new CONCACAF qualifying format like or dislike?

Discussion in 'CONCACAF' started by JYDA, Sep 1, 2010.

?

Do you like the new format?

  1. Yes, this is good for CONCACAF as a whole

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. No, the status quo was fine

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. No, but expanding the final phase to 8 teams would have been better

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. No, 2 groups of 6 in the final phase would have been better

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Other

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Wile Coyote

    Wile Coyote Red Card

    Sep 21, 2000
    Punta del Este, Uru.
    Club:
    Club Nacional de Football
    wow warner and beached whale chuck unpresentable blazer will do any thing to get more resort destination teams into a world cup to further besmerch the embarrasment concaCRAP already is.......


    wow no US vs Mexico the only fixture worth watching and attending...

    well guess i dont have to pay attention this concacrap qualifiying mex annd us are all but in and the next 2 are just a pick from a hat........
     
  2. midknight

    midknight New Member

    Sep 5, 2005
    Paris
    wow...when the heck did all these newbies join Bigsoccer?

    You guys are acting like this is the first time MexUsa has had to play the likes of Montserrat and Barbados. Where have you been for the last three quali cycles?

    As for the guy who suggested the combined teams, I counter that the USA is way too powerful as it stands and should be broken down into 50 odd statewide teams :rolleyes:
     
  3. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Yeah CONCACAF has it pretty good. You could be a Japanese supporter and have to travel to places like Turkmenistan and Myanmar if you wanna follow your team everywhere
     
  4. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    For anyone who was worried about this format being more cut-throat: if CONCACAF succeeds in petitioning FIFA for four spots at the next World Cup, at least teams in the final round will now have a 50% chance of qualifying. Now then, to make sure that an unbalanced USA-MEX-Honduras or Costa Rica Group of Death doesn't occur...
     
  5. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I don't think petitioning for 4 spots is a big deal. Honestly, if we truly deserve 4 spots then our 3.5 is good enough, because if we deserve it it means that our 4th team won the intercontinental playoff and should rightfully be in the world cup. If our 4th team loses, then hey, we don't deserve that 4th spot.
     
  6. JYDA

    JYDA Member

    Sep 10, 2003
    With respect to the 4th spot, I'm not sure we deserve it. I'd settle for our 4th place finisher getting to face Asia's 5th or the Oceania champ instead of having to go to South America. I think we'd win that most every time.
     
  7. leeka

    leeka Member

    Feb 7, 2009
    Bayamón PR
    Club:
    Puerto Rico Islanders
    Nat'l Team:
    Puerto Rico
    Hey! Stay in your CONMEBOL business, and let the CONCACAF do their. This is a good way to increase the level in the region for the weakest team like mine. And I dont know why Asia have 1 more spot than CONCACAF. Based on the formula for the FIFA ranking, CONCACAF have better regional strength than AFC, so give this spot to us. This format going to be a mess on the first years, but let the region grow.
     
  8. JYDA

    JYDA Member

    Sep 10, 2003
  9. leeka

    leeka Member

    Feb 7, 2009
    Bayamón PR
    Club:
    Puerto Rico Islanders
    Nat'l Team:
    Puerto Rico
    And what if CONCACAF make that the final groups winners play for the 1st and 2nd position? The US-Mexican rivalry can still alive and the Caribbean teams can grow and play much games than the old format. If we receive the 4th spot then the group runner-ups can play for the 3rd an 4th position, don't you think ;)
     
  10. Chicago76

    Chicago76 Member+

    Jun 9, 2002
    There is a much better solution that would:
    1-Preserve the biggest matchups of qualifying.
    2-Reduce the probability of 11-0 thrashings.
    3-Allow the smaller islands to play more than a single home-away against competition that would be more favorable.
    4-Subsidize travel expenses for the smaller teams.


