58 of 70 USA World Cup venue candidates express interest

USA Crest

And then there were 58.

Representatives from a total of 58 of th original 70 stadiums listed by U.S. Soccer's World Cup bid committee as potential sites for World Cup matches have expressed interest in hosting World Cup matches in either 2018 or 2022.

Representatives from Las Vegas and Raleigh-Durham markets have expressed interest in being considered as hosts for the World Cup as well (No, Las Vegas doesn't have a stadium now, but a proposed stadium project is in the works). Also, Rice-Eccles Stadium in Salt Lake City, Utah has also applied for consideration.

Two venues, one in Jacksonville and one in Oklahoma City, are still in discussions with the U.S. bid committee as officials analyze the feasibility of hosting World Cup matches.

Here is a rundown of the original list of 70 potential World Cup stadiums (with the 12 stadiums that declined interest crossed out):


Potential USA World Cup Stadiums

Metro Market

Stadium Location
Atlanta, Ga. Georgia Dome Atlanta, Ga.
Atlanta, Ga. Sanford Stadium Athens, Ga.
Austin, Texas Royal Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, Texas
Baltimore, Md. M&T Bank Stadium Baltimore, Md.
Baton Rouge, La. Tiger Stadium Baton Rouge, La.
Birmingham, Ala. Legion Field Birmingham, Ala.
Birmingham, Ala. Bryant-Denny Stadium Tuscaloosa, Ala.
Boston, Mass. Gillette Stadium Foxborough, Mass.
Buffalo, N.Y. Ralph Wilson Stadium Orchard Park, N.Y.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa Kinnick Stadium Iowa City, Iowa
Champaign, Ill. Memorial Stadium Champaign, Ill.
Charlotte, N.C. Bank of America Stadium Charlotte, N.C.
Chicago, Ill. Soldier Field Chicago, Ill.
Cincinnati, Ohio Paul Brown Stadium Cincinnati, Ohio
Cleveland, Ohio Cleveland Browns Stadium Cleveland, Ohio
Columbia, Mo. Faurot Field Columbia, Mo.
Columbia, S.C. Williams-Brice Stadium Columbia, S.C.
Columbus, Ga. Jordan-Hare Stadium Auburn, Ala.
Columbus, Ohio  Ohio Stadium Columbus, Ohio
Dallas, Texas Cotton Bowl Dallas, Texas
Dallas, Texas Dallas Cowboys New Stadium Arlington, Texas
Denver, Colo. Invesco Field Denver, Colo.
Detroit, Mich. University of Michigan Stadium Ann Arbor, Mich.
Detroit, Mich. Ford Field Detroit, Mich.
Detroit, Mich. Spartan Stadium East Lansing, Mich.
Fayetteville, Ark. Reynolds Razorback Stadium Fayetteville, Ark.
Green Bay, Wis. Lambeau Field Green Bay, Wis.
Greenville, S.C. Memorial Stadium Clemson, S.C.
Harrisburg, Pa. Beaver Stadium University Park, Pa.
Houston, Texas Reliant Stadium Houston, Texas
Houston, Texas Rice Stadium Houston, Texas
Houston, Texas Kyle Field College Station, Texas
Indianapolis, Ind. Lucas Oil Stadium Indianapolis, Ind.
Jacksonville, Fla. Jacksonville Municipal Stadium Jacksonville, Fla.
Jacksonville, Fla. Ben Hill Griffin Stadium Gainesville, Fla.
Kansas City, Mo. Arrowhead Stadium Kansas City, Mo.
Knoxville, Tenn. Neyland Stadium Knoxville, Tenn.
Lexington, Ky. Commonwealth Stadium Lexington, Ky.
Los Angeles, Calif. Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum Los Angeles, Calif.
Los Angeles, Calif. Rose Bowl Pasadena, Calif.
Madison, Wis. Camp Randall Stadium Madison, Wis.
Miami, Fla. Dolphin Stadium Miami Gardens, Fla.
Minneapolis, Minn. TCF Bank Stadium Minneapolis, Minn.
Minneapolis, Minn. Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome Minneapolis, Minn.
Nashville, Tenn. LP Field Nashville, Tenn.
New Haven, Conn. Yale Bowl New Haven, Conn.
New Orleans, La. Superdome New Orleans, La.
New York, N.Y. Meadowlands Stadium East Rutherford, N.J.
Oklahoma City, Okla. Oklahoma Memorial Stadium Norman, Okla.
Omaha, Neb. Memorial StadUium Lincoln, Neb.
Orlando, Fla. Florida Citrus Bowl Orlando, Fla.
Philadelphia, Pa. Lincoln Financial Field Philadelphia, Pa.
Phoenix, Ariz. University of Phoenix Stadium Glendale, Ariz.
Phoenix, Ariz. Sun Devil Stadium Tempe, Ariz.
Pittsburgh, Pa. Heinz Field Pittsburgh, Pa.
Roanoke, Va. Lane Stadium Blacksburg, Va.
Salt Lake City, Utah LaVell Edwards Stadium Provo, Utah
San Antonio, Texas Alamodome San Antonio, Texas
San Diego, Calif. Qualcomm Stadium San Diego, Calif.
San Fran/Oakland, Calif. Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Oakland, Calif.
San Fran/Oakland, Calif. Stanford Stadium Stanford, Calif.
San Fran/Oakland, Calif. California Memorial Stadium Berkeley, Calif.
Seattle, Wash. Qwest Field Seattle, Wash.
Seattle, Wash. Husky Stadium Seattle, Wash.
South Bend, Ind. Notre Dame Stadium Notre Dame, Ind.
St. Louis, Mo. Edward Jones Dome St. Louis, Mo.
Tallahassee, Fla. Doak Campbell Stadium Tallahassee, Fla.
Tampa, Fla. Raymond James Stadium Tampa, Fla.
Washington, D.C. RFK Memorial Stadium Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C. FedEx Field

