Major League Soccer 2016

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It would be cool if we could get at least a semi-final in a Canadian city.

Good point, Canada and Mexico will likely host a semi-final each and Canada most likely will host the opener since it's our candidacy that's making this possible (both the US and Mexico have hosted already). Our drawback was we didn't have enough stadiums to manage the 48 teams.
As far as temporary seating, I tried them out at the MLS Cup Final, and they were just as comfortable as the regular seats and quite good for standing. The drawback was they didn't have a roof directly over them so it was hard to project our voices and it wasn't as loud as other parts of the stadium.

[OutOfTowner]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

What's this about $150mil for a fixed roof? I thought it was $500mil? Anyway, we're most likely going with the top 3 cities, Mexico with a similar number and the US with 6+ including the final. With a secondary layer of sod and grow lights, Vancouver would be feasible at minimal expense. Same for Olympic stadium. BMO has expanded multiple times since its inception, by 2026 it will be well due for another expansion if one hasn't already been completed by then. They recently added 10,000 temporary seats in grandstands with room to spare despite what the naysayers on SSP said, so 45,000 permanent seats are quite feasible.

You know for a fact that it can be expanded to 45,000 or are you just 'figgerin'?

Besides, I dont think FIFA will be impressed by a temporary stand stadium that only accommodates 45,000 - if that's even possible.

[Acajack]

Let's not forget the feds would be bankrolling a good chunk of this event.

In addition to being the biggest cities in the country, Toronto and Montreal are the most vote-rich areas in the country.

Plus the bid and decision would take place during JT's tenure. And he is from Montreal.

Vancouver, while I am sure is unchallenged as a third host city if Canada gets three, is somewhat expendable in a two-city scenario due to its smaller size but also the fact it got tons of federal money not that long ago to host the Olympics. (16 years when it comes to the Olympics and the WC is basically yesterday.)

So there is no way Montreal is excluded from the party if the WC comes to Canada. (Unless Montreal itself says it wants to opt out.)

[FrankieFlowerpot]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Good point, Canada and Mexico will likely host a semi-final each and Canada most likely will host the opener since it's our candidacy that's making this possible (both the US and Mexico have hosted already). Our drawback was we didn't have enough stadiums to manage the 48 teams.
As far as temporary seating, I tried them out at the MLS Cup Final, and they were just as comfortable as the regular seats and quite good for standing. The drawback was they didn't have a roof directly over them so it was hard to project our voices and it wasn't as loud as other parts of the stadium.

Sorry but that's just wrong.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

How much more do you think BMO can be expanded? Berlin has a capacity of 75,000. That's 50% more than BC Place. Any coversion to natural grass would have to be permanent and that would cost a fortune, if it is even possible.

What does Berlin have to do with any of this?

BMO was expanded to near 40,000 for the Centennial Classic by adding seats to the North section. If expansion is done correctly, either permanent or temporary, BMO could theoretically be 50,000. Large enough for WC games. It depends on how much desire there is to make it happen. BC Place is already large enough for WC.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Even a modestly reno'd Big O probably pushes Montreal ahead of Toronto and maybe even Vancouver.

For some reason I doubt this. There's a reason why CSA prefers hosting all national team matches in either Vancouver or Toronto. Renovation or not Montreal drew relative peanuts compared to other hosts cities in the FIFA Women's World Cup (including Edmonton) and only managed one match with 50K+ attendance (a US semifinal). The Team Canada match against the Netherlands didn't sell out. Montreal's attendance in this event, plus the numbers from the past month for U20 hockey, begin to show a pattern of sports interest in big events IMO.

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Good point, Canada and Mexico will likely host a semi-final each and Canada most likely will host the opener since it's our candidacy that's making this possible (both the US and Mexico have hosted already). Our drawback was we didn't have enough stadiums to manage the 48 teams.

Absolutely not. The US can easily host the tournament on its own.

When Toronto hosted some Gold Cup matches in 2015 they weren't given the opener, or Semifinals, or any knockout round matches at all. BMO received two group matches on the same day and that was it. I'd expect something similar if Canada were to share hosting duties with the US/Mexico.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

For some reason I doubt this. There's a reason why CSA prefers hosting all national team matches in either Vancouver or Toronto. Renovation or not Montreal drew relative peanuts compared to other hosts cities in the FIFA Women's World Cup (including Edmonton) and only managed one match with 50K+ attendance (a US semifinal). The Team Canada match against the Netherlands didn't sell out. Montreal's attendance in this event, plus the numbers from the past month for U20 hockey, begin to show a pattern of sports interest in big events IMO.

.

You seem to have a "thing" with Montreal.

Uhh, most of the highest-attended soccer games in Canadian history have been held in Montreal. And most of them have been since 2010:

59,000 and 61,000 in 2012

61,000 in 2015

61,000 in 2016

Friendlies involving big European clubs typically draw bigger crowds in Montreal than they do in Toronto as well.

And even though it's unfashionable to raise this on here, Toronto had trouble selling out the championship game for the country's national football competition...

Pan-Am games ticket sales were extremely worrisome in the GTA two years ago...

So it's not nearly as clear-cut as you're making this out to be...

[Metro-One]

I feel like this is going to boil down to a homerism debate.

For my own homerism soccer is surprisingly popular in Vancouver.

For what it is worth we had excellent attendance during FIFA 2015, recording the highest attendance at over 54 000.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I feel like this is going to boil down to a homerism debate.
.

On SSP for sure. But not so much in decision-making circles.

Ultimately the feds are going to be signing a bigger cheque for this (if it happens) than almost anyone, including the CSA.

So...

[tomthumb2]

If its Canada and US, the two no-brainer sites for Canada IMO would be Vancouver and Edmonton. Both stadiums are pretty much ready to go with minimal effort and money.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

You know for a fact that it can be expanded to 45,000 or are you just 'figgerin'?

