New WCQ format offered by Mexico and CA

[cmonaco]

CONCACAF is in acutality not unlike other regions (UEFA, Africa, Asia): we have minnows and powerhouses. But unlike these other regions, we oinsist on having as complicated and lengthy a qualifying process as possible. AFC and CAF both have simple two-round qualifications, UEFA has one round followed by play-offs. There's no reason CONCACAF cannot do something similar:

Taking 1998 as an example (can't seem to find the 2002 teams), there were 30 teams entered for the qualifiers. The new format should be simpler.

PROPOSAL #1:

The 22 or so minnows play in a first round, in 8 groups of either 2 or 3 teams. 2 games each. 8 first place teams advance.

Semi-final round is 4 groups of 4. #1 seeds are US, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras. #2 seeds are El Salvador, Canada, Jamaica, Guatemala. Home-and-home. 6 games each. Top 2 teams in each group advance.

Final round is 2 groups of 4, seeded according to placement in semi-final round. Home-and-home. 6 games each. Top team in each group automatically advances. Bronze medal match (home and home) for the 3rd automatic spot. #4 plays Asia #5 for final 1/2 slot.

---OR---

PROPOSAL #2

First round: 12 lowest ranked teams play home-and-home to whittle down to 6. 2 games each.

Semi-Final Round: 24 teams, seeded by FIFA ranking into 6 groups of 4, regardless of region. home-and-home (or, in some cases, the seeded team can host the group). Top 2 teams from each group advance. 6 games each.

Final Round: 12 teams, drawn into 2 groups of 6. Home-and-home. 10 games each. Top team from each group automatically advances. Bronze medal match (home and home) for the 3rd automatic spot. #4 plays Asia #5 for final 1/2 slot.

[Daniel from Montréal]

1. In that format, you just "forgot" T&T, currently ranked 4th in the region...

2. When we fall into more than one final group, you can have a whole thing about losing on purpose to be placed in an easier group or whatever.

I think it could be interesting to have the 3 semi-final groups (of 4) put their 2 best teams in the final round, with the 3 3rd-place teams playing off on neutral ground for the last spot in the "Heptagonal".

[Crazy_Yank]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal
1. In that format, you just "forgot" T&T, currently ranked 4th in the region...

2. When we fall into more than one final group, you can have a whole thing about losing on purpose to be placed in an easier group or whatever.

I think it could be interesting to have the 3 semi-final groups (of 4) put their 2 best teams in the final round, with the 3 3rd-place teams playing off on neutral ground for the last spot in the "Heptagonal".


This what I suggested on another thread and it's the best and most fair way to do it. The final round has to be a single table in which eveyone plays everyone else home and away. This is to ensure that the best teams rise to the top. It's the only way to get the best possible teams to represent concacaf.

[RalRhino]

Originally posted by cmonaco
UEFA has one round followed by play-offs. There's no reason CONCACAF cannot do something similar


Yes, CONCACAF could do something similar, but why would they want to? In my opinion, UEFA's qualifying format sucks! How else can you explain Holland staying home while Slovenia went to Korea (and went 0-3 for that matter). I don't see how anyone could argue that a system works when it doesn't result in the best teams going to the Finals.

Yes, CONCACAF's past qualifying formats may be ugly, may not be "samba" qualifying, but it produces the best results. Better than UEFA. Better then Africa. Better than Asia. Why mess with that?

By trying to emulate UEFA, CONCACAF could easily end up leaving its best teams home from Germany 2006.

[cmonaco]

Originally posted by Daniel from Montréal
1. In that format, you just "forgot" T&T, currently ranked 4th in the region...

2. When we fall into more than one final group, you can have a whole thing about losing on purpose to be placed in an easier group or whatever.


1. You're right. My fault. The point is, the top FIFA ranked teams would get byes.

2. A valid criticism. However, it should be balanced against the need to have the minnows (or Canada in the proposed plan) play over 20 matches to qualify. When you have a single final round of qualifying, it needlessly increases the number of matches played.

The only confederation (besides oceana) that has a single final group is CONMEBOL, but they have no preliminary rounds. Do you think CONCACAF has a better system than the rest of the world as it stands right now? I don't. Too many matches for the non-bye teams, too much regional separation. In Asia for instance, Hong Kong might play Syria in the first round. Why can't Guatemala play Netherlands Antilles in a prelim round? It would makes things simpler and fairer, since it would be based on FIFA rankings, and would lessen the number of matches played.

I think it could be interesting to have the 3 semi-final groups (of 4) put their 2 best teams in the final round, with the 3 3rd-place teams playing off on neutral ground for the last spot in the "Heptagonal".

This might work, although it is odd to have such a playoff in the middle section. A playoff would be better at the end of a qualifying process, since it would provide incentive for teams to win their groups (unlike your proposed final round, where a team can be assured of advancing and play 1 or 2 meaningless matches at the end).

Yes, CONCACAF could do something similar, but why would they want to? In my opinion, UEFA's qualifying format sucks! How else can you explain Holland staying home while Slovenia went to Korea (and went 0-3 for that matter). I don't see how anyone could argue that a system works when it doesn't result in the best teams going to the Finals.

