Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 hours ago, ionel said:

All the games have been pretty much sell outs. 

the ongoing 2026 FIFA World Cup hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada has officially broken the record for the highest cumulative attendance in World Cup history. 

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Caveira said:

the ongoing 2026 FIFA World Cup hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada has officially broken the record for the highest cumulative attendance in World Cup history. 

This is unsurprising.  The field was expanded this year from 32 to 48 teams.  This added 4 groups of 4 teams to the group stage and an extra round to the knockout stage.  An additional 6x4=24 group games and 16 knockout games.  Adding 40 games to the competition would have set a cumulative attendance record regardless of where it was hosted.

Edited by fishbane
Posted
12 minutes ago, fishbane said:

This is unsurprising.  The field was expanded this year from 32 to 48 teams.  This added 4 groups of 4 teams to the group stage and an extra round to the knockout stage.  An additional 6x4=24 group games and 16 knockout games.  Adding 40 games to the competition would have set a cumulative attendance record regardless of where it was hosted.

the games look well attended / sold out. 

Posted
3 hours ago, Caveira said:

the ongoing 2026 FIFA World Cup hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada has officially broken the record for the highest cumulative attendance in World Cup history. 

So rv is 110% wrong again! 

  • Wrestle +1 1

.

Posted
2 hours ago, Caveira said:

the games look well attended / sold out. 

Yes and that's true of every world cup.  The World Cup record for both cumulative and average attendance was previously the 1994 World Cup hosted in the US.  The main thing driving the US success here is stadium size.  The US has more large stadiums than any other country.  When the US hosted the World Cup in 1994 all the stadiums that were used had a capacity over 50,000.  The only other time all the host stadiums had a capacity of at least 50,000 was 1974 in Germany.  This World Cup all US host venues have a capacity over 60,000.  Only two stadiums have capacities below 50,000.  One is in Mexico and the other in Canada.  Perhaps due to the smaller venues and the expanded field this year is behind 1994 in average attendance.

Compare this to the hosts of the last two World Cups.  Qatar had 0 stadiums with a seating capacity over 30,000 before winning the bid to host over the USA.  They had to build 8 stadiums with seating capacity over 44,000 all within a 20 mile radius as part of their bid.  Russia hosted the World Cup before that in 2018.  There are only two football stadiums with a capacity over 50,000 in the entire country.  Two host sites had capacities under 40k. 

Posted
1 hour ago, fishbane said:

Yes and that's true of every world cup.  The World Cup record for both cumulative and average attendance was previously the 1994 World Cup hosted in the US.  The main thing driving the US success here is stadium size.  The US has more large stadiums than any other country.  When the US hosted the World Cup in 1994 all the stadiums that were used had a capacity over 50,000.  The only other time all the host stadiums had a capacity of at least 50,000 was 1974 in Germany.  This World Cup all US host venues have a capacity over 60,000.  Only two stadiums have capacities below 50,000.  One is in Mexico and the other in Canada.  Perhaps due to the smaller venues and the expanded field this year is behind 1994 in average attendance.

Compare this to the hosts of the last two World Cups.  Qatar had 0 stadiums with a seating capacity over 30,000 before winning the bid to host over the USA.  They had to build 8 stadiums with seating capacity over 44,000 all within a 20 mile radius as part of their bid.  Russia hosted the World Cup before that in 2018.  There are only two football stadiums with a capacity over 50,000 in the entire country.  Two host sites had capacities under 40k. 

You cold have agreed the Viking is wrong in a lot else worlds. 

  • Wrestle +1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, fishbane said:

Yes and that's true of every world cup.  The World Cup record for both cumulative and average attendance was previously the 1994 World Cup hosted in the US.  The main thing driving the US success here is stadium size.  The US has more large stadiums than any other country.  When the US hosted the World Cup in 1994 all the stadiums that were used had a capacity over 50,000.  The only other time all the host stadiums had a capacity of at least 50,000 was 1974 in Germany.  This World Cup all US host venues have a capacity over 60,000.  Only two stadiums have capacities below 50,000.  One is in Mexico and the other in Canada.  Perhaps due to the smaller venues and the expanded field this year is behind 1994 in average attendance.

Compare this to the hosts of the last two World Cups.  Qatar had 0 stadiums with a seating capacity over 30,000 before winning the bid to host over the USA.  They had to build 8 stadiums with seating capacity over 44,000 all within a 20 mile radius as part of their bid.  Russia hosted the World Cup before that in 2018.  There are only two football stadiums with a capacity over 50,000 in the entire country.  Two host sites had capacities under 40k. 

So America is the best place to host. Got it. 

LIVING the dream in the GREATEST COUNTRY on the planet!!!!

Posted
54 minutes ago, Caveira said:

You cold have agreed the Viking is wrong in a lot else worlds. 

Was he talking about attendance at the World Cup or the 250th Birthday celebration on the National Mall?

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, red viking said:

Total attendance was a joke. Just like the USA soccer team tonight. 

@fishbane you tell me.    He is the most u happy American probably in America today. 
 

but.   Both the World Cup and the 250th bday have been a big success so far. 

Edited by Caveira
Posted
17 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

So America is the best place to host. Got it. 

If NCAAs break an attendance record in 2028 at US Bank Arena will that mean Minneapolis is the best place to host?

Posted
1 minute ago, fishbane said:

If NCAAs break an attendance record in 2028 at US Bank Arena will that mean Minneapolis is the best place to host?

The World Cup is a big success boss.  What are you even arguing.  

Posted
5 hours ago, Caveira said:

the games look well attended / sold out. 

When and where is world cup not well attended? 

