Today the USA Bid Committee announced the thirty-two venues (in twenty-seven metro areas) still in contention to host World Cup matches in either 2018 or 2022 should the country be selected.

There are a couple of surprises on the list, Jacksonville Municipal Stadium and Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium chief among them, but the inclusion of the extremely narrow Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor may also raise some eyebrows. Michigan Stadium, or "The Big House" to fans of the University of Michigan, is the largest stadium (not counting auto facilities) in the United States so maybe it's inclusion isn't such a mystery, but some major modifications will have to be done in order for the stadium to house the seventy yard wide pitch required to host the FIFA World Cup, the same goes for Jacksonville though there is a long shot of that happening anyway. RFK Stadium does have history as a soccer venue but it's hard to get passed it's crumbling, cookie-cutter facade and small capacity, especially considering that the 90,000-capacity FedExField in nearby Landover, Maryland -- another venue that falls into the above category -- is also bidding.

Washington, DC is one of five "markets" (for some reason terming cities "markets" really irks me) that have two stadiums in the running, the other two are Dallas, Texas (The 89,000-capacity Cotton Bowl -- a 1994 host venue -- and Arlington's 100,000-seat Cowboys Stadium), Los Angeles, Detroit, Michigan who in addition to the aforementioned Michigan Stadium have also put forth Ford Field, located in the heart of Detroit, and Seattle. No city is going to get two host venues, not in a country with as many options as the United States so there's a good chance we can rule out Ford Field, though there's still a glimmer of hope for the Cotton Bowl as the Cowboys Stadium seems to have some issues when it comes to hosting soccer matches. RFK Stadium will very likely be demolished by 2018 anyway, stopping any potential debate regarding a possible capital venue.

An interesting debate is about which Southern venue will host matches if only one is chosen. Atlanta is the largest city in the South (though Charlotte proper is actually larger than Atlanta proper) and would seemingly get the nod without much debate, but it's stadium, the Georgia Dome, is in the same boat with Ann Arbor, Jacksonville, and Landover in it's inability to fit a proper pitch unlike it's rivals Charlotte and Nashville. Charlotte has the largest stadium of the three at just shy of 74,000 and will have rail links in place by the time a potential World Cup rolls around, and Nashville is probably in the most central location of the three. However, with the American population demographics continuing a Southern shift there is no reason why two of the three couldn't host matches.

Florida has four venues in the mix: Jacksonville is joined by Miami (Land Shark Stadium), Orlando (the Florida Citrus Bowl) and Tampa (Raymond James Stadium). While geographically in the South, Florida's sheer size and status as a tourism hub means it merits separate status when determining host venues. Miami may well be a shoe in, it was kept out of the mix in 1994 because baseball's Florida Marlins were unable to vacate then Joe Robbie Stadium for the required time, but the Marlins are moving to a new stadium within the next few years and will no longer present a problem. Rumors continue to circle around the potential fate of the NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars, residents of the city-owned Jacksonvile Municipal Stadium. Jacksonville, oddly, is somewhat of a Rugby League hotbed and if the Jaguars up sticks to Los Angeles it could mean that the Axemen get a sweetheart deal on the stadium which may merit a widening of the pitch, but unless this long shot happens Jacksonville is likely to lose out to Miami or Tampa. While Orlando hosted matches in 1994 the Citrus Bowl is nowhere near up to standard and the city has bigger worries than renovating a stadium without a big tenant.

In the northeast New York (East Rutherford, New Jersey) is essentially a shoe-in and one would think the same of Foxborough, Mass. (near Boston). Philadelphia and Baltimore may end up being left out in the cold given how close they are to New York and Washington.

The only automatic choice in the "heartland" is Chicago's Soldier Field. Chicago is a soccer hotbed and the second city and couldn't possibly be left out. St. Louis (with the Edward Jones Dome), Kansas City (Arrowhead) and Indianapolis (Lucas Oil Stadium) are also bidding. Arrowhead is rather famous for it's noise but doesn't present much else that would stand out to the electors and the two domed stadiums have retractable seats which allow them to fit soccer fields but reduce capacity. All three of these places are likely to lose out to a second Texas venue in Houston's Reliant Stadium.

Out west you have several strong candidates including two famous venues in Greater Los Angeles: The Memorial Coliseum and the Rose Bowl. Both stadiums are starting to show their age though both may be set for a renovation in the near future, if it gets renovated the Rose Bowl will almost certainly host the final. Seattle is looking to capitalize on the rousing success of the Sounders and has put forth Qwest Field which doesn't face much competition in that area unless you're willing to include Denver's Invesco Field. Glendale is an interesting one as it has the fine University of Phoenix Stadium, it looks likely that it would host ahead of Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, Qualcomm Stadium and Stanford Stadium. Husky Stadium has no chance.

My final bid would be: Foxborough, East Rutherford, Washington, Nashville, Charlotte, Miami, Chicago, Arlington, Houston, Glendale, Seattle, and Pasadena.

