Rumor: CONCACAF and CONMEBOL Discuss Merging WC Qualifying

Discussion in 'USA Men: News & Analysis' started by thedukeofsoccer, Mar 14, 2019.

  1. thedukeofsoccer

    thedukeofsoccer Member+

    Jul 11, 2004
    Youtube: Jimmy Dore, Secular Talk
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #1 thedukeofsoccer, Mar 14, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2019
    https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019...-could-combine-world-cup-qualifying-processes

    It could have gotten dicey when only 32 teams made it, but now at 48 it will provide a cushion and make qualifying more interesting, so I'm all for it!

    And I hear CONMEBOL reffing can be suspect, but it can't be worse than CONCACAF, so it's worth the risk to find out with the transition.

    The only thing is U.S. foreign policy could make it a little messy. Where would the U.S. play Venezuela if they invade them? Not like the US plays matches in the Middle East.
     
  2. tbonepat11

    tbonepat11 Member+

    Jun 21, 2001
    The thought of our boys flying to Chile to play at like 60,000 feet makes me cringe. Park the bus fellas!!!!

    In the end this is all about the $$$$$$

    Playing in America will make tons of money for all of the South American Federations. Same reason we always play Mexico in L.A. and not Seattle. Nothing to do with US home field advantage but $$$$.

    In the end, if we do this, I think this will actually make it more difficult for the USA to qualify for the World Cup since we know all of our home games will be played in places with very large immigrant populations of the away country. Making these fixtures away and REALLY away versus home and away.
     
    RalleeMonkey, Mahtzo1 and 2in10 repped this.
  3. The Foo Fighter

    The Foo Fighter Member+

    Mar 15, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm all for it. It would make our road to the world cup all the more challenging, but I think a merger in general would be extremely beneficial for CONCACAF and CONMEBOL in the long run.
     
  4. Suyuntuy

    Suyuntuy Member+

    Jul 16, 2007
    Vancouver, Canada
    No way CONMEBOL goes for this. All those rumors keep coming from CONCACAF, and always get shot down by CONMEBOL people.
     
    STR1 repped this.
  5. sidspaceman

    sidspaceman Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 20, 2002
    AMÉRICA DE CALI
    Club:
    America de Cali
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
     
    tomásbernal and Winoman repped this.
  6. ceezmad

    ceezmad Member+

    Mar 4, 2010
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    For qualifying the USA plays Mexico in Columbus.
     
    SilentAssassin and superdave repped this.
  7. ceezmad

    ceezmad Member+

    Mar 4, 2010
    Chicago
    Club:
    Chicago Red Stars
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree, but Conmebol probably has a hard limit on how many teams can qualify from their federation.

    Having 6 or 7 out of 10 teams qualify may not be something FIFA allows (maybe they will).

    Right now is what 3.5 + 3.5 = 7, if the new allocation is 10+, then S. American clubs could have 7-8 qualify "easily".

    Shit in a bad concacaf year, maybe all 10 could (I doubt it would happen).

    Honduras and Panama would be the biggest possible losers here.
     
  8. LouisianaViking07/09

    Aug 15, 2009
    I don't want this. I want more competition within CONCACAF from the already current members. Canada is on its way. Costa Rica will always be a worthy opponent.
     
    Winoman repped this.
  9. STR1

    STR1 Member

    May 29, 2010
    McAllen, TX
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  10. Suyuntuy

    Suyuntuy Member+

    Jul 16, 2007
    Vancouver, Canada
    They'd have to be crazy to ever give voting majority to the Caribbean islands, considering they are one of the Big Two confederations.

    The berths for 2026 are six for CONCACAF (including hosts) plus six for CONMEBOL, plus a seventh team from both goes to compete the mini-tournament with other four teams, one from AFC, one from CAF, one OFC and a second one from the hosting confederation (CONCACAF). The top two in the mini-tournament also go to the WC.

    So the 2026 qualification in C-CAF is for three spots plus two mini-tournament spots, since three spots will be taken by the organizers. That's room for Costa Rica, Panama and Jamaica/Honduras to get their tickets directly, and the loser of the last plus Trinidad to go to the mini.

    C-BOL can get six direct qualified teams (ARG, BRA, URU, COL, plus two more) and sends a seventh to the mini-tournament (ECU, PER, PAR, CHI, VEN are all likely) which is likely to be one of the faves to get one of the two extra tickets. So South America is not unlikely to end up sending 70% of its teams.
     
  11. beamish

    beamish Member+

    Jul 6, 2009
    I know you picked that number out of the air, but Everest is 29,000 ft. I like the idea of trying to play at twice that elevation. It's like trying to play on Mars.
     
    Winoman repped this.
  12. Ger90

    Ger90 Member+

    May 13, 2016
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    if the USA doesn't participate in Copa 2020 and CC 2021 is dead, you know what that means...

    USA has nothing but 2 Gold Cups, Concacaf NL X2, WC Qualifiers and friendlies.

    so pretty much nothing but concacaf for almost 4 years.
     
  13. Suyuntuy

    Suyuntuy Member+

    Jul 16, 2007
    Vancouver, Canada
    Being stuck in CONCACAF for us is bad, but for Mexico is almost a tragedy.
     
  14. Ger90

    Ger90 Member+

    May 13, 2016
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    can't be helped, it is what it is, countries play in their respective regions.Don't see the 2 big guns of USA/Mexico leaving. I see too much concacaf put down even though the USA failed to qualify from concacaf to begin with.

    well they are saying 2020 copa will have 2 guests, so it's possible it could be USA and/or Mexico. Could also make sense why some young players like Weah/Sargent are going to U23, give them so non concacaf experience and what looks like concacaf dominated schedule.
     
