you agreed with him

but I guess you were referring to the cities being spread out and not it having FAIL written all over it?

1/12/2010 6:59:34 PM

Yes. I actually should have clarified that from the start. I absolutely believe the World Cup will (if we win) be a success from a US perspective and a FIFA perspective. I just think there are better countries in the pot from a fan experience perspective.

1/12/2010 7:04:35 PM

Quote :

"Taking away my personal bias as an American, I would be more prone to support England, Portugal and Spain, or Belgium and the Netherlands."

man what a random collection of teams

1/12/2010 10:16:33 PM

^I don't think he was referring to teams. He was referring to host nations. At least that was the discussion at the time.

Quote :

"just admit that you can't see why FIFA will strongly consider giving 2018 or 2022 to the US because you're a dumb ass"

Having been to a World Cup myself, I can see clearly why the USA would not be a good candidate for the World Cup. Many of the reasons why have already been said in this thread.

[Edited on January 12, 2010 at 10:21 PM. Reason : .]

1/12/2010 10:19:29 PM

Yes. Those are three of the 2018 bids.

1/12/2010 10:28:11 PM

If you'd prefer other countries to host, then whatever, that's your opinion.

However, that the US has already proven it's capable of hosting a tournament that a) was the most attended World Cup ever and b) was the most successful WC to date (in 1994) is a fact. And with newer and better stadiums available for this bid, there's no reason to think it wouldn't be just as successful this time so it would be far from a fail and if you still think that, then you're a moron.


The only reason we wouldn't get 2018 or 2022 is because we've had one more recently than everybody else bidding for one, which is a reason I definitely think should be considered (England HAS to host again, right?). All the other reasons you've mentioned in this thread would not factor in at all.

^ I'm personally not a fan of joint bids, especially because that's one less spot for somebody to qualify in. I'd like to see England or Russia in 2018, and if not us in 2022, Australia.

[Edited on January 12, 2010 at 10:32 PM. Reason : .]

1/12/2010 10:31:39 PM

There is no way belgium would be a better host country than the usa. With our recent improvements in the soccer world, it would be really beneficial for our country to get a world cup soon. If soccer gets more support from the usa, it would generate a shit ton of money and interest. Other countries around the world are going to watch the world cup no matter what, but getting more support from the usa would be huge.

1/12/2010 10:32:55 PM

Quote :

"the most successful WC to date (in 1994) is a fact"

Where are you getting any of this information from? The facts I see say that Germany 2006 was the most successful WC to date.

[Edited on January 13, 2010 at 10:46 AM. Reason : oh I also forgot to call you a moron for thinking the USA is a good bid.]

1/13/2010 10:44:08 AM

"Was the most successful to date (in 1994)" was supposed to mean - up to 1994, it was the most successful financially, and pre-World Cup talk had been all doom and gloom and talks of being a major FAIL just like you're doing.

Judging a WC's overall success strictly on financial success won't tell the full story anyways with every WC after the next having more opportunities to make money with increased sponsorship/marketing options, television revenues, etc. But WC94 still holds the attendance record and I don't see any other country in the foreseeable future breaking it, unless it's us again.

Why are you still arguing about it? It already WAS a good bid and there's no reason to think that would be any different with even nicer and newer stadiums

1/13/2010 12:08:54 PM

^Plus the US is a melting pot which can't hurt ticket sales. I am friends with people who live in the USA that are from Northern Ireland, England, Germany, Argentina, and know some people from Honduras, Mexico, and Costa Rica. The World Cup will do just fine no matter what countries win the up coming bids.

1/13/2010 12:48:32 PM

If I could go to any country on the planet for a World Cup, expenses paid, I would NOT pick the United States first, second or third.

With that being said, Golovko, are you mad?



Not successful?

Like aimorris mentioned, the '94 World Cup had the highest attendance of all of them. Now one would be really confused about how the United States could manage that, since you claim we don't have large enough stadiums. Oh, wait, there were 94,194 people at the Rose Bowl for the '94 final?

