dot   Home     World     World Cup Blog  

USA World Cup Bid Hosting Cities Down to 27

Bidding to host a World Cup is about more than just the logo. It’s mostly about the cities and stadiums you have to offer.

So while the various nations are bidding against each other to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, the cities within those nations are also competing to be part of the official bid.

In the case of the United State’s 2018/2022 bid, the shortlist is now down to 27 cities. From those 27, a final 12 to 18 cities must eventually be selected.


According to the Seattle Post Intelligencer (now online only!) the remaining 27 candidate cities (and stadiums) are:

Atlanta
, Georgia
Georgia Dome
71,250

Baltimore
, Maryland
M & T Bank Stadium
71,008

Boston
, Massachusets
Gillette Stadium
71,693

Charlotte, North Carloina
Bank of America Stadium
73,778

Chicago, Illinois
Soldier Field
61,000

Cleveland, Ohio
Cleveland Browns Stadium
72,000

Dallas
, Texas
Cotton Bowl
89,000

Dallas, Texas
Cowboys Stadium
100,000

Denver, Colorado
INVESCO Field
76,125

Detroit
, Michigan
Ford Field
67,188

Detroit
, Michigan
Michigan Stadium
108,000

Houston, Texas
Reliant Stadium
71,500

Indianapolis, Indiana
Lucas Oil Stadium
64,200

Jacksonville
, Florida
Jacksonville Municipal Stadium
82,000


Kansas City
, Missouri
Arrowhead Stadium
77,000

Los Angeles
, California
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum
93,607

Los Angeles, California
Rose Bowl
92,000+

Miami, Florida
Land Shark Stadium
75,540

Nashville, Tennessee
LP Field
69,143

New York/N.J.
New Meadowlands Stadium
82,000

Oakland, California
Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum
63,026

Orlando, Florida
Florida Citrus Bowl
65,616

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Lincoln Financial Field
67,594

Phoenix/Glendale, Arizona
University of Phoenix Stadium
71,000

San Diego, California
Qualcomm Stadium
70,500

San Francisco
, California
Stanford Stadium
50,500

Seattle
, Washington
Qwest Field
67,000

Seattle
, Washington
Husky Stadium
72,500

St. Louis, Missouri
Edward Jones Dome
67,268

Tampa, Florida
Raymond James Stadium
65,856

Washington, D.C.
RFK Stadium
45,600

Washington, D.C.
FedExField
91,704

The odd thing about the US bid is that very few of these stadiums are actually used for the beautiful game (unless you call NFL the beautiful game that is). The progress of soccer specific stadia is obviously a positive for soccer in the US, but the downside is that not many of these structures meet the 40,000 minimum seat requirement for a World Cup destination.

Not that this should be a problem. The atmosphere at FedExField for the recent Dc United vs Real Madrid friendly seemed lively enough. You could barely smell the gridiron. The only worrying thing is that leaving MLS stadia unused during the World Cup may tempt the powers that be into keeping the league running while the World Cup is going on. Stranger things have happened…

The USA bid will narrow the above list down to 12 to 18 cities by May 2010. Any preference for which cities and stadia should or shouldn’t make the list?

Subscribe

 

rss icon World Cup Soccer – South Africa 2010 RSS Feed

Print

Share

Comments

Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 33 comments.

Read the rest of the comments

By Thomas | August 20th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Top

Yeah Oakland. Oh, and Stanford Stadium is not in San Francisco, it’s in Palo Alto (Which is closer to San Jose.) The Oakland Coliseum used to host the San Jose earthquakes, so It has hosted the beautiful game…

Posted from United States United States

By CSD | August 20th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Top

It’s funny that Cowboy Stadium has had “soccer” played in it before “football.” I think that one is a must. It’s brand new, state of the art, and can hold a ton of people. It’s also not far from me so I could attend. =)

Posted from United States United States

By Ryan McManus | August 20th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Top

American football is not a beautiful game.

