Canadian Soccer Association to bid for 2026 World Cup

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Could the Blue Jays game be moved to another stadium or would the MLB not allow that? The world cup is obviously much, MUCH bigger than a few baseball games. Either way I still think BMO expansion is the best way to go.

MLB will only allow it under extreme circumstances. IIRC the last time they allowed a game to be played at an alternate stadium was in 2007 when the Cleveland Indians had their opening home series played in Milwaukee's Miller Park due to major snow storms in Cleveland (Miller Park has a retractable dome). However that was only for a short 3 game series not multiple weeks.

In 1996 the Atlanta Braves went on an extended road trip during the Olympics, which were using the Braves new stadium.

Neither situation was/is ideal especially in Toronto's situation considering there is a soccer specific stadium sitting there 20 mins down the road that can be used.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

In 1996 the Atlanta Braves went on an extended road trip during the Olympics, which were using the Braves new stadium

Just to the above - the Olympic baseball took place in the Braves old stadium - which the Braves continued to use until the end of 1996. Then they moved to the redeveloped Olympic stadium for the 1997 season

 

[nfitz]

Surely you mean the east stand - not the west

Yes. Though presumably you could do the same to the main grandstand in the west if you wanted to spend the $$$ - and we've certainly done this before. The current structure is stadium number 5 . ... but I'd think you'd start with the other 3 sides first.

 

[Tuscani01]

MLB will only allow it under extreme circumstances. IIRC the last time they allowed a game to be played at an alternate stadium was in 2007 when the Cleveland Indians had their opening home series played in Milwaukee's Miller Park due to major snow storms in Cleveland (Miller Park has a retractable dome). However that was only for a short 3 game series not multiple weeks.

In 1996 the Atlanta Braves went on an extended road trip during the Olympics, which were using the Braves new stadium.

Neither situation was/is ideal especially in Toronto's situation considering there is a soccer specific stadium sitting there 20 mins down the road that can be used.

I don't think moving a game to another stadium would be that big of an issue for the MLB. Remember how easily they moved the Jays game during the G20? If the World Cup isn't an extreme circumstance, I don't know what is.

 

[TOareaFan]

I don't think moving a game to another stadium would be that big of an issue for the MLB. Remember how easily they moved the Jays game during the G20? If the World Cup isn't an extreme circumstance, I don't know what is.

They moved one series for the G20....not saying they could not do it for the WC but it would be a much longer move......6 weeks or so.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

G20 was a pretty huge deal given the security concerns and the fact that the building would have been in the ultra secure zone (with the Convention Centre). Further, as stated by TOareaFan, it was one series not six weeks of series.

I just don't see MLB allowing this to happen when BMO is down the road, and I don't see FIFA and the CSA wanting to go through all that trouble negotiating with MLB when, once that's done they still have to figure out how to keep real grass alive in a stadium that was not designed to handle real grass.

 

[GenerationW]

The likely relationship between an Olympic bid/stadium is that a stadium is built for Olympics out of the games budget and then sold to an NFL team for post games use (or a long term operating lease) which recovers a significant amount of the cost.

Considering that the last Olympic bid featured a part-temporary stadium, I believe the chances of that are quite low.

And you can't sell it to a team that doesn't exist. There is no present Toronto NFL team, nor is there one imminent (barring a major breakthrough arising from Rob and Doug's promised but still unscheduled meeting with Roger Goodell). It is totally unrealistic to expect that the federal government would spend the hundreds of millions more it would take to build a permanent stadium for the benefit of a completely theoretical post-Olympics tenant. The political fallout would be disastrous.

 

[BurlOak]

BMO can't be expanded over 28,000 seats due to structural issues its out.

