Post-match: USA v Mexico Post Game.

I agree, having too many teams in the wc is dumb.

 

What is too many?

The powerful soccer nations will favor more teams since it will make qualification less stressful (see the Dutch). And give more younger players a look earlier.

The medium soccer power & minnows will also favor it since it will enhance their chances to qualify.

The large clubs will favor it, since qualification is easier, some of the star players won't have to get called every match.

With all (or almost all) of fthe soccer passionate nations at the Cup, more people will watch. More money for FIFA.

There are a lot of factors pointing to it. Wanting PKs over draws, that is silly.

 

Just a matter of time until there's a minute between each round of penalties, so Trivago and Netcom can place commercials.

 

Jesus H.Christ,I wish people would stop citing FIFA rankings as proof of anything.
They're worthless

 

Will come back in a bit, I am at the Miami United game right now, we brought Rambo De Leon, dude is almost 40, still great touch.

 

Netcom is still a thing?

 

Please listen to what several other posters have written. Your idea of penalties after draws in all games will INCREASE the incentive for "coward coaches" to play for a tie game. Your idea will make it worse.

If a coach understands that his team has only a 25% chance to win in regulation by playing a more open game, but his team has a 50% chance to win in penalties, that coach will play for the regulation draw MORE OFTEN, not less. The coward coaches will WANT penalties because it reduces the benefit of skill/talent and increases the benefit of luck.

 

You don't lose touch. Just everything else.

 

I'm not a scientists or a mathematician but I doubt that is true.

I guess I have never been a guy that even considers a tie, I play to win always.

 

I was very impressed, for a guy his age, he was running and tackling sometimes.

His touch is great for this league, you can tell he played in Sería A at some point.

 

Ignore the "math" if you like and just think about the incentives, about human nature. Your idea creates an incentive to play negative, bunker-ball and get to penalties. Weaker teams always have a better chance in penalties than in open play, so weaker teams will play MORE defensively.

 

Could be, and they will train a lot on penalty kicks, make sense.

I actually played for a coach that spent a lot of time on set pieces, it was terrible. Hated every minute of it.

 

I take that back, in reality, I still believe we will be much better off with penalty kicks after a tie.

I think it will be better for the fans and the enjoyment of the game.

 

Right now a win is worth 3x a draw, and there is already as you point out a tendency for weaker teams to bunker.

Why on earth do you think that making a win only worth 2x a draw (after 90), which is what your plan in effect does, will improve things?

I would like to see PKs after 90 for international friendlies because, hell, why not. Gives the fans of the winning team bragging rights and lets the teams practice their PK shooting in case they ever need it in a tournament. But it would be disastrous for regular competitive games.

 

You've also never been a guy to coach at a high level, if any level, were a single point can make the difference between 100 million dollars or even your own lively hood.

 

Let's not forget that not all games end up in a draw.

Pure instinct, i just think it will be better for the game.

 

Mediocre coaches who play to draw like Mourinho will be crying around with this, wait, he cries about everything anyway, it will be like early retirement for him.

 

You keep calling Mourinho a mediocre coach.

You're missing a few things . . .

http://www.skysports.com/football/n...er-milan-and-porto-jose-mourinhos-21-trophies

 

I know who is, I started to hate him when he joined Madrid, ugliest football ever.

 

Your post is worthless while the FIFA rankings are used to determine seedings in major tournaments including the World Cup.

 

So forget about strategy which becomes play a defensive team that can draw with defensive tactics then sub in 3 penalty specialists in the last 2 minutes and go to pens.

 

Better than 0-0 games.

People always comes up with the most extreme examples.

We should do a survey with fans of what they prefer.

To me, it will force coaches to train to win so they don't go into a 50/50 chance of getting no points, sounds good to me.

 

Welp, you sure had me fooled.

 

I guess the poster you are answering to is on my ignore list. And for a reason. Win was, actually, worth 2x a draw till mid 70th and then turned into 3x a draw in order to deal with abundance of 0:0 ties.

 

Why is it extreme? Substitutions are key in a game. In your system, substitutions become penalty shooters who might have limited skills in other areas so the game gets all defensive while waiting for pens. Nturally the keeper will now be somebody who doesn't really clear or kick or do all the things keepers normally do. Instead he will be good at saving pens.