1 tourney should not sway the allocation slots.. If they continue to out perform MLS and or LMX in future CCL's then 3 for CR & 3 for US MLS makes sense. But as stated earlier since the reformat in 08 US and CR are tied in head to head. The US is also leading 6 to 5 in series, and have placed the highest outside LMX teams. CR are better this tourney it doesn't mean they will be next year.
I agree 100%. But for this performance, maybe Costa Rica must be rewarded .... and for next edition to keep 3 clubs, can be one of method. Same for USA when they made performance. But, anyway, for USA is something normal (like for mexicans) to reach final phase of the competition ... because they have at start 4 teams, the biggest number of clubs for a country. So, if a club from USA will reach the final, will be not same with a final for a club from Costa Rica or Honduras (for last country will be better), because they have not a equal number of clubs.
Actually, the mml does need the CCL to be successful, no one will respect the league until it gets results internationally. Mexico and the other teams do not have more to gain, they have already earned international respect. This confederation is more dependent on Mexico fans than on anyone else. The ccl has already taken off as much as it ever will, it peaked in 2010 and has fallen off since to a level we will see probably for good. You're completely wrong in thinking that other teams are thinking about any potential pie you speak of, they do not care. You're literally making things up. They play when they qualify, then it's back to league play, there is no wishing on a star for a slice of a potential pie. Mexico can live without the CCL, they have the Liberators Cup. The mml needs the CCL, however. Without it, they'd have 0 international games. Why should they have to be better just to get equal slots? They have been equal this entire time, so they deserve equal slots already. It's a travesty that usa gets 4 spots, there's no way around that. This tourney will never take off as long as there is an undeserved slot allocation.
There could be a qualifying stage: a) 13 teams would get a direct spot in Group Stage - 2 MEX, 2 USA, 1 CAN; 1 from each Central American association (7); and 1 CFU. b) 22 teams would play a home-away series for the remaining spots - 4 MEX; 4 USA/CAN (MLS); 2 CRC; 2 HON; 2 GUA; 2 PAN; 2 ELS; and 4 CFU.
Look my simulation here for 32 teams in groups stage : http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/anyway-to-spice-up-ccl.2007872/page-4#post-31872902 and alocation of slots for each country : http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/anyway-to-spice-up-ccl.2007872/page-4#post-31868976
Come on you can't find 10 teams accross the region that can play at competitive level against LMX, MLS and CRC teams and we have some blowouts with this ridiculous format, and knowing that you propose it to be expanded by 11 teams. 16 is a maximum, they must not go with more thatn 16. Four groups of four, amen.
Can increase at 32 easy : Can use Copa Libertadores system ... 1 team - TH (probably from Mexico) 5 teams from Mexico (with TH, probably 6) 5 teams from MLS 3 teams from Costa Rica 3 teams from Honduras and just from 4 countries we have 17 competitive clubs rest of 15 : 2 x Guatemala, Panama, Canada, El Salvador, 1 x Belize and Nicaragua and 5 from CFU
No one in Mexico will respect the league.... people in the States don't care what Mexicans think. The US is big enough to not care about international recognition. It can be ignored, and still be a very successful league. Look at baseball and basketball for examples. These sports got were they are without the need of international competitions. You have to remember the US mentality.... we are a bunch of egomaniacs. The only thing that matters is what happens in the States. Costa Rica teams couldn't gain from a nice paycheck from TV money? Mexican teams are more financially well off... but the teams are not making much, if any money playing in this tourney. Anyone know what you get for qualifying or winning it? The Confederation is trying to build this tourney for the future. They are betting/ hoping MLS will be a big part of the future.
this is due of all americans mentality are bad ... they think that they are God on this world. FIFA Clubs World Cup give for CONCACAF champion 1 million euro just for participation (5th receive 1.5 mil / 4th receive 2 mil / 3rd 2.5 mil euro). and from CCL winner take 2 - 3 million euro I think (from matches and from CONCACAF). So, you tell me that 4 - 5 millions of euro is not enough for a team from MLS to join seriously CCL? I think they can't. Like in World Cup ... Mexico and Costa Rica is, and have teams which can beat easy clubs from MLS (I don't tell about LAG, Seattle or Kansas City)
No one in Europe or the rest of America or anywhere where people know the league exists, will respect the league either. Everyone already laughs at you guys. A league is judged by its international prowess, why do you think the Spanish league gets so much props and Germany is regarded higher than Italy now. Actually, baseball teams barnstormed and crushed Japanese teams and beat Latin teams. If they lost, respect would have been lost. When Negro League teams started beating MLB teams, the calls for integration increased to avoid further embarrassment and loss of respect. So you are wrong there. Same with basketball, David Stern demanded to let NBA players play in the Olympics to restore respect. You're wrong again. Again, you are wrong, only a certain segment of this population are egomaniacs. I'm from the u.s. and I am not an egomaniac. Neither are many of us. It's not a u.s. mentality, it's a u.s.-Caucasian mentality. You need to specify that. Yes, we know what CONCACAF has up its sleeve, but that doesn't make it right or necessary. Their chickens come home to roost every time people ignore this tourney because of its ridiculous format. It behooves C'CAF to make things right, otherwise this tourney will continue to be seen as a joke.
