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 31st, 2008, 11:34 AM   #81
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by GEwinnen View Post
The best bid is not enough. Spain for example will have a lot of top stadia comparable to yours and Spain has very short distances compared to the U.S.
My prediction: 2018-England 2022-Australia 2026-Asia 2030-Spain
2034- North America
Well, i think the best bid is whats really considered isnt it? I dont think thy would take the worst bid over the best. Bids are comprised of more than just the stadiums. Its the people, city infrastructure, transportation, etc...

And if your going to criticize the US for being too big, then why try to include Australia, which would require a whole lot more travel than in the US, or Asia, whos bid would likely come from a larger country. Think about it.
en1044 no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old May 31st, 2008, 11:38 AM   #82
Tillor87
CSH
 
Tillor87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 90 210 Guararí Hills
Posts: 25,545
Likes (Received): 4253

It would be nice to have a game in Anchorage Alaska
__________________
CRCRCRCRCR
SE REGALAN PEJIBAYES CON MAYONESA EN EL FORO DE COSTA RICA
Tillor87 no está en línea  
Old May 31st, 2008, 11:58 AM   #83
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

yeah, and they would probably play here haha

en1044 no está en línea  
Old June 1st, 2008, 12:22 AM   #84
Scba
Registered User
 
Scba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: US
Posts: 1,589
Likes (Received): 1420

I'm pretty sure that M&T Bank is too small.
Scba no está en línea  
Old June 1st, 2008, 10:47 AM   #85
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

Whoa

By TOBIAS XAVIER LOPEZStar-Telegram staff writer
Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones is aiming to fill the new Cowboys stadium with the nation's premier events ranging from college football to the NBA.

So isn't it natural that the premier event in international sports, the FIFA World Cup, also would be on his fantasy check list?

It's certainly a strong possibility and in reality the only thing standing between a return of World Cup soccer to this market are the English.

The United States and England will spend about the next three years amid the political gamesmanship that can only be matched by the finagling for a bid to be host for the Olympics.

The four biggest politicians in United States soccer sat down with the English media on Wednesday and, even in London, the Cowboys' stadium on Collins Street was making its presence felt.

U.S. Soccer president Sunil Gulati and secretary Dan Flynn, along with Major League Soccer's Don Garber (commissioner) and Ivan Gazidis (deputy commissioner), addressed the English media prior to the U.S.-England men's match.

Somewhere in the conversation the American contingent bragged about all the massive stadiums available in the United States that would be available come 2018.

Of course, the Cowboys' stadium, with its $1 billion price tag, was among the venues mentioned.

Now that's not a promise that Arlington would get World Cup games, but let's be honest here, it makes complete sense that it would be one of the final dozen cities.

When the United States was host for the 1994 World Cup, the old gray mare that is the Cotton Bowl was the site of matches that featured, among others, Brazil, Argentina, Holland and Germany.

The 1994 tournament remains the most successful in World Cup history in terms of both attendance and financial windfall, which Gulati is always quick to point out.

Professional soccer and the Cowboys are hardly a new combination. The U.S. national team has played at Texas Stadium, and Mexico and Bolivia played there before 38,858 on March 19, 2003.

From the very beginning of planning for the new Cowboys' palace, officials have said the field bowl would be built to accommodate the necessary width of international soccer.

Dallas/Fort Worth Airport also benefits the area's ability to quickly allow a flood of foreign guests in and out for matches.

So basically it will come down to this: The United States has the flash and the cash.

England, well, it has soccer tradition on its side.

The Old Country also hasn't hosted the World Cup since 1966, which might earn England some sentimental votes.

The best thing that could happen for area soccer and sports fans in general is if the FIFA voters follow the No. 1 practice in modern sports, which is, of course, show me the money.

