daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old May 29th, 2008, 04:03 AM   #1
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

USA - FIFA World Cup 2022 bid

I thought i would make this being that the 2018 WC thread seems to be expanding...

If the US gets 2022, who should the host cities be??

Last edited by www.sercan.de; June 24th, 2008 at 11:16 PM.
en1044 no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old May 29th, 2008, 04:08 AM   #2
Dallasbrink
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas/Amarillo TEXAS
Posts: 1,105
Likes (Received): 38

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
I thought i would make this being that the 2018 WC thread seems to be expanding...

If the US gets 2022, who should the host cities be??
could care less
Dallasbrink no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 04:59 AM   #3
TexasBoi
Texas-NoVA
 
TexasBoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NoVA
Posts: 2,259
Likes (Received): 33

I care and I think a good part of this country will too. I would love for the world cup to return to the US.
TexasBoi no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:04 AM   #4
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasBoi View Post
I care and I think a good part of this country will too. I would love for the world cup to return to the US.
Thank you TexasBoi, NOVA represent!
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:10 AM   #5
NeilF
Reasons To Be Cheerful
 
NeilF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Edinburgh / Belfast
Posts: 552
Likes (Received): 3

Two out of three world cups held in the Americas seems unlikely. I'd say 2026 or 2030 are more realistic targets for the US. Ultimately, however, I'd say the US is about the only country that could choose stadia and cities that cover its vast geographic advance, given the stadia available.
__________________
In economics, hope and faith coexist with great scientific pretension and also a deep desire for respectability.
NeilF no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:29 AM   #6
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Here's what I'd like to see - might be a bit far fetched, but it's what I'd like...

The USA is clearly the biggest and most powerful country in terms of hosting ability, so I'd like FIFA to hold out until 2030 and then grant the US the hosting rights for the centenary tournament.

I'd then like to see a one off increase of competing teams from the world's top 32 to the top 64 sides competing at 20 stadiums rather than 10. The tournament would only have to be lengthened by an extra few days to incorporate a 'round of 32' knock out.

This would allow Europe to have 2018, Asia to have 2022, and South America or Africa to have 2026, prior to the Yanks getting the big one. (The only problem I can see is that this would take the finals out of Europe for at least 16 years).

I know Uruguay are very keen to (part)host 2030, in commemoration of them hosting the first finals, but even with Argentina as a partner, I can't see them being able to match what the USA could come up with.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:34 AM   #7
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Los Angeles, CA
New LA Coliseum 75,000


Seattle, WA
Qwest Field 68,000


Glendale, AZ
University of Phoenix Stadium 63,000


Dallas, TX
New Cowboys Stadium 80,000


Chicago, IL
Soldier Field 63,000


Nashville, TN
LP FIeld 68,000


Miami, FL
Dolphins Stadium 75,000


Washington, DC
FedEx Field 91,000


Foxboro,MA
Gillette Stadium 68,000


East Rutherford, NJ
New Meadowlands 82,000


FedEx Field would host the final

Other possible sites:
Cleveland
Denver
Minneapolis
Tampa
Kansas City
Houston
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:35 AM   #8
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjuk View Post
Here's what I'd like to see - might be a bit far fetched, but it's what I'd like...

The USA is clearly the biggest and most powerful country in terms of hosting ability, so I'd like FIFA to hold out until 2030 and then grant the US the hosting rights for the centenary tournament.

I'd then like to see a one off increase of competing teams from the world's top 32 to the top 64 sides competing at 20 stadiums rather than 10. The tournament would only have to be lengthened by an extra few days to incorporate a 'round of 32' knock out.

This would allow Europe to have 2018, Asia to have 2022, and South America or Africa to have 2026, prior to the Yanks getting the big one. (The only problem I can see is that this would take the finals out of Europe for at least 16 years).

I know Uruguay are very keen to (part)host 2030, in commemoration of them hosting the first finals, but even with Argentina as a partner, I can't see them being able to match what the USA could come up with.
I can see where your coming from, however, this thread is about where the stadium sites would be if the US hosted, not if they should host it
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:43 AM   #9
Canadian Chocho
Registered User
 
Canadian Chocho's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Managua/Toronto
Posts: 3,470
Likes (Received): 28

Isn't it mandatory to have a roof?
__________________
Colonial Cities

1 2 3
Canadian Chocho no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 05:51 AM   #10
Dallasbrink
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas/Amarillo TEXAS
Posts: 1,105
Likes (Received): 38