Landover, Md.

While a potential U.S.-hosted World Cup is still up to a decade away (assuming the United States is even chosen for either of the next two cycles) it is still exciting to look at this list and consider the possibilities.

What do you think of the remaining list? Disappointed to see any of the 12 stadiums off the list go? Does the idea of a World Cup match being played in Las Vegas make you as excited as it does me? (or does it just make your head want to explode?)

Share your thoughts below.

This entry was posted in U.S. Soccer. Bookmark the permalink.

111 Responses to 58 of 70 USA World Cup venue candidates express interest

  1. dave says:

    no real surprises

  2. scott says:

    better play a game in Tampa

  3. Scott says:

    What’s the smallest sized stadium listed there?

    For that matter, what would be the requirements for the stadiums, or is that too much to list here?

  4. Joe says:

    Bye Jordan-Hare :(

  5. soccerroo says:

    Suprised that some of those stadiums were on there. Although it might be interesting to see a game in them they are probably not suited for soccer. I would like to see a game in Notre Dame or Royal Texas Memorial Stadiums but that is just because it would be intersting to go to games there.

  6. ricecloudnine says:

    “FIFA calls for each bidding nation to propose a minimum of 12 stadiums, each capable of seating 40,000 or more spectators. Stadiums with a minimum capacity of 80,000 are required by FIFA for consideration to play host to the Opening Match and Final Match.”

    I believe Ives posted it on with the original 70 list.

  7. EA says:

    Would love to see the Superdome used.

  8. CK says:

    come on Buffalo!

  9. Philly Outsider says:

    How does the Linc in Philly qualify? After months of hearing from Philly insiders that the field doesn’t meet FIFA regs, that’s why no qualifiers, and now it suddenly meets FIFA regs? More BS from the ownership and Philly insiders.

  10. Nicholas says:

    I still don’t see how Ohio Stadium in Columbus can host a game. I’d say that’s as good as off the list.

  11. BlueWhiteLion says:

    Thanks, fellow Detroiters, for being small minded enough to exclude yourselves from consideration. We are rolling in economic good news, you are right to dismiss how could a World Cup presence add to our already glowing vibrancy.

  12. Steve C. says:

    I live 45 minutes south of Ann Arbor.. Would love to have it played there. I can’t imagine how that would be.. the ‘Big House’ holds 109,000 people. Thats a lot of peeps for a game.

    Ford Field would be awesome as well.

  13. Dave says:

    Heinz Field? Are they kidding? That turf makes Wembley look pristine.

  14. brant says:

    Here’s the coolest thing about that list – we could host the World Cup twice, in the same year, never use the same stadium twice, and *still* not interfere with any other sporting event in the US that’s going on because there’s another truckload of stadiums there.

    Meanwhile, every other country on the planet has to build stadiums just to get to the *minimum* capacity needed to host the ‘Cup. No wonder USSF told FIFA to “give us a few weeks notice” if they need us to host.

    And this list doesn’t include another 40-50 stadiums that could host with some reconfiguration, or working around baseball teams, plus a *bunch* of college stadiums that aren’t listed (NC State, U Maryland, Penn St, Colorado, etc).

  15. Homey Boehme says:

    Go Minnestoa! World Cup in a DOME!!!

  16. Mike says:

    Having gone to BYU, no surpise that they dropped out. They wouldn’t sell alcohol at the games.

  17. blake says:

    surprised that autzen stadium (university of oregon) wasn’t on the list… nike’s home stadium, all the new mls expansion in the pacific northwest, and the autzen zoo… too bad.

    would’ve loved to see beaver stadium filled up for a match – 110,000 makes the earth shake – plus it’s still a grass field

  18. Brian says:

    I love how the SEC schools said no, as if college football is more important. What a joke…again another reason MLS will never have a team in that part of the country. This is all politics anyway, we all know that there will probably only be 12 venues used and they will all be NFL stadiums.