What I suggest:

1) Vancouver - Bc Place
2) Calgary - New Stadium with temporary seating
3) Regina - New Stadium with temporary seating
4) Edmonton - Commonwealth Stadium
5) Winnipeg - Investors Field with temporary seating
6) Hamilton - New Ivor Wynne with temporary seating
7) Toronto - Rogers Centre and New Stadium (90,000, reduced to 20,000) with temporary seating
9) Ottawa - Frank Clair Stadium - with temporary seating
10) Montreal - Olympic Stadium.

You only need 10 to host.

I found 15 possible site along with their Wiki expandable capacities. I am sure for additional money, expansion greater than what is shown is always possible.

1) Victoria – Royal Athletic Park = 25,000
2) Vancouver - BC Place = 60,000
3) Edmonton - Commonwealth Stadium = 60,000
4) Calgary - New Stadium with temporary seating = 46,000
5) Regina - New Stadium with temporary seating = 33,000
6) Winnipeg - New Investors Field with temporary seating = 40,000
7) Hamilton - New Ivor Wynne with temporary seating = 22,000
8) Toronto - Rogers Centre = 52,000
9) Toronto – BMO Field = 22,000
10) Toronto - New Olympic Stadium = 60-80,000
11) Ottawa - Frank Clair Stadium – 29,000
12) Montreal - Olympic Stadium = 66,000
13) Montreal – Molson (McGill) Stadium = 25,000
14) Quebec City – Peps Stadium = 20,000
15) Moncton – Moncton Stdium = 20,000

What this shows is that there are really 4 to 6 stadia that would be great venues, and 3 or 4 marginal ones, and 5 or so that would need significant work to bring them up to acceptable.

We could put together 6 or 7 venues and go jointly with the USA. I am not sure they would be interested though. There is always the Quebec separation issue that will have a negative effect on anything that we plan.

 

[TOareaFan]

I am not in the habit of quoting myself but there is a discussion about this at bigsoccer.com and it sparked a bit of a realization in me and I think it applies to this discussion to:

The more I think of it, the biggest problem a Canadian bid for the WC has is this whole discussion of stadiums.

While it is interesting and healthy to have the discussion, the fact is we are like a contortionist twisting ourselves into a pretzel.....just to, maybe, get to the bare minimum criteria....and at that we don't even know where the billions (how many we don't know) of required money will come from and we don't know what we would do with the current tenants in those stadiums.

Inevtibably, we are bidding against the other two CONCACF nations capable of hosting the tournament. One of those submitted a bid for 2022 which included 23 stadiums in 18 cities(Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Indianapolis. Kansas City, Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Diego, Seattle, Tampa and Washington, D.C.) all of which have stadiums in place ready to go (no cost...greater certainty of execution to FIFA), only one tenant who would be playing at that time to displace (Sounders) and they can do that and leave out so many more cities/stadiums that would make what we come up with look not so good (like Soldier Field in Chicago as an example.....or the new {will be there by then} 49ers stadium in the Bay area)....and the smallest of those stadiums holds 66,500......the list of stadiums they considered and rejected would be capable of setting World Cup attendance records!

I know that the one thing we have going for us over, both, USA and Mexico is that they have already hosted....but by 2022, 1994 will be a "long time ago"......28 years.....4 years less than the gap between German world Cups.

That is if it is even deemed to be time to come back to CONCACAF?

I would be more inclined to think FIFA will be ready for another African adventure by then.

Should we investigate/try? Sure, nothing ventured nothing gained.....should we expect to get them....not unless we are willing to spend a whack of money to get our stadia far beyond the minimum criteria AND (i would suspect) have some plan in place for a national league of our own (has any country ever hosted the World Cup without this? Is USA 1994 not the reason we have MLS?).

 

[BurlOak]

I am not in the habit of quoting myself but there is a discussion about this at bigsoccer.com and it sparked a bit of a realization in me and I think it applies to this discussion to:

I think that applies to all sports. USA towers over Canada, yet we still managed to pick up 1 summer and 2 winter Olympic games. The anti-USA sentiment will always be there and Canada could benefit from this. Of course the USA bid would look better than ours, but if our bid can match some of the past host it would be worth a shot. I think all of the last World Cups had venues with capacity in the low 40,000's or even in the high 30,000's. Anyways, the decision is still a long time away and Montreal may not even be part of Canada's bid .