Quote :

"But, elduderino, the Rose Bowl is pretty old!"

You're, right. How about the brand new Meadowlands and Cowboys stadiums, both state of the art with respective capacities of 82,500 and 80,000 (expandable to 111,000 with standing room). Hmmm. Of the largest 20 stadiums in the world, 12 of them are located in the United States. Oh, and to add insult to injury, there were only 24 teams in that world cup as opposed to the 32 in each one after it. Yes. We managed more people with less games. Perhaps the list you were looking for was this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stadiums_by_capacity

Quote :

"But elduderino, nobody cares about soccer in the US."

Well, obviously enough people care to have the highest attendance of all the World Cups. Not to mention I personally remember seeing "World Cup '94" plastered everywhere. All over the airport, all over the paper, all over the TV. Maybe it was just because I was living in New York, I don't know. Somehow, I even had a Striker The World Cup Pup action figure (it's ok I was 9), and I didn't even like soccer that much back in '94.

Truth of the matter, I would rather see the World Cup in England. I would rather see the World Cup in Spain. I would rather see the World Cup in a bunch of places. But to say the World Cup in the US would be a FAILure is flat out




And, yes, I am aware of the excessive bolding, italics, and condescension.

[Edited on January 14, 2010 at 1:56 AM. Reason : ]

1/14/2010 1:55:38 AM

Why do so many of you not want to see the World Cup in the USA? I would love it because it would be cheaper to go to games than having to fly to Europe, Africa, or Asia. Washington DC is 6 hours from Raleigh. All you would have to do is drive up there and stay in the hotel over night and then leave in the morning.

1/15/2010 1:17:02 PM

I clearly said multiple times I wanted the World Cup in the United States for selfish reasons, like the ones you just posted.

1/15/2010 1:36:06 PM

^Yeh I know you did, but it seems like some other people don't feel that way. If the USA does win 2018/2022 then hopefully they don't host for about 100 years after that. I do agree that it needs to travel around the world. I am not a fan of a 3 to 1 hosting ratio.

1/15/2010 1:42:58 PM

Paraguay/Club America Striker Shot in the Head

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/731133/ce/uk/?cc=5901&ver=us

1/25/2010 11:22:26 PM

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/4892686/ce/us/fifa-selects-martin-hansson-thierry-henry-hand-ball-ref-world-cup&cc=5901?ver=us

As if FIFA doesn't already look corrupt and incompetent enough.

2/6/2010 4:08:08 PM

The simple fact is that there just aren't many world class officials to choose from so you just have to take what you can get. And although he's made a couple big mistakes, he still has experience refereeing big games at a high level and he's way better than any referee somewhere like the US can offer.

2/6/2010 5:08:26 PM

Howard Webb made it. Best referee in the world in my opinion.

2/6/2010 7:22:15 PM

I don't necessarily disagree with letting the guy in, but it looks bad. That crew missed a bad handball in a game that decided who goes to the world cup and who missed out. From a PR standpoint you really shouldn't let any of the 3 ref in the world cup.

2/6/2010 8:17:32 PM

Ovrebo gets my vote as the best......

2/7/2010 9:00:53 AM

So has anyone seen the 2010 World Cup ball up close. They are selling replica ones for $19.99 at Dicks that are smooth like soccer balls, but the authentic ball ($119.99) feels like a rugby ball, football, or basketball. It is rough on the outside. I wonder why they did that.

2/20/2010 10:42:32 PM

^^lol at the timing of that post

[Edited on February 20, 2010 at 10:46 PM. Reason : timing]

2/20/2010 10:45:34 PM

haha

2/21/2010 12:19:52 AM

^^^

Keepers have been complaining (what a surprise) about the flight of past balls. The texture is to ensure both true flight as well as grip. I saw a video somewhere with an Adidas rep explaining it.