Fighting the Good Fight Against Non-Stop Winger Lies and Hypocrisy

Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Caveira said:

The World Cup is a big success boss.  What are you even arguing.  

Not for USA. THEY SUCK.

Overall attendance has absolutely nothing to do w the gross incompetence of the pedo trumptard admin. 

Edited by red viking

Fighting the Good Fight Against Non-Stop Winger Lies and Hypocrisy

Posted
1 hour ago, Caveira said:

The World Cup is a big success boss.  What are you even arguing.  

I never said otherwise.  There is more to being the best site than setting an attendance record.  The attendance record for a World Cup final is 199,854 which was at Maracanã Stadium in the 1950 World Cup.  Does this make Brazil the best place to host the final?

Posted
45 minutes ago, red viking said:

Not for USA. THEY SUCK.

Overall attendance has absolutely nothing to do w the gross incompetence of the pedo trumptard admin. 

Why would attendance have anything to do with Trump.  Damn yall are a bit obsessed 

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Caveira said:

Why would attendance have anything to do with Trump.  Damn yall are a bit obsessed 

This thread is about the repeated failures of this administration. Why start talking about the world cup being successful if it has nothing to do with Trump? 

Edited by red viking

Fighting the Good Fight Against Non-Stop Winger Lies and Hypocrisy

Posted
6 minutes ago, red viking said:

This thread is about the repeated failures of this administration. Why start talking about the world cup being successful if it has nothing to do with Trump? 

Yall have a distorted view of reality.  Trump has little to nothing to do with the World Cup.  

  • Wrestle +1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, red viking said:

This thread is about the repeated failures of this administration. Why start talking about the world cup 

Quick review: who inserted soccer and the World Cup into this thread?????  

Posted
22 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Quick review: who inserted soccer and the World Cup into this thread?????  

I brought up the pathetic performance of the USA soccer team. Completely different from the overall attendance or success of the world cup in general. Try again. 

Fighting the Good Fight Against Non-Stop Winger Lies and Hypocrisy

Posted
11 minutes ago, red viking said:

I brought up the pathetic performance of the USA soccer team. Completely different from the overall attendance or success of the world cup in general. Try again. 

So the answer is….you.  And with that, there’s really no need for me to “try again” 

  • Wrestle +1 1
Posted
18 hours ago, red viking said:

Not for USA. THEY SUCK.

They had a bad round of 16 game. That being said, they were a top 5 scoring team in the tournament up to that point.

Far from sucking and not bad considering soccer is the 4th most popular sport in the US at best.

Posted
18 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

So America is the best place to host. Got it. 

There is a good chance the US will host again in 2038.  FIFA has a rule that countries in the same confederations as the countries that hosted the last two World Cups are not allowed to bid for the next World Cup and the 2030 World Cup has a really complicated hosting arrangement which eliminates most of the world.

There were two bids to host in 2030 and both were multi country.  One was a combined bid from Morocco, Portugal, and Spain and the other was a combined bid bid from Uruguay, Argentina, and Paraguay.  Morocco is in the African confederation (CAF), Spain and Portugal in UEFA (Europe) and the other three in South America (CONMEBOL).  FIFA picked the Morocco/Spain/Portugal but also gave each of the South American bidders one match to celebrate 100 years from the first World Cup which was played in South America.  So the 2030 World Cup eliminated 3 confederations (CAF, UEFA, CONMEBOL) from bidding for the 2034 and 2038 world cups.  Since CONCACAF is the host this year that left only Asia and Oceania as eligible to host the 2034 World Cup.  Only 1 stadium that meets the FIFA minimum capacity of 40,000 exists in all of Oceania so it was pretty clear that 2034 eould be hosted in Asia or at minimum a joint bid with an Oceania nation(s).  It went to Saudi Arabia.

Looking to 2038 countries from AFC, CAF, UEFA, and CONMEBOL will be prohibited from hosting due to the rule.  This leaves the only options as CONCACAF or Oceania.  Oceania is unlikely to make a winning bid because the stadium requirements mentioned earlier and outside of the three countries hosting the 2024 World Cup there are 2 stadiums with capacity over 40,000 in CONCACAF.  So it must be the US, Mexico, and/or Canada in 2038.  FIFA has additional stadium requirements like all semifinals venues must have a capacity of at least 60,000 and at least 80,000 for the opening match and final.  Canada currently doesn’t have any that meet the semifinal/final requirements and Mexico has one above 80k and another that meets the semifinal but not final requirement.  Still either country could successfully bid, but it would require more new construction and $$ than a bid involving the USA.  If none of the US, Mexico, and Canada want to host in 2038 FIFA probably opens up the process to other confederations.

Posted
2 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

So the answer is….you.  And with that, there’s really no need for me to “try again” 

Your "point" is pointless though. While I did bring up the world cup, it was in a 110% different context. 

Fighting the Good Fight Against Non-Stop Winger Lies and Hypocrisy

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Latest Rankings

  • College Commitments

    Ben Ziola

    Skutt Catholic, Nebraska
    Class of 2027
    Committed to Nebraska
    Projected Weight: 174

    Zane Engles

    Northfield, Minnesota
    Class of 2027
    Committed to Minnesota
    Projected Weight: 174

    Aidan Gore

    Garner, North Carolina
    Class of 2027
    Committed to North Carolina State
    Projected Weight: 157, 165

    Luke Padgett

    Croatan, North Carolina
    Class of 2027
    Committed to The Citadel
    Projected Weight: 197

    Will Clanton

    New York Military Academy, New York
    Class of 2027
    Committed to Mercyhurst
    Projected Weight: 125
×
×
  • Create New...