20thStDad Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Getting the WC could really be worth trying for. We already have the stadium (I hope they wouldn't expect a bigger one, but I guess I wouldn't doubt it), so there wouldn't be all that worthless spending; or at least as much. Let's get the vote out.2708 people have signed the petition so far. That aint gonna cut it.http://www.khou.com/....246c3c749.html2708 - that sounds about right for the number of people who care about soccer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 2708 - that sounds about right for the number of people who care about soccer.Their ads should probably be translated into spanish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen4rmptown Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 We need to sign that petition, you all!Houstonians only have 2802, compared to Dallas' 4612! I think Dallas is going to get it,AGAIN! But only if 1 Texas city gets chosen to bid. They have the Cotton Bowl and the new Dallas Cowboys stadium, with higher capacities both. I doubt the Cotton Bowl will get it, but the new stadium is our main competition, but thank god that its located in Arlington, our strongest argument to why it should be in Houston. Unless they mention the closer proximity to the airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 We need to sign that petition, you all!Houstonians only have 2802, compared to Dallas' 4612! Almost 100 votes in about an hour is pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtticaFlinch Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 If you want the world cup to come here, Harris County Judge Ed Emmett and other officials are asking you to vote for Houston/Harris County. We already have the world here. Have you ever been to the Wal-Mart on Dunvale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 We already have the world here. Have you ever been to the Wal-Mart on Dunvale? If you don't have anything to say about the topic then don't post, OK? Junk comments just trash the board up. Back on topic, the World Cup is typically hosted by a country, not a city, because of the number of stadiums that are required. It would make more sense for an overall bid from Texas including all of the major cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 U know, we had a chance at hosting some of the World Cup games at the Astrodome for 1994, but Harris County didn't commit to natural grass Wow, those good ol' boys just don't budge do they? Amazing. Either way, I think most of the venues listed in the original post are way too small. Plus, we would need to build way more hotels as well. Then a new problem surfaces when all those hotel rooms are built and the games are over... who will occupy all those empty rooms? We are not THAT big of a tourist destination.... Inevitably, those rooms will sit empty and the hotels will go broke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Interesting idea, typically though, the world cup is hosted by an entire nation, not a state. It would be curious to see! U know, we had a chance at hosting some of the World Cup games at the Astrodome for 1994, but Harris County didn't commit to natural grass Incorrect, well, partly. soccer has to be played in a stadium, not a dome (no covered fields). soccer has to be played on a grass field. the grass part would have been easy, I mean they filled it up with water for that water sports thing they did back in the mid 90s, and they filled it up with copious amounts of dirt for the rodeo every year. grass wouldn't have been that hard. however, the open field part would have been impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombero451 Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Interesting idea, typically though, the world cup is hosted by an entire nation, not a state. It would be curious to see!Incorrect, well, partly.soccer has to be played in a stadium, not a dome (no covered fields).soccer has to be played on a grass field.the grass part would have been easy, I mean they filled it up with water for that water sports thing they did back in the mid 90s, and they filled it up with copious amounts of dirt for the rodeo every year. grass wouldn't have been that hard.however, the open field part would have been impossible.Fact: FIFA allows soccer to be played on artificial turf and indoors. Fact: several European clubs and some national teams play on Field Turf (Russian, Austrian, Swedish, Norwegian, Polish leagues, etc). Fact: MLS clubs currently play on Field Turf (New England, Seattle, Toronto). Fact: Saprissa of the Costa Rican league and the Costa Rican national team plays on Field Turf.Fact: Stabæk IF (Norwegian Tippeligean - top flight) play all their games indoors on artificial turf at Telenor Arena. Impact de Montreal played indoors at Olympic Stadium on Field Turf against Santos for their home leg of the Concacaf Champions League semifinal round last year.Fact: The Pontiac Silverdome hosted several matches for World Cup 94. Detroit was willing to lay down natural grass on pallets in order to host games.If the US gets to host World Cup 2018 or 2022, Houston will have a tough time hosting any matches given the new Dallas Cowboys Stadium. USSF will want to spread the games around the country like they did in 1994 and there may only be one spot for Texas to host, and I doubt it will be Houston. On the bright side though, Chicago will almost