The longtime front-runner to get the bid to host the 2026 World Cup has been North America. The combination of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico proves to be able to sustain such a large event with plentiful up-to-date infrastructure and, if given the bid, can really help for football to solidify itself in the U.S. sports market. It seems like a no-brainer going against the North African country of Morocco for the bid, but there's one thing that sticks out as a huge negative for North America: the Trump narrative.
The North American bid officials have had a hard time deflecting the anti-American sentiment from across the world due to stereotype-perpetuating comments often made by President Trump. This makes FIFA officials second guess their once easy decision and question whether or not America will be able to unite foreign worlds together during the World Cup.
Morocco is in a better place than ever to receive their long-awaited bid. After the World Cup was successfully held in South Africa in 2010, maybe it's time for Africa to prove themselves again. Also, it is much easier to get to from Europe than the Americas, where majority of FIFA's fans reside. The main issue with Morocco is whether or not their infrastructure can sustain such a large event, and questions relating to their own, and their neighboring countries, political stability and safety.
The vote isn't placed until the eve of Russia 2018, so there is still time for the North American bid officials to smooth over this mess.
I now pose some questions for you guys, and want to hear your thoughts in the comments below:
Who do you think will receive the 2026 bid?
If North America loses the bid, how much of this would you blame on Trump?
Will holding the World Cup partly in the U.S. be enough to stabilize the growing football fanbase there?
Sources:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/u-s-may-not-land-the-2026-world-cup-and-its-trumps-fault.html
https://en.as.com/en/2018/02/22/football/1519304716_401839.html
The North American bid officials have had a hard time deflecting the anti-American sentiment from across the world due to stereotype-perpetuating comments often made by President Trump. This makes FIFA officials second guess their once easy decision and question whether or not America will be able to unite foreign worlds together during the World Cup.
The vote isn't placed until the eve of Russia 2018, so there is still time for the North American bid officials to smooth over this mess.
I now pose some questions for you guys, and want to hear your thoughts in the comments below:
Who do you think will receive the 2026 bid?
If North America loses the bid, how much of this would you blame on Trump?
Will holding the World Cup partly in the U.S. be enough to stabilize the growing football fanbase there?
Sources:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/u-s-may-not-land-the-2026-world-cup-and-its-trumps-fault.html
https://en.as.com/en/2018/02/22/football/1519304716_401839.html
I think that North America will still receive the World Cup bid. After issues around corruption in Russia and Qatar, and workers' right issues in Qatar, I think that the most important quality UEFA is looking for is a well-established host country where the World Cup will not incur huge construction costs. The US, Canada, and Mexico have more than enough stadiums for matches and practices, and have sufficient infrastructure for huge crowds of supporters. I do think that events around Trump may lead Mexico and Canada to play bigger roles in the event, but to me North America still beats out Morocco.
ReplyDeleteI agree that FIFA needs a successful World Cup that won't cause social issues and corruption as the recent destinations have, and North America would be the obvious destination for this. Luckily, even if Trump was to win re-election in 2020, he would not be serving in 2026. If by then the US is still perceived as an unfriendly place for foreigners and football is still not as popular with Americans, that could have an impact on the attendance and overall success of the events.
DeleteHANNAH HENRY: I believe that holding the World Cup North America will help stabilize a football fan base, specifically for the younger age groups. While soccer is growing in popularity, it is still not even comparable to that of other areas of the world. By bringing the world's best players from all over the world to America, I think it will bring about an excitement surrounding soccer that our country has yet to experience. Kids will be able to see the best players play in their own country, which will make them feel more connected to them, leading to an increase in popularity for the sport. In addition, American company's will see the football craze firsthand, which may lead them to invest in sponsorship and realize the profit that the sport can bring to the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree that having the World Cup in North America will increase the popularity of the sport even more than the FIFA video games did. You bring up a good point that other American companies can start to sponsor football events and tailor their market more towards Americans that are interested in becoming football fans. If companies are willing to invest in the future of the sport in America, then that will be a huge plus for football and the MLS.
DeleteI also think that North American will end up holding the 2026 World Cup over Morocco. I think this because I do not think that Morocco has the infrastructure right now as a country to hold such an event. I think that North American is much more suited for the 2026 World Cup and if Morocco wanted to try for the next one they should build up their infrastructure proving that they are ready and able to host this event. I also think that hosting the World Cup in the US could be very beneficial to spark interest and gain a fanbase for football in the states. I personally would be interested in attending the World Cup if it is held in the US and would definitely pay more attention to it just because it would be more local than if it were held somewhere farther away. I think that after events that FIFA have "allowed" or known about that have occurred in Qatar, I don't think North American looks so bad compared to the treatment that has been going on there.
ReplyDeleteThe lack of infrastructure compared to the US is a huge negative for the Moroccan bid. I do agree that for a 2030 bid, they could be an idea candidate with more updates infrastructure and proof of being able to hold a large scale event with some smaller trial-runs. And even though Morocco is close to Europe, it is harder to get to as their airport may need to be expanded and renovated. I would too be interested in attending an event if it were held in the US even though I don't consider myself a football fan. I think Qatar was the last straw in terms of giving the bid to a country that could use the event as a way to spark economic activity, but maybe after a safe bid is given, they can be a good candidate for the future.
DeleteI think that the United States will end up getting the bid for the world cup in 2026 over Morocco and could even get it sooner if Qatar falls through. I also think that while the Trump narrative definitely stirs up some drama now, he won't be in office during the tournament which would completely change the dynamic. FIFA also looks for the cheapest and easiest way to solve their problems and giving the bid to the United States takes a lot of stress off of FIFA and lets them sit back knowing the United States has the infrastructure already in place to pull it off. The United States is also slowly on the come up in the soccer world and I think hosting the tournament would be a great boost to the sport in the states and help it to grow which FIFA wants. Americans are also one of the largest demographics of fans at world cups regardless of who is playing which would almost guarantee sell out games, even for less enticing matches.
