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?
Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 33 comments.
Read the rest of the comments
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
American football is not a beautiful game.
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
my bad, take out Indy and put in new meadowlands/NY stadium
A 500 mile game road trip up along the California Coast would be fantastic.
Starting at, Woo hoo! Qualcomm San Diego!
NY plzzzzz
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
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
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…
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
@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
I mean now live not no
Posted from
United States
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.
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.
@James You must not be paying attention.
Posted from
United States
@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
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
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
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
wohoooo! San Diego!
Posted from
United States
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.
Gawd, please axe RFK stadium from that list.
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
If Detroit gets games, they’ll be at Ford Field. Michigan Stadium is too narrow for World Cup play.
Posted from
United States
Comments are closed

World








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