Indeed. FIFA doesn't allow teams from the same confederation to be drawn into the same group, except UEFA.
In fact, the reason for CONCACAF getting half a spot was because CONCACAF did so well in 2002 (USA and Mexico in the Round of 16, with the USA being a quarterfinalist and nearly making the semis, and Costa Rica only went out in the group due to GD, even then, they had the eventual champions and 3rd place finishers in their group as well)
On average, CONCACAF has gotten over half of its representatives through the group stage in the last three World Cups (5 out of 9 opportunities, if I remember correctly -- 3 chances in each World Cup, with Mexico advancing three times and the U.S. twice). That compares favorably versus the other confederations that we'd be fighting with for an extra half spot (Africa and Asia).
Leaked USMNT WC Jerseys? God i hate the sash... http://twitter.com/joedavis4/status/379930188999831552/photo/1
That seems the case. It appears you are correct. It's interesting, because that means we definitely want a South American seed in our group. I don't care if it's Brazil. We absolutely want an African team over the non-seeded CONMEBOL team.
I actually like the blue one but the white one rivals our denim jersey's for the worst we've ever had IMO. I'm sure it's fake anyway
Is there any scenario where we could end up in the same pot as the unseeded CONMEBOL teams? If our groups seeded team ends up being a UEFA team we could see a group with an unseeded CONMEBOL and UEFA team. Imagine this group... Spain Uruguay Portugal USA
I guess the best-case scenario would be something like Uruguay/Iran/Bulgaria? Like I said, it's way too early to know what the pots will look like--CONMEBOL could have anywhere between one (Uruguay and Colombia both get seeded, Jordan wins the playoff) and four (Uruguay and Colombia both unseeded, CONMEBOL team wins playoff) unseeded teams.
But (assuming there are at least 4-6 UEFA seeds, and that FIFA establishes pots as they have done for recent WC draws) there will be groups with a UEFA seed and a second UEFA team and an African team (and some team, potentially the US, from the Concacaf/Asia pot). There are ways to get an African team (rather than a non-seeded CONMEBOL team) in the group even if your group doesn't have a CONMEBOL seed. (With, very likely, more UEFA seeds than the available number of non-seeded CONMEBOL teams, there will be a group or two drawn to comprise: UEFA-seed, African NT, Concacaf/Asian NT, UEFA-unseeded.) But yes, the US being drawn into a CONMEBOL-seeded group ensures that the US will -- assuming FIFA establishes pots as they have done for recent WC draws -- get a non-seeded African NT and non-seeded UEFA NT in their group.
Very likely CONCACAF and Asia will get placed in the same pot ahead of the draw, so the US will likely not wind up in a group with a Iran (or any Asian NT). (Admittedly this assumes that NZ and Jordan do not qualify and it would be easy enough for FIFA to place 4 Concacaf and 4 Asia teams in the same pot for the draw.) Yes, much is still to be determined (and Concacaf could get placed in the same Pot as Africa, but likely only if NZ wins their playoff, and there's no certainty even then, as FIFA will do what FIFA wants to do). And we likely won't know until December how FIFA is assigning Seeds and Pot compositions. (Speculating between now and then can be fun, but there might be a limit to what can be added to a N&A thread at this time. Maybe check back in after the MLS Conf Finals. fwiw, MLS Cup 2013 is scheduled for either Dec 7 or 8, on the weekend after the Friday, Dec 6 WC draw.)
You're right. You can still get Africa without a seeded CONMEBOL, that's a good scenario for us, but the odds are pretty low. And you're right, there's naturally a large amount of speculation still. But seeing people with best cases of Iran & Bulgaria both in our group? It could happen, but I like to look at more likely scenarios. We will be grouped with Asia if it's 4 CONCACAF and 4 Asian teams, that's only logical, and chances of it being 4 and 4 I put at about 70% (SPI odds have Jordan @ 9.33% and NZ odds at 22.09%). And Bulgaria has a 14.25% chance of getting in right now. The non-seeded Euro team is likely to be favored against us. I guess a real best case would be something like USA (seeded), Albania, Ethiopia and Jordan. That's still possible right?
I've seen a lot of talk about Belgium and Colombia's chances at getting seeded, based off FIFA rankings (particularly the latter, viz-a-viz Uruguay). I've yet to see anyone ask, on BigSoccer, if FIFA has ever seeded a non-hosting team that didn't make the previous World Cup. So I just did the research. Best I can tell, 1982 was the only time it was done, when FIFA seeded England. England missed out in qualifying for 1978 on goal differential (to Italy). It would appear that they were seeded in 1982 at the expense of Poland, who had made the second group stage (quarterfinals) in 1978 and the semifinals in 1974. England had not qualified for 1974 either--it lost out to Poland. So there is one instance where FIFA has seeded a team that did not make the previous (two) World Cups. It was 32 years ago and it was at at time when the format of the tournament was expanding from 16 to 24 teams, so FIFA needed to come up with two "new" seeds and England apparently seemed more palatable than Poland in 1981. Of course, Poland ended up outperforming England in that tournament, too. Since 1982, there are a few good examples where FIFA could have found a way to seed "big" teams that didn't make the previous World Cup (England in 1998, Netherlands in 2006 both come to mind) but opted not to do so. So, I doubt FIFA are going to come up with a formula that see Colombia or Belgium make the cut. History isn't on their side and there are too many methods FIFA could use to ensure that doesn't happen.