  19. SayervilleFC says:

    I gotta say that a World Cup in the Big House would be cool though I bet it would make Bo Schembechler turn over in his grave.

    I think a great pitch to FIFA would be to have a World Cup where every venue was accessible via train or light rail. The idea of a green-ish WC would make for a great promotion.

    That said, not many of those stadia meet that criteria so it likely won’t happen.

  20. Eazy says:

    “I still don’t see how Ohio Stadium in Columbus can host a game. I’d say that’s as good as off the list.”

    Why would you host a game in Columbus, when you could have it in Ann Arbor?

    Bigger Stadium and closer to a real metro area(although i dunno if Detroit is something the US wants to show the rest of the world.)

  21. William the Terror says:

    having lived in Tallahassee for over 20 years, I can’t realy se them giving any serious consideration to Doak Campbell Stadium. The city only has a population of about 225K, and while they may fill an 82,000 seat stadium for football games, 20,000 of those seats are filled by students, another 15,000 by local alumni and the rest by alumni who make day trips for games. The World Cup would require people to travel and stay for a few days, and we just don’t have the hotel capacity within a 100-mile radius.

  22. Barry U says:

    Bank of Amrica stadium in Charlotte still in the running. SWEET. I am already talking to my 1 year old about the games we are going to go see 10 or 14 years from now!!!! Come on you FIFA idiots give us the WC.

  23. Ryan says:

    “This is all politics anyway, we all know that there will probably only be 12 venues used and they will all be NFL stadiums. ”

    The 94 Final was held at the Rose bowl, so it’s not a guarantee it will be held at an NFL venue since college stadiums can hold more people.

  24. dabull says:

    Unfortunately, the idea that cities like Clemson, SC will host a WC game is a pipe dream. Probably all the games will be played in NFL stadiums (with LA being the exception).

  25. Orr112 says:

    Don’t really understand why Memorial Stadium in Austin wouldn’t be interested in hosting some World Cup games – the stadium is huge and largely sits empty with throughout the year when football isn’t being played. Would have been great – right now it’s like 5 minutes from where I live.

    I know this isn’t really US Soccer Federation place to play politics – but I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing them perhaps offer games to cities as an incentive for supporting MLS stadiums, particularly in DC and Houston. Just a thought.

  26. Joey says:

    Nebraska dropped out? Oh geez, there goes the US’s chances of hosting the WC. In all seriousness, though, the only things to do in Nebraska are watch the Cornhuskers (screw em) and cook meth. Yet Nebraska doesn’t want at least the promise of an opportunity to entertain the cornfolk, or to attract tourists to a vacuous wasteland?

  27. ERic says:

    @Orr112. How long have you been in Austin? DKR is hallowed ground. Allow something other than pointyball there? No chance in hell.

    Though I understand your personal desire. It’d be an easy 15 minute bus ride for me.

  28. The Beard says:

    Disappointed to see some of the college stadiums backing out. Bryant denny will be able to hold 100k+ and would be a terrific venue for a few games.

  29. Arthur Spooner says:

    Notre Dame and Penn State would’ve been sweet

  30. Orr112 says:

    Eric, been here for over 20 years – yeah, don’t get me wrong I’m well of aware of how seriously football is taken here but given how much the community contributes UT you would think they would want to contribute something back as well by helping bring additional tourist and their money into town. That would have been great, but yeah – I pretty much knew that Austin wouldn’t be getting any games even if they had decided to continue for the process.

  31. debbie jenkins says:

    @Brian – Neyland is still in. But it might be just a little too big.

    Unless it’s for the final.;)

  32. gaucho says:

    Most of the 12 that dropped out were college football stadia that would probably not get chosen anyway because they are too far from a metro area (or in a metro area that has other stadium options). Logistics matter. I’m betting on all NFL stadiums, plus maybe the Rose Bowl, since there’s no NFL in LA.

    Meadowlands Stadium for the Final!

  33. Charley says:

    sad to see College Station off of the list, but it makes sense.

  34. Chris says:

    “”I love how the SEC schools said no, as if college football is more important. What a joke…again another reason MLS will never have a team in that part of the country. This is all politics anyway, we all know that there will probably only be 12 venues used and they will all be NFL stadiums.

    Posted by: Brian | April 23, 2009 at 03:02 PM””

    As a huge fan of both SEC football and MLS, it kills me to hear that, but for the most part its true. People that don’t live here do not understand how passionate these people are about college football. They have no interest in any other sports. College Football takes priority 24/7. I am one of the 85,000 Alabama fans who went to see a scrimmage last weekend. If we had a soccer team I would be just as passionate but am afraid that I would be the only one.

