Fucking why?
Why does the US have to share?
It may make sense for small after countries like the Netherlands and Belgium
But we could give every game it's own 40k+ stadium and still have leftovers
Fucking why?
Why does the US have to share?
It may make sense for small after countries like the Netherlands and Belgium
But we could give every game it's own 40k+ stadium and still have leftovers
you know why, quit playing
Trump thats why
England should host it. They only did it once back in the 60s, they have all the facilities ready to use too.
They get embarrassed every wc you want to embarrass them at home?. Too much pressure fuck them for leaving the EU.
>what is the North American Union
>globalists
>black helicopters
>water filters
because globalists. soccer unites the world.
You just want us to get spanked at home m8, just leave the league to us and let Spain have it.
Reddits leaking
this
using sports to ease in the idea of north american super state
fuck the globalists
Fuck that shit. The workd cup should rotate between Europe, Asia, and Africa so it's in the worst possible time zones when the games are live here.
>Canada
>US
The FIFA (tm) World Cup (c) played on artificial turf with a baseball mound in the middle of it. That'd be sweet.
>Mexico
That'd actually be sweet. I'd figure Maradona might come back and play, if you know what I mean.
Agreed. I'd like to see England-Germany in Anfield, or Nigeria-Japan in Old Trafford. Those would be fun.
Blud, England games would be played at Wembley.
Nah you'd be great hosts. Travels from stadium to stadium would be 6h long at most, lingua franca, not a dime needing to be wasted on construction. And who's to say England can't get good until 2026.
The last one here was on grass, you know that right?
>Canada, America & Mexico co-hosting
.....do they even understand how much fucking land this is? Hosting it in Canada alone would be enough of a travel burden
Probably to make room for the 60 team World Cup
Does Canada even have enough appropriate outdoor stadiums?
Leafs are a hockey nation, they mostly build indoor hockey arenas
There are some artificial turf stadiums in Mexico, not to mention we're bombarded with ads every 5 seconds.
This sounds reasonable, but I still think it would be a mess, I mean, who would get the Final? Stadio Azteca? Cowboy's stadium?
Obviously we'd get it
So what?
We can host a 3000 team world cup with all of our stadiums
No
Probably why we have to share
Especially since the new CONCACAF president is a leaf
Share what faggot
>We can host a 3000 team world cup with all of our stadiums
What about revenue? Maybe I'm wrong, but I think lesser team matches could get better revenue if they're played outside the main territory.
What do you mean?
It's a world cup
People are going to show for them
We still have the record for highest total attendance for a world cup and our world cup had 12 less games than the ones that followed it
I hope they don't have any games in Boston traffic will be shit
Well to be fair the last WCs played in Mexico (86) and USA (94) were pretty good.
i think we've seen the last world cup.
I think you should have it to be honest, Mexico has too much shit going on to really enjoy a WC right now, but I think what the brit said was reasonable.
What shit is going on in Mexico right now that wasn't going on in 1986?
Social Media
All of them heading north
So which cities would host? Ive picked 12 since Russia has 11 (moscow has two stadiums hosting games)
>Canada
Vancouver
Calgary
Toronto
Montreal
>USA
Los Angeles
New York
Seattle
Orlando
Boston
Dallas
>Mexico
Mexico City
Guadalajara
Being serious:
Corruption is getting uncovered lately, relationships between cartels and government is decaying, poor people are being used as tools for different parties in the south (this hasn't changed tho, but now they're literally killing themselves). In other words, they're going to spend a lot and will never use the money on something useful, not to mention than only like 3 cities are going to benefit from it.
Being silly:
Social media outcry over "more important things that soccer" that will probably lead to violent protests, unavoidable "sick burns" about Donald Trump.
On the bright side:
No need to build new stadiums.
Monterrey and Tijuana are also viable.
Thanks i dont know much about mexico. I think having 4 cities in each country might be optimal
Lion's share of games should be in the US but it's not terrible to throw Canada and Mexico a few meme games
How about no Mexican or Canadian cities because this is a worse idea than giving Qatar a world cup?
