Is the Libertadores going to have a 2 leg final again this year? I do not understand the purpose of that format. The final should just be one game. It is all the more precious that way. Whose idea was it to have 2 games played for the Copa? Why???
may be you dont understand this bcause you havent feel the great atmosphere each country could have when they play finals you wont understand this unless you are in there, but i like the idea of having just one-leg final, anyways,we used to have it a few decades ago
yeah, money is the biggest issue. More revenue since it's two legs and not one. I would support a one-leg final experiment like they are doing with the away goal rule this year. A one-leg final in different venues around South America would be great, but I don't see the fans supporting it. South American fans are very closed to their team and only their team. Some fans would go to see two teams from other countries that are indifferent to them, but the most wouldn't. revenue would fall a lot. It would be great. Let's hope they try it in the future.
There is nothing "precious" about a single-match final. A two-leg final will be more likely of having the best club prevailing. Both clubs have to be prepared for the long 180-minute haul, where depth will count for something. Both clubs will have to play in the firey atmosphere of their opponents stadium. And both clubs fans from both countries are entitled to see their would-be champions in action. Next, we'll have fools saying it's best to play it in a neutral site. What I call "the Super Bowl" mentality.
Exactly ... South American distances and purchasing power can't equal to Europe's, where they can travel to a one match final ... It is a way of rewarding the fans of the teams that made it to the final ... I like to see extra time in the 2nd leg if needed thou ... 90 minutes of hanging from the cross bar ain't fair enuff. Vip .
remember that the average south american fan can't afford to travel to support their team in a neutral country. This is a key factor in having a 2 leg final.
I gotta disagree with you here my man, i think a final game has to be only one game in a neutral field, as they do in the UCL For example, my team Saprissa (CR)qualified for the final game of the Concacaf champions cup, we have to play PUMAS from mex, first game at home and the second game wil be at their field...so i feel that the closing team has some kind of advantage
Yes, the home team in a second leg has an advantage in that they know what they must do and have the opportunity to do it in front of its own fanaticos. In light of this, Saprissa fully realizes what has to occur. They must really pile it on at home in the first game.
we have to hit first!, or..... go to mex, play a defensive game and pull out a win in PK's as we did in the semis (eliminating monterey, same circustances.)
Exactly... UEFA & FIFA can have tournaments where a 1 - game final at a "neutral" site can bring in a$$- load of money per seat. To do it in a 60-90k stadium, all the better. They know fans will pay bigtime $ and can easily travel across Europe at affordable rates. CONMEBOL - probrably wishes they could do this. Naturally there's more money - doing it this way. With Supply (only for 1 game instead of 2) and Demand (all the higher) justifying crazy prices. But look at South America's economy and you know few people (a couple 1,000 MAX - maybe 100's) could travel across the continent to a neautral site. A 1-game final will probrably happen only when South America's economy is similar to that of Europe's.
What they should do is get the two finalist, make them play one game and find a stadium between the two teams. For Example, if the final was Santos vs. Boca put the final in a stadium of Paraguay or another country in betwwen the two. Or just make them play in the U.S