CONCACAF Gold Cup in USA, is it forever?

Discussion in 'Gold Cup' started by Gwadaboyz 72, Mar 16, 2012.

  1. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    England
    Apr 18, 2015
    A mile from Yankee Stadium
    Country:
    United States
    Or to put it another way, the combined GDP of the qualifiers other than USA, Mexico and Canada is lower than New Zealand, which in turn is significantly lower than Louisiana.
     
  2. Mr. P Mosh

    Mr. P Mosh Member+

    Aug 10, 2009
    Monterrey, NL, Mex
    Country:
    Mexico
    Huh?

    Guatemala has always been soccer crazy.
    Nicaragua and Panamá (this is changing in the latter though) are the baseball nations from Central America.
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  3. Paul Berry

    Paul Berry Member+

    Notts County and NYCFC
    England
    Apr 18, 2015
    A mile from Yankee Stadium
    Country:
    United States
    Maybe he meant The Dominican Republic.
     
  4. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    You're correct. My error.

    General point remains, however, that among the larger Central American and Caribbean nations many of them devote their limited resources and sporting passions to things other than soccer. Until 2-3 of them can break onto the world scene with the level of play comparable to Costa Rica and make the upper tier of the region stronger then there won't be much appeal to lure more casual fans in the region to CONCACAF events, let alone garner more international attention.
     
  5. slaminsams

    slaminsams Member+

    Mar 22, 2010
    #30 slaminsams, Jul 8, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2017
    Not sure why Australia gets its own population bracket but that is a side point.

    Also Guatemala is not a baseball mad country soccer is their main sport and has been for a long time

    Fair point concacaf isn't built like other confederations but that is an excuse not a reason for not growing the game beyond what it's been for the past few decades in the region. We won't ever be conmebol but that is no excuse for not improving or making the effort to improve as a confederation

    The CCL is regressing not improving in terms of interest. Concacaf's desire to just focus on squeezing as much money as they could from North America made the tournament format a joke and is the best example of their flawed thinking which you are justifying by just pointing out population. We can go on and on with examples of concacaf's missed opportunities to grow the game outside of the USA but CHOOSING not to because it was easier to make a buck by just keeping the status quo. Yet you think there is little concacaf can do to improve things.

    There is nothing wrong with starting to build the game in Canada, Dominican Republic, Haiti, T&T, El Salvador and Jamaica by letting them host a gold cup or cohost it initially. Canada has done a great job hosting international events and the locals tend to embrace the task. Each of the countries I listed would benefit tremendously from hosting for different reasons. If concacaf used the gold cup money to help those countries then we would start to see growth. Instead we get the excuse that the gold cup money funds youth tournaments but anyone watching knows that is bs there is no way concacaf is investing that much in their youth tournaments. Ad revenue alone could more then fund what concacaf invests in youth tournaments

    In terms of relying on the FA's to drum up business that is insanely flawed. Concacaf despite having had a chance to reform concacaf after Warner then Webbs departure chose not to rock the boat to much with what is expected from fa's. So we will continue to get fa's that pocket what little money is available and do nothing to grow the sport in their country. Even the positive example of Costa Rca recently had an FA president arrested for corruption. Concacaf having the attitude of letting everyone sink or swim on their own means nothing will change
     
    AlbertCamus, M and Pønch repped this.
  6. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I was merely copying and pasting a table based on continents as a quick reference, and since Australia is an island...

    Yeah, my error in haste. Though it does beg the question, given Guatemala's size how can we make them a stronger footballing nation? They're larger and wealthier than Costa Rica, Jamaica and Urugauy, three nations with a much better established pedigree, so it's stands to reason if we could unlock much of their potential they could become a more formidable program.

    Well, then we need to start building the dialogue of identifying what CONCACAF can/should do, especially since we all want the same thing. To wit:
    I have no problem with this. I think within the next generation both Canada and Mexico will host, especially as the eventual joint World Cup approaches. I would also favor a Central American joint offer and the same from Caribbean nations. I can't say the event would garner as much $ for CONCACAF, but if we all agree that's a secondary concern then by all means move the event around. Maybe the notion that it will travel will endear more appeal among the locals and travelers?

    But what else should be done? (Perhaps that should be a new thread?)

