Exactly the france Croatia final didnt draw eyeballs like a normal final...England would've helped that but all three obviously more then haiti/Panama would've rated in that final.
It's possible that playing mostly minnows really hurts teams going to the world cup but I'd add that where they play there club ball probably matters a lot more.
Mostly agree but I do think guys get habits on national team and are very capable of playing down to competition.
Tomorrow is the AFC draw for Qatar 2022. 40 countries will fight for 4.5 places . This is a fair system! learn something Concacaf 24 hours away to the #AsianQualifiers Round 2 draw!🤔 Who do you want to be in your group? Tell us! pic.twitter.com/NteMQ5FzN3— AFC (@theafcdotcom) July 16, 2019
Um...not really, no. It's true that there is a committee that selects teams on an at-large basis, but every conference has an automatic bid for winning the conference, so virtually every team in the country has a chance to play their way in. After those teams are in, the committee fills out the field with at-large teams. And there isn't a metric like the FIFA rankings which the committee sticks to when picking at-large teams, they take a variety of factors into account.
A fair system which CONCACAF does not have enough time for if they're going to have a 2021-22 Nations League and 2021 Gold Cup. You can argue that they shouldn't have these things, but they clearly are going to, so... Honestly, I think what they came up with was a pretty good compromise, with the exception that they should've used Nations League results instead of the FIFA rankings. The four group winners from League A, the winner of a 4-team playoff featuring League A runners-up, and the winner of a 4-team playoff between League B group winners. Everybody else goes into the pot to play for the playoff spot. Done. Really, the only bad part is the FIFA rankings bit. The rest of the wailing is really silly, especially since they found a way to keep the Hex...and it's just one cycle with everything being turned upside down the next time around, so I'm not sure of the need for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth.
And that is the problem. We have too many damn Gold Cups. I have been saying it for 15 years … we need to go to 1 per cycle, and be done with it.
I'm guessing that's all that mattered to you. The problem is that mid-level teams that had a realistic shot at making the Hex under the old format (e.g. Canada, Haiti, Curaçao, Trinidad and Tobago) are now all but an epic collapse by El Salvador away from getting stuck in the bottom-feeders' tournament, with no high-profile matches against the bigger teams in the region and no way to qualify directly for the World Cup.
Maybe somebody has already said this higher in the thread, but isn't this changed qualifying format all about CONCACAF looking at the future expansion of its World Cup slots and worrying about how to preserve the US vs. Mexico rivalry. I can see CONCACAF continuing to use a format very similar to this new one in the future, by expanding the playoff between the Hex fourth vs. another team to a larger tournament with more than one advancing spot at stake. Of course, that would not happen until the 2030 cycle, because of the confusion caused by the fact that there will be several automatic qualifiers from CONCACAF in the 2026 cycle.
I've expanded here on how (if Concacaf wants to go this route and it doesn't prove politically toxic - as I would have hoped) it could be implemented for the 2030 cycle. The tl;dr is that with 6+ berths in the 48-team WC finals, keeping the Hex would be non-sensical, and expanding to an Octagonal would be only slightly less ridiculous (14 games to eliminate 1 team). Rather, there is a way to fit 2 Nations Leagues and a Decagonal into the same WC cycle - top 6 qualify for finals, 7th place goes to playoff against the 11-35 tournament winner for a ticket to the WCQ intercontinental playoffs.
Exactly. It's a financially unjust system, too. It leaves out the meat of the season for countries like those, when they have games against the big teams and get the money, not to mention the zero chance they have now to take out one of the big scalps in the region. It's not a coincidence at all that this is happening right after we failed to qualify. You don't need to be particularly smart to notice the entire thing is to be sure we make it straight to the Hex.
Could be. Even so unfairly it might be for the good of the region if we do. say we didn't make it for a few cycles and soccer drifted back into the pre-90's wilderness. Right now the US hosts most of the money making games for the rest of CONCACAF. If that goes away is that in the best interest of CONCACAF? Unfortunately we have a very odd collection of nations in CONCACAF. CONMEBOL was able to cherry pick who they wanted and have a reasonable collection of somewhat similar sized nations while jettisoning the three tiny countries and coastal islands they didn't want. CONCACAF has three large nations, Central America and a bunch of small Caribbean islands that don't really fit well together in culture, language or economies. What if the reverse were true where CONCACAF had the top eight economies and CONMEBOL got the rest? Think their qualifying wouldn't be a mess?
Maybe. Or maybe these teams that would've been completely shut out of qualifying with two years to go until the World Cup before (or at best been anchored to the bottom of the Hex table) now have a winnable tournament with which they can jump straight to a playoff against the fourth-place Hex team (so probably a beatable team), and then into the interconfederation playoff, where they're one step away from the World Cup and potentially playing like New Zealand or Uzbekistan or somebody. I would argue this makes it more likely that Canada or Haiti or whoever can make the World Cup, not less. It's true that it does make it less likely they'll get to host the U.S. or Mexico in a competitive game, but that shouldn't really be the goal of the qualifying system, and I don't really think it's as important as you seem to. Plus, they can still host one of those teams in Nations League play. Canada and Cuba are hosting us in Nations League play this year, for instance. This system gives the mid-levels/minnows more competitive games and gives them a real path to the World Cup, or at least to within shouting distance of the World Cup. Really, I stand by my opinion that the only thing unfair about it is that it uses FIFA rankings instead of on-field results. Was that to make sure that the U.S. and Mexico made the Hex? Probably. Is that a problem? Yes. But it's that aspect specifically, not the whole setup, that's the problem.
