For some reason I thought the format was going to be 16 groups of 3, with the top two from each advancing. Must've just been a rumor. I like 12x4 better because everyone gets more games, but the third place seeding is sure to be crazy. We won't know exactly who's all in the knockout round until the last group match has been played.
3 west coast games for the US is not ideal for most of us, but those matches will be incredibly expensive anyway. I can use that money on two NFL games instead with room to spare.
On the (very) off chance that the Bears complete their currently pending new stadium in time, I wonder if Chicago could be worked into the schedule. It's disappointing that the country's third largest city, the hub of the nation's middle third, won't be hosting.
I'm guessing Dallas and Atlanta will be better options than KC in terms of flight and hotel availability and expense, as well as the quality of the teams playing.
1. The 3-team groups were under serious consideration, but the 2022 World Cup's dramatic group stages allegedly swayed FIFA's hearts. I think the actual reason is that 3-team groups mean that subtle match-fixing can (and would) happen, similar to the infamous
Disgrace of Gijón in 1982, where West Germany and Austria played to the exact result needed for both teams to advance at the expense of another group member. As a result, all future FIFA tournaments have the final matchday in a group played simultaneously to prevent this kind of thing from happening again.
2. Seattle has historically been neglected because of our distance from European-based players, our stadium turf, and general apathy from USSF to grow the game in an already "good" market. It's great that FIFA remembered that we create some great atmospheres; everyone else in the country can enjoy a nice late-night kickoff.
3. Chicago wasn't willing to pay ball with the financials that FIFA wanted, so having a completed new stadium would not change the decision. It's pretty much final now.