No WC Soccer at the Big House
Per US Soccer, Ann Arbor is not one of the 18 final host cities for US bid for the 2018/2022 World Cup.
It was probably a long shot to begin with, but it would have been pretty sweet.
http://www.gousabid.com/blog/entry/18-cities-included-in-the-us-bid-for…
January 12th, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^
Nowhere in the Big Ten footprint, huh?
Screw you guys and your fancy futbol.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:11 PM ^
They included Indianapolis (but not Chicago?!?!?!)
January 12th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
don't really want the Big House used for anything but Michigan Football and graduation. I understand back when we had a grass field but with the non-killable FieldTurf, I'm a little surprised its taken this long for them to finally agree to do ANYTHING non-football related (of course referencing next winters Michigan-MSU hockey game) and I'm surprised they haven't tried a concert the way MSU is or some other large sporting event like World Cup.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
Neither Detroit nor Ann Arbor? Fuckers. *pouts* now I almost hope we don't get it and have to put up another bid later, when there's a chance people will think of the state of Michigan as "developing" instead of "third world."
January 12th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
that Chicago didn't make the cut. The atmosphere for Gold Cup games and qualifiers there was really good (despite the rooting interest of the large Mexican fan base, they know how to create excitement at a soccer match). Plus Soldier Field has a lot of experience hosting soccer games.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:21 PM ^
Most ridiculous thing is that five East Coast cities within a half-day's drive of each other all get a game, but the Midwest can't get a sniff. No St. Louis, no Chicago, no Detroit, no Cleveland. Someone needs a swift kick in the pills from an angry Midwesterner.
January 12th, 2010 at 5:33 PM ^
Foreign fans coming over to watch the world cup would probably appreciate close venues so they could see multiple games/teams in different cities without having to fly.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^
(no cool FACEPALM graphic because I'm lazy) but this is NOT OT. This is about Michigan Stadium.
UGH GOOD GRIEF!
January 12th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
Who's pumped for the drive to that hotbed of soccer fandom, Kansas City?!
January 12th, 2010 at 4:33 PM ^
It's not like an attendance record would be set by having it there.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:34 PM ^
Indianapolis remains firmly rooted in the Midwest. You guys can come on down to Lucas Oil Stadium to watch "football."
January 12th, 2010 at 4:44 PM ^
But then I'd have to visit my Aunt who lives in Speedway.
January 13th, 2010 at 5:44 PM ^
And she always makes meatloaf...
January 12th, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^
Option 1 - Don't tell her you're coming.
Option 2 - The day you're supposed to visit, make the excuse that your car was blocked by a pack of wild (Brazilians, Italians, British - insert applicable crazy soccer fans here whose team is playing in Indy).
EDIT: meant as reply to above.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^
Soiling the sacred grounds of the Big House with a Pinko Commie sport?? Never!
January 12th, 2010 at 5:57 PM ^
Going to all that work (widening/elevating the field, putting in grass) for like three games would have been a questionable move from a cost-benefit standpoint.
January 13th, 2010 at 12:14 AM ^
But no Chicago. That is a lame plan. Baltimore and DC are way to close to be considered different areas for a World Cup hosting in America. No Chicago, the 3rd largest metro area in the country is ridiculous. Especially considering their history with soccer and the caliber of their stadium. I'm disappointed by the plan.
January 13th, 2010 at 5:15 PM ^
What an offensively ridiculous list. This is like hosting it in the UK and ignoring the north of England.