Of course. Honduras, Panama and Costa Rica looked bad in 2018. I'm sure the whole deal was signed with the consent of most national federations, otherwise it would have happened. Probably even some of the directly negatively affected parties. Still, my sense of fairness bristles.
Pedro Chaluja gave the game away when he admitted that this was decided back in 2017. By that logic, El Salvador should tank the Nations League so that they can take the tournament route It makes it almost entirely unlikely (unless one of the US and Mexico slip up and end in 4th place). As a Haitian, I can't even remember the last time the US or Mexico visited PaP for a WCQ, and I was looking forward to the possibility of us reaching the Hex and mixing it up with the big guns (as slim as our chances of actually reaching the WC finals would be). What should be the goal of the qualifying system, if not to grant everyone a fair shot at reaching the Finals (a failure of this system, if only six teams get to play for the automatic WC berths) and maximize the possibility that the best teams go through? A simple example: Jamaica have been better than Haiti over the last 4 years on the strength of the back-to-back Gold Cup finals...but can anyone really argue that they're head-and-shoulders above us right now? And yet, they'll get to be within striking distance of going straight to Qatar (fighting for a direct berth with Costa Rica...whom we just beat), while Haiti will have to get into a knife fight with Canada and (maybe) Panama just to then be two more playoffs away from the Finals.
So looking further into this since I posted, it seems that it's inaccurate to say an individual country's chances to make the World Cup are better through the secondary tournament. The chances are actually better in the Hex, as it's slightly more likely for a mid-tier/minnow to supplant Mexico/U.S./Costa Rica for one of the three automatic spots than to clear every single one of the individual shorter hurdles set up by the secondary tournament. However, the new system does make it more likely that one of the mid-tier teams will make the World Cup. It's just that when you're looking at it from an individual perspective of one of those teams instead of as a group, you'd rather be in the Hex.
.@CNationsLeague to serve as pathway for 2021 @GoldCup 🗞>> https://t.co/j5xa3ekZGu#FollowTheDream #LoveForOurGame pic.twitter.com/ARRFSiMbDL— Concacaf (@Concacaf) September 4, 2019 CNL multiplier will be (X25) instead of (X15) For the FIFA Men’s World Ranking, all 2019-2020 Concacaf Nations League matches will be granted a coefficient score which corresponds to qualification matches to a Confederations final competition, rather than friendly international matches played during FIFA International Match Calendar window.
Was this a vote of the whole region or some select board? Because I am sure the true minnows would be happy to basically claw back one slot to fight for amongst themselves, and the minnows could outvote the rest. That the process for the other 5 slots favors the routine big dogs would be more of a concern of the marginal semi level teams who might think this makes harder cinderella runs. You can't luck out on a semi draw anymore. But vs the 50+ regional sides those would be just a few teams, and the elite would go for this because it would lower their risks of missing Hex even further. Whether that's fair or not, I agree, I think this should be an equal chances process where everyone starts at the same stage. Like UEFA. That you might parcel out teams from pots but advancement is won on the field by actual wins and not vis a vis an algorithm. I am not a fan of permanent tiering of the teams that presumes perpetuation. I think that should be proven/won on the field each go round.
Reading these quotes from Canada's manager and just shaking my head right now: https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2019...ft-watch-scoreboard-nations-league-hex-future There are still some international windows to try and gain the points for the Hex but Canada likely will need to land friendlies against some higher-ranked opposition. It’s going to be a tough challenge to even get those games organized, let alone get a result should they manage to line them up. “You have to be very strategic. And then the big question is who wants to play Canada in that window,” said Herdman. “We’ve been working behind the scenes to make sure that we’ve got these teams lined up that can give us a range of points that are realistic based on where we are in our journey.
Could they get the MLS Contingent together and lineup some January friendlies, and milk points there?
I'd really like to see how Montagliani returns home to Canada with a straight face after having screwed them over (unless he picked up the entire Jack Warner playbook and just doesn't care anymore).
Your theory is crocked. Basically a similar anti-meritocratic sop. And worse than the current process. League A was earned: 6 2018 Hex teams plus the best 6 teams from a region wide quali process, of which you are surely aware as Canada played there to get into NL. League B was the next best set of teams. In acting like League A's 3rd best should evaporate in service of League B's best, you basically ignore even the best of League B were explicitly second rate to those third place teams League A teams in a quali process held this cycle. Now, technically the League B champs are "winners," but only having been sorted there by first being "losers" at the initial stage of the tournament. And then playing fellow "losers." Whereas the teams you appear to deem "losers" were the "winners" the previous round. I understand you think you are replicating the NL process, with its pro/rel. But the problem is you are effectively using next cycle status to evaluate where they stack this cycle, which was previously resolved when the League B teams couldn't finish ahead of League A qualifiers and dropped to a lower league. That certain League B teams after a poor start rebounded within what could be seen as the loser's bracket, shouldn't elevate them above teams that qualified in front of them. Personally I want to go back to the old approach, or maybe even make everyone qualify from the first round. Each team should be treated equally in the region, and quali should be decided on the field in that specific event. And the process shouldn't be involving ranks and other competitions and basically be a big country protection device plus 6th slot sop to everyone else. But failing that, excluding the 3rd place League A teams that outperformed the League B sides