They might be giants

It's not unusual for Costa Rica to ascend to the top of the CONCACAF World Cup qualifying final group as they've done in 2009. Los Ticos won the group for Korea/Japan 2002 and a similar forerunner for Italia '90 (though Mexico were banned from competing that year). On their day Costa Rica is one of CONCACAF's three giants, but on their off days they appear a team that would have a hard time scoring against Montserrat. This week the Ticos proved that once again when they were humiliated 4-0 in San Pedro Sula. Now Honduras isn't a bad team, not at all, with David Suazo set to return there's a legitimate possibility that Honduras could win the group. But Costa Rica can't lose this way if they're to be included in the same conversation as Mexico and the United States. This is the only team to go to the Azteca against Mexico and win. Yes, Mexico hosted two World Cups, but their one loss came in 1970 in Toluca (in '86 they were eliminated on penalties in Monterrey, officially a draw).

I'll openly admit that I defend Costa Rica in debates with Mexicans and other Americans who pass them off as a joke, but the best way for Costa Rica to stop these remarks is to find some stability.

Leasing out soccer-specific stadiums

A big reason behind the push for soccer-specific stadiums in MLS and the USL is the idea that they can help teams become solvent, something they have a problem doing when they lease stadiums from NFL teams. Another reason was that fans were sick of seeing American football lines on the field, and you have to admit, it's very annoying. But those lines could be coming to soccer-specific stadiums as four (well, five) new American football leagues are set to kick-off in the very near future. The United Football League has announced that it's Las Vegas franchise, the Locomotives, will play a "home" game at the Home Depot Center in November. This is after the season ends for the three soccer teams that call the HDC home, and while that particular venue has no problem creating revenue, it's good to see any money coming into the game.

While the UFL is a fall-winter league, the opposite of MLS and the USL, the other three leagues (the AAFL, the UNGL, and the USFL) are planning to play a spring-summer calender which would put them in line with the soccer season, potentially creating turf problems if the stadiums are leased out. Only one of them, the UNGL has a proposed Dallas team, has plans to put a team in an area with a soccer-specific stadium. I guess the MLS teams could put down piss-yellow lines for them.

The fifth league is a bit, well, different. That'd be the Lingerie Football League, and call me "cosmopolitan" for saying it, but this has "novelty" written all over it. This is relevant to the blog post because one team, the Denver Dream, will be playing at Dick's Sporting Goods Park [insert your favorite sexual joke here]. Money is money, I guess.

I know there are arguments that the LFL is indeed a "serious sporting endeavor", but if women really want to American football, they already have a league. I mean, sure, the players aren't in bras, but it's an actual sporting competition. It just strikes me as odd, and THIS strikes me as creepy.

It seems that the LFL will have a Charlotte team in 2010, well, I guess the Grady Cole Center needs a tenant. You can rest assured the local USL team isn't going to ground-share with them.

Donovan has H1N1

Grant Wahl broke the story on SI, although the AP gave credit the LA times for doing so. It seems have contracted it before he arrived in Mexico City and felt tired during the game. That certainly explains why he wasn't up to his usual standard. It has to be said that he did manage to get an assist on Charlie Davies goal though. Landon is the best player this country has ever produced, regardless of his critics, and I wish him well.

According to Soccer By Ives, fifty-eight of the seventy venues contacted by the United States Soccer Federation have expressed interest in hosting World Cup matches. The twelve venues that expressed no interest are all NCAA (American) football venues.

Of the remaining stadiums there are many that I have questions about, specifically their ability to fit an international sized pitch. I know that the field can be raised at the expense of some sections of seating but I don't really think FIFA or the USSF wants to do that this time.

Well, it is good to see interest from so many cities anyway.

Today is Earth Day and being a self-described hippie I felt like I should write something on the subject. Stadiums tend to be large sources of pollution, mostly due to their immense size and energy consumption. But recently some stadium designers have decided to buck that trend and use stadiums to create energy rather than consume energy. So, here are the stadiums I picked:

The Princes Park; Dartford, England (Dartford Football Club - Isthmian League Division One North)

This tiny stadium in Kent has received big reviews from architects and designers. The 4,000-capacity stadium is home to Dartford FC, who had been a nomad club of sorts between 1992 and the stadium's completion in 2006. Groundtastic magazine named the stadium it's choice for "Best new non-league ground, 2006" and English fashion designer and architect Wayne Hemingway "the absolute number one new stadium in the country" in early 2007.

In addition to the grass roof and solar panels the stadium goes the extra mile and has a small lake used to collect rainwater for recycling purposes.

The Royal Institute of Charted Surveyors has acknowledged the stadium for being "green".

St. Jakob-Park; Basel, Switzerland (Footballclub Basel - Swiss Super League)

Arguably the finest stadium in all of Switzerland, St. Jakob-Park, home to Swiss giants FC Basel, will host the opening match, two quarter-finals, and one semi-final at this summer's European Championships. The ultra-modern stadium features a large solar installation on the roof of the main stand that supplies a large portion of the stadium's required energy.

World Games Stadium; Kaohsiung, Republic of China (No fixed tenant)

I have previously blogged about this stadium in depth, so I'm going to be lazy and relink that post.

I apologize for my lack of posts over the last week, but if you read my personal blog you'll see a long explanation as to why. I've had kidney stones and been in pain.

Oh well, happy Earth Day everyone and best wishes to all of you.