Besides, I dont think FIFA will be impressed by a temporary stand stadium that only accommodates 45,000 - if that's even possible.

They expanded it to 40,000 with temporary stands (that take up as much space as permanent stands), with lots of empty space left over. They could easily fit 45,000+ permanent seats without even using the current adjustable canopies (which can be lifted).

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot

Sorry but that's just wrong.

How can you make that statement so definitively. At the very least it's debatable. CONCACAF is the federation that's in line for the 2026 World Cup, its president is Canadian, we're the only major country here that hasn't hosted before and we're the first ones who put our hats in the ring, we did so a couple years ago. The US didn't even state they'll be bidding until the Canadian confederation president took them into a corner with Mexico and suggested a joint bid. The US could host all on its own, making a joint bid is an admission that Canada has a good shot and they'd increase their odds by joining us in a bid.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Absolutely not. The US can easily host the tournament on its own.

When Toronto hosted some Gold Cup matches in 2015 they weren't given the opener, or Semifinals, or any knockout round matches at all. BMO received two group matches on the same day and that was it. I'd expect something similar if Canada were to share hosting duties with the US/Mexico.

Regardless of the USA's ability to host the tournament all on its own, if it's a 3 way joint bid with the majority of games on US soil (including the final), then it's only fair that Canada and Mexico get a semi-final each. Giving up the final is a big sacrifice.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by OutOfTowner

You know for a fact that it can be expanded to 45,000 or are you just 'figgerin'?

Besides, I dont think FIFA will be impressed by a temporary stand stadium that only accommodates 45,000 - if that's even possible.

As JHikka stated above already, it could be expanded to even greater numbers than that. It was designed for expansion with special adjustable canopies. Realistically it will likely be expanded to at least 40,000 permanent seats by 2026 (given the growth rate of the attendance and stadium) and could easily accomodate 5,000-10,000 temporary seats. For the Centennial Classic it had 40,000 seats (10,000 temporary) and tons of space to spare to add more.

[mistercorporate]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You seem to have a "thing" with Montreal.

You've got no business accusing others of having a "thing" with Montreal when you yourself continue to deny you have a "thing" with Toronto. Reference: your last few years of posting history on multiple forums, that snarky remark about TO in your last post, and oh yeah, your signature...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

You've got no business accusing others of having a "thing" with Montreal when you yourself continue to deny you have a "thing" with Toronto. Reference: your last few years of posting history on multiple forums, that snarky remark about TO in your last post, and oh yeah, your signature...

My "thing" with Toronto - if that's even true - would never prevent me from recognizing that if Canada ever gets a major international event like the World Cup, that Toronto would be a virtual shoo-in as a host city.

[EpicPonyTime]

I can't imagine Montreal being chosen over Toronto and Vancouver, and that's coming from someone who is a pretty big homer for Montreal. The Feds won't fund a major reno of the Big O for Canada to host a couple games when Vancouver is ready to go and Toronto will be for much cheaper. Aside from that, the CSA would want there to be a divide so the East and West both can host games; they won't put all of our games within hours of each other and leave the West out cold.

Though I suppose you could ditch Toronto and do Vancouver and Montreal if you want the bigger crowds. That'd be entertaining.

[blueandgoldguy]

There will not be any soccer matches in Canada unless we have three stadiums with grass fields. BMO Field has this covered although the stadium will need further upgrades in permanent seating. Two of Olympic Stadium, BC Place or Commonwealth Stadium will need to make the transition to real grass for Canada to have any hope of sharing hosting duties with Mexico and the US.

As it stands right now, the US could easily host the entire tournament with relative ease. There are at least 14 NFL stadiums with grass fields with each seating a minimum of 60,000 that play hosting duties for the World Cup. Given the shorter NFL field, the stadiums are also superior to the ones in Canada bringing the fans in the end zones closer to the action.

[tomthumb2]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

There will not be any soccer matches in Canada unless we have three stadiums with grass fields. BMO Field has this covered although the stadium will need further upgrades in permanent seating. Two of Olympic Stadium, BC Place or Commonwealth Stadium will need to make the transition to real grass for Canada to have any hope of sharing hosting duties with Mexico and the US.

As it stands right now, the US could easily host the entire tournament with relative ease. There are at least 14 NFL stadiums with grass fields with each seating a minimum of 60,000 that play hosting duties for the World Cup. Given the shorter NFL field, the stadiums are also superior to the ones in Canada bringing the fans in the end zones closer to the action.

I don't think that would be a huge hurdle. Biggest issue I think is why US would do a joint bid when they already have plenty of stadiums that are World Cup ready - why would they want to share with us and Mexico. And of course by then Mexico will be walled off...

[cjones2451]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

There will not be any soccer matches in Canada unless we have three stadiums with grass fields.

The Silverdome in suburban Detroit had grass put in for the last time the US hosted the WC in 1994 and many others have had temp grass for short periods. I do not think it would be that difficult for BC Place, Commonwealth or the Big O to have grass for month.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

I can't imagine Montreal being chosen over Toronto and Vancouver, and that's coming from someone who is a pretty big homer for Montreal. The Feds won't fund a major reno of the Big O for Canada to host a couple games when Vancouver is ready to go and Toronto will be for much cheaper. Aside from that, the CSA would want there to be a divide so the East and West both can host games; they won't put all of our games within hours of each other and leave the West out cold.

Though I suppose you could ditch Toronto and do Vancouver and Montreal if you want the bigger crowds. That'd be entertaining.

The renos at the Big O would not be on the feds' dime. Or at least not really significantly more than their contribution to WC costs in other cities. The Big O is a provincial and municipal facility.