The same can be said of the Confederations Cup, which is what this tournament is roughly analogous to right now. The Club World Cup, to be like the real World Cup, needs to have several elite teams in the final tournament, the way the real World Cup does.
The timetable you mention isn't realistic as it would only work if all four groups would literally play their matches on the same day, something Fifa wouldn't want as they prefer the staggered approach of letting the groups play one after the other like in a WC in order to have maximum exposure. In any case the top players already literally have to play every three days, the calendar is so packed throughout the year that additional tournaments simply couldn't fit in anymore. The reality is that top club teams only get through the season by employing squad rotation on a regular basis. Furthermore one could argue that the massive calendar is one of the reasons why so many top players underperformed at the last couple of WCs
Actually, the format I prefer would be something like the following. It would add perhaps a couple of matches for some of these clubs, but not so many they wouldn't be able to handle. New Club World Cup Format The new Club World Cup format would see 12 clubs divided into 4 groups, each group hosted in different regions and confederations as follows, with all the finalists from the club championships in the main confederations and the top 3 in UEFA represented, with the OFC only represented by their champions. Group A: (Host to rotate between Concacaf and Conmebol club champions) 1- Host (Concacaf or Conmebol club champions) 2- (Concacaf or Conmebol club champions) 3- UEFA 3rd place team Group B: (Host to rotate between AFC and OFC club champions every third time - i.e., twice AFC, then OFC, then twice AFC) 1- Host (AFC or OFC club champions) 2- (AFC or OFC club champions) 3- Conmebol runner up Group C: (UEFA CL Winner as Host) 1- Host (UEFA CL Winner) 2- Concacaf runner up team 3- CAF runner up team Group D: (CAF club champions as Host) 1- CAF club champions 2- UEFA runner up 3- AFC runner up team The winners of each group would advance to the semifinal. The semifinal and final matches would all be played in a previously designated host country, with that host country rotating between the confederations.
That would surely be better than the current format. Seems the challenge is making the largest tournament possible that can fit within the soccer calendar.
It's ridiculous for eliminated UEFA teams to get a 2nd shot at the World Title, which is what you guys are advocating. Once a team is zapped, it should be done and finished. That's what's great about this format now, it's cutthroat.
I don't think it would be ridiculous, no more than its ridiculous that you might see World Cup champion that has failed in say the Euro championships. The format I have suggested, in any case, applies to all confederations. UEFA would have its top 3, Conmebol, CAF and AFC their top 2, while OFC only its champion. But even if you wanted to confine the tournament to champions, I would then prefer a league format as opposed to what we have now. In that case, I would put all 5 confederation champions in one group and have them play one another to determine the Club World Cup champions.
How the World Cup, unlike the dreaded Confederations Cup, has more than just the continental champions qualifying has just been mentioned. In the club realm, multiple teams from each domestic league (well, the good leagues anyway) qualify for continental competition. So multiple teams from each continent should also qualify for global competition.
Why SHOULD they also qualify? Like IT'S CALLED FOOTBALL says, every one in the world can play this, they just need to win something. Why anyone would want to send a runner up or semi finalists to a Club World Championship is beyond me really. It's just a ploy to add more European teams and even when you say play at end of European season you also forget when the finals for Africa and Asia currently take place. Comparing Club World Cup to a World Cup for national teams is also wrong, CWC is played every year and rightly so, it can't be played every four years and then saying World Cup has none champions, well that's why its played every four years. CWC format is fine, why everyone wants to make it bigger is beyond me. We have regional champions and a host - that's fine. If you want more teams, then I suggest you write to FIFA to create the runners up cup, which everyone would laugh at and mock, all your trying to do is put them in to the real thing, you also have more European teams than African/Asian together, why? If having a tournament, then at least have the same number of clubs from confederations represented!!
And I'll simply add: the current format is the best one possible, taking into account the various interests that FIFA has to take into account. The knockout format avoids fixture congestion for the European and South American champions; at the same time, it allows the champions of the other confederations a shot at the title. Finally, as long as the Champions League/Libertadores competitions around the world are annual, it only makes sense that the world championship would be as well.
The problem with the current format is that no one takes that seriously or is all that interested in it. I think a lot better can be done to promote a tournament that will crown some club as world champions.
Do you think European teams who don't win their domestic leagues should be taken out of the Champions League and put in a "runners up cup?" Do you also want every league to have equal representation in the Champions League? Or every confederation to have equal representation at the World Cup? Because that's where your logic leads to.
