2017 Confederations Cup - Qualifiers, News and Updates [R]

I don't think it will be Columbus, but seeing as the is an extension of the Gold Cup and a CONCACAF competition, I can't imagine it will be in Azteca. My guess would probably be LA, Chicago, New York, Washington, something like that. They will just want butts in the seats

 

Should a playoff be necessary, I think the non-US team, whomever that may be, should host it. Surely it would not be too much to ask that Concacaf representative play and win at least ONE game on the road in order to qualify after hosting the TWO qualifying tournaments. I suspect this one game playoff would be a sell in any country if the host is one of the participants.

 

Why does it hurt you that chile won?

 

Texas?

 

People in Peru don't like Chile that much.

 

Gonna be weird to see a Confederations Cup without either Argentina or Brazil for the first time ever.

 

Brazil in particular. Their consecutive win streak will end now.

Even when they weren't some kind of champion they managed to be at the 1999 one (France didn't go) and 2013 (as host).

 

@Paul Calixte

Is your heart more peruvian these days? Is that why your upset chile won? No longer feel the stars and stripes?

 

I'm perfectly willing to have the U.S. play the Ticos in Azteca.

 

Okay, my early prediction for the Group rigging (I mean draw) are:

Russia
Euro Champ/ second
Oceania
African Champ


Germany
Chile
USA/whoever
Australia

 

I think it's ridiculous that there will be a playoff if the USA doesn't win the Gold Cup. I mean it's bad enough the U.S. hosts the competition every time, do they really need to come up with some backdoor way to cheat their way into the Confederation Cup ? Why can't the 2015 winner just go through as has always been the case ? What does the 2013 winner in a tournament that nobody takes seriously have to do with the 2017 Confed Cup ? Just another example of US bully tactics, I highly doubt there would be this playoff nonsense if Mexico or somebody else won the 2013 cup.

 

They added the playoff precisely because nobody was taking the second Gold Cup seriously. Mexico took the 2013 edition pretty seriously because they knew what was at stake, same as everyone else. It just happened to coincide with their horrendous form that cycle. It was announced well before the 2013 cup that a half spot for the Confederations Cup would be at stake. Your bigotry against everything US is getting a bit stale.

 

Well I did not know that, but either way it's still a stupid idea. The reason every second gold cup is not taken seriously is because the gold cup champion is at the Confederation Cup. No matter how "seriously" Mexico took it as you say, they presented a much weaker squad. Nothing to do with poor form at that moment.This will not change unless the years of the gold cup are moved away from the Confederation cup. Anyways it dilutes the prestige of the Confed, because the CURRENT regional champs should be there, not the winner of some silly playoff.

In fact CAF had a much better reason for a playoff when there were 2 cups within 2 years, 2012 and 2013, even they just elected to go with the more current winner.

 

Mexico presented the best squad they could with the coach they had. They were a bit of a mess then with some expats refusing to play and what not, and a huge drop in the national team form.

 

The current regional champs will be there when the USA hoists the trophy in two weeks, making the playoff moot.

 

Mexico took a B team, because their best players had just played at the Confederation Cup. I don't know why you are trying to hide this fact.

 

I'm fairly certain the US also didn't send a team with most of it's starters to this Cup.

 

The US also took a B-team.... Altidore, Bradley, Dempsey, Howard, Guzan even missing. Donovan was only in cause he was just getting back from his sabbatical. But it was mostly local based US players that made that team. That's kind of how the bi-annual gold cup works, the one just after the WC is the big one and used to be the sole-method of determining the confed cup representative.... the one just before the WC, the big guns would almost always bring their b-team, especially the team who'd just played in the confed cup... this is the first time where they've made a playoff between the two gold cup winners to determine the confed cup representative.

 

Yes you are correct I fully remember now, and a quick check of the rosters shows this. I assume the U.S. also didn't take it as seriously because Mexico wasn't going to send their top team.

 

It was also seen as a prep for the world cup... a chance for Jurgen to have a look at fringe-players with an outside chance of making the WC squad.

 

I live in Africa (and have for three years or so now) and I find it to be just as annoying here with the Bi-annual Cup of Nations. The frequency does seem to detract from the event. I do think CONCACAF was smart to institute this playoff system. I barely paid attention to the Gold Cup in 2009 due to WCQ and the Confederations Cup, although as VanCity alludes, this playoff system does seem to potentially negatively effect the chance of the Region's team that plays in the Confed Cup .

In Africa, it's even more confusing and annoying, since it isn't really a chance for the Confederation to cash in, but thats another discussion for another forum.