It's actually not that bad, the elevated seats for front row viewers offers a better view of what's happening.

The infrastructure here for hosting such huge events is second to none.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the last World Cup hosted in England almost 50 years ago? That being the case, it's a little unfair to bring up attendance figures from tournaments that happened 30 years later.

As for the weather, there were times durung this World Cup where it was hotter here than where the match was being played, and we're 4 hours ahead.

It was warmer in England when I landed back than it was in Rio when I left. And definitely warmer than it was in Sao Paulo.

1994 was 20 years ago, and the US attendance figures far and away exceed any, since, before or after. and okay if you want to hamster dance about a few days of warm weather that happen randomly and rarely, go nuts with that.

But the real question for the us is does a country where the vast majority of it's sports fans openly mock the sport deserve to host the World Cup?

29 million Americans tuned in to watch the WC final. Britain could only come up with 20 million viewers.

Do you really need anyone to point out why this is a faulty comparison?

Go ahead. Explain to me how you can make more money off 20 million than 29.

America isn't great because we are clever, we're great, for the time being, because we have a massively large middle class.

Those numbers would probably be the same wherever the world cup was held (not withstanding time zone difference) so money is pretty irrelevant.

Nah it's not that bad, just awful in comparison to the experience you have in soccer specific stadiums.

what? going back 20 vs 29 million viewers and ad dollars, how is money irrelevant? to my argument? ... in football? and to FIFA? you think sepp wants to crack the US market, because he wants Americans to like football?

anywho, United States vs. China 1999 Women's World Cup final: 17.975 million viewers on ABC (Saturday, July 10) ... the women's world cup final

but this is what i love about the UK... Some of Britain’s biggest TV advertisers will be spending heavily on World Cup final ad slots this Sunday. And with the cost of a 30-second spot estimated at up to £300,000 the stakes are high. Unfortunately most brands are aiming their ads squarely at male viewers even though research indicates that 38 per cent of UK women will be watching the footie too.

I don't really care about lining Fifa's coffers, even if that is their primary motivation. RIght now, a World Cup in England would be better than a World Cup in the US.

So Real bought James Rodriguez. Boo.

Also, are there any other quality young CBs (under 27) besides Varane and Hummels?

a shit ton, Boetang of Munich, Dejan Lovren of Southampton, Alderweireld of Atletico, maybe Nastacic of man city