    Canada's efforts of late are their own doing, not CONCACAF's. And this is not a top-down thing. CONCACAF can lead by example but it is essentially governed by the FA's, and if the FA's are waiting on a savior from on high then woe be unto them. As the adage goes "all politics are local," and this is no exception. The local FA's must be the ones to coordinate investment in facilities and working with youth in ways that are best for them, as that will also endow the best connections with the locals. Much like any other business you need local connections to establish deep roots.

    That many of these nations are too small for the local FA to be so self reliant, then, highlights the flaw within the overall system. As with Oceania FIFA is thick with members who are large enough for a national team but nary anything beyond that. To what extent is FIFA or the confederations charged with subsidizing their existence? If these teams and programs can't survive without such stipends then perhaps it's not worth the investment. I'm not saying this as a measure of cruelty against the likes of, say, Antigua, but merely to ensure discussion of what and how CONCACAF should act should include a measure of return. We want to be in the business of teaching people how to fish, not simply giving them fish every day. So if CONCACAF is going to invest their money in helping poorer members are we simply trying to be equitable in sharing resources or are we eyeing a long-term program to improve the region? I ask because in my mind the two aren't compatible. Want a stronger CONCACAF? Then over invest in middling sized nations like El Salvador and Guatemala to get their youth development programs and facilities to the next level. Won't help the likes of Barbados but it will raise the profile and appeal of CONCACAF events.
     
  7. slaminsams

    slaminsams Member+

    Mar 22, 2010
    #32 slaminsams, Jul 8, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2017
    Football is a top down game like no other. If Fifa weren't in the business of essentially promoting corruption because it suited their need at the time then a lot of these fa's would be run better. However when governments have tried to step in and see the books of fa's especially in Central America were several receive government subsidies fifa either threatens to or does claim government interference and pulls them from fifa competitions.

    It can't simply be let's keep the same corrupt members with no outside interference and then also make it work on your own. That is just flawed.

    Concacaf also controls how their International competitions are run which is a more pertinent argument in this thread the least they could do is take some of their non North American members into account when making decisions

    Concacaf just had the golden opportunity to clean some of it up but declined to

    As far as getting Guatemala to be competitive a good start would be lifting the ban fifa placed on them. However in a more long term sense concacaf could invest some of the gold cup money they claim to into youth programs. Even a little assistance would go a long way such as technical help and training other youth coaches
     
    edcalvi repped this.
  8. edcalvi

    edcalvi Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 1, 2005
    Nevada
    Guatemala may have a large population and large economy with considerable wealth compared to its neighbors but roughly 50% of the population is a segregated indigenous Mayan population living in extreme poverty and then you a very wealthy oligarchy. As you may see there's very limited football development within these marginalized Mayan communities.

    This hinders our overall development as we mostly depend on the rest of the non-Mayan population of 6 to 7 million people for football players.

    Despite these obstacles we should still remain competitive because we have an economically successful domestic football league. And as @slaminsams said the youth programs should receive investment...But our domestic clubs only care about signing expensive old foreigners instead of polishing our youth talent.

    Also there's the corruption within the football federation (FA) so again no priority is given into youth programs.

    If you look elsewhere, priority into youth football developmental programs has been key to Costa Rica's national team success.
     
    Q*bert Jones III repped this.
  9. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Nassau County, NY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Country:
    United States
    Even 6 to 7 million is more people than the 4,586,353 for Costa Rica in 2011 according to Wikipedia. What clubs do Guatemalan U-20 players play for?
     
  10. edcalvi

    edcalvi Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 1, 2005
    Nevada
    Most U20 play in the club reserves and not in the first team. Clubs prefer old foreigners instead.
     
  11. Robert Borden

    Robert Borden Member

    Chelsea
    Canada
    Apr 19, 2017
    Toronto, Ontario
    Country:
    Canada
    CONCACAF Gold Cup in USA, is it forever?

    God I hope not. It's bad seeing all those empty seats in stadiums where there's no US or Mexican matches
     
  12. Q*bert Jones III

    Q*bert Jones III The People's Poet

    Feb 12, 2005
    Woodstock, NY
    Club:
    DC United
    Do you think attendance would be higher for Martinique vs. El Salvador if the game were in Vancouver or Puebla?
     
