http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/33041467
http://www.espnfc.us/fifa-world-cup/stor...atar-scala
If the **** truly hits the fan and FIFA has to pull the bids to save face, North America is due to host, the Chicago bid was a finalist, and the US is one of a few countries that can host with proper capabilities on short notice.
Could Birmingham build a stadium of the quality to serve as a venue for a June 2018 FIFA World Cup soccer match? Would Birmingham put a bid in to be a venue for 2022 (much easier time-frame)?
i can't see it happening.
That would be a bigger shock than football being reinstated.
Even if Birmngham had a stadium, they don't have the hotel space.
No.
My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
The U.S. already had a plan/bid for 2022...Birmingham wasn't a part of it before, won't be now
(You said the Chicago bid, but of course you realize that the WorldCup isn't held in 1 city...entire countries bid, using many different cities/venues)
(06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]No.
My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
The U.S. already had a plan/bid for 2022...Birmingham wasn't a part of it before, won't be now
(You said the Chicago bid, but of course you realize that the WorldCup isn't held in 1 city...entire countries bid, using many different cities/venues)
I'm aware, but I believe Chicago was to be the site of the finals.
As far as likelihood goes, I think Russia will keep their bid purely for political reasons unless they do something crazy (ex: march to Kiev).
Qatar is a possibility. The sponsors have to be getting nervous about the slavery, and the bribes make it worse.
For 2022, if the US puts in a bid, I can't see why not that Birmingham could put a bid into the US World Cup committee to be a venue other than lack of organization. Now is the perfect time to strike for a stadium push in the city, and opening it up with the world cup is instant economic impact. CONCACAF would probably be open to a "southern strategy" for soccer, with an expansion team in Atlanta on the way.
Better than building new hotels: build new dorms for UAB that serve as hotels for the world cup before being converted to dorms. If the plan for UAB is to expand enrollment, that is instant cash for the project by renting the dorm space at a premium during the games. Also shows off the university.
(Again, I have ZERO basis for this--just a gut feeling ):
While I think it's possible (if not likely) that Qatar loses 2022, I don't see it coming to the U.S. While it would be appropriate, it would look shady for the U.S. being responsible for taking it away, and then taking it ourselves. It would look spiteful.
I think England picking up 2022 (since they should have gotten 2018) would be a good compromise
I really wish bham could have found a way to be apart of copa America 2016
(06-07-2015 05:58 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]No.
My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
The U.S. already had a plan/bid for 2022...Birmingham wasn't a part of it before, won't be now
(You said the Chicago bid, but of course you realize that the WorldCup isn't held in 1 city...entire countries bid, using many different cities/venues)
I'm aware, but I believe Chicago was to be the site of the finals.
As far as likelihood goes, I think Russia will keep their bid purely for political reasons unless they do something crazy (ex: march to Kiev).
Qatar is a possibility. The sponsors have to be getting nervous about the slavery, and the bribes make it worse.
For 2022, if the US puts in a bid, I can't see why not that Birmingham could put a bid into the US World Cup committee to be a venue other than lack of organization. Now is the perfect time to strike for a stadium push in the city, and opening it up with the world cup is instant economic impact. CONCACAF would probably be open to a "southern strategy" for soccer, with an expansion team in Atlanta on the way.
Better than building new hotels: build new dorms for UAB that serve as hotels for the world cup before being converted to dorms. If the plan for UAB is to expand enrollment, that is instant cash for the project by renting the dorm space at a premium during the games. Also shows off the university.
A good idea because many Olympic cities developed housing for that event and then turned it to civilian use afterwards. If B'ham could build the MPF, it could convert Legion Field back to natural grass and host soccer there as it did in 1996. Hotel / motel accommodations respond quickly to increased need for more rooms and suites. Is that big empty space at 3rd Ave North and 10th St still available?
(06-07-2015 06:24 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]If B'ham could build the MPF, it could convert Legion Field back to natural grass and host soccer there as it did in 1996.
Legion Field will be demolished when the MPF is built. Legion Field will never host a major international sporting event (IE the 1996 Olympics, the World Games don't count) ever again. It is decrepit and unfixable.
(06-07-2015 06:51 PM)GreenMississippi Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2015 06:24 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]If B'ham could build the MPF, it could convert Legion Field back to natural grass and host soccer there as it did in 1996.
Legion Field will be demolished when the MPF is built. Legion Field will never host a major international sporting event (IE the 1996 Olympics, the World Games don't count) ever again. It is decrepit and unfixable.