    Another reason the SEC stadiums can’t host is because everyone of them is in a mid-size town that does not have the airports or the hotels to host the events. Trust me, the universities would love to make the $$$ but the town’s can’t host so many long distance travelers.

  35. Strider says:

    Those of you who think NFL stadia are a lock need to remember that the Rose Bowl, Stanford Stadium, and the Cotton Bowl were all used for WC 1994. I don’t think any of them were NFL stadia at the time. There may have been other non-NFL stadia, but I can’t remember them all.

    However, NFL stadia do have some advantages over others, e.g. typically in large metro areas, typically newer, and often with better mass transit. The one other question is field width. Fields need to accomodate an 80-yard wide field, so that would probably cut out some of the college and pro fields.

    The Dome in Detroit was used in the ’94 Cup as well and the condition of the turf at these fields is irrelavant because they would most need new natural turf. Besides, 2022 is a LONG way away (we all know 2018 will be in Europe).

  36. w says:

    also many college stadiums are not ready to host a world cup match. i know that for tiger stadium in baton rouge most of the stadium is bench style seating and i dont think that is allowed for a world cup match. im also not sure if the field could be converted from football to soccer with the size difference and whatnot.

  37. MikeD says:

    I would love to see Heinz Field get a game and have England play there. It would be hilarious listening to the English complain about the condition of that field.

  38. A.S. says:

    “I still don’t see how Ohio Stadium in Columbus can host a game. I’d say that’s as good as off the list.”

    Why couldn’t the ‘Shoe host a game? Yes, it might require some renovation to widen the field and whatnot, but that’s probably true of a lot of these stadiums.

  39. ThaDeuce says:

    disappointed that Death Valley punked out. Its a great place to watch a game.

  40. Daniel Karell says:

    How come all the stadiums crossed out are college arenas?

  41. Jesse says:

    I think Lambeau Field would be fantastic. While it’s a cathedral to the “other” football and located in a small city it is a beautiful stadium and there’s not a bad seat in the place. The tie-in between the 2 types of football could even be a bigger draw if marketed correctly because people would probably be interested just to come to Lambeau with the history of the place.

  42. sucram89 says:

    let the southeast host some games. Atlanta, Birmingham, Charlotte, Nashville, and Jacksonville.

  43. Henry says:

    c’mon New Haven!!!

  44. Bobby says:

    Awesome that Charlotte is still in the running is still in the running. I’m glad that, even though they don’t have a chance, Clemson and Columbia are showing interest.

  45. ignoramus says:

    Now that the crazy tree-sitters are finally gone, Cal’s getting Memorial Stadium in Berkeley into very nice shape. It is one heck of a nice place to watch a sporting event and would work very well for soccer– much better than the Oakland Coliseum, and it’s bigger than Stanford. Also has some very picturesque views. The only drawback is parking. But the Bay Area really should get a game and it beats all the other options by a mile, I think.

  46. brian says:

    all i can say is please no domes or that crappy stadium in tampa with the pirate ship or the just as crappy stadium in miami

  47. LDQ says:

    Come on Kinnick Stadium. Bring the World Cup to Iowa. – LDQ

  48. brant says:

    @ Nicholas, who said:

    “I still don’t see how Ohio Stadium in Columbus can host a game. I’d say that’s as good as off the list.”

    To those of you that don’t know – “Ohio Stadium” is where the Ohio State football team plays, on campus. Seats about 100k, right next to the river, nice facility, huge, imposing, LOUD, and would be a great place to host a big rivalry game. Plus, campus/Columbus PD used to dealing with drunken crowds of idiots who barely speak English and just won a major sporting event (see: every home game v Michigan since, oh, 1932, especially 2002)

    Crew Stadium is over by the fairgrounds on I-71 in the middle of the city, seats about 30k when fully-loaded, and is the home of your reigning MLS champs. Nice facility, smaller, still loud and a good place to host a CONCACAF game, but would strain at the seams if you had Germany-Argentina there, or something similar. Easier parking and easier on/off the highway, but not nearly as impressive as the ‘shoe.

  49. ricecloudnine says:

    “Don’t really understand why Memorial Stadium in Austin wouldn’t be interested in hosting some World Cup games – the stadium is huge and largely sits empty with throughout the year when football isn’t being played. Would have been great – right now it’s like 5 minutes from where I live.”

    I have to imagine that it would be the required modifications that is an issue for Austin (and a number of other college stadiums). One example would be turf modification to eliminate the crown of the field. Perhaps they wouldn’t want to worry about that construction between the seasons. Also, with Dallas and Houston being within a close drive, they likely weren’t expecting to be chosen. I imagine some of the SEC schools would have to tear out their hedges which would be near “disastrous” for the tradition.

    The entire list was made to show the rest of the world “look at us” and what we resources we have for hosting. No worries about stadiums being ready.

  50. Matt L says:

    Please Raleigh!