    Step 1 (Summer 2011): Run GC and World Cup minnow qualies concurrently. All non-GC qualified teams (23) would start WC qualifications. 5 groups of 4, and 1 of 3. The top 2 from each group move into the second round. (4-6 matches for minnows)

    Step 2 (Fall 2011-Spring 2012): At the conclusion of the GC, the 12 GC teams would then be added to the 12 surviving minnows for 24 teams. 6 groups of 4. #1 and #2 teams from the minnow groups would remain together, so there would be no need for them to play again. Top 2 from all 6 groups to advance. 6 matches for everyone, as 8-10 through this stage for minnows.

    Step 4 (Summer 2012): The 6 groups consolidate into 3x4. Teams #1 and #2 from group A would consolidate with teams #1 and #2 from group B for example. Like the minnow example in prior step, there would be no need to for teams from the same group to play again--results to carry over, so 4 more matches in this stage for everyone. 10 matches for everone to date, as 12-14 for the minnows through this stage, although non-GC teams are unlikely to survive through this step.

    Final Step (Summer 2012-Early Spring 2013): hex, with results from prior groups carrying over for Step 4 group winners and runner-ups. 8 more games for everyone.

    18 matches total for the likely qualifiers--same as the current proposal, but with higher opponent quality. Smaller nations guaranteed at least 4 matches and almost always 6 with a decent probability for 10 total--generally the same as now, but without the Mexico/USA/CR beating. The dates are more dispersed chronologically, which helps the club v country angle.

    The only downside I see is the travel expenses for the smaller teams. The large teams could donate a small portion of their gate receipts in later rounds to subsidize travel costs. Presumably, they're grossing more if the US and Mexico are both guaranteed to be on the calendar in a hex.

    2013 GC qualifying could run a staggered format such as this as well, where teams enter qualies as soon as they are eliminated from WC qualifying...always something to play for.

    Other than getting FIFA to agree to an earlier start date, is there anything else that makes this inferior to the current proposal?
     
  11. JYDA

    JYDA Member

    Sep 10, 2003
    I agree with having a minnows group stage during the gold cup. This would be good for football development in the smaller nations. They'd actually get to have winnable games.
     
  12. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't think that principle has been used anywhere in FIFA since the 1950s.

    For instance, in the 2006 World Cup, France and Switzerland played each other in the group stages in Germany despite having run into each other twice in qualifying.

    And in qualifying for the latest World Cup, North and South Korea ran into each other in the same semi-final group (Asia's last two rounds [before the third place playoff and the intercontinental playoffs] are 5 groups of 4, then 2 groups of 5) and played twice. They both survived, and were drawn into the same final-round group - so they played each other twice again.
     
  13. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    If Guadeloupe, who cannot play in the World Cup, makes the Gold Cup, that leaves 24 non-Gold Cup teams. If two or more Caribbean islands that cannot play in the World Cup qualified for the Gold Cup, then there would be 25 or more non-Gold Cup qualified teams which would require either 7 groups or at least one group with 5 teams, and increasing a group size from 4 to 5 increases the necessary matchdays by 4 from 6 to 10.
     
  14. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    This may have been asked but down anyone know what FIFA's plans for the breakup of the Netherlands Antilles are?
     
  15. EPJr

    EPJr Member+

    Los Angeles FC
    United States
    Mar 21, 2009
    Richmond VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What do you call it when you play The Faroe Islands in European qualifying? ;)
     
  16. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England

    I don't mean to sound like a contrarian or like a little technical sh*t disturber, but I hate when people rag on the Faroes lol. Use a true crap team like Andorra, Liechtenstein, or San Marino, because the Faroes are really good for having like 50,000 people. Heck, here in CONCACAF they'd have a chance at top 4, seriously. They've won their fair share of games against decent teams.

    I think there's a soft spot for the Faroes in all of us :)
     
  17. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Faroe Islands got 1 point from 10 games in qualifying for World Cup 2006, 0 points from 12 games in qualifying for Euro 2008 (in 5 games they allowed at least 5 goals and didn't score), 4 points from 10 games in qualifying for World Cup 2010, and 1 point from 5 games in qualifying for Euro 2012 so far. That's a total of 6 points from 37 games with the only win coming against Lithuania.
     