Like people who live in an old house, we are intimately familiar with its shortcomings. People coming in from other cities may not see it as we do. To them, it may just be the "historic and legendary stadium" and since they won't be around it for a long time, it may charm them more than it does us.
Besides, those who make such decisions would probably be sitting in the skyboxes or club level seats eating and drinking catered food and beverages and using those private restrooms. They sure won't be standing in line for concessions or waiting in line for toilet service..
(06-07-2015 10:57 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]Like people who live in an old house, we are intimately familiar with its shortcomings. People coming in from other cities may not see it as we do. To them, it may just be the "historic and legendary stadium" and since they won't be around it for a long time, it may charm them more than it does us.
I guarantee you that any person with money to make the trip to Birmingham and purchase a World Cup ticket would have been in much nicer stadiums before and would know that Legion Field is a dump.
and most people would be coming from other countries...to them, legion field is neither historic nor legendary
(06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
I doubt they would give UEFA consecutive tournaments.
(06-07-2015 10:57 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ]To them, it may just be the "historic and legendary dump".
Fixed that for you.
(06-08-2015 08:40 AM)aflanry Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
I doubt they would give UEFA consecutive tournaments.
Plus the England FA has come out saying they aren't interested in hosting either 2018 or 2022.
If Qatar doesn't get to keep 2022 (and they shouldn't) then it comes to the US, either as a lone site or jointly with Mexico/Canada (though that seems a big stretch). The only way the US isn't hosting a 2022 not in Qatar is if they take 2018 away from Russia and we host that one.
Legion Field will be used for the 2021 World Cup Games as per Mayor Bell so this is really a mooooooooooo point.
First USA will be punished for indicting FIFA officials. The Current head will be there for six months when its picked.
Further small third world countries have twice the votes of Europe and the Americias combines. They would never vote to move from a small third world country to one of the big ones
(06-08-2015 09:00 AM)TMcCarty Wrote: [ -> ] (06-08-2015 08:40 AM)aflanry Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
I doubt they would give UEFA consecutive tournaments.
Plus the England FA has come out saying they aren't interested in hosting either 2018 or 2022.
If Qatar doesn't get to keep 2022 (and they shouldn't) then it comes to the US, either as a lone site or jointly with Mexico/Canada (though that seems a big stretch). The only way the US isn't hosting a 2022 not in Qatar is if they take 2018 away from Russia and we host that one.
(06-08-2015 10:19 AM)uabbean Wrote: [ -> ]First USA will be punished for indicting FIFA officials. The Current head will be there for six months when its picked.
Further small third world countries have twice the votes of Europe and the Americias combines. They would never vote to move from a small third world country to one of the big ones
If someone paid them enough, they would.
(06-08-2015 10:19 AM)uabbean Wrote: [ -> ]First USA will be punished for indicting FIFA officials. The Current head will be there for six months when its picked.
Further small third world countries have twice the votes of Europe and the Americias combines. They would never vote to move from a small third world country to one of the big ones
(06-08-2015 09:00 AM)TMcCarty Wrote: [ -> ] (06-08-2015 08:40 AM)aflanry Wrote: [ -> ] (06-07-2015 04:53 PM)LairDweller Wrote: [ -> ]My prediction (with no basis)...Russia keeps 2018, England gets 2022
I doubt they would give UEFA consecutive tournaments.
Plus the England FA has come out saying they aren't interested in hosting either 2018 or 2022.
If Qatar doesn't get to keep 2022 (and they shouldn't) then it comes to the US, either as a lone site or jointly with Mexico/Canada (though that seems a big stretch). The only way the US isn't hosting a 2022 not in Qatar is if they take 2018 away from Russia and we host that one.
IF either world cup is moved, I highly doubt the re-vote would happen while Blatter remains in place. It's probably going to be a re-vote on president at the extraordinary congress, then, if Russia or Qatar lose their right to host, the re-vote on those will occur at the next regularly scheduled ordinary congress (which I think is March next year). If no one attempts to run against the US (which they may not, for fear of getting investigated) then they have no choice.
I'm kinda thinking that the US won't host if they can find a suitable 3rd world country to host it and wants to host it. We look like we have four grapes about losing the bid, even though it was obviously rigged. Unfortunately there are not a lot of good options other than the ones already hosting it recently. It's a shame the US has to lead the investigation because we really should host it and shouldn't have to look like we are being the bully.