By pfelds | August 20th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Top

12 Stadiums:

Boston- Gillette Stadium

Chicago- Soldier Field

Denver- INVESCO Field

Dallas- Cowboys Stadium

Detroit- Michigan Stadium(not Ford Field)

Indiannapolis- Lucas Oil

Kansas City- Arrowhead Stadium

Los Angeles- Rose Bowl

Philadelphia- Lincoln Financial Field

Phoenix- Univ. of Phoenix

Seattle- Qwest Field

Washington D.C.- FedEx Field

By pfelds | August 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Top

my bad, take out Indy and put in new meadowlands/NY stadium

By Johnny | August 20th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Top

A 500 mile game road trip up along the California Coast would be fantastic.

Starting at, Woo hoo! Qualcomm San Diego!

By Seth | August 20th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Top

NY plzzzzz

By El Asasino | August 20th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Top

Romanian football hits again in the Europa League …

http://www.blogdefotbal.com/2009/08/dinamo-slovan-liberec-0-2-lasati-i-sa.html

Posted from Spain Spain

By Pseudinho | August 20th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
Top

Here are my 18……

Atlanta, Georgia
Georgia Dome
71,250

Baltimore, Maryland
M & T Bank Stadium
71,008

Boston, Massachusets
Gillette Stadium
71,693

Charlotte, North Carloina
Bank of America Stadium
73,778

Chicago, Illinois
Soldier Field
61,000

Cleveland, Ohio
Cleveland Browns Stadium
72,000

Dallas, Texas
Cowboys Stadium
100,000

Denver, Colorado
INVESCO Field
76,125

Houston, Texas
Reliant Stadium
71,500

Indianapolis, Indiana
Lucas Oil Stadium
64,200

Los Angeles, California
Rose Bowl
92,000+

Miami, Florida
Land Shark Stadium
75,540

Nashville, Tennessee
LP Field
69,143

New York/N.J.
New Meadowlands Stadium
82,000

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Lincoln Financial Field
67,594

Phoenix/Glendale, Arizona
University of Phoenix Stadium
71,000

Seattle, Washington
Qwest Field
67,000

Washington, D.C.
FedExField
91,704

Posted from United States United States

By pusillanimous | August 20th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Top

i dont think countries who dont wholeheartedly care about football should be allowed to host a world cup, its just not fair on the rest of the countries who do care but havent been allowed to host it for a long time or have never been given a chance to. but i dont think fifa really care as long as they can make some more cash…

By Brad | August 20th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Top

I’m expecting Detroit to get one of them. I’m not sure which stadium I want yet. Both are relatively close to me from a personal standpoint, and Detroit needs all the help it can get, but Michigan Stadium will be such a better stadium to watch a game in. Plus Ann Arbor will be a more soccer friendly stadium.

Posted from United States United States

By Pseudinho | August 20th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Top

@pusillanimous

If you are referring to the U.S. how can you make that claim when they shattered the World Cup attendance record, even with the following World Cup’s having 12 more games than the ‘94 Cup. The U.S. show they care about the World Cup by paying more tv rights money than any other country not named England. Between ESPN/ABC English language, Telemundo/Univision Spanish language they dp just that. So maybe they care more than a few people perceive them to. People get things misconstrued because America has about 20 sports to choose from instead of most countries that have 1 or 2. But don’t confuse that with not caring about the sport, because America truly cares about pretty much all sports. You can tell when sports like swimming, track and field, figure skating get huge ratings during the Olympics. Plus the fact that so many people that weren’t born in the United States no live in the U.S. and bring part of their culture over and usually still root for the national team in which they were born.

Posted from United States United States

By Pseudinho | August 20th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Top

I mean now live not no

Posted from United States United States

By James | August 20th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Top

I really don’t think the U.S. should host it, most of the other countries would die to host it, but the U.S. not many people would speak up or even care.