  13. Robert Borden

    Robert Borden Member

    Chelsea
    Canada
    Apr 19, 2017
    Toronto, Ontario
    Country:
    Canada
    Based on past World cup at lower level for both men and women U23 or less involving countries no one usually go out of their way to watch and past Gold Cup at BMO Field...absolutely, without a doubt for Canada.

    As for Mexico, they love the sport so I think so as well.

    The US love their team above else ahead of the sport, that's my opinion. We're not talking half full stadiums here, were talking embarrassingly empty
     
  14. Rafael Hernandez

    Rafael Hernandez Moderator
    Staff Member

    Mar 6, 2002
    You're wrong. They love the sport but dislike CONCACAF teams. No way in hell do people in Mexico go to see a match like that unless it's free or they get paid to go.
     
  15. Robert Borden

    Robert Borden Member

    Chelsea
    Canada
    Apr 19, 2017
    Toronto, Ontario
    Country:
    Canada
    #40 Robert Borden, Jul 12, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2017
    Fair enough, I was just assuming. I can only speak for Canada and we would absolutely attend all the game with a big crowd

    I can even back this up

    2014 World Cup in Brazil

    [​IMG]

    If you look at the ratio of tickets sold by overall population, Canada ranks higher than the United States, Germany, France and Mexico. If we would have qualified, it would have been even higher.

    Besides, the Canadian Soccer Association plans to host 100% of the Gold Cup once we have the Canadian Premier League soccer specific stadiums built.

    We already have the stadiums but it's a tough sell to convince the Canadian Football League to shutdown their league and lend their stadiums for the Gold Cup.
     
    AlbertCamus repped this.
  16. Rafael Hernandez

    Rafael Hernandez Moderator
    Staff Member

    Mar 6, 2002
    I agree that Canada is the only other nation that can host the Gold Cup. Mexico has the resources and facilities but would not have the fan support.
     
  17. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    If you're asking for objectivity regarding your CPL then provide the same elsewhere, please.

    The Gold Cup as an event has been diluted since it's every 2 years instead of 4, and as has been discussed here and elsewhere it's been demonstrated about the limitations of the national teams and their audiences. Several teams participating come from nations that are smaller and/or economically weaker than the weakest CONMEBOL member. Then they go and put the teams in NFL sized stadiums, in part due to the appeal of the host market or expecting the paired match (featuring US or Mexico) will provide a spillover draw.

    In other words I think the level of criticism, or perhaps your expectations, are unfounded. After all, you're watching nations like Martinique, Curacao, French Guyana and Nicaragua in 60k+ seat venues. I would love to see larger crowds or put these games in smaller venues, but there's little value in griping about it or suggesting it's an indication of a US problem.

    Keep in mind we're on the heels of seeing a bigger and more prestigious event here in the US last year (Copa America) that drew record crowds.
    Please explain to me how Canada selling the 11th most amount of tickets to Brazil 14' implies your nation would "absolutely" yield stronger crowds for a Gold Cup match than we're seeing in the States? Especially when the US sold the 2nd most to the same World Cup?!

    That's rhetorical, BTW.

    Look, I would love to see the event travel around the region and get into more right-sized stadiums, as I think down the line that would pay greater dividends for the event and soccer in the region. But if the next event were held in Canada surely the largest boost in audience stems from the novelty of the now-mobile event compared to where American-based fans can assume it will just be back again in 2 years. In which case, after it's toured Canada, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean then when it did return to the States I'd wager the crowds would in fact be larger than we see today.

    So cut us and the event some slack. We may be guilty of some apathy but that's way down the list of forces at play here.
     
  18. Robert Borden

    Robert Borden Member

    Chelsea
    Canada
    Apr 19, 2017
    Toronto, Ontario
    Country:
    Canada
    You must have been missing the word "opinion" in my sentence. Doesn't mean I'm accurate and there's been plenty of said "opinion" on Canadian Soccer and CPL so please, no need to get sensitive

    Sure, we all know that CONCACAF is stupid to have the Gold Cup every 2 years but it's still a continental trophy. Empty stadiums doesn't help and by the way, the US didn't even sell out the stadium against Martinique and before you say: "oh, it's Martinique", I'll stop you right there and say that during Euro 2016, Albania and Sweden had an attendance of 33k, Nothern Ireland and Poland 33k, Ukraine Nothern Ireland 51k...they pretty much all sell out.