  18. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England

    Put it in perspective. How much better would T&T, Canada, Jamaica, El Salvador, Guatemala, or Panama do in UEFA qualifying? Maybe a point or 2 better, but really not much. All those countries would get killed as well.
     
  19. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Except that those teams (especially Jamaica and El Salvador) would get a lot more out of their home games. Not against the top-seeded teams of course, but against the mid-level sides of UEFA like Scotland, Bosnia and Lithuania that I wouldn't rate above Mexico, who themselves struggle mightily when playing at Jamaica or at El Salvador.
     
  20. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Ok and you're right, Mexico does struggle against those teams, and your point is valid, but Mexico also fields B teams ALOT more than UEFA teams do. It's harder for players to make trips to North America to play games (especially road games, where Mexico's pool of players is for the most part restricted to players already playing in the region). When guys are already in Europe its easier for Bosnia, Scotland, and Lithuania to keep their top squad together and go to places as out of the way as the Faroes. I'd be willing to bet the Faroes' A squad at home would be better than a Scotland, Bosnia, or Lithuania B squads playing there. Also remember that if you send a carribean or Central American team to the Faroes the cold + wet conditions are really going to effect them and make things really tough.
     
  21. Sakatei

    Sakatei Member

    Jun 24, 2007
    Mexico was using their B team in WC qualfying? Interesting.
     
  22. Cody667

    Cody667 Member+

    May 10, 2010
    Sudbury, ON
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England

    Well not entirely, for away matches they used B teams for the most part. Heck, the match they played in Canada they used a borderline C team against a Canada B team, and that wasn't a throwaway game. That was a must-not-lose or they would be eliminated before the hexagonal. And they came very close to losing, and managed a very lucky 2-2 draw
     
  23. Paul Calixte

    Paul Calixte Moderator
    Staff Member

    Orlando City SC
    Apr 30, 2009
    Miami, FL
    Club:
    Orlando City SC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Ah, I get it: I think you're confusing "Mexico sent out a B team against Canada" with "Eriksson didn't have the first f^%$!*g clue what he was doing with the Mexican NT." :D
     
  24. TrueCrew

    TrueCrew Member+

    Dec 22, 2003
    Columbus, OH
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    For those wanting to develop alternate ways of qualifying, please remember:

    1) CONCACAF currently has 35 FIFA eligible entities (not all are independent nations).

    I think the Netherlands Antilles breakup is upon us soon, and the number will jump to 36 with Curacao and Sint Maarten (currently only CONCACAF eligible) joining the fray (if they so desire).

    2) There are currently 5 entities that are CONCACAF only eligible:

    French Guyana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Martin, Sint Maarten (who will move up).

    I believe, the breakup of the NA will give us 3 more: Saba, Bonaire, St. Eustatius.

    -------------------------------

    So, in the near future, we'll have 43 entities: 36 FIFA eligible and 43 CONCACAF eligible.

    In order of FIFA Ranking, by Region:
    NA (3). United States, Mexico, Canada.
    CA (7) Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Belize.
    SA (2). Guyana, Suriname.
    Caribbean (24). Jamaica, T&T, Cuba, Barbados, Antigua & Barbuda, Haiti, Grenada, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Bermuda, Puerto Rico, Dominica, Cayman Islands, Dominican Republic, Turks & Caicos Islands, St. Lucia, British Virgin Islands, Bahamas, Aruba, US Virgin Islands, Anguilla, Montserrat, Curacao, Sint Maarten (Netherlands Antilles are currently ranked after Bermuda).

    As for the CONCACAF only crowd:

    SA (1). French Guyana
    Caribbean (6). Guadeloupe, Martinique, Saint Martin, Saba, Bonaire, St. Eustatius.
     
  25. JYDA

    JYDA Member

    Sep 10, 2003
    C team??? You're talking out your a$$. Aside from an injured Marquez they were full strength. Dos Santos, Vela, Torrado, Guardado, Osorio, Galindo, Salcido, and Magallon all started that game. The make up of the team only changed when Aguirre brought certain differences of opinion on player selection to the table when he got the job.
     

Share This Page