  51. Adam M. says:

    There are some absolute locks here. The new stadia in the Meadowlands and Dallas and Soldier Field are givens, as is the Rose Bowl (unless something new gets built in LA by then). Seattle has to be favored also. I think its very likely that one of Boston or DC gets in (with Philly less likely) as does something near San Fran. Tampa wouldn’t surprise me; Miami would. Nashville wouldn’t surprise me. I hope they don’t use domes, but if they do, that its the Superdome only. I like Michigan Stadium if they get a game that will fill it.

  52. Chase says:

    My pipe dream is still alive, Obama needs to flex his muscle and get a WC match in Iowa!

  53. Tommy says:

    As mentioned above, Lambeau Field would be AWESOME!!

    Play a USA game there and I guarantee an all USA crowd.

  54. John says:

    The application process to express interest must not have been that extensive. Kinnick Stadium in Iowa City, while one of the finest college football stadiums and probably the stadium that would put fans closest to the field of play, is not reasonable for the WC. I am sure the folks in Iowa City, and others in towns a ways away from major markets realize the small odds but said, “why not?”

    The usual suspects will host the WC if it comes back to the US. This list is just proving a point about stadia in America.

    With that said, bring the World Cup to IOWA CITY, IA!! GO HAWKS!

  55. Edward says:

    Jordan-Hare crossed out, nooooooo! =(

    Seems like most of the college campuses declined; makes sense since transit and finding suitable hotels would be a logistical nightmare.

  56. sean monaghan says:

    World Cup at college,lets postpone until school starts….so there alcohal and girls left and right ;]

  57. Mr. Fish says:

    Gotta go with top markets:

    East Coast: NY, BOS, PHI, DC, MIA
    Central: CHI, DAL, HOU
    West Coast: LA, SF/SJ/OAK, SEA

    Add in a surprise: Nashville

  58. orange315 says:

    Meadowlands – New York
    Cowboys Cathedral – Dallas
    Fedex Field – Washington D.C. (Daniel Snyder will probably get a new stadium by this time)
    Ford Field – Detroit
    Rose Bowl – L.A.
    Gillette Stadium – Foxboro/Boston
    Future 49ers Stadium – San Francisco
    Carolinas Stadium – Charlotte
    University of Phoenix Stadium – Glendale Arizona
    TCF Bank Stadium or Future Viking Stadium – Minneapolis
    Qwest Field – Seattle

    Thats only 11 because I think you would have to put the last one in the south somewhere, probably Florida. Problem with that is all the stadiums in the south are old or Domed, but I would bet that that new stadiums will probably be built in Miami, Orlando, or Atlanta by that time but one of the Florida venues would probably get it. Could be an argument for Philly over Foxboro, or Reliant Stadium in Houston over Phoenix, but Foxboro got it in 94 so I gave them the nod, and you could go either way between Phoenix and Houston. I just think it would be hard not to give it to most of these venues in the large cities with the most modern stadiums. What does everyone think?

  59. Matt says:

    Please no more soccer at Rice Eccles Stadium ever again! Unless while you are watching the world cup you dont mind the run of play disappearing when it gets within 5 yards of the sideline.

    Do other football specific stadiums have this problem? Not being wide enough?

  60. F x B says:

    Damn, University Park aka Penn State is off the list. That would probably be the sweetest thing ever to go to at Beaver Stadium.

  61. NJsoccer says:

    For some of the colleges dropping out it may not be the problem that it’s not near a metro area but more than that it would probably disrupt the college’s programs. I am sad to see Notre Dame drop out but Meadowlands is still in the running (as expected) so I’m fine with the remaining venues.

  62. gaucho says:

    I think Mr. Fish is about right, though I think Philly will miss out, with two venues somewhat nearby in the Meadowlands and FedEx Field. I would think Denver would be the replacement, since it provides some geographic balance.

    There isn’t an obvious #1 choice out of the Bay Area. If the 49ers get their stadium built, then it probably goes to the top of the list.

  63. This Guy says:

    Indianapolis would be without a doubt a good place. We live for sports here.

  64. Ulrich says:

    Geez!!!!!

    The list of stadiums is simply a Marketing strategy by US Soccer. 75% of the locations on the list aren’t going to make the head-honcho’s cut, but they list them all to show FIFA that the USA has all of the infrastructure in place now. Sure more stadiums will be built between now and the Cup, but even if they weren’t because the economic recession continues to go south, FIFA can sleep at night knowing the WC isn’t going to experience a hiccup like South Africa.

    No need to dream about the fringe stadiums – you’ll only wake up dissappointed.

  65. This Guy says:

    East Coast: NY, BOS, PHI, DC, MIA

    Central: CHI, DAL, HOU

    West Coast: LA, SF/SJ/OAK, SEA

    Posted by: Mr. Fish | April 23, 2009 at 04:50 PM

    Houston and Dallas are not Central. Indianapolis, Columbus, Lexington, Detroit are Central.