Yeah it is
Why? Vancouver, Calgary, and Montreal have proven to be good host of the Olympics. Mexico is more soccer crazed then USA and Canada.
Because it's a pain in the ass for travel
If the US or Mexico hosted it you could figure out ways to prevent teams from having to travel cross-country but that's impossible now
Olympics are almost all in one location
World Cup will only work in North America if all of the game are held in east coast US cities, and maybe a few in Toronto/Montreal
you could centralize group locations
No way they could get away with only giving one coast games
Why not just do what suggests and keep the group centralized?
it's an absolute disaster for attending fans, these retards are going to destroy football competitions
what?? I HATE SAWKER NOW!
Politics
See if you centralize the groups you'd also have to give the final to neither New York or LA
That's hard enough on its own
But Mexico will want a semi and probably Canada too since they won't host the final
Then you have to satisfy every host city in the US
It would obviously need to be played in LA
>warm year round
>Mexicans
>...
>Mexicans
You can't have the final in LA without having a team travel cross-country for the final
>Group A:
Vancouver
Calgary
Seattle
LA
>Group B:
Dallas
Mexico City
Tijuana
Guadalajara
>Group C:
Montreal
Toronto
New York
Boston
During the group stages, groups could be placed in these regions. Once the group stages are over Give the big games to the biggest cities.
>LA
>New York
>Toronto
>Mexico City.
The final should obviously be hosted in USA, It could be in LA for instance.
Just my brain storming. I think it could work, Most of these cities would be happy hosting a group stage. Save the big games for the biggest cities.
>Let's fuck over most of the US
You just made the travel during the knockout stages even worse
Or Pakistan vs Israel in london.
most of the US doesn't care for the sport, so it's fine
they play 1 game a week. im sure they can handle it
That puts no games within a 2 hour drive for like 80% of the country
It's two
That has a very bad effect on the soccer
What your argument here? You want it all on the east coast to reduce travel, right? If Thats the case then "that puts no games within a 2 hour drive for 80% of the country". Youre contradicting yourself.
Oh well. I still don't see a problem here, most there wouldn't care about going to a game. And those that do and live there can start saving up now.
Avoiding Turf stadiums while trying to hit as many regions as possible
Mexico City (Azteca)
Guadalajara (Estadio Chivas)
Los Angeles (Rose Bowl)
Seattle (Century Link Field)
Dallas (Cotton Bowl)
Miami (Orange Bowl)
Washington DC (Fed Ex Field)
Kansas City (Arrowhead Stadium)
Chicago (Soldier Field)
Toronto (BMO Field)
New York (Metlife Stadium)
Foxboro (Gillette Stadium)
No
Who the fuck would want a east coast only cup?
You can pick 16 strategic locations to basically be centers and play everything regionally, expanding further and further until you get to the final in Jerry World
Unfortunately that's impossible given the spread between 3 countries
That leaf's plan avoid so of the biggest MLS cities
You're also fucking over those communities who won't get tourism dollars
Fuck anyone who thinks this is a good enough idea to come up with stadium plans
Also you can play with grass over turf
Just don't half ass it like they do for those friendlies
How is that any different to what i listed here ? The only difference is that all the games are in america which leads me to believe the whole basis of argument was simply your desire to rid Canada and Mexico of their games because of some issue you have with them.
Because you gave knockout games to only 4 cities that are too fucking far apart
Also I don't think the US should share solely because we should be too prideful to share a world cup
2026 FIFA World Cup. Fight and Win.
Those were just example cities. The point is to keep it centralized.
>Also I don't think the US should share solely because we should be too prideful to share a world cup
All you had to say was this.
Well it's too bad this is the globalist's sport, not america's sport.
I wanted it more regionalized I guess
The "Only give the east coast a world cup" is a big movement in itself too
But yes
The US should not have to share a world cup
I would rather never get it again then have to suffer the indignity of sharing
This is the United States of America
We don't fucking share