2/21/2010 1:34:31 AM

^Yeh I remember hearing that keepers were bitching about the 2006 World Cup ball dipping when shots were taken.

2/21/2010 1:41:50 AM

There have been complaints about every Adidas match ball since they retired the Tango in '98. The Fevernova was too light. The +Teamgeist, Roteiro, and Europass wobbled unpredictably. We'll see how things turn out with the Jabulani...the match Fevernovas were slightly textured, too, and it didn't seem to make anyone any happier.

2/21/2010 5:33:07 AM

^Maybe they should just play defense, or make the save.

2/21/2010 1:19:21 PM

no WC for Becks, ruptured achilles... I'm not sure if he would have even been included on the squad anyways

Apparently there's a chance his career is over too.

[Edited on March 14, 2010 at 7:01 PM. Reason : .]

3/14/2010 7:00:31 PM

now ESPN can focus on decent, meaningful players

3/14/2010 8:07:23 PM

Quote :

"no WC for Becks, ruptured achilles... I'm not sure if he would have even been included on the squad anyways Apparently there's a chance his career is over too."

He would have been a reserve.

3/14/2010 11:02:52 PM

Quote :

"^Maybe they should just play defense, or make the save."

Play an entire season with a traditional Mitre ball and then switch to a newer Adidas ball and tell me the difference is fair.

Match balls have never been truly standardized, and it's always been a problem.

3/15/2010 4:36:47 AM

^eh, both teams gotta play with the same ball

3/15/2010 5:22:27 AM

Heaven forbid we see some more goals in soccer. That would be awful.

3/15/2010 5:51:11 AM

Quote :

"He would have been a reserve."

Thanks Fabio.

3/15/2010 7:49:23 AM

figured this belongs here.

Next week in Charlotte there is an International Friendly at Bank of America Stadium between Mexico and Iceland.

20,000 tickets remain. I would like to see the US play a match here.

3/15/2010 10:13:46 PM

Bradley has emphasized scheduling international friendlies away from the US to better prepare for the World Cup.

3/15/2010 10:32:12 PM

^^ 55k to freaking Iceland vs. Mexico is pretty crazy. I doubt we'd even draw 10k against an opponent like that.

I've read that Bradley has Cary in consideration for a pre-WC training camp again but we won't see a friendly.

3/16/2010 7:46:52 AM

Platini thinks only England, Spain, and Brazil can win the WC

Quote :

"I see three teams who have the quality to win it – in alphabetical order, Brazil, England and Spain"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/mar/25/england-spain-brazil-world-cup-platini

3/25/2010 12:14:43 PM

I could see one of those 3 winning it, but never count out Germany and Italy at the World Cup.

3/25/2010 12:24:20 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZnUr8lcqjo

or this guy. And it doesn't matter how shitty they were in qualifying

3/25/2010 1:11:25 PM

There are some good looking kits out there for the World Cup

England's 3rd shirt



The Brazil 3rd kit (all black) and away shirt caught my eye too





No more gold/black for Spain

3/25/2010 1:38:37 PM

The gold and red was dope

3/25/2010 8:50:19 PM

i might have to pick me up a brazil jersey this summer.

3/25/2010 8:58:10 PM

JTSAMBANCSU

[Edited on March 25, 2010 at 9:21 PM. Reason : ]

3/25/2010 9:21:25 PM

just following my roots, brah

3/25/2010 9:23:52 PM

What are the chances of getting the World Cup final back in the USA at the WakeMed Soccer Park?

3/25/2010 9:24:16 PM

negative 0% chance

3/25/2010 9:26:00 PM

i'll talk to roy wegerle this weekend and see if we can put something together

3/25/2010 9:44:41 PM

Quote :

"negative 0% chance"

Aw shucks..........................

3/25/2010 9:50:21 PM

7,130 at a World Cup Final would be interesting.

There were only 93,000 at the first world cup.

3/25/2010 10:49:34 PM