5 teams from MLS? It's champion's captain takes break and misses CCL quarters last season, for Gods sake. Red Bulls fielded reserve squad in this tourney. Also, this season we saw 3/5 missing out the qualification to the k.o. stage with one of qualified teams played in group with another MLS team. Competitiveness my ass. 3 teams from Honduras? 5 from CFU? 2 from Canada? Jesus Christ.
MLS clubs play with reserves? This is due CONCACAF rules. If CCF will use UEFA rules, where a country can lose berths in competition, then MLS will treat seriously this competition, because they will remain with 1 or 2 slots for clubs. 3 from Honduras : Olimpia, Real Espana and Marathon. results in 2014 : Real Espana - Pachuca 3-2 1-4 Olimpia - Portland 3-1 2-4 results in 2013 : Olimpia - Kansas 0-2 0-0 Victoria - Tijuana 2-3 0-6 2 from Canada? Yes ... depind of their performance, Canada can have 1 or 2 slots in CCL. Montreal Impact and Toronto FC have good results in this competition everytime. 5 from CFU? Yes .... there are almost 30 associations. Give them a chance to develop their football. results for CFU Clubs in last 3 editions : 2015 : 2W - 0D - 10L 2014 : 0W - 1D - 11L 2013 : 1W - 4D - 7L Outside Mexican clubs, all the rest (26 clubs) will fight for 10 places to qualify in Round of 16. And then, we will have greatest matches between clubs from Guatemala and Honduras, when they will keep alive their chances to qualify for KO round.
I could say 32 is too much, but I suggested 35. Still, 11 of those would be eliminated after just 2 games. Even the current 24 seems exaggerated. The group stage is full of team using mixed or full reserve squads, many advancing to the final rounds. Making 32, all 32 would play six games, which could be too much. With 35: 11 play 6; 13, 4; 11, 2. It does not stretch the schedule too much. As a compromise, I could argue for my proposal to be a step toward yours. The advantage of 24, eight groups, is giving some teams opportunity to play 4 games against good/better opposition. It shares experience, make those teams better, help develop soccer in countries still behind in quality. Among those 24, there are good teams enough for some groups to get interesting. However, I admit, it has this feeling of a qualifying stage; which makes 4 games a reasonable number. Instead of 4 groups of 4, I would keep the 8 groups of 3. As I have said before, I believe it makes more sense having a second group stage with the 8 qualified teams.
Ok, 32 is too much, 16 was in past, so 24 is ideal number. But not this format 8 x 3 ... this is a big stupidity. and why ? : - one of all these 3 clubs (can be) are out from the competition after 2 matches. (A beat two times team B, then B why to play against C, if they are already out? ) - in last round, must give chances to all teams from a group to play in same time... to not favor the result (A have already played 4 matches and need that B dont lose againt C in last match. B have no chance to qualify, so they will put second team in match, and C win, A suck) - teams from pot C, if have unlucky to join a group with Mexican/MLS team and second team from Costa Rica, they they can say something before the matches : WITHDRAW So, if we keep this system with 24 teams, let's to so : 6 groups of 4 teams with 6 matches for each team. For Knock-out round will qualify 16 (top2 from each group + best 4 clubs which finished 3rd in group). Ah, CONCACAF don't support Round of 16 .... clubs from El Salvador, Honduras or Panama will qualify here? then, let after groups stage same like today, quarterfinalst so : 6 clubs from 1st place in groups stage best 4 clubs from 2nd place will play a play off for quarterfinal => 2 clubs in quarterfinals I think both these systems will be more interesting for all people and fans around the world, than actual system
You might want to check your history, the NBA had little to no interest in sending its players to the Olympics. FIBA wanted it, USA basketball wanted it, the NBA didn't care. The NBA was hesitant to send its players (and still is today). The NBA had absolutely no need for the Olympics, FIBA needed the NBA. Get your facts straight.
Invite South American clubs. After all, they invite the Mexican clubs to their Libertadores. Let's allow a couple of clubs from Brazil and Argentina in.
while this would certainly "spice up" the tournament, what's the incentive for the South American clubs?
Why, money of course. You can bet FOX and even more Univision would see more viewers from the deal. Use that money to entice 'em to come. Besides, there's the chance for them of giving it to the Mexicans in their own confederation. I think that'd count for a bit of a stimulus.
CONCACAF Champions League can invite clubs from New Zeeland !!! Auckland City (third in Clubs World Cup 2014) and Waitakere United can join with succes this format of CCL. Oceania Champions League is played in April,. so the program doesnt affect it. New Zeeland Championship is too short, with only 16 matches per club. So, they can join CCL groups stage, even quarterfinals. Geographycal, they have same disstance wit Mexico for Copa Libertadores. and I understand that New Zeeland want to join CONCACAF in some years. This can be the start point.
Ah, imagine that! Seattle Sounders vs. Boca Juniors Cruzeiro vs. LA Galaxy Unidersidad de Chile vs. Orlando City SC Philadelphia Union vs. Cerro Porteño The mouth waters...
Not exactly like you thought, but check it here, how I would do it: http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/how-to-include-usa-can-in-copa-libertadores.1934897/ Tell me about it...
Interesting read. I thought about something similar, but with 32 teams in 20+12 scheme, 64 teams in 40+24 is just way too much for both confederations.
I know it seems huge, but the current number is already 62 clubs: Libertadores, 38; CCL, 24. I just took away the 3 Mexicans spots in Libertadores and added 5 new; rounding the total in 64.