    What does economy has to do with it? Martinique almost beat the states. Economy doesn't always equals overall talent in FIFA.

    So the USSF can't tell FIFA to use smaller stadiums?

    Sounds like excuses to me. Why don't you just say that there are limits to how much Americans are attracted to soccer? There were empty stadiums in some matches during Copa America Centenario as well. BTW

    So? That's justification for poor crowds at a continental tournament?

    You don't understand ratios

    No shit!

    Excuses and assumptions

    You could have avoided all that by admitting that Americans aren't attracted to FIFA lower scale events and that other nations should try to host instead. See? Wasn't that hard.

    US team not selling out is telling a lot and Copa America Centenario (as big a it could get) had empty stadiums at first. No one is disputing Americans interest in big scale events, but it just isn't the case for medium to lower scale events. That my friend is a fact.
     
  19. charlyBrown

    charlyBrown New Member

    Dec 8, 2004
    I think only the gold cup finals should be played in the USA. Quaterfinals through to the Final.

    The round-robin should be played as a home-away round, similar to the champions format.
    I believe if you had a Jamaica vs Martinique in that format you would draw alot more funds than one match in the USA where only 50 spectators show
     
  20. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Nassau County, NY
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Country:
    United States
    I think GunnerJacket was bringing up economy to compare the USA and Martinique in popularity and attendance, not performance on the field. If you asked any of the top countries who they would rather host to maximize attendance, they would choose USA over Martinique. The decisions are made by CONCACAF, not FIFA.
     
  21. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    #46 GunnerJacket, Jul 14, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2017
    I saw it. I'm disputing your basis for it.

    Albania and Sweden have a combined population of 13M, with plenty of folks wealthy enough to travel to France. Martinique has roughly 400,000 and is decidedly poorer, both in soccer pedigree and wealth among households. Meaning the prospects for the smaller nations within CONCACAF to bring fans to an event can be slim to none. UEFA is about 300,000,000 people larger than our region, with greater balance among teams such that more fans have cause to be enthused, and a deeper pool of wealthy-enough fans for most of their teams that they can pull off this event with relative ease. For CONCACAF you cannot go 12 deep without reaching a pool of small, poor nations that simply are not going to bring 2k fans to every game, much less 10k like most European nations.

    I would never attest otherwise. I've been watching pro and national soccer here since the late 70's and understand full well the obstacles and degree of apathy involved. But, again, that's not the only determinant at play in this issue and you can't deny the progress that's been made in the States, either. I've never said we're superior even to Canada in this regard, merely defying the assertion that the attendance woes of this event are solely down to "Murica."

    Yep. Also:
    Average Attendance
    47,594 Euro 2016
    46,370 Copa America Centenario

    Sure I do, and I'm guessing that even if Canada has a better ratio of locals supporting this event you'll still have some problems given the smaller resident populations seeing as you're about 1/10 the size of this nation and you harbor smaller numbers of immigrants from the likes of El Salvador and Panama. To say nothing of the longer travel for some visiting fans.

    You use the latter all the time regarding the potential for Canadian soccer. Am I not entitled to the same?

    Never denied that. Nor have you demonstrated that it's a given Canadians would find it more attractive.

    Agreed, and I haven't said otherwise.

    My main focus had to do with the ability of fans to travel to watch their teams. The Euros draw fans because it's rarer, they have a larger population/fan base from which to draw, and they have a wealthier fan base that can more easily afford and arrange the travel necessary to see their teams. Most of the nations within CONCACAF, the smallest of the FIFA confederations population-wise, are poorer. Their teams have fewer players and resources from which to grow the calibre and appeal of their teams, and the fans have less with which to support their teams. True enough, it would likely be cheaper for fans to travel to, say, Costa Rica than to the US, but then CONCACAF itself is going to make less money per match based on the revenue potential of those stadiums.

    The bottom line is this - In terms of resources available for dedication to soccer and its fans CONCACAF is a poor region compared to the others. A few teams can match the global norm but after that it drops off very quickly. And while US fans can do much better than we're regrettably seeing they're not the cause of the problems facing CONCACAF or the Gold Cup, either.
     
