1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Soccer Thread (IV)

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Inky_Wretch, Jul 2, 2009.

  1. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    GOAL! Shocking marking at a corner, and Portsmouth win at the death in extra-time.

    But ye gods, this team sucks.
     
  2. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member



    I am wondering if they're going to look at travel concerns on this, and pod cities together, rather than look at the grand scheme.

    As such, they could go: New York, Boston, D.C.; Miami, Tampa, Atlanta; Dallas, Houston, Kansas City; Phoenix, Los Angeles, San Diego.

    That would leave Denver, Seattle, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Nashville as the cities on the outside.

    It would allow all the teams to prepare for similar conditions for each of their group games, especially in the Southeast pod, and mean that fans could actually pick up a rental car and drive to games instead of having to be flying from Denver to San Diego to Dallas for their pool games.
     
  3. Twoback

    Twoback Active Member

    None? OK. But Lucas Oil is an incredible stadium. (And it is right up the road from IU, which has a bit of soccer tradition, I'd say).
     
  4. kingcreole

    kingcreole Active Member

    I would say Kansas City, with the improvements to Arrowhead, would get selected this time.

    Agree with GB on every city actually except for Tampa. I'd substitute Seattle.
     
  5. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    As great a soccer city Seattle has been, I am concerned with the travel to and from any of the other locations, and the artificial surface. Qwest Field isn't in the sort of location where it can easily wheel in and out a grass surface like Phoenix does.
     
  6. NoOneLikesUs

    NoOneLikesUs Active Member

    I get it...

    YET

    Soldier Field is good enough to host a CONCACAF Gold Cup final, but not good enough to host a couple World Cup games? I understand the whole seating arrangement issues (61K isn't enough they say), but so what?

    Cleveland has hosted USMNT and USWNT games as well as a few friendlies (Celtic and Boca Juniors comes to mind). Plus right down the road is Columbus who is always at the top of the list for WCQs against Mexico.

    What international friendlies or USMNT matches has Indianapolis hosted?
     
  7. MN Matt

    MN Matt Member



    Houston is bigger than Dallas and better than Dallas.
     
  8. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member



    Yeah, but its stadium isn't.
     
  9. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    KC would suck for a WC match. There's little public transportation there and the stadium is out in the middle of BFE.

    I'll be shocked if Dallas doesn't get the final the next time a WC is played here.
     
  10. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    I think it's between that and the new Giants Stadium.
     
  11. kingcreole

    kingcreole Active Member

    You don't think the Rose Bowl would get selected for the final? I told my brother I thought Jerry World would get the final, but he insisted it would be the Rose Bowl.
     
  12. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    No, I think they will learn their lesson from 1994 and hold the final in a location where either it can be climate controlled for eaxmple Phoenix or Dallas, or where it's a mid-afternoon kickoff like Giants Stadium, rather than noon PST, which would be required for the standard 8 p.m. Britain, 9 p.m. Central Europe kickoff.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page