Topic: FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread - page 166. (Read 62908 times)

I don't think it's either a good or a bad thing... it just is.

The passion about football only exists in Europe and South America. Is that a good or a bad thing?, I don't think it matters, it just is.

And also I don't think you can create that by putting more money into the competition. South America is an example of poor countries with a love of football whereas in the European competitions there's a lot of money involved. So, it's independent of money.

Men's "soccer" (football) has always been a Pandora's box for the Americans, (female soccer has dominated or been present at the top for years...) not being able to dominate in men's football has always been a rarity for a country that if it does not dominate some sport, is always in the top 10, at least, and regularly in the top 3.

The point is that soccer/football is a boring sport for Americans, you know the reason, there are always few points (goals) or at least that's how the old school of managers or businessmen saw it, but that situation is going to change, they already have the experience of the first attempt with Pele, and contrary to what you say, it is not about the public or the level, when soccer/football manages to penetrate as a business, it is in the process of doing so, they are not going to stop them.

The sports that succeed in the United States do not need international paraphernalia as football in each of the countries does, especially the European one, right? what would local leagues in Europe be without, for example, UEFA. (At least in some countries without international competitions, these leagues would be impoverished)

It's all about cultural difference, not human rights that is for sure. If there were culturally fun stuff and free planes for each world cup ticket holder (they had enough money to do that) with their airlines and they allowed everyone to wear whatever they want and drink whatever they want, then I bet you that human rights wouldn't be an issue.

Everyone thinks that USA would be great, why? You can go to a game in a bikini if you want, men can wear no tops at all and write the names on their chest, and just wear shorts, everyone will be drinking beer all game long, and nobody will remember that USA not only killed tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of middle easterners but also supported coup against democratically elected presidents in Latin America.

I think the main reason for FIFA to choose three countries instead of one country is that we are going to have more teams in the tournament and this can put any host under more pressure, however, America had enough potential to host the 2026 World Cup by themselves and even now when we are going to have three countries hosting the world cup, still America will host most of the games and the other two teams are just co-hosting this tournament.

American football, Basketball and Baseball are popular spot in United State and ever watching with how stadium full when American Football match than soccer match actually with MLS League. United State is not popular with football and we can count how many their player aboard to top European teams. FIFA have own assessment why choosing United State as host for FIFA World Cup 2026 with Canada and Mexico. Actually Major League Soccer is not really excited and competitive league, their league not regelation yet and all teams participants not get huge pressure have quit well performance because keep stay on the top level competition although finish on bottom standings position. Its not really important about United State are country with football is not popular sport but how matches World Cup will play without any problem yet and how United State supporters' enthusiasm.

Well, there is no point I would make against your statement. It's true, the most money he could ever make from the sale of the Hornets (or has he already?) would be more than what he has earned as a player and merchandise contracts, ok. Which is why you say that the real way to make money is buying clubs and sell them.

Alright, Michael Jackson "died in June 2009 but according to recently audited records, posthumous business dealings have brought in an average of US$360 million (NZ$582m) a year, equating to more than $2 billion ($3.2b) since he died."
So I am arguing that the real way to make money is to make music and then die early.

Michael Jordan was the first to introduce a clause into his contract with sports sponsorships that he will get a share of the revenue of the products he is producing and that the products are in line with his name. If anything was the real trigger for him to build a fortune, it was that sponsorship contract. Then the sponsorship contract allowed him to do other stuff later down the road.

There is more to buying a club and selling it later for a lot of money. The reason is that Jordan built a brand, and it was not Micheal the Jordan who bought the Hornets, it was the entire brand empire that bought the Hornets.

If Messi buys a meaningless soccer club once he retires, what do you think will happen to that soccer club? Messi won't make money because buying a meaningless soccer club is cheap and then he can sell it for more later. He will be able to build and sell it for more later because he is freaking Messi.

So there is much more to the business idea of buying a club and selling it again. These guys have built gigantic brands in the first place and there is hardly, if any, brand that is so strongly tied and so widespread like Jordan's.

Well, with respect to Qatar, things can be very ambiguous, some say yes, it was a mistake, but why was it Qatar and not another country? Was there a lot of money there for them not to take away the world headquarters from this country? Why did FIFA become a blind eye, of course many say that human rights are biased in these countries, but there are countries that also violate human rights and continue walking without saying anything, the Qatari workers are unfortunate, It is something that should not have happened, but who are we to get into the rules, laws of that country and tell them what is right and what is wrong? I don't think we will have that right, as I have said before, if a country chooses to be the headquarters of the world, that country has its customs, it has its rules, and it is the one that hosts an event, the people and the fans, and players have to stick to the rules of that country, there is nothing to do there, if things are like that, you simply have to respect, there are many things that you like and others that you do not like, but after all, that country is sovereign, It has its own laws and FIFA knew that.

Now the new world cup with these 3 countries , it would be Excellent if they could include some good games from Europe from European countries, because I do not consider that Mexico will have few people, it is a common country and like all, of course there are some customs that are Different , and that are usually seen with the naked eye, but it is a different country, nothing else in its language and everything, but it must be taken into Consideration that Mexico is a very Beautiful country, that it has a lot to know and that it has a lot to do with the things that exist, it has a lot of history, compared to the USA, the USA is a developed country, it is quite obvious that the people there will cause more emotion, it has a lot to entertain themselves, and apart from the Disney parks and all those things, they are quite Striking, obviously you also have to do and grow to know Something,  your security is superior, in Mexico things have to be Better, with more Security.

