Top Stories

Door ‘wide open’ for USA, Mexico, Canada joint World Cup bid


FIFA president Gianni Infantino is looking to make changes to the World Cup format beginning in 2016 and, according to CONCACAF’s president, those changes could first be implemented in a tournament spread across North America.

CONCACAF president Victor Montagliani says that “the door is wide open” for a joint 2026 World Cup bid from the U.S., Mexico and Canada. The 2026 tournament is being targeted by Infantino as one that could see the tournament’s field expanded to 48 teams.

Montagliani, who is also president of┬áthe Canadian Soccer Association, believes administration across the three countries would be more than open to combining to host the game’s biggest tournament.

“The opportunity for a joint bid, I think that door is wide open,” Montagliani said on Wednesday at the Dubai International Sports Conference. “It is pretty obvious the President-Elect [Donald Trump] is a supporter of sport, a supporter of the Olympic movement and builds golf courses.

“At face value I don’t see it being a challenge and I think any administration, whether it be in the west or in my case Canada, or in Mexico, would be supportive of an event like the World Cup. And no pun intended, I would think the World Cup would trump any political issues.”

The World Cup has not been hosted by more than one country since the 2002 edition of the tournament, which featured Japan and South Korea as joint hosts.


  1. Here is how you do a North American World Cup. Just have the beginning rounds at the farthest locations, then have each successive round at stadiums closer and closer to the center. World Cup Final to be held in St. Louis.

    • If FIFA does a USA-MEX-CAN World Cup, the final will be in Los Angeles. The $2 Billion new Rams stadium will be 3-4 years old and LA is the perfect bridge between the US and Mexico.

  2. Total rip-off for concacaf. Sure just lump in all 3 possible host nations on the continent, and get it over with. Then, since the cat is out of the bag for bribery in 3rd world nations, Euro-centric fifa can get back to hosting the WC where “football belongs” for the next 40 years.

  3. Would love to hear all the bitching and moaning from European players and European coaches who consider Champions League/Europa League travel to be a bother or tiresome.

  4. LOL – no.

    no politics please but “It is pretty obvious the President-Elect [Donald Trump] is a supporter of sport, a supporter of the Olympic movement and builds golf courses” might be the dumbest thing I have ever seen on this website.

  5. I’m not a fan of this, but it could still be pulled off. Travel wouldn’t be as bad as some think. Certain groups would stay local to certain regions and travel more miles once they progress deep in the knockout stages. If FIFA really includes 48 teams, everything will need to be spread out. This is the best region (that’s qualified to host the 2026 edition) to pull that off with excellence…

    • I think the 48 teams makes the travel worse, not better.

      More teams, not going to make the WCup a month and a half to compensate, so more games in less time means that whoever plays in DC for group stage then has to play final in the RoseBowl, doesn’t have enough time to recover from time zone change.

      • If FIFA is willing to expand the field, they’ll likely expand the tournament by a week as well, dependent upon format. No one will convince me that folks will not tune in to the cup because of too many teams. Even in Korea/Japan, the teams were split up until the knockouts. In this case, some teams would remain in Canada, some in US, and others in Mexico, and it would remain thatway until probably the semis, quarters at eearliest. At least that’s how I’d do it…

  6. USA does not need Canada or Mexico to do a joint bid. We can have it here without any issues. Joint bids tend to be for countries that need extra accommodations. Plus, the travel would be a nightmare. We have the infrastructure, the fans, hold the record for most attended World Cup. What’s wrong with it just being in the U.S.?

    • Because the US had it too recently. Frankly, I would like to see Australia get it. If it’s going to be here, I would like to Canada, then US, then Mexico get it (they already hosted twice).

      As a side note, I think expanding to 48 is ABSOLUTELY ridiculous. if you want more teams, how about taking all the half bids and couple extra spaces and have an open playing in for 4-6 at large bids form hopefuls from all confederations.

      • It will have been 30 years for the US, the place that is the best place to host…and it isn’t even close.

        The WCup has been around going on 90 years now, 4 countries have hosted twice. US should be the 5th. Not many can do it. Maybe just do Canada and US. Canada isn’t going to get it alone most likely.

      • I think FIFA could also justify a second World Cup here by looking at it in terms of growing the game. The first World Cup did a lot to get the game on the radar of mainstream America. A second World Cup could finish the job and finally turn the US into a full fledged soccer market. That has major appeal to FIFA.

    • I agree, But then there is little need to expand to 48 teams. However FIFA (still mainly controlled by UEFA) see the writing on the wall and with the advancement of soccer around the world and the ability for UEFA to hold onto around 40 percent of the WC final slots in jeopardy, there proposal is to KEEP and even expand their number of teams, but then add a lot more teams. Europe gets even more team admitted and then adds some third tier teams, who have no business there as a diversion.

      And lets forget about co-hosting for the US. WHY? Why do we NEED to co host, we could put on a WC with 72 TEAMS and it would go off without a hitch, because we have more stadiums and more infrastructure than Europe put together. NO, FIFA wants to sell this 48 team Fiasco CUP and want to show it can be done via co-hosting with the US included to make sure it doesn’t fail and then tout it as an example..

      Why do we need Mexico, Why do we need Canada? Mexico has had 2 WC’s already, they do not deserve a third so soon. Canada should bid on its own as its big enough (40Million) already and had a successful WWC.

      I think the US should just recuse itself from this WC and NOT be a tool for the fools at FIFA

  7. That would be cool. But three questions

    One, the travel. Wow.

    Two, so all three nat teams get in then? Hardly seems fair to the rest of CONCACAF or do they assume that the US and Mexico would have anyway and just give the one extra spot for the Canadian gift?

    Three, does Mexico play at home even once or are all the games in their summer home, the US?

    • I’m sure Canada would like to get in for a change. What’s it been, 30 years? Basically since we rose back up.

      FIFA has approved of some multinational siting like this, and they will probably have pressure to make an “obvious” choice next time to prove they play by the rules.

      I agree the travel is horrific, but they rubber stamped Brazil and Russia with long trips. If they were being thoughtful it should be a consideration but I figure they’ll be more concerned with anticorruption optics than with whether a schedule results in practically wearying travel.

      One way of limiting it would be that if they do travel from match to match, that a group stays in a country. But as big as the three are, that could still be thousands of miles. One game in BC and one game in Toronto. Hoo, boy.

    • Belgium and Holland is one thing, the whole northern chunk of North America is something else. That’s almost continental hosting.

    • Three free bids would be a bit much for a 32-team World Cup, but if there’s 48 teams in the thing, who cares if you let three teams in for free?


Leave a Comment