You can take the new Cowboys stadium off that list, the field is going to be made at dimensions that wont allow soccer play, same could be said for U of P stadium and new New York Stadium. These new stadium are being built with the crowd closer to the field, making it to narrow for soccer.
Dallasbrink no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:00 AM   #11
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallasbrink View Post
You can take the new Cowboys stadium off that list, the field is going to be made at dimensions that wont allow soccer play, same could be said for U of P stadium and new New York Stadium. These new stadium are being built with the crowd closer to the field, making it to narrow for soccer.
No, actually all three of those stadiums have been designed to host a soccer game
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:01 AM   #12
mgk920
Nonhyphenated-American
 
mgk920's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Appleton, WI USA
Posts: 2,583
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Chocho View Post
Isn't it mandatory to have a roof?
Not that I know of. Remember that the final in 1994 was played at the Rose Bowl, a stadium with only one bowl-style seating tier and no roof, much like Lambeau Field in Green Bay, but bigger. The opening ceremony and match in 1994 was played at (old) Soldier Field in Chicago, which was also a one-seating-tier stadium. Only one of the venues was an indoor stadium, IIRC it was the Silverdome in Pontiac, MI. They had to haul in a temporary grass field for the World Cup matches.

The USA is very rich indeed in venues capable of hosting World Cup matches. From what I remember, Brasil was scheduled to be the 1994 host, but they were in the midst of an economic meltdown that prevented that, so the USA got the tournament as a 'plan B' - with oodles of venues ready to go with only minor modifications.

Chicago and Los Angeles would again be ideal places for the opening and final matches, IMHO.

As for fan interest? USA-1994 had one of the highest total percentages of available seats used of all World Cups - nearly ALL of the matches were sold out.

Mike
mgk920 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:05 AM   #13
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Chocho View Post
Isn't it mandatory to have a roof?
No its only encouraged
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:16 AM   #14
Benjuk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 920
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
I can see where your coming from, however, this thread is about where the stadium sites would be if the US hosted, not if they should host it
Yep, I understand, but my suggestion is relevent in that I am putting forward the notion of twice as many venues (something which only the US could handle)... Thus - the selection of host cities is widened allowing a great number of venues to be discussed (showed off).



Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Chocho View Post
Isn't it mandatory to have a roof?
It's mandatory for the VIP/Media sections to have a roof, the paying supporters can get soaked or sunburnt, FIFA don't care.
Benjuk no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:16 AM   #15
rover3
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Likes (Received): 2

Actually, somebody on another board listed these:

Seattle (Northwest)
*San Fransisco (west coast)
*Los Angeles (southwest/west coast)
*Dallas (southwest)
*Miami or Tampa (south)
*Washington (lower Atlantic seaboard)
Philadelphia (middle Atlantic seaboard)
*New York (upper Atlantic seaboard)
*Boston (New England)
*Chicago (midwest)
Columbus (midwest)

* venues in 1994

Use Seattle, Los Angeles, Columbus, Miami, Philadelphia, New York, Boston and Chicago for the 16s
Los Angeles, Dallas, Chicago and New York for the quarters
Boston and Los Angeles for the semis
Chicago - 3rd placer
And New York for the final.

You have to start from the 1994 venues. Those were so well-placed in terms of stadia, geographical spread and local population relevance. But due to new stadia, spin them around a little.

With such a wealth of choices, I don't see how FIFA can go anywhere after England is picked for 2018. It would only make sense.
rover3 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:35 AM   #16
Mr. Fusion
Just A Pilot... :-)
 
Mr. Fusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Enewetak Atoll
Posts: 523
Likes (Received): 10

FedEx Field will be replaced by 2022, Snyder already wants to move the team right now to a brand new facility where RFK Stadium is.
Mr. Fusion no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:39 AM   #17
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Fusion View Post
FedEx Field will be replaced by 2022, Snyder already wants to move the team right now to a brand new facility where RFK Stadium is.

Oh wouldnt that just be awesome...i hate FedEx
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:50 AM   #18
Dallasbrink
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas/Amarillo TEXAS
Posts: 1,105
Likes (Received): 38

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
No, actually all three of those stadiums have been designed to host a soccer game
Listen to someone who lives in Dallas. The Dallas Cowboys new Stadium in Arlington Texas will not have the dimensions for soccer. trust me, its been discussed, its planned for better things then soccer.
Dallasbrink no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 06:57 AM   #19
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallasbrink View Post
Listen to someone who lives in Dallas. The Dallas Cowboys new Stadium in Arlington Texas will not have the dimensions for soccer. trust me, its been discussed, its planned for better things then soccer.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...m.37128e0.html

I dont believe for a second that there isnt any interest in Dallas to host a soccer match
en1044 no está en línea  
Old May 29th, 2008, 07:05 AM   #20
Dallasbrink
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas/Amarillo TEXAS
Posts: 1,105
Likes (Received): 38

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...m.37128e0.html

I dont believe for a second that there isnt any interest in Dallas to host a soccer match
Designs have changed around the field. Besides, let reliant in Houston host it, They already did a bad enough job when they hosted USA vs Mexico and didn't let in ANY USA fans.
Dallasbrink no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
los angeles, united states of america, world cup

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu