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 April 18th, 2009, 12:10 AM   #1021
nomarandlee
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
nomarandlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: 1060 W. Addison, City by the Lake
Posts: 7,209
Likes (Received): 2761

Quote:
Originally Posted by massp88 View Post
My point is this, a city like Chicago, aside from the large metro area and diverse population, is easily accessed by people from Europe, Asia and South America via non-stop flights. A city like Green Bay, Wisconsin is not.

I am sorry, but a city like San Antonio or Indianapolis is going to be very low on the list of cities that get to host the games. As far as Boston, New York and Philadelphia not being proven soccer markets, you are wrong in this regard. Both Boston (Foxboro) and New York are solid market for the MLS with each team averaging solid attendance figures. Both cities also have a long track record for hosting World Cup qualifiers and friendly matches with good attendance.

Since the field has expanded by 8 teams since 1994, the U.S. would really only need 2 more venues, maybe 3. So besides the cities that hosted last time, I could see Philadelphia and Houston as the 2 most obvious choices.

What's interesting to point out is that every city that hosted in 1994, will have a new venue by the time 2022 rolls around.
Perhaps Green Bay is on the verge of being too small but I think city's like Cinncy, Indy, Tampa, or Cleveland for example would fit. You can't tell me that Nuremberg, Leipzig, or Hanover are more interconnected to oversees Asia, NA, SA, and Africa then those listed Americans city's are. If there are substantial improvements on certain corridors then travel to those aforementioned American medium markets by air or rail shouldn't be relatively painless.

Orlando is also the exception to your new stadium rule. I'm not sure why Miami or Tampa wasn't chosen for 94 cup.
__________________
Stephane Charbonnier, “I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.”
nomarandlee no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old April 18th, 2009, 05:33 AM   #1022
hingus2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 7

I don't actually see why the USA would actually have a better infrastructure than England.

By 2018/22, should we get the WC, it is likely the country will see a high speed rail network (200mph) nationwide, as well as the fact it would take 5 hours to drive from one end of the country to the other.

While the US has a multitude of huge stadia nationwide, if you see England as the equivalent as a single US state, no actual US state could come close to it when it comes to frequency and proximity of 5* stadiums.
hingus2000 no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 06:01 AM   #1023
westsidebomber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 211
Likes (Received): 39

Quote:
Originally Posted by hingus2000 View Post
I don't actually see why the USA would actually have a better infrastructure than England.

By 2018/22, should we get the WC, it is likely the country will see a high speed rail network (200mph) nationwide, as well as the fact it would take 5 hours to drive from one end of the country to the other.

While the US has a multitude of huge stadia nationwide, if you see England as the equivalent as a single US state, no actual US state could come close to it when it comes to frequency and proximity of 5* stadiums.
Um...New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore could basically host the WC alone if they had to. Now obviously they aren't all in the same state but they're all probably within 5-6 hours of each other.
westsidebomber no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 07:43 AM   #1024
JYDA
Registered User
 
JYDA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,173
Likes (Received): 94

People.... Euro bids are not competing against non-euro bids so comparing USA to England is pointless. 2018 is going to Europe. England just has to focus on beating Spain, Russia and Benelux. USA just has to worry about Australia and Indonesia.
JYDA está en línea ahora  
Old April 18th, 2009, 08:27 AM   #1025
parcdesprinces
churches & stadia/arenas
 
parcdesprinces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Auteuil, Paris XVI | Quercy | Monaco, MC
Posts: 16,701
Likes (Received): 9705

Quote:
Originally Posted by hingus2000 View Post
By 2018/22, should we get the WC, it is likely the country will see a high speed rail network (200mph) nationwide, as well as the fact it would take 5 hours to drive from one end of the country to the other.
Never too late...

Thanks to Alstom.....or Siemens.....
parcdesprinces no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 12:19 PM   #1026
hingus2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by westsidebomber View Post
Um...New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore could basically host the WC alone if they had to. Now obviously they aren't all in the same state but they're all probably within 5-6 hours of each other.
It isn't just proximity of stadia, although that is a bonus. Take the Olympics for example - it is all about putting on a show, the shop window effect. The USA thrives on such events.

Obviously there is an element of that in a WC, but it is also a deeper celebration of football. It is about catering to the individual fan, and not in terms of hotel rooms, and food, but in terms of allowing them to express their fanatacism. Not saying the US can't do this, but I think it requires a shift in mindset from the purely infrastructural considerations that seem to be most prevalent on this board - and probably most prevalent in the eyes of the public, and those running the bid.

The poster above is correct in saying the US isn't competing with the European bids anyway, so yeah, I think Australia will be you guys biggest rival. FIFA have been doing everything to push football in Australia (eg. shifting them into the Asian confederation to make things more competetive), so I think a World Cup is the next logical step. Add that to the fact that you guys are applying again extremely soon (in WC terms) since you last hosted it. I think Australia are going to be tough to beat.
hingus2000 no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 01:56 PM   #1027
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by westsidebomber View Post
Um...New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore could basically host the WC alone if they had to. Now obviously they aren't all in the same state but they're all probably within 5-6 hours of each other.
What's your point, so could London.
bigbossman no está en línea  
Old April 18th, 2009, 09:58 PM   #1028
El Cholo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Houston
Posts: 82
Likes (Received): 144

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
What's your point, so could London.
It wasn't a point, it was a counter-point.
El Cholo no está en línea  
Old April 19th, 2009, 03:27 AM   #1029
El Mariachi
Registered User
 
El Mariachi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,156
Likes (Received): 5995

Quote:
Originally Posted by massp88 View Post
My point is this, a city like Chicago, aside from the large metro area and diverse population, is easily accessed by people from Europe, Asia and South America via non-stop flights. A city like Green Bay, Wisconsin is not.

I am sorry, but a city like San Antonio or Indianapolis is going to be very low on the list of cities that get to host the games. As far as Boston, New York and Philadelphia not being proven soccer markets, you are wrong in this regard. Both Boston (Foxboro) and New York are solid market for the MLS with each team averaging solid attendance figures. Both cities also have a long track record for hosting World Cup qualifiers and friendly matches with good attendance.

Since the field has expanded by 8 teams since 1994, the U.S. would really only need 2 more venues, maybe 3. So besides the cities that hosted last time, I could see Philadelphia and Houston as the 2 most obvious choices.

What's interesting to point out is that every city that hosted in 1994, will have a new venue by the time 2022 rolls around.
You don't think that if there were available tickets to an England game at Lambeau--that it still wouldn't sell out? Also, cities like Green Bay or Ann Arbor might have small airports, but there are air connections to these cities from major airports--like O'Hare or Detroit. You think well-off, diehard soccer fans from England, Brazil, Spain, or Italy would have a problem with a flight and a transfer? I don't.

But you aren't talking about tiny cities. You are saying that major cities like Minneapolis, Atlanta, or Indianapolis wouldn't sell out. No offense, but I think thats ridiculous!

As for Boston, New York, and Philly being soccer strongholds--I stand by my claim. I have no facts for Philly, but New England and New York are not exactly lighting the MLS on fire with their support for their own clubs. I know people on the coasts want us all to believe that they are more open to soccer (and everything international) but they are as much into the "big four" as people in Milwaukee or K.C.

Of course this is all discussion. Obviously, these games would be played in larger markets. I am just arguing rantanamo's point, that the U.S. could hold these games in covered stadiums next year, if need be.
El Mariachi no está en línea  
Old April 19th, 2009, 03:35 AM   #1030
El Mariachi
Registered User
 
El Mariachi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,156
Likes (Received): 5995

Quote:
Originally Posted by miguelon View Post
the US has no doubt the capacity to put at least 10 cities, that are capable of hosting WC games, they have the cities, hotels, airpots, etc...

my only concern is that the US security forces just dont have criteria, I mean, If police in the US sees a bunch of people in the street, the last thing they think is that they are celebrating a win, more likely the officers will report a riot, and disperse the crowd and arrest a couple of guys.

On the other hand because of inmigration and geografical position, my team Mexico will be the de facto local team. similar situation with many latinamerican countries.
Again, why do you people all assume this is the way things are going to be? Its not like American police departments aren't going to be notified of such a huge event as a World Cup game. Yeah, there will obviously be a security presence (as there was for every W.C.), but they aren't going to react as rashly as you predict, unless brawls and riots do infact break out.
El Mariachi no está en línea  
Old April 19th, 2009, 05:02 AM   #1031
Fizmo1337
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bruges
Posts: 931
Likes (Received): 61

Quote:
Originally Posted by hingus2000 View Post
A lot has been said about 94 being the best attended, and most profitable WC ever.

But I think a lot of people are missing the point. To those of us passionate about football (soccer), the World Cup isn't about the profitibility for the host nation or FIFA, nor is it that a certain country managed to have the biggest stadiums and hence the biggest attendances.

It is about the overall perception, and experience. And the fact is, of the modern games, USA 94 isn't perceived as a particularly successful competition outside of North America.

Everything that Germany 06 had, I can't see USA 18/22 having. And that is no slight on USA as a nation whatsoever, I love the USA, but when it comes to football, it just isn't the same.
I totally agree with your post allthough I thought Korea was quite football fanatic during WC'02 with millions and millions of crazy Koreans in red shirts on the streets. The atmosphere was great (less in Japan though).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like in '02 and '06 stadiums have to be 'ok' (off course) but ask a European and when he says a tournament is successful it's based on the games and (especially) the atmosphere. At the WC '06 in Germany the stadiums were average/ok, the attendance was average/ok, the games were average/ok but still it is seen as a very successful WC because of the atmosphere.

Nobody will argue that Americans have the best (and most) stadiums. I'm sure they will put off a great tournament based on profitibility, infrastructure, stadiums, etc... but I'm not sure about the atmosphere which is maybe the only downside of the USA.
We, in Europe (I hope I don't sound too "Europe is better then USA", it's not intended), are used that cities are totally transformed and focussed purely on football in these 4 weeks. Everything is put aside for the football. Whole centres of cities, market places, etc... become fan zones and no cars are allowed etc... This makes football the centre of everything and makes you feel as fan more 'welcome'/at home. Also lots of streets are closed and are for fans only + with all the squares in the centre where all the fans gather together it makes it more fun and creates more atmosphere. (see Germany '06)
Cities are not too big, not too small so all fans are in the same neighbourhood (better for atmosphere).
Also almost every person supports the WC and takes part in the atmosphere and give up some things (like not being able to use your car in some places).
I don't think that people in Chicago or New York want to close streets in the centre of the city for a WC. Also football fans will be in the minority in such a big cities and won't really be noticed that much whereas in European cities you can see it everywhere when its a WC.

Like hingus said, I'm not too sure about a WC in USA. Football has grown a lot so maybe a WC now will be much different and many more people will follow it and take part in the party atmosphere during a WC but it's difficult to say atm.

I would say 2018/2022 is maybe a bit too early to host it again in the USA (Australia etc... haven't hosted before so they should get a chance) but maybe in mid/late '20's I think it's ok to host it again. USA deserves a 2nd chance and it will be interesting to see the differences compared to '94 and how much things have improved.
Fizmo1337 no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 05:08 AM   #1032
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes (Received): 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby3 View Post
I'm sure you as a Metrostars fan will have to agree with me on this:

Fire the current Giants Stadium security staff because they DO think all soccer fans are hooligans...even 5'4" female fans.

I absolutely agree with you. The only issue that colonies would have is with security. Security forces in this country don't get soccer.
nyrmetros no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 09:56 AM   #1033
hngcm
Registered User
 
hngcm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,644
Likes (Received): 20

I don't think Australia could get generate a much better atmosphere than the USA...

Australia is the only real competition for the 2022 WC.
hngcm no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 11:07 AM   #1034
Walbanger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,241
Likes (Received): 1111

^ I think we could
Walbanger no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 11:45 AM   #1035
Wezza
©
 
Wezza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Townsville
Posts: 8,861
Likes (Received): 968

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walbanger View Post
^ I think we could
I know we could.
Wezza está en línea ahora  
Old April 20th, 2009, 01:51 PM   #1036
haggiesm
Registered User
 
haggiesm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pretoria
Posts: 1,912
Likes (Received): 0

I think you could too.
haggiesm no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 08:31 PM   #1037
hingus2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 7

Australia although not a footballing nation as such, has a history of hosting successful international, fanatic type events. Namely rugby world cups. It is a similar mindset.
hingus2000 no está en línea  
Old April 20th, 2009, 09:40 PM   #1038
en1044
Unregistered User
 
en1044's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,405
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by hingus2000 View Post
Australia although not a footballing nation as such, has a history of hosting successful international, fanatic type events. Namely rugby world cups. It is a similar mindset.
I dont see how the United States has done anything different than that.
__________________
WASHINGTON REDSKINS
en1044 no está en línea  
Old April 21st, 2009, 12:09 AM   #1039
hingus2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 123
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by en1044 View Post
I dont see how the United States has done anything different than that.
If I am wrong tell me, but there can't be too many team sports in which the US regularly compete internationally? (apart from soccer)

Australia is constantly playing Rugby Union, Rugby League, Cricket etc against other nations, and has held World Cups in all those events.

I can't see the US getting a World Cup before they give Australia a chance.
hingus2000 no está en línea  
Old April 21st, 2009, 12:15 AM   #1040
Bobby3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,267
Likes (Received): 52

Basketball.

We actually field national teams in every sport but the only ones that draw well are soccer and basketball. Baseball is more an event team.
Bobby3 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 04:07 AM.


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