Without a doubt the local soccer league on the US is weak, but I think FIFA by giving the world cup to the US as the main host is trying to strengthen soccer as one of the main sports there, if this can be done and the infrastructure on colleges can be used to train players, and those which are psychically gifted begin to select soccer as their sport of preference over baseball, basketball and football then we could begin to see a major improvement on the quality of the soccer played at the US.

Well.. the last line summarizes it. It's a good thing, right? In Europe and Latin America, too much importance is being given to one sport and everything else suffers as a result. But in the United States, no one sport is having a monopoly and there is enough attention being given to most of the Olympic disciplines. One disadvantage with the United States is that despite being the no.1 economy in the world, they don't have a good football league. The Major League Soccer is nowhere in comparison to European leagues such as Serie A or EPL.

Yeah, fair enough, but what I'm saying is that in South America and Europe you have fans talking about footaball 365 days a year, every year.

It's like religion. Everyone loves it and lives it.

Whereas in America is just popular when there's something big going on.

Not just me but everyone knows football is the first priority in America because the American people usually prefer to watch basketball instead of Football but we are talking about a great tournament like the World Cup in which people from all over the world will come to watch the games, there is the same situation in America and even if football is not their first priority but I'm sure their people will pay more attention to this sport in during the World Cup.

Even though we could definitely say that Jordan made a lot of money from the Nike deal without a doubt (and the sudden increase recently has been because air 1's are getting reproduction) we could still can't ignore the team purchase as well. He spent 275 million dollars to buy the team, and now he can sell it for nearly 2 billion dollars, that's a huge gain without a doubt.

I think if you look when he signed the Nike deal and how much he has made so far, this beats that, he bought the team later obviously after he retired, and then he has made more money to this day in shorter amount of time. Obviously he has to spend some money on the team time to time, but we could say that he is overall making more money on that the moment he sells the team than anything else he has ever made.

That is quite a short version of Michael Jordan's story. There is even a movie now and everyone is aware that he was a pioneer in signing merchandise contracts that grant him a share of the revenue, in his case Nike. Until 2020, he has made an estimated $1.3 billion from his Nike deal. He earned $256 million from Nike in 2022 alone. So where his money comes from is a share in marketing revenue.

The big difference is that the money he gets is cash on a yearly basis. He can only sell the Hornets once and he has to give up the feeling and status of being an owner as well. The real value is his Nike deal.

I also think that it is not that easy. Can the Chelsea owner be sure to go home with a profit? I don't know and times can change as well, business can shift from one place to a different place. Though it has been very cheap a while ago to buy clubs.

World Cups and such can be catalysts to pricing and such, but I doubt that someone buys a club in order to sell it in 4 or 8 years from now. Events like the World Cup make construction companies rich who are well connected with FIFA officials. That's how the world works over there.

Somehow debatable because there are other players in the NBA league who did achieved more than what Michael Jordan had. It's that just he was the face of the NBA and he's the idol for the most people but if we look at it closely, there are a lot more guys who have achieved more and won more rings compared to him. Also, he already sold the Hornets for $3 billion and the wonderful part after that, he's still one of the shareholders and will still get profits overtime while the franchise is still running.

Mexico is looks not safety host based on three countries become host of World Cup 2026 between Canada and United State, I don't have ideas with FIFA why choose Mexico is host of World Cup and seems two countries becoming host of World Cup 2026 seems enough. Homework for Mexico government how to change their country reputation with criminal cases become more safety country when World Cup will play, have left several years later and I sure FIFA will not change immediately host for World Cup.
Need huge promotion do by Mexico government about their country most friendly right now for all traveler and there are not any criminal cases yet based on how bad reputation from Mexico.

I would guess that Mexico ones will not get all that much visitors, not as many as USA ones to be fair. I think it's obvious that we are going to end up seeing USA to get the most visitors out of all three nations and they are going to do fine. This is of course not guaranteed, but I bet that it's not going to be a big deal and we should be seeing trouble on the long run.

This is of course a trouble when you consider that it's going to end up with a cultural resemblance as well, there are tons of western nations going to world cup, and most of the time it's either Latin American or European teams that wins it, and that means cultures are quite close enough, for clothing, drinking, acting, everything will be pretty similar.

I am not denying the fact that Mexico is not exactly a low-crime destination. But at the same time, for comparison United States is not exactly a low crime destination. Every now and then, we hear news about mass shootings and all. So I don't think that we should focus on the higher crime rate in Mexico. If countries such as South Africa can host the tournament, then what is the issue with Mexico? Anyway, the security arrangements will be very tight and I don't believe that there will be any untoward incidents during this tournament.

A very small number of matches will be played in Mexico, while 80% of the matches will be played in the Americas, with Mexico as the only World Cup host country. Crime happens in all countries and police and military are there to fight crime so when a country hosts a World Cup that country will host the World Cup with maximum security and major tournaments like the World Cup are less likely to have untoward incidents as law enforcement is very less at that time. A higher amount is seen. If the world cup tournament can be finished well in Africa then why not in Mexico because Mexico is a much safer country compared to Africa. I hope that the 10% matches that will be held in Mexico can be completed well and with more security by the Mexican administration.

Basically every South American country is at the same level of interest.

There's only one sport in those countries, football.

Nothing else comes even close.

In the US things are very different, and they have many different sports, and football is just one more of those.

Very different attitudes towards the sport.

That's true! With Messi negotiating to play in the United States and the next World Cup to be hosted there, I have no doubt, this will draw the attention of the whole world and will be a "game changer" for football in the US.
I believe, the United States is not a hegemony in football because it is not American culture to play football like in Brazil or other American countries. They have money and structure and that's a fact, if the Americans start looking at football in a different way, if they train and improve their techniques, I have no doubt in the next world cups they will be able to be champions, or at least to be among the top 3 of the world cup.