the country no matter what, giving the whole program down to the grass roots a forced kick start (or kick in the ass, take your pick) and would be a great couple weeks while Team Canada is still in it (or, 2 matches) and the month as a whole.

Whatever it takes for the CSA, or if much better run private corporations or (yes, even a better run government compared to the CSA) the government have ability to make this happen, it should be pursued, full stop, ASAP.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I dislike soccer, but had to come to the defence of Winnipeg. During the winter you are correct it is a nightmare, a frozen white hell.

However, during the summer it comes alive. There are some nice areas. I would take The 'Peg over, Mulletville, Regina, Saskatoon.

That is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

If it's a joint bid, I would fully expect that each country will have an equal number of venues. In 2002, Japan and South Korea each had 10. I could see Canada doing six and USA doing six or even something like Canada doing six and USA doing 10 but an equal number of games on both sides of the border. 2008 Euro (Austria/Switzerland) and 2012 Euro (Poland/Ukraine) both also had an equal number of venues. I think that's the way it is.

This would be a great opportunity for Calgary to get their stadium built. I bet Toronto would get a new one, also. Maybe even Montreal. You blow out every stadium to Grey Cup size and you can make it work pretty easily.

Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Toronto, Winnipeg (or Regina) and Montreal.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Winnipeg is a horrible host city and fans would not want to travel there (besides games, all they could do is....wish they were in another city).

Because Manaus is such a hotspot for tourists.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That is not exactly a ringing endorsement.

Meh, it is still Winnipeg.....but is certainly better than those places I listed.


I can only continue to hope the World Cup does not come to Canada.