    I don’t think they go with big markets, It’s the World Cup, I suspect they would go with venue. Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis is as nice as it gets. Also market shouldn’t imply just Americans and if it does Indianapolis host the single largest atteded sporting event in the World. The Indianapolis 500 which seats and sells 250,000 for a single event and day.

    If you want a World market then Indianapolis hosts the number one sporting attended event by Europeans in the United States. The F1 race which will be back on next year.

    Markets is what you want then Indy it is.

  66. ben says:

    “Please no more soccer at Rice Eccles Stadium ever again! ”

    Not that UT will get the WC anyway, but I’d much rather have it at Rice Eccles than at Cougar Stadium. Cougar Stadium sucks for (american) football, I can’t imagine soccer. Plus, no parking at all, I remember walking 2+ miles to see Syracuse play there and it was only about 2/3 full. Add in no Trax in Provo and RES is the only viable option in UT (and really, in fairness, wasn’t all that bad for soccer).

  67. M says:

    Joey, don’t make fun of Nebraska. The American Outlaws supporters group was founded by a bunch of college students from U of N.

    Soccer is pretty big in the midwestern states. It’s that they don’t have a large enough population.

  68. ThaDeuce says:

    -The Beard,
    Have you seen Tuscaloosa traffic on college game day? The stadium is perfect, but the infrastructure would collapse. Tuscaloosa would have to be bulldozed to to make way for the hotels etc that must be in place.
    I’m speaking from one who has gotten caught on McFarland Blvd at 5:00, not even on a game day.

    However, Baton Rouge, the capital of louisiana, totally could have handled a game. That would have been sick. Personally I would have given a kidney to have the U.S.A. group stage games in Oxford, MS… Beautiful town, but could never, ever, handle that kind of massive international crowd.

  69. ThaDeuce says:

    In that case Ulrich, I sure hope Birmingham gets one. If not, I think it would still be relatively safe bet that Atlanta or Nashville will get one.

  70. Eugene says:

    The USA bid committee should exclude all turf stadiums if there are plenty of available venues with natural grass.

  71. Gary says:

    isn’t it fantastic that we’d be hosting the most important international soccer competition, and none of our SSSs can hold the event?

  72. gerald says:

    Gary – that is pretty ironic

  73. Caldwell says:

    Martin Stadium in Pullman! It’ll have 40K by then.

  74. Nelson Mandela says:

    Shoe in Areas:

    LA

    NY

    Bos

    Dallas or Houston

    Chicago

    Bay Area

    DC

    Mia or Tampa/Orlando

    Likely Host Areas:

    Philly

    Seattle

    Phoenix

    Hotlanta

    Denver

    San Diego

    St Louis

    Detroit

    Field surfaces will not be an issue, because all plastic fields have the capability to convert to grass.

    Cities must have the infrastructure (hotels, transportation, cultural/tourism attractions) I think it’s doubtful college stadiums’s wil be used. FIFA will want complete security control of the stadium and surrounding area.

    France ’98 used 10 stadiums, Japan/Korea ’02 used 20 stadiums, Germany ’06 used 12 stadiums.

    It would be possible to see 2 stadiums per group stage. In the current format, you’re talking about 16 stadiums.

  75. Brant says:

    You gotta figure all the small towns (Clemson) will get cut b/c they won’t appeal to international travelers. You’ll end up with the usual suspects in the big cities, plus maybe 2-3 ‘surprise’ cities like San Antonio or Columbus.

  76. jrc says:

    Re: Bay Area Stadiums

    To my knowledge, only the Oakland Coliseum and the renovated Stanford Stadium have hosted big matches. The Coliseum is a dump, while the new Stanford Stadium is pretty nice. (see – link to images2.cdn.fotonauts.com taken from Chelsea/Club America game; Inter and Club America are going to play there is summer) If a World Cup game were to be held tomorrow, Stanford would probably be the choice over both the Coliseum and Memorial Stadium (which also needs to be renovated).

    However, by the time the World Cup does come to the US, it is likely that a new 49ers stadium will exist, and that stadium would certainly be the host for the Bay Area.

  77. Justin O says:

    Not all the SEC schools declined. UK is in! And all we know about Commonwealth Stadium is it’s too windy for baskeball.

  78. K1p says:

    I’m not much up on NFL regulations. Is a crowned field required? How will NFL stadiums comply without a Cat D9?

  79. Jacob A. says:

    I do think the idea of a National Soccer Stadium is something that needs to be talked about more. It could be in place for this easily. I would throw DC in first being the nation’s capital, but with the trouble United has, I have a hard time believing it could get done there.

    It could host WC, Qualifiers, Friendlies, when these Euro teams come. Surely we could find SOME way to at least get the idea looked at by SOME one.

