It's my understanding that they play it every 2 years to help fund CONCACAF, so that most of the nations can afford to have a national team. I could be wrong though.
Well I don't disagree CONCACAF makes a nice chunk of money out of the Gold Cup, which is why they want to hold it as often as possible. What I doubt very much is that most of that money actually finds its way down to the individual federations. At least as far as prize money goes, the amounts seem rather low (although to be fair, looks like they increased them significantly for this edition).
That's an increase of $1,700,000 from $1,000,000 to $2,700,000 but 69.4% of the increase goes to the finalists and 30.6% for ten teams combined.
First, yes, it needs to be every 4 years, Second, it doesnt need to have 16 teams, but merely everyone needs to have to qualify in some way Third, the host needs to be rotated. The USSF stands to gain everything from each Gold Cup since they always host it. If they wanted, they could split up the three groups, one in N. America, one in C. America, and one in the Caribbean each cycle, then have the knockout round in one of the acceptable countries with 3 or 4 acceptable stadia, or rotate it another way. Its really sad how its viewed, because it could be a decent competition if it was done correctly.
How do you propose making USA, Mexico, and Canada qualify? If you combined them with UNCAF you would have a tournament that qualified 8 out of 10 teams. With 10 teams you would have to play groups with unequal numbers of teams (3, 3, and 4), two groups of 5, or no Group Stage. Two groups of 5 plus Semifinals and Final (which UNCAF plays even though they aren't necessary for qualification) would use 7 matchdays (with everybody having one Group Stage matchday off due to the odd number of teams per group) for a tournament that is currently played on days when UEFA clubs don't have to release their players. If you had a host from North America or UNCAF with the other 9 teams competing for 7 spots, you could play three groups of 3, but how would you decide which third place team qualified? You could simply take the best third place team albeit dealing with groups with unequal difficulty or take the best two third place teams and have them play each other. Also with three groups of 3 would you take the group winners and best second place team to the Semifinals (which UNCAF plays even though they aren't necessary for qualification)?
USA and Mexico should have direct berth as teams that can not fail to qualify if they played in qualification round - so, I don't see point in them playing qualifiers. Canada could join UNCAF qualifiers - it would be great for them to play more competitive matches and I believe they would qualify via UNCAF Cup.
I really like this set-up. If it's just one winner for the Confed Cup then it puts all the eggs in one basket. This way more have a chance to make it. US really needs to get this GC so they at least have a foot in the door.
After yesterday's events, it looks like this set-up also provides CONCACAF an insurance policy in case the most profitable final doesn't play out. In effect: if the US win on Sunday, the only way Mexico can reach Russia's pre-game is by beating their archrivals in two blockbuster matches in 2015 (Gold Cup Final, then the playoff if necessary).
At this point I'd like to see Mexico (or Canada obviously, but let's be realistic) win the 2015 tourney just so that this is an issue. BC Place might be the best option? All of the Mexicans from Cascadia would drive up, and the US would get a decent turnout from Washington/Portland
I honestly wouldn't have an issue with that. Frankly the crowd would probably be friendlier than most American venues, however I bet CONCACAF would put it in a place like the Rose Bowl or Cowboy Stadium just for the cash
Just dropping my $0.02 on the biennial issue: For those arguing that the Gold Cup's current frequency does not allow it to build prestige, let's be honest: even if it were held quadrennially, the Gold Cup would still be what is is, a championship for a region of low (albeit growing) football saturation. If prestige is what we're after, then making the expanded Copa América a reality 1) in 2016 and 2) long-term (ideally, CONMEBOL would continue to invite 6 CONCACAF teams, or US and Mexico +4, for Brazil 2019 on) is the way to go. As for those who believe we should hold our continental championship every four years because UEFA or CONMEBOL does, you have to take into account the difference in World Cup formats. Both Europe and South America only have one stage of qualifying (ditto for the Euro), so the minnows in both confederations are guaranteed 18-20 competitive fixtures every World Cup cycle. In CONCACAF, OTOH, our multiple-stage format means that everyone who didn't make the Hex needs the biennial Gold Cup, and the corresponding subregional tournaments, in order to avoid two years of hibernation.