View Full Version : How many spots does Concacaf deserve?
BenReilly
22 Jul 2002, 03:42 PM
Given teams like Slovenia in the World Cup, I'd have to say that Concacaf deserves 7 spots. Since usually one good European team fails to make it, we should structure qualification to allow for one good Concacaf team to fail.
Top tier teams
USA
Costa Rica
Honduras
Second tier teams (above Slovenia)
Mexico
Guetemala
Jamaica
Trinidad & Tobago
Canada
schmuckatelli
22 Jul 2002, 03:47 PM
Come now, this must be trolling, surely. Mexico was a quarter finalist in the World Cup, and to suddenly find them termed "second tier" is certainly an error.
I think a reasonable person can argue that CONCACAF deserves four places, but more is ridiculous.
Brownswan
22 Jul 2002, 03:54 PM
I'd say 3.5 slots, with SA going to 4.5 -- a playoff between TFC #4 and SA #5. That seems more than fair to me.
This WC saw a higher percentage of TFC teams advancing than SA teams, so I wouldn't blame FIFA for awarding us a 4th spot. This was a Cinderella Cup for sure; don't know if the results will hold up over the next decade.
Crazy_Yank
22 Jul 2002, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by Brownswan
I'd say 3.5 slots, with SA going to 4.5 -- a playoff between TFC #4 and SA #5. That seems more than fair to me.
This WC saw a higher percentage of TFC teams advancing than SA teams, so I wouldn't blame FIFA for awarding us a 4th spot. This was a Cinderella Cup for sure; don't know if the results will hold up over the next decade.
I agree that 3.5 would be fair. a playoff between TFC and SA would be an awesome match.
Frank Cunha
22 Jul 2002, 04:02 PM
Agree, not with seven spots but with 6.
Crazy_Yank
22 Jul 2002, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by Frank Cunha
Agree, not with seven spots but with 6.
Really? If we did that how would you do the qualifying formatt? I think concacaf has some good sides, but don't you think 6 is too many? I'm interested in your reasoning.
blech
22 Jul 2002, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by Crazy_Yank
I agree that 3.5 would be fair. a playoff between TFC and SA would be an awesome match.
ditto!
Clan
22 Jul 2002, 04:07 PM
And honestly now...how long do yeh think CONCACAF would be able to merit 6 spots.
Leave it at three...as it wasn't changed after poor '98.If a similar good performance is shown by CONCACAF in '06 then give them a FULL spot.
nowhere
22 Jul 2002, 04:18 PM
I'd say three and a half, so another continent has the opportunity to beat Australia. After Australia tries to be a team that can't get to the world cup from every continent FIFA will just give up and give them an automatic berth.
kickin365
22 Jul 2002, 04:28 PM
7 teams is insane. Look who the 4th team would have been in this cup - Honduras- who would have helped their chances had they not blown a hope game to Trinidad. I think 3 or 3.5 is fair.
beejoo
22 Jul 2002, 04:31 PM
2 spots, but that's dropping down to 24 teams in the finals again.
BT in DC
22 Jul 2002, 05:27 PM
I agree with 3.5, for now. I like the idea of the CONCACAF 4th place in a playoff against the Oceana winner. Australia would probably like this since they have failed against SA and Asia.
Elninho
22 Jul 2002, 05:28 PM
1998 was poor for CONCACAF? Wait a minute, CONCACAF still outperformed both CAF and AFC in 1998!
nowhere
22 Jul 2002, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Elninho
1998 was poor for CONCACAF? Wait a minute, CONCACAF still outperformed both CAF and AFC in 1998!
Don't let facts get in the way. Concacaf sucks, has always sucked, and will always suck.
thepremierleague
22 Jul 2002, 09:38 PM
Mexico are the best Cocnacaf team I think. Their only loss was against the USA, but the USA got beaten by Poland.
Concacaf does not deserve more spots.
Cameroon Nigeria and Senegal alone are better than the whole of concacaf put together.
Funny how only Concacaf supporters ever think their federation is any good. :D
A very knowledgable Italian-American football expect said Concacaf was among the worst federations and that this world cup was a one off. He's an American who works in Italy and is also on Talksport radio sometimes.
Elninho
22 Jul 2002, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by thepremierleague
Concacaf does not deserve more spots.
Cameroon Nigeria and Senegal alone are better than the whole of concacaf put together.
Funny how only one of the three got to the second round...
Also interesting how Senegal is suddenly great on the merit of one quarterfinal appearance in their first World Cup, while the USA gets to the quarterfinals and they call it a fluke.
Cameroon have only gotten to the quarterfinals in 1990 and have never gone that far again, yet they're supposed to be better?
Nigeria have yet to reach the quarterfinals.
Africa has yet to get two teams into the second round in the same World Cup. CONCACAF's done it in two of the last four, with less teams in the World Cup in all four.
schmuckatelli
22 Jul 2002, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by thepremierleague
A very knowledgable Italian-American football expect said Concacaf was among the worst federations and that this world cup was a one off. He's an American who works in Italy and is also on Talksport radio sometimes.
Well, then he must be the expert on North and Central American soccer!
(Ahem)
Or, we could say World Cup 2002 was not a "one off", and have just as good a chance of being right. There's just no merit in throwing out results you don't happen to like.
thepremierleague
22 Jul 2002, 10:10 PM
Senegal got to the African nations cup final, beat France and Sweden who won the group of death. They lost 1 game.
Their attacking football was fantastic, especially against Uruguay. I don't see a ton of European teams buying up USA, Mexican and Costarican players based on their performances.
It's not all about results, it's about ability and skill too, and those 3 teams are miles ahead of Concacaf.
As for the past. Nigeria were 2 mins from knocking out Italy in 1994 in the 2nd round. They were among the best teams there. Nigeria won their group twice in a row in 1994 and 1998.
Name me a great concacaf team from history everyone remembers? Um... Everybody remembers Cameroon 1990, Nigeria 1994 and Senegal 02,
Crazy_Yank
22 Jul 2002, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by thepremierleague
Mexico are the best Cocnacaf team I think.
You may "think" that, but it doesn't change the facts. US has beaten Mexico 5 of the last 6 times we've played them, outscoring them 10-1. If that is what you meant by Mexico being better then okay :rolleyes: Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.
thepremierleague
22 Jul 2002, 10:48 PM
The only thing USA did better than Mexico at the WC was beat them with 2 sucker goals. Mexico won their group ahead of Italy, and did not get beaten 3-1 by the bottom team of their group and therefore have to rely upon other results.
If Poland can beat USA 3-1 in a one off, then so can USA beat Mexico 2-0 in a one off. It doesn't prove who's better.