We should all be aware of one feature of the draw that happened last time, as you'll note at roughly the 4:00 mark here from 2010: When there's a clash of the same confederation (outside of UEFA) between a Top seed and another country from a later pot--which in this case will be CONMEBOL--the rule is that the countries in the pot who are not from that seed will go to the non-clashing groups first. This is why, despite our heart-attacks that we had drawn Ivory Coast here, they nonetheless skipped all the way down to Brazil's group in 2010. The same thing is going to happen this year with CAF teams if there's a CAF/CONMEBOL pot. You could have this situation. Let's say "Nigeria" comes out first--they go straight to Brazil. Then "Ghana" comes out next, they skip group B and get assigned to Group C. Then "Ivory Coast" comes out, they skip down to Group D. Only then, AFTER the CAF countries fill CONMEBOL-headed groups, would it become a straight draw for who joins Group B and the others. A--------B--------C-----------D---------- Brazil---Spain----Argentina--Uruguay ---------(USA)---------------------------- Here's a different scenario below, but the same idea. "Colombia" is drawn first--goes to Group B. "Ecuador" next, goes to Group D. "Nigeria" next, goes to Group A. "Ghana" next, goes to Group C. "Ivory Coast" next, goes to Group G. "Chile" next, goes to Group E. But--flip Chile and Ivory Coast's draw order, and you get Colombia to B, Ecuador to D, Nigeria to A, Ghana to C, Chile to E, and then Ivory Coast to F. Why? Because once all the non-seeded CONMEBOL teams are assigned and only CAF teams are left in the pot, they can then go by group order, right? That's the part that really needs clarification. A--------B----------C--------------D--------------E---------F--------G--------- H Brazil---Germany---Argentina----Netherlands---Spain---Italy----Uruguay--(Whoever)
To answer your last question, that would be my assumption. There would be no reason to put the next CAF team into Group G with Uruguay, since there's no fear of putting a CONMEBOL team with them anymore.
Personally, what I would do (to sort of piggyback what Autogolazo was talking about) would be to seed teams in Pot 1 who are ranked 1-8, Pot 2 9-16, Pot 3 17-24, and Pot 4 25-32. Then, other than UEFA of course, if you draw a team for a Group that already has a team from that continent, you just put it in the next group that doesn't have that continent, sort of like what they did with 2010. For example, in Group A, if you have Brazil, Belgium, Japan so far, and you draw another AFC team (Iran)? Put them in the next group that doesn't have an AFC team (for example, Group B with Germany, Colombia, Norway so far). Then the next team drawn from Pot 4 that doesn't have a CONMEBOL or AFC team can go into group A (for example, a Ukraine or a Costa Rica). This ensures that we at least get a possibility of a CONCACAF and AFC team in the same group. Also, it helps balance out the groups. It's unfair that a pot can have widely varied teams like USA and Jordan, or Belgium and Bulgaria. But maybe some people like that chance of having GoD's *shrug*
You're basically copying the way UEFA does their groups for qualifications and champions league right? Yeah, not a fan. I much prefer a more random drawing. When stuff like that happens it's pretty darn difficult to move up pots. At least it is in UEFA.
Well, they seem to factor in past results more than FIFA rankings, whereas seeding in the World Cup is (at least for the last cycle) more favorable to rankings. If the latter is the case, it would seem easier to move up in pots. Take this WC cycle for instance. Would it be easier for the US to get a seed if we only took FIFA rankings into account, or if we took past WC results (say the last two) into account as well?
@MassachusettsRef very nice post above. IF Columbia and Belgium do NOT get a top 8 seed those 2 spots will/would b filled by other Euro teams Switzlerland, England, Portugal, are the most likely it looks like Portugal, will have to win their playoff just to get into the WC right now in (9) : spain, england, bosnia, russia, switzerland, netherlands, germany, italy, belgium playoff (8) : france, ukraine, greece, portugal, hungary, sweden, coratia and 1 of iceland/bulgaria only 4 of these get in (November 15 to 19th ) if this is the case, i cant see Portugal as getting seeded so, Switzerland, England are left * euro 9 : spain, england, bosnia, russia, switzerland, netherlands, germany, italy, belgium euro + 4 : france, greece, portugal, croatia 6 S.America : brazil, argentina, columbia, uruguay, ecuador, chile 5 from Africa : cameroon, egypt, ivory coast, nigeria, algeria 4 N.America : usa, costa rica, honduras, panama 4 Asia : iran, s.korea, japan, australia A. -- 1.Brazil -- 2.Bosnia.H -- 3.Ivory Coast -- 4.Australia B. -- 1.Spain -- 2.Russia -- 3.Uruguay -- 4.Panama C. -- 1.Argentina -- 2.Croatia -- 3.Algeria -- 4.Japan D. -- 1.Germany -- 2.Greece -- 3.Ecuador -- 4.Honduras E. -- 1.Italy -- 2.Portugal -- 3.Cameroon -- 4.s.Korea F. -- 1.Netherlands -- 2.France -- 3.Nigeria -- 4.Costa Rica G. -- 1.Switzerland -- 2.Chile -- 3.Columbia -- 4.Iran H. -- 1.England -- 2.Belgium -- 3.Egypt -- 4.USA IF statements : Columbia and Belgium, most likely WONT get a top 8 seed, were not in WC last time Switzerland and England get it (possibly Portugal, prob not cause wont win group) (possibly Uruguay) Brazil and Argentina CANT have Columbia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Chile no 2 African, N.American, Asia teams in same group
I don't see Group G as possible (given that you put 2 CONMEBOL nations in it, assuming your misspelling is for Colombia, and not some other nation). If Chile does become a Pot 2 team along with all of the non-seeded UEFA teams, then I do not think FIFA would allow a CONMEBOL Pot 3 team to be placed into Chile's group.
I really can't see Switzerland getting a seed.... I don't understand it. Portugal were semifinalists and R16ers last two world cups, Switzerland is R16, don't make it out of their group in 2010, and all of a sudden they're in the talk for a seed? Who have they beaten (besides Spain) to get their rankings so high?