  15. STR1

    STR1 Member

    May 29, 2010
    McAllen, TX
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.espn.com/soccer/copa-america/story/3799941/ussf-copa-america-2020-invitation-is-still-valid-despite-conmebol-rejection-cordeiro?platform=amp

    "It's not about what we call it and who runs it.
    It's about growing the game for our fans and our players. We think there is a significant opportunity here that we want to take advantage of."


    As per reports I had seen before claiming SUM/USSF got way ahead of themselves and went as far as asking FIFA if it was okay to rename Copa America to Continental Cup without even consulting with CONMEBOL, that quote by Cordeiro confirms it. SUM probably thought CONMEBOL was going to drop to their demands because of money and let them take over Copa America.

    That is why CA 2020 won't be here and CONMEBOL is now looking at making it in Argentina/Colombia. US and Mexico will be invited but it looks like SUM wants to make money that summer and is dead set on making a tournament here in the states but I just don't see with whom.
     
  16. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    Considering the US has been in space and other extremely low atmospheric environments far more often than the other CONMEBOL and CONCACAF nations, I believe our uniforms will give us a technological advantage that will propel us to the WC.
     
  17. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    they wouldn't have to to merge qualification. They could have COCACAF and CONMEBOL have equal voting rights. The Caribbean nations would keep their status in CONCACAF but not increase it beyond. I believe the qualification could be combined without combining CONCACAF and CONMEBOL.
     
  18. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    I think that it definitely IS about the money but it could still make for a good opportunity. it would raise the level of the qualifying process (at least the latter stage(s) to a level somewhere inbetween the current tournament and the wc. The fact that it is about the money doesn't mean it won't be good for fans and doesn't mean it won't be a good thing for the USMNT specifically or even the rest of CONCACAF.

    While it is primarily about the money, It may not just be about the money. CONMEBOL has 4.5 slots. My guess is that they wouldn't double their slots to 9 out of 10 but if they were to combine with CONCACAF they could maximize slots. Because CONCACAF is larger, perhaps their 3.5 slots is more likely to rise to 6 or 7. I could see combined the two regions getting 13, 13.5 or 14
    slots. With this in mind, CONMEBOL could still very easily qualify 9 from their region and CONCACAF would possibly qualify one less than they might without CONMEBOL but with the added $$$$ and prestige that would go with the combined tournament. Small CONCACAF nations that have absolutely no hope of qualifying for the WC would now have hopes of qualifying for a tournament that is more prestigious than the current wc qualifyiing tourney.
     
  19. Ghost

    Ghost Member+

    Sep 5, 2001
    New York is 1000 miles closer to London than it is to Buenos Aires. Why do we match up to SA?
     
  20. RalleeMonkey

    RalleeMonkey Member+

    Aug 30, 2004
    here
    Especially with SuMLS scheduling home WCQ's in places with large scale immigration from the opponent. Bottom line is immigrants are willing to poney up more $$ than MNT fans, and suMLS is all about the bottom line.
     
  21. Suyuntuy

    Suyuntuy Member+

    Jul 16, 2007
    Vancouver, Canada
    Because UEFA wants us even less?

    It's always about the money. The problem is how the loot is divided. If it's true things were not fair after Centenario and CONMEBOL didn't get as much as expected, I can understand why they're wary of doing business again.
     
  22. SilentAssassin

    Apr 16, 2007
    St. Louis
    And Panama was created out of Colombia. Distance doesn't really help your case here, unless you want individual cities to pick which confederation to belong to. We are clearly closer to the other CONCACAF countries than any other confederation, and CONCACAF as a whole is closer to CONMEBOL than any other confederation.
     
    tomásbernal repped this.
  23. Pegasus

    Pegasus Member+

    Apr 20, 1999
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    that would be more interesting with about five cities like Seattle, Boston, Miami, Houston and Chicago showing the distance from the farthest city in each federation to the closest.

    I'll give a couple of examples - Seattle, Miami. BTW, seems crazy until I look at a map that Boston is closer to SA cities than San Diego. Still for some players those will be extremely long flights to either continent.

    Seattle - Moscow = 7685
    Seattle - Reykjavic = 3618
    Seattle - Buenos Aires = 6923
    Seattle - Bogata = 4118

    Miami - Moscow = 5616
    Miami - Reykjavic = 3685
    Miami - Buenos Aires = 4415
    Miami - Bogata = 1521

    San Diego - Moscow = 7786
    San Diego - Reykjavic = 4363
    San Diego - Buenos Aires = 6017
    San Diego - Bogata = 3390

    Boston - Moscow = 5264
    Boston - Reykjavic = 2435
    Boston - Buenos Aires = 5382
    Boston - Bogata = 2618
     
  24. Mahtzo1

    Mahtzo1 Member+

    Jan 15, 2007
    So Cal
    Of course more important than the distance is the time difference. Travelling north to south and back is easier on the body than east west.

    That is not to minimize the difficulty of travelling those kinds of distances but I would rather spend more travel time with 2-4 hours time difference than half the half the distance with 8-10 hours difference. I know that the time difference between Los Angeles and Sweden just destroys me when I have been visiting in-laws. (of course that is a combination of long trip and big time difference)
     
    Pegasus and onefineesq repped this.

Share This Page