If FIFA follows that philosophy, Mr. Jones will have himself an event that makes the NBA All-Star Game look like a quaint little party.
rantanamo no está en línea  
Old June 1st, 2008, 01:21 PM   #86
BeestonLad
PQS
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 3,224
Likes (Received): 551

Im all for the US getting another world cup but 2018 is to soon considering they had it in 94. It would be a disgrace to pick the US over England who by that time wouldnt have had it for 52 years
BeestonLad no está en línea  
Old June 1st, 2008, 01:36 PM   #87
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,778
Likes (Received): 10338

We'll see how the bids go. Nobody should get too overconfident yet.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old June 1st, 2008, 08:41 PM   #88
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

The article is revealing in many ways:

- Now we know for certain the US is bidding on 2018.
- Now we know for certain the continental thing is ending with 2014
- Jerry's statement about it being built specifically for football were just salesmanship, so the sideline suites will be further to the sideline than specifically thought.
rantanamo no está en línea  
Old June 1st, 2008, 09:11 PM   #89
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes (Received): 19

told ya Dallas would be FIFA ready.
nyrmetros no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 01:29 AM   #90
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

have no problem being wrong, but Jerrah himself kept saying it was a football only stadium. Perhaps just trying to sell the sideline suites as closer. Those suites would be awesome for soccer given that they're dugout, so eye level is the field itself.
rantanamo no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 09:30 AM   #91
rover3
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by rantanamo View Post
The article is revealing in many ways:

- Now we know for certain the US is bidding on 2018.
.
I knew that long ago. The US was really gearing up and hoping to get 2018 -- and made no bones to FIFA about their displeasure after parcelling it out to South Africa and then Brazil, and then pulling the rug from under the US for 2018.

This is one of the main reasons FIFA has now decided to award 2018 and 2022 simultaneously -- to placate the US (which of course will bring great funds to FIFA's coffers) and give the US a chance to lock in 2022 (since 2018 would seem to be England's turn).
rover3 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 03:09 PM   #92
Carrerra
Registered User
 
Carrerra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pohang
Posts: 1,452
Likes (Received): 22

I think there is no room for USA as long as there is a long waiting line of countries who can afford Worldcup but haven't had the opportunity
Carrerra no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 09:45 PM   #93
rover3
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrerra View Post
I think there is no room for USA as long as there is a long waiting line of countries who can afford Worldcup but haven't had the opportunity
Baloney. Do you really think FIFA is as naive as you are?
rover3 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 09:49 PM   #94
Iain1974
Registered User
 
Iain1974's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Longvieew
Posts: 950
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by rantanamo View Post

So basically it will come down to this: The United States has the flash and the cash.

England, well, it has soccer tradition on its side.

The Old Country also hasn't hosted the World Cup since 1966, which might earn England some sentimental votes.
I think the issue is a little more complex than that

Realistically FIFA are unlikely to allow the World Cup to be held out of Europe 3 times in a row. UEFA would certainly be unhappy about that.

While the larger size of US stadiums would allow a larger average crowd, shall we say 70,000 vs 50,000 for the sake of arguments, the ticket prices charged in England would certainly allow a higher revenue from match venues.

Sponsors/TV money is largely independent of venue so I feel is a moot point here.

TV companies paying the most are European based and would most definitely be happier with matches scheduled in England rather than the oppressive heat of an afternoon game in Dallas or LA. Undoubtedly the players would prefer Manchester to Miami.

The Premier League is currently the richest football league in the world and within a couple of year will overtake the NFL (per team) if not next season. The people in charge are not business novices. Nor are the managers of US Soccer, but there's no need for the article to be quite so condescending.

The English bid has;

1) Tradition (unquestionably)
2) Stadiums (FIFA criteria are not a problem, 10x40K + 2x60K and every one purpose built for football)
3) Time-zone (BST just 1 hr from CET)
4) Climate (Daytime highs unlikely to break 90F)
5) Proven cash for football (PremLeague ~$195M per team average)
6) Worlds most popular league (high level of overseas viewers, likely to generate $4bn for seasons 2010/11 thru 2012/13 becoming the first league ever to be worth more abroad than domestically).
7) Shorter travel between host cities (Obvious)

The US bid has

1) Large, modern stadiums (can host entire tournament with stadiums less than 10 yrs old albeit not specifically designed for football)
2) Cheap hotel rooms (abundance of moderately priced motels)
3) Generally lower cost for overseas visitors, depending on exchange rate somewhat.
4) Huge untapped market (can double football awareness with a World Cup. England would be lucky to increase awareness by 10%).
5) Better organized local government. (Hard to imagine sometimes, but true)


Overall, I feel FIFA will go with a European host. I really don't see any other likely outcome. If England were the UEFA choice, then USA would be better off aiming for 2022/2026 which are unlikely to be in Europe.