 

[TOareaFan]

I think that applies to all sports. USA towers over Canada, yet we still managed to pick up 1 summer and 2 winter Olympic games. The anti-USA sentiment will always be there and Canada could benefit from this. Of course the USA bid would look better than ours, but if our bid can match some of the past host it would be worth a shot. I think all of the last World Cups had venues with capacity in the low 40,000's or even in the high 30,000's. Anyways, the decision is still a long time away and Montreal may not even be part of Canada's bid .

The difference between the World Cup and Olympics is pretty clear. Olympics are given to cities not countries. So, for example, Montreal had to match whatever US city (if any) bid for 1976. Our top 3 cities can match up with US cities. It is when we get to having to have 12 stadiums spread across the country we get in a bit of a mismatch.

 

[BurlOak]

The difference between the World Cup and Olympics is pretty clear. Olympics are given to cities not countries. So, for example, Montreal had to match whatever US city (if any) bid for 1976. Our top 3 cities can match up with US cities. It is when we get to having to have 12 stadiums spread across the country we get in a bit of a mismatch.

Good Point.

Still strange things can happen. Nobody thought 10 or 15 years ago the South Africa would get it. Nobody thought Qatar would win either. If corruption helps sway some decisions then we should do ok with Quebec on our side - if they separate we go from having a 5 or 10% chance to 0%.

 

[zeke123]

A world cup bid without a league? Think FIFA will buy that?

I think most people here have missed a key point that makes WC for men impossible: no soccer league in Canada.
(this isnt about women's WC since womens pro soccer is so hopeless that there are no standards)

Every country on the planet (almost) has a league. Denmark, Norway with 4million people, Iceland with 300,000 inhabitants and even Faroe Islands have a pro league. Canada has just one professional sports league: the CFL (btw, do away with Cancon in the CFL and the game disappears at youth level) We know the reasons why but wont matter.

The US got the 94WC because it was a HUGE market that FIFA wanted to tap and the US got it under condition that it creates a league which became the MLS.


Would FIFA be willing to accept Canadian candidacy under the conditions given to the US?
Not sure.
Canada is nowhere close to being interesting to FIFA like the US market was then and the situation in the 1980s' was different than it is now.
Soccer doenst need a big event to get itself noticed anymore, its part of everyday life. Soccer overtook hockey as the #1 sport here in the mid 80s and in the past 30years everyone and their neighbour has had kids or family play the game. Canada doenst have to discover soccer, it knows it pretty well. But Canada doesnt do pro sports well, its content being a protectorate of the US.

Would FIFA give Canada a WC even though it has had no league in 20+ years?
Why should it is actually the question to ask.
What does Canada have to offer to make itself stand out from other countries?


And FIFA has been talking a lot about the Chinese market... LOTS and LOTS of money there.
They showed in 2008 that they can do big shows very well and they have league.
China will be a factor for 2026 and beyond, its sheer size (money) is just as appealing as the US was for 1994.

India with its billion people is also a huge market waiting for FIFA but that would happen only about 15-20 years after China since they are still in the early stages.

Is FIFA prepare to offer the same deal that it offered the US for 1994?
With so many countries wanting the WC, with new players and continents coming in play and old nations wanting to have it again, I honestly dont think they will bother.

 

[DavidJamesTO]

I think most people here have missed a key point that makes WC for men impossible: no soccer league in Canada.

The men of the Canadian Soccer League might take issue with that, even if all but one of the teams are in Ontario.

 

[TrickyRicky]

All these technical comments are funny when you consider that 2022 is in Qatar, a country of 1.8 million people where it's aound 40 degrees during the day. In other words FIFA could care less if Nunavut held the World Cup on it's own.