certainly host several games! And since I live in Chicago, that's alright by me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen4rmptown Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Wow, it looks like Houstonians have woken up! 11180 Votes!I think it was the Houston media that got us voting, with the newspapers, and tv stations mentioning how much of an economic boost we would receive, and the fact that Houston has a soccer culture, i guess that pushed us to vote. All they needed was someone to tell them that Houston was bidding. Also, i was skimming though some cities, like LA,ATL,DAL,SF,NYC,OAK,MIA, CHAR,CHI, BOS,PHI, And it seems we have the most, i skipped some, so dont take my word. The closest number was Atlanta with 11,000+, followed by Philly with 9,000+the rest were ranging from 5000+to 1000+, so i'm pretty excited. But i dont think they'll base it solely on votes, but perhaps it'll give us the extra edge or push. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N Judah Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Why not start with something manageable? Maybe an U-20 or U-17 WC. The U-17 World Cup is going on right now in Nigeria. The weather there is, according to the announcer, over 30 C (> 85 F) with 70% humidity. They are playing at least some of their games in a stadium with artificial turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Fact: FIFA allows soccer to be played on artificial turf and indoors. Fact: several European clubs and some national teams play on Field Turf (Russian, Austrian, Swedish, Norwegian, Polish leagues, etc). Fact: MLS clubs currently play on Field Turf (New England, Seattle, Toronto). Fact: Saprissa of the Costa Rican league and the Costa Rican national team plays on Field Turf.Fact: Stabæk IF (Norwegian Tippeligean - top flight) play all their games indoors on artificial turf at Telenor Arena. Impact de Montreal played indoors at Olympic Stadium on Field Turf against Santos for their home leg of the Concacaf Champions League semifinal round last year.Fact: The Pontiac Silverdome hosted several matches for World Cup 94. Detroit was willing to lay down natural grass on pallets in order to host games.If the US gets to host World Cup 2018 or 2022, Houston will have a tough time hosting any matches given the new Dallas Cowboys Stadium. USSF will want to spread the games around the country like they did in 1994 and there may only be one spot for Texas to host, and I doubt it will be Houston. On the bright side though, Chicago will almost certainly host several games! And since I live in Chicago, that's alright by me!Wow, great info! I had based my comments on what a friend had told me, he is very knowledgeable on soccer, so I took his word, Never again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 U know, we had a chance at hosting some of the World Cup games at the Astrodome for 1994, but Harris County didn't commit to natural grass Not sure where you came up with that bit. It's not true. Harris County was completely willing to commit to natural grass and worked closely with the Louisiana Superdome and Pontiac Silverdome to develop the system that was ultimately used by the Silverdome. The World Cup folks were just not comfortable with the time available at the Astrodome to install the grass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen4rmptown Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Houston expected to be in U.S. World Cup bidHouston is expected to be included in the United States' official bid to host a FIFA World Cup in 2018 or 2022.The USA Bid Committee will conclude its eight-month host city selection process by unveiling the list of 18 cities to be included in the bid on Tuesday.The bid is due to FIFA, soccer's international governing body, by May 14.Houston Bid Committee members like Houston's chances of making the cut.http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/soc/6805599.htmlBasically, the bid comittee likes our chances? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citizen4rmptown Posted January 12, 2010 Share Posted January 12, 2010 Houston remains in hunt as possible World Cup venueNEW YORK — Chicago and the San Francisco area are out of the running as venues if the United States lands the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.Eighteen cities, with a total of 21 stadiums, were selected Tuesday. About 12 stadiums would be chosen if the U.S. bid is successful. The bid will be submitted in May, and FIFA will make the decision on hosts in December.The 18 cities are: Atlanta; Baltimore; Dallas-Arlington, Texas; Denver; East Rutherford, N.J.; Foxboro, Mass.; Glendale, Ariz.; Houston; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Mo.; Landover, Md.; Los Angeles-Pasadena, Calif.; Miami; Nashville, Tenn.; Philadelphia; San Diego; Seattle; and Tampa, Fla.http://www.chron.com...oc/6811728.htmlI'm sure Baltimore, Nashville, Tampa, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Glendale will be eliminated. Mixed feelings about Foxboro, Denver, Seattle, and Landover.I think it will come down to Atlanta, Arlington, Houston, East Rutherford, Los Angeles-Pasadena, Philly, and San Diego. But, the ones who have a chance at getting it too, are Foxboro, Denver, Seattle, or Landover. Just mo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 We might get it... I mean we have new hotels and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.