Last edited by Iain1974; June 2nd, 2008 at 09:52 PM. Reason: Tidying.
Iain1974 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 09:55 PM   #95
Carrerra
Registered User
 
Carrerra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pohang
Posts: 1,452
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by rover3 View Post
Baloney. Do you really think FIFA is as naive as you are?
If FIFA chose to give 2022 tournament to USA instead of China it would be called moron instead of naive
Carrerra no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 10:03 PM   #96
rover3
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrerra View Post
If FIFA chooses to give 2022 tournament to USA instead of China it would be called moron instead of naive
So call them 'moron.' It wouldn't change the reality.

Oh yeah, China -- with their human wrongs record, killer earthquakes, major epidemic outbreaks before international sporting events. (have you already forgotten the SARS outbreak before the 2003 Women's World Cup awarded to THEM?) If it had to take them 2 tries to carry off the Women's game, do you thnk they could carry off the men's WC in one try?

And who stepped in 5 years ago to save the tournament China's face and FIFA's butt in that instance? Why, only a small, football-backwoods country called the USA.

Gee, I hope FIFA does not have another brainfreeze moment in 2011 as the IOC did.

Last edited by rover3; June 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 PM.
rover3 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 10:10 PM   #97
Carrerra
Registered User
 
Carrerra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pohang
Posts: 1,452
Likes (Received): 22

Americans always emphasize on the attendance record set in 94 tournament but keep in mind that gate receipts account for only 10 percent of the total revenue from World cup these days. What they really care about is broadcasting right and sponsorship. For FIFA, gate receipts are only bonus.
Carrerra no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 10:28 PM   #98
rover3
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 562
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrerra View Post
Americans always emphasize on the attendance record set in 94 tournament but keep in mind that gate receipts account for only 10 percent of the total revenue from World cup these days. What they really care about is broadcasting right and sponsorship. For FIFA, gate receipts are only bonus.
Well, #1 - how do you know? Are on the FIFA payroll in that you speak for them?

#2 - uhmmm, others always emphasize how 'Americans always emphasize the attendance records.' Well, let me ask you this: have the USA 1994 records -- in TERMS OF bodies paying to see the Games -- been broken since? Has any succeeding host surpassed that?

You conveniently forget that the 1994 tournament only hosted 24 teams; today's WCs are 32 teams. Two countries (Korea and Japan) co-hosted 2002. With 17, mostly brand new, venues between them, did they even come to within 5,000 heads of matching the 1994 - 24 team tournament? A big NO!!

People like you only downplay it because you know there are no REAL major objections you can truly throw in. You make up these totally weak, porous non-arguments.

If gate attendance then were such a minor consideration, then why not award the WC to the small South Pacific island republics (Tuvalu, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Samoa, etc...) where they may have stadia only of 10,000 or 15,000 each since , as you claim, attendance records are quite immaterial?
rover3 no está en línea  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 10:52 PM   #99
RobH
Registered User
 
RobH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London-ish
Posts: 12,778
Likes (Received): 10338

You've deliberately missed his point and you know perfectly well the answer to your last sentence rover! His point wasn't that the USA wouldn't again set the record if it got 2018 (because it would) nor that that's not a good thing for FIFA (because it obviously is) but, purely and simply, that revenue-wise attendences don't matter as much as you'd think.

That doesn't take anything away from the USA's record. It's just a fact.
RobH está en línea ahora  
Old June 2nd, 2008, 11:00 PM   #100
Carrerra
Registered User
 
Carrerra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pohang
Posts: 1,452
Likes (Received): 22

You overlook one thing which is very important. If an evening match is held in USA, that means that Asian football fans which account for the majority of world's viewing should watch the game in workplace or school after they go to wok or go to school because of time difference with Asia and this could be a very serious problem to FIFA who is always concerned about broadcast right deals.
Carrerra 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 06:28 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