I'm not proposing a UEFA system. In fact, I think UEFA should fix their system to minnow out the minnows before the final group stage. I'd prefer a system akin to Asia's, actually. Basically, a 2-stage round robin system with preliminary home-and-homes (or 3-team playoffs in a neutral site) to whittle the minnows down, and a 2 group final round with a playoff for 3rd place. Work the numbers any way you want.

If you want to keep the final "hexagonal" or "heptagonal", you won't be able to reduce the matchload by much at all, and you'll have the same problem of meaningless matches at the end of the final round that could affect the outcome.

[sidspaceman]

The Executive Committee of the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football will gather for the first time in 2003 when they meet on Friday 7 February at the offices of the General Secretariat in New York City.




I wonder with all the snow in NYC if the meeting will be postponed?

[RalRhino]

Originally posted by cmonaco
If you want to keep the final "hexagonal" or "heptagonal", you won't be able to reduce the matchload by much at all, and you'll have the same problem of meaningless matches at the end of the final round that could affect the outcome.
Why should CONCACAF want to reduce the matchload? This is basically the only thing they've got. It's not as though the US, Mexico, and Costa Rica are crying over the number of matches they have to play for the Gold Cup. The qualifying process for the Gold Cup is hardly like what teams are going through for Euro 2004, and doesn't even involve most of the top teams.

And I'm confused by how a "meaningless" match could affect the outcome of qualifying. I feel that one final group of 6 or 8 is the only way to go.

[RalRhino]

From concacaf.com...

CONCACAF will present a new qualifying format for the FIFA World Cup Germany 2006 for approval by FIFA. The new format was approved at the meeting of its Executive Committee at the offices of the General Secretariat in New York City today.
After reviewing several formats for CONCACAF qualifying to FIFA World Cup 2006, the Executive selected a plan that calls for the following:

All CONCACAF member national associations will enter at the first phase, with teams in either one of the 11 three-team or one two-team, home and away, round robin series beginning in Spring 2004.

The teams would be separated into four pots for the draw, which will conducted be FIFA at a later date.

The three CONCACAF representatives to FIFA World Cup 2002, Costa Rica, Mexico and the USA, would be placed in Pot A;

Honduras, Trinidad & Tobago and Jamaica, the teams placed fourth through sixth in the final group during the last qualifying cycle, in Pot B.

Meanwhile, Pot C would consist of Canada, Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Panama, all of whom reached the semifinal round of qualifying to Korea/Japan 2002, while Pot D would be comprised of the remaining 23 national associations entering in the competition.

Having all teams enter at the first phase guarantees each of a minimum of four qualifying matches (with the exception of those in the two-team group), as opposed to two in previous World Cup cycles.

The winners of each initial round robin tie will advance to one of three groups of four teams apiece, once again to be played in a home-and-home round-robin format.

The teams finishing in first and second in each four-team group at the second phase are qualified to the final phase, which will be a group of six teams to determine the CONCACAF representatives at FIFA World Cup Germany 2006.

The top three finishers in the final group are automatically qualified to the finals, with the fourth place team to meet the fifth-placed team from the Asian Football Confederation in a playoff to determine the last berth at Germany 2006."

Now if someone could just tell me why there are 4 pots for spliting the teams into 11 groups of 3? I'm assuming they'll pick 1 from Pot A and 2 from Pot D until Pot A is empty, then move to B and C.

This needs a little more clarification. But I'm VERY relieved to see that the final stage is a single group format.

[Davids26]

So with this format their are 3 teams in both pots A and B. And then 6 teams for pot C.

You would hope (but remember this is CONCACAF) that they would give those 12 teams that represent Pots A-C the "seeds" in each of their groups. And then have the other seeded team in the home and home playoff with a Pot D team.
With this you would see a lot of blowouts in the preliminaries, but this is the format that they want. And that is why their are three phases to whittle out the bad teams, then whittle out the average teams then whittle out the good teams that just weren't good enough to qualify.

It seems like this would be the best way to go and the numbers make sense that the draw will likely be this way. I just hope the US doesn't see Honduras, Jamaica, or T&T in a first round home and home series!

This probably does help smaller nations in the region because they get to see some of the bigger teams in real competition for once...

[Davids26]

So with this format their are 3 teams in both pots A and B. And then 6 teams for pot C.

You would hope (but remember this is CONCACAF) that they would give those 12 teams that represent Pots A-C the "seeds" in each of their groups. And then have the other seeded team in the home and home playoff with a Pot D team.
With this you would see a lot of blowouts in the preliminaries, but this is the format that they want. And that is why their are three phases to whittle out the bad teams, then whittle out the average teams then whittle out the good teams that just weren't good enough to qualify.

It seems like this would be the best way to go and the numbers make sense that the draw will likely be this way. I just hope the US doesn't see Honduras, Jamaica, or T&T in a first round home and home series!

This probably does help smaller nations in the region because they get to see some of the bigger teams in real competition for once...

[GRUNT]

The idea that any Pot A team should have to play any Pot D team is unbelievably ridiculous.

It is not a question of whether the Pot A teams will advance. We all know they will absolutely destroy and humiliate any of the Pot D teams. So why submit legitimate contenders to the risk of injuries in absolutely meaningless games?

Seems CONCACAF has been studying the Oceania playbook.