  22. Robert Borden

    Robert Borden Member

    Chelsea
    Canada
    Apr 19, 2017
    Toronto, Ontario
    Country:
    Canada
    Yet we still hold the record for the Women's World Cup and some U World Cups...that with only 1/10 of the US population. Same for last year's MLS Cup playoffs and final. The TV viewership weren't even close between Canada and the US.

    Sure I make assumptions, but I don't make excuses for the state of Canadian soccer

    We won't know unless we try right?

    yes, CONCACAF is a mess, hopefully Montagliani can fix some of the issues. He addressed the WCQ needed to be changes, a league of Nations replacing random friendlies and he changed the CCL format. He won't fixed everything but at least he's trying to fix some of the issues...starting with corruption.
     
  23. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I know about the WWC. That was a fine job done and proved to me your lot could host a men's one someday. At the least I agree you deserve a Gold Cup effort, as well.

    A different animal, though. Again, I agree the US has struggled in the TV departments in this regard but there's a vested interest in getting metro Toronto and Montreal to watch their teams in a few playoff matches. Not so with regards to Nicaragua vs Curacao.

    I hope you get the chance, not only to build the appeal of the event by moving it around but also because I believe growing Canadian soccer will help soccer in the region. Maybe it will also illustrate the advantages of using more smaller stadia, to boot.

    Agreed, and I think the benefit is that in coming from Canada vs. some small island nation he'll offer a decidedly different perspective on the long-game for the region. While I'm not sold on the LoN approach it's safe to say change is needed so I'll give it a shot. Now the question is whether or not he can identify other ways to lift the Central American nations to greater heights, as well.
     
  24. ATLfirefan

    ATLfirefan Member

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Jul 8, 2005
    Dacula, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Country:
    United States
    Since the North American teams are basically guaranteed a spot each tournament, it would make sense for Mexico and Canada to host group-stage matches, in my opinion.

    This could do one of two things:

    1) Allow more native Central Americans to attend matches in Mexico, as opposed to the many immigrants who are here in the U.S. to attend.
    2) Allow for more venues to host the matches, as they wouldn't have to be in doubleheaders just to sell tix.

    Let me explain 2:
    Obviously, the organizing committee uses NFL stadiums for the groups of USA and Mexico. Why? Because they know that they can sell at least 40,000 tickets to a doubleheader when about 85% of those people are there just for the Mexico or USA match. This does create a not-so-good look when Nicaragua and Martinique play after the USA in Nashville or El Salvador and Curacao play before Mexico in Denver.

    In group A, they used all Soccer-Specific Stadiums, the largest being Red Bull Arena with a capacity around 25,000. Because of this, the stadium looks full for BOTH matches.

    If USA. were to only host group B matches, they could use NFL stadiums for the USA match and a regionally proximate soccer-specific stadium for the other match on that day. For example, USA vs Nicaragua in Cleveland NFL Stadium, Martinique vs Panama in Columbus MLS Stadium.

    Canada could host group A matches, Mexico could host group C matches with their home teams playing in larger stadiums (Vancouver, Guadalajara, Montreal, Mexico City) and the secondary matches in smaller stadiums (Toronto, Tijuana, Torreon, Winnipeg).
     
  25. GunnerJacket

    GunnerJacket Moderator
    Staff Member

    Sep 18, 2003
    Gainesville, GA
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I was about to offer how that would only exacerbate the advantages for the bigger teams, then I recalled how Mexico arguably draws as well/better here in the States and the other team is, well, Canada! :)

    Still, I think such a move would simply dilute the event further. I think the answer is a classic case of "less is more."

    - Have it once every 4 years and allow the infrequency to make it more special.
    - Rotate hosting locations, so it's even more infrequent in host cities and other nations get more enthused about hosting. US, Central America, Canada and Mexico can all host. Maybe someday a Caribbean event.
    - Expand to 16 teams. More nations/people have a reason to watch, the urgency to win is ramped up (to finish top 2 in group), and over time that would endow more opportunities for 2nd tier powers to evolve.
    - Host in more intimate stadiums throughout the event and regionalize it where possible so that fans don't have to travel as far or spend as much money.
    - Make tickets cheaper.
     

Share This Page