ReplyDeleteI think that hopefully the Trump narrative will blow over by 2026 and it won't be a big deal 8 years down the road. I definitely think that it may sway some, not all, of the FIFA voters on the bid as Trump has personally attacked some of their home countries. North America would be the easy, safe, and cheap choice, but if we have learned anything from watching FIFA make decisions int eh past, corruption and bribery can make anything happen.
DeleteAlthough I think the united states will receive the bid, this provides some difficulties separate from trump. Many large events like this and the Olympic Games like to host on time zones that are easy for people to watch. As football is so popular in Europe, hosting in the United States causes media coverage issues.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, this could be a great opportunity for the United States to continue to build up soccer within the country. As the London games increased sport following the games, it would be interesting to see the aftermath of the World Cup on soccer in the states.
-Alison
I like your point concerning the the time zone difference, which can be detrimental to an event's viewership as we just saw happen to the Winter Olympics in South Korea. I do think that even though many of the games would be played during undesirable times for European fans that the sport is so popular and fans are so die-hard that it won't affect their viewership too much. Also, the increasing amount of viewers from the States will more than make up for those who don't watch in Europe or Asia.
DeleteTo follow suit, I also believe that regardless of the Trump narrative, North America will receive the 2026 bid over Morocco. While Morocco is in a much better national economic and political position now than it has been in recent years, the country's infrastructure and overall level of uncertainty puts them at a disadvantage when competing against the United States. And, as many have mentioned prior, the fact that Trump will not be in Office during the 2026 World Cup lessens his overall impact on the final decision.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the likely possibility of the 2028 Olympic Games going to Los Angeles may work in Morocco's favor; it would be difficult to sell having BOTH the World Cup and the Olympics on the same continent in such a short period of time.
Additionally, I would have to say that I whole-heartedly agree with Emma and Cole's comments regarding fan base. Having the World Cup "on our home turf" brings the likes of football superstars and different country comradery front and center in the United States; this alone, I believe will have an influence on the growing football fan base in the United States. I, like Emma, would be very interested in attending a World Cup match, and how easy would it be to not have to travel off the continent - or even outside the country - in order to do so? As Cole pointed out, FIFA wants more football fans in the United States, and holding the World Cup in North America does seem like one of the easiest ways to achieve that goal.
- Jenna
The US having both the World Cup and the Olympics within two years of each other does seem like we are hogging all of the benefits, but in a time where less-developed countries have failed time and time again to put on a socially and economically successful event, both events need a host country they can count on.
DeleteI also agree that holding it in the US will widely increase football's popularity in America. It is also super convenient that the games would be held all throughout the US so it reaches potential football fans from all corners of the country.
I agree with Jenna, I think ultimately north america will get the bid. Between the three countries it is easily the best place to host the world cup in terms of infrastructure. Also, if the world cup was to be hosted in North America I think it would have a huge impact on our fanbase in terms of soccer's popularity. Come world cup time fans get so excited for to watch our team and having the games in our country would gain attention from everyone in America. And with the addition of a soccer super star like Pulisic leading the way for our country it could cause for spike in soccer popularity.
DeleteI think that the Unite States should get a bid but I understand the concern. President Trump has not been a good representative in the eyes of most Europeans and that definitely has led to some caution. One reason why I believe it would be more beneficial to have the World Cup in the United States is because we are already a developed nation and it will not leave the city in shambles after the World Cup is finished. This was the problem in Rio and now the city is still struggling to rebuild years after the last world cup. I think Chicago would be a good destination because it has all the facilities you need and a large city to accommodate the number of people that would attend.
ReplyDeleteMichael Strode
Despite the early mishaps in Qatar's execution of the World Cup, I believe that the fate of a North American bid rests in the continued development of the projects in Qatar as well as the execution of the next World Cup in Russia. I believe the USA, Mexico, and Canada undoubtedly have the best infrastructure in place, but travel costs are a concern. Not only will most fans have a long and expensive trip just to get to North America, but the travel expenses and times between games would be extensive. Juxtaposed with Qatar in which the all of the games will be played within driving distance of each other, the proposition of having games anywhere from Mexico City to Montreal to Seattle would complicate transportation between games both for fans and players. Additionally, with the absence of the USA from the 2018 World Cup, interest is likely to decline steadily in the States for the next eight years. Widespread excitement for soccer rarely survives months in the US, let alone eight years, while Morocco would obviously cherish the prestige and economic boon that could potentially accompany a bid. In regards to the Trump factor, I would argue that if Putin can successfully receive a World Cup bid, then the USA should have no trouble. Russia is presently aiding the Syrian regime that is using chemical weapons on their own people, the idea that a few ignorant comments from one man who will not even be in power in 2026 would derail the entire bid is comical and unlikely to affect the bid.
ReplyDeleteA North American world cup could be huge for Football’s ever growing fanbase. Football has yet to truly penetrate the American market and a north American World cup would be enormous for its popularity. As a kid, I saw very little Football on TV. This led to me focusing way more on American football, basketball and other sports as a sports fan. I played Football as a child, however I never followed any teams. Having a north American world cup would allow young viewers to connect more to the Football, and thus have a connection to the world’s leading competitive sport. I think its important for Americans to get involved with soccer because its more of an international focus rather than just American athletes like so many other sports we watch. It would be very exciting to see the world cup being played on our turf.
ReplyDelete