By Jetland | August 20th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Top

Charlotte – B of A stadium, YES!!!

> MoMoney – The only way for the US to get more soccer exposure is to host another WC. The ‘94 games were hugely successful. US Participation in the beautiful game is constantly growing and we should tap the momentum.

By Pseudinho | August 20th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Top

@James You must not be paying attention.

Posted from United States United States

By Unbelievable | August 21st, 2009 at 5:55 am
Top

@James

How old are you? I bet you were just a wee-lad during the 94 world cup. That world cup was a huge success. Broke all attendance records AND the largest grosser of moola for FIFA ever at the time. You do it again here and soccer is so much more popular here than it was. There is a league (at least there is one now) and a major following. When it is held in the states again it will break every record at that time, guaranteed.

And the author was saying something about 40k compacity. Practically every single stadium listed is almost double the 40k capacity.

The world cup should be held in the US every 3rd rotation. Plus, the dollar is cheap and the Euro and Pound are strong. Come on over and enjoy yourself.

GLTTMNT

Posted from United States United States

By Thomas | August 21st, 2009 at 7:17 am
Top

I know Knoxville, TN doesn’t have the glitz & glamor of a lot of those other cities, but we do have Neyland Stadium with a capacity of 100,011 for American football, which could be increased considerably for real football. According to Wikipedia it is the fifth largest stadium in the United States, and the ninth largest stadium in the world.

And best of all, REAL GRASS!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neyland_Stadium

Posted from United States United States

By Thomas | August 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Top

I just found a link though that Wikipedia article, I guess Neyland was originally in the bid but didn’t make this short list. Disappointing.

http://www.wbir.com/sports/story.aspx?storyid=83815&provider=rss

Posted from United States United States

By wob | August 21st, 2009 at 8:20 am
Top

I hope the World Cup comes to Holland. Holland is such a football supporting country. Even people who really don’t care about football support the Dutch team and watch the games. In the US only people who already are into the beautiful game are excited about the World Cup. In Holland the ‘Oranjekoorts’ (Orange fever) takes over every 2 years. As an example, take a look at this site and look at the photo’s: http://www.oranjebern.ch/OR_SPLASH_NED.html . And this is in Switzerland not in Holland so prepare for real excitement when the World Cup comes to Holland and Belgium.

The only thing I worry about is the size of our stadiums. In the Netherlands there are only 2 50,000+ stadiums (Amsterdam ArenA and de Kuip). I don’t know how the situation is in Belgium but it’s obvious that the US have better facilities. I will agree to you Americans that you have big stadiums and that they will be full. But in America there isn’t such a World Cup atmosphere. It’s such a big country that there will be only much support for the WC in the bigger cities. You have to travel days to go to another city. US to host the World Cup is like Europe to host the World Cup. And despite good memories from ‘94 I don’t think that would be the right decision!

Posted from Netherlands Netherlands

By ernie | August 21st, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Top

wohoooo! San Diego!

Posted from United States United States

By Jon | August 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Top

Wob – I must disagree. While the US isn’t quite soccer crazy, interest in the sport has grown massively, and the last World Cup was quite well watched here. Television ratings for the 06 World Cup final were not far from the ratings of the last baseball World Series. Soccer is continuing to grow, so by the time the World Cup makes it back here, whether in 2018 or 2022, it will be ready to explode.

By El | August 23rd, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Top

Gawd, please axe RFK stadium from that list.

By Gene | August 25th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Top

I hope all 4 CA stadiusm stay on the final list. It would make sense to have group matches for a particular group or two all in one state. If we ever get around to building around that high-speed rail, travel by air or land should not be a problem.

Posted from United States United States

By DJ | September 21st, 2009 at 9:59 am
Top

If Detroit gets games, they’ll be at Ford Field. Michigan Stadium is too narrow for World Cup play.

Posted from United States United States

Comments are closed

 
 
 

CATEGORIES & ARCHIVES

 
 
Closer