Yes, I Would prefer the Champions League to only feature champions and that's for every confederation. It was like this once and failures went into to UFEA Cup - a decent competition in its own right. Again, the champions leagues are yearly, the World cup is every four years and we of course know the obvious gap between Europe and Africa/Asia/ Concacaf, and the fact that these 3 nations generally only send the same nations - so we are generally at a fine consensus here - only opening up playoffs would be the next big route.
A problem with that is that UEFA would need an extra neutral site game or two leg series to determine the third place club. In 2012-2013 the Semifinal losers were Real Madrid and Barcelona and the La Liga season ended after the Champions League Final.
If that was the only problem, I am sure a solution (even if somewhat arbitrary) could be found without having to force an extra game. For instance, UEFA could decide that its 3rd team will be chosen in the following order of preference: (1) the semi-finalist who lost to the eventual champion merely on penalties; (2) any semi-finalist who lost the semi-final match merely on penalties (e.g., Real Madrid in 2012); (3) the team that lost the semifinal to the eventual champion, if that loss was after extra-time; (4) any semi-finalist who lost the semi-final match after extra-time; (5) the semifinalist which lost with the lowest aggregate goal difference with such goal difference added or subtracted as the case may be, by the goal difference between the eventual champion and the runner up team depending on whether the semi-finalist lost to the eventual champion or runner up team. (6) flip of the coin.
Accepting runners-up at the continental level doesn't mean you have to accept it at the world level. You already have situations where a #10 seed can win a league title, and a #4 finishing team can win the CL. We're used to it, so it's ok now at the national and continental level. But adding runners-up to the world level would be overkill. Let's leave it at 2 out of 3 phases.
Bayern Munich brought their loving cup to help compliment the scenery in Morocco. One year I'd like to see all of the continental champions bring their trophies and line them up for a group photo. Always wanted to see UEFA's Big Ears next to the Copa Libertadores. I know UEFA does a 'trophy tour' of its prized jewel but I've never seen it photographed next to the Copa when the tour has been in South America.
i think the format is fine, there just needs to be more money put into the prize pot (for player/managerial incentive). Also, if the teams got a fancy patch for their next seasons jerseys i feel like it would be taken more seriously, especially as time goes on and it becomes more of a tradition. Honestly this tournament is genius because as the global sport continues to grow, the competition will as well. Its a very forward looking tournament like the Confederations cup. It was a joke when it started but as world teams developed and it was engrained into the football world it became very relevant. I also think the hosting scheme is a stroke of genius, I just hope that they can spread it more to Europe and the America's (although i understand FIFA's fears of having another Eurocentric tournament), but ofcourse that can only happen if those nations place a bid to host it, and according to wikipedia only China, India, and Indonesia want the next one. But with the already crammed football schedule (especially in Brazil) an expanded format would only lessen the competition as teams would put out weaker squads to rest players. All this tournament needs is time...and a bit more press, to gain the prestige it deserves
Agree with many posters who like the tournament as it currently is....any expansion would be overkill. What's wrong with a nice short tournament that wants you wanting more but you have to wait, you have to follow the regional tournaments to see who will get there. Any expansion would make it too long and lose appeal in future editions. I like the host aspect aswell, it's good for nations to test themselves before looking further ahead, nations like India, China, even Qatar need a tournament like this before going World Cup. I'm sure USA will get their shot at it coming upto 2022 aswell!! As for the hosts, I sometimes here that people aren't happy with the hosts nation not really being good enough on the field, well, you got to put your country forward to host! Would be interesting to see how it would fair in a cold, wet country in December, an Iceland, Norway, Finland would all be suitable hosts from Europe.
^^^ Corinthians wore their 2012 FIFA World Champions patch for the final time last weekend, a dreary 1x0 loss to Náutico in their final match of 2013. The reigning world champions finished a disappointing 10th in the Brasileirão and failed to qualify for the 2014 Libertadores. Btw, the FIFA Club World Champions patch was first awarded to AC Milan in 2007.
terribly sorry, i guess I never saw the patch before. its pretty cool, i have no complaints with it Maybe its the Confederations Cup that needs the patch "the champion of champions"
So all those times Brazilian club fans traveled in droves to fill up stadiums on the other side of the world, they weren't taking it seriously?
The real issue is not the fans of a particular club who might get a title that sounds good or their interest seeing their club against a top European club. The issue is more about how many of these world champions are remembered and regarded as such by everyone else when its all said and done?
India to bid for 2015 and 2016 FIFA Club World Cup (now confirmed) http://news.yahoo.com/india-bid-2015-2016-fifa-133144129.html Personally I think China should get it first to capitalize on Guangzhou's efforts this year. It will motivate the rest of the CSL to raise their game. India can then have it in 2017 and 2018. As for the format discussion, the current one is just fine. At least until other confederations raise their game.