  80. Richard says:

    Uh, the Home Depot Center already exists. However, why would anyone want to build a “National Soccer Stadium” anyway? Where ever you put it in this country, 90% of the US would never get to see a USMNT game unless they booked a plane ride under such a plan. Does Brazil have a “National Soccer Stadium”?

  81. Jedediah says:

    Spartan Stadium in Michigan should never have been on the list as the available playing surface is much too narrow. That being said, I’m still disappointed that Michigan State didn’t even express interest in attempting to bring an economy-boosting event to the East Lansing area. Goodness knows we need it, and Michigan will still need it in 2018 or 2022. Maybe they knew they had no shot.

  82. Ben says:

    Haha, imagine Lambeau field or something hosting a WC final…

  83. quen47 says:

    “No, Las Vegas doesn’t have a stadium now, but a proposed stadium project is in the works”

    Las Vegas DOES have a stadium, Sam Boyd stadium, where UNLV plays… it would need to be expanded slightly, but otherwise is probably fine

    link to en.wikipedia.org

  84. ga-gone says:

    Reliant is great, but I wonder if they’ll get screwed because Dallas’ new stadium would have to be considered one of two absolute locks (new Giants stadium the other).

  85. ga-gone says:

    This country is far, far, far too big for the idea of a single national soccer stadium. Not to mention there are clearly 75+ stadiums capable of holding big-time matches for the USA. It would be pointless to spend even a dime on creating our own stadium.

  86. metrostar 4 life says:

    why the hell were some of these stadiums on there to begin with?

  87. Oranje15 says:

    Well the Detroit one that was declined is actually in East Lansing, Michigan. Since I am from EL, MI I can say that it would be awesome to host any potential World Cup matches, it is not an easy place to get to (i.e no major airports…you can’t count the rinky-dinky Lansing airport) and it is kinda of a crappy town with not much to do.

    However, it is good to see that Detroit and AA have thier act together.

  88. mike ruze says:

    Chicago should get every match.

  89. chg says:

    Why would they settle for the small NFL stadiums? Did every SEC stadium say no?

  90. Action Item says:

    The problem with most of the college stadiums is that they’re simply not wide enough currently for soccer fields. Has anyone ever been to Michigan Stadium? It just barely fits the football field; I’ve never seen less space between the sidelines and the wall (if you watch a game on TV, look at how close the benches are to the field). They’d have to do major renovations there (including removal of a whole lot of seating), which I just don’t see happening. The same is true of a lot of the other stadiums that have undergone renovations recently (past 10 years) such as Ohio Stadium and Camp Randall Stadium. Ricecloudnine has it right – most are either surrounded by small populations or have nicer professional stadiums nearby to compete with. The only two that really are the nicer venue in their area are Stanford Stadium (recently renovated, hosts soccer matches already) and the soon-to-open TCF Stadium (built to fit a soccer field; currently a prospective site for soccer for the 2016 Chicago Olympic bid).

    To Homey Boehmy: Yes, the Metrodome is on the list. So is the Georgia Dome, Alamodome, and the Edward Jones Dome Yes, I agree it’d be a bad choice. However, let’s not forget that the Pontiac Superdome hosted games in ’94. So it’s not necessarily a deal breaker – but I’d think with the options they have they probably will stay away from domes this time around.

    Here are my twelve:

    Soldier Field (Chicago), FedEx Stadium (Washington, D.C.), Giants Stadium (New York), Reliant Stadium (Houston, TX), University of Phoenix Stadium (Phoenix, AZ), Rose Bowl (Los Angeles, CA), TCF Bank Stadium (Minneapolis, MN), Gillette Stadium (Boston, MA), LP Field (Nashville, TN), Raymond James Stadium (Tampa, FL), Qwest Field (Seattle, WA), Stanford Stadium (Alameda, CA)

  91. kevindjohnson says:

    I live in Baton Rouge, the WC would be invisible here, sadly but at the Superdome in New Orleans would be amazing. I swear it would be packed even a Bulgaria vs Iran match.

  92. This Guy says:

    One thing that FIFA learned from the WorldCup 94 was that the humid, hot weather was a problem. Coaches and players complained about it. So all the pipe dreams of 3 California venues and 3 Texas venues and an Arizona venue should be thrown out.

    San Diego no

    LA yes

    SanJose no

    San Fran no

    Dallas Yes

    Houston no

    Phoenix no

    I also have doubt Miami as popular as it is could sustain a crowd like the World Cup would bring.

    I’m still for Indianapolis.

  93. Robert says:

    I think they should play every game in a different stadium. Spread it over as much of the country as possible to help grow soccer. And you could have each group be based in a region to make travel easier (ie no cross country travel). NE region w/ NY, BOS, PHI, New Haven, Pitt, Buffalo, DC, MD. SE region w/ ATL, CLT, RDU, JAX, TAM, MIA. So on…

  94. Rocco says:

    This is why Austin is wierd.

  95. jrc says:

    This guy –

    You’re dreaming if you think SF/Bay Area (or any of the CA cities) is going to be eliminated b/c it’s too hot/humid. There’s no humidity in the bay area (or CA in general). The average high in July in Palo Alto is like 75-80, and it’s cooler in SF/Oakland. It’s probably better soccer weather in CA in the summer than most of the rest of the country b/c of the lack of humidity.

  96. Brant says:

    @ This Guy, who said:
    “One thing that FIFA learned from the WorldCup 94 was that the humid, hot weather was a problem. Coaches and players complained about it. So all the pipe dreams of 3 California venues and 3 Texas venues and an Arizona venue should be thrown out. ”

    Uh… you ever been to Arizona in the summer? Humid it isn’t. It’s 120 in the shade, and the heat feels like a brick wall when you walk outside, and the entire crowd in the stands would look like cooked lobster by the end of the game (unless you played a Saudi Arabia – Mexico match there). But it would NOT be humid.

    I don’t see how New Orleans *doesn’t* get a game. They’ll still be recovering from Katrina even 20 years later, and there are plenty of things for international travelers to do there.

  97. Kiko says:

    So does any of these have a roof over the stands? Just out of curiosity.

  98. Fid says:

    “Crew Stadium is over by the fairgrounds on I-71 in the middle of the city, seats about 30k when fully-loaded – brant”

    Err, Crew Stadium seats 20,000 – 21,500 when they add seats underneath the stage.

  99. HE from NJ says:

    It’s a shame we can’t use the stadium @ s. bend.
    Would have been so cool 2 see a world cup game there.
    Bummer!

  100. fubar says:

    Let’s be realistic. Cut this list down to less than 25. That’s the max…All the others should fall on their swords like ND and Penn State. Why go through the pain of even considering this when you know that it will eventually come down to the venues in the biggest cities.

    Everything else is bollocks.

  101. i would pay anything to see a WC game in Norman.

  102. ricecloudnine says:

    @ This Guy, who said:
    “One thing that FIFA learned from the WorldCup 94 was that the humid, hot weather was a problem. Coaches and players complained about it. So all the pipe dreams of 3 California venues and 3 Texas venues and an Arizona venue should be thrown out. ”

    The stadiums mentioned in Houston, Dallas, and Phoenix all have retractable roofs, so they can be climate controlled.

  103. This Guy says:

    To find FIFA quotes about the humidity you might have to get off the Internet and go to your library. It was discussed during halftime matches also.

    I remember watching it as I was about 15 during the WC94.

    The whole argument from everyone on here suggests Indianapolis should get a game anyways. That was my whole point in the first place.

    Retractable Roof: Indy has

    Accomidations: Indy has

    History of hosting big events: Indy has

    Population: Indy has, more than most cities named.

  104. jpc says:

    WORLD CUP GAMES IN “THE SWAMP”, AMAZING

  105. SFTony says:

    Way to go San Francisco! Not even on the list. Of course we all know the Stick needs to be brought down, but damn. SF is seriously the best, with only New York competing, as the best place in the United States to enjoy the WC, inside and outside of the stadium.

    But this is our lot in life. Damn (SF)liberals don’t like sports so we’ll never get another stadium. Bye Bye World Cup. Bye Bye Super Bowl. Bye Bye Olympics.

  106. Kevin says:

    Where the hell is Albuquerque?

  107. Alan J says:

    The Big House would make a perfect opening or final game venue. 100K+ seats. 30 mins transit time from a major international airport w/direct flights from Asia and Europe. 31,000 hotel rooms in the area. City/region has recent experience with major marquee sports events.

    Except that the playing field will require widening (same for Ford Field, barely wide enough for international friendlies, no way it is WC standard). I assume that this is understood when the venues consented to be on the consideration list.

  108. Jason H. says:

    Bobby Dodd in Atlanta would be a much better choice than the Dome … no indoor soccer please!!

  109. Legion Field is a dump and it’s in a bad neighborhood. Yale Bowl is all-bench seating — a big no-no in footy — plus it’s too close to New York and Boston.

    Oakland should be ruled out as the World Cup is held during baseball season.

    I see the US bid utilizing NFL stadiums plus Los Angeles for most matches. Opening match and championship final go to the new 100,000-seat Dallas Cowboys stadium. In return the NFL awards a future Super Bowl to Wembley.

  110. The newly revamped Cotton Bowl would be an awesome place to watch a WC game. So would DKR in Austin. I heard they are putting in new turf and ripping out the drainage pumps, so unfortunatly it looks like the crown is going to be necessary. That stadium is awesome though…

  111. Derek Droeger says:

    Indianapolis!!! With the plans for the 2012 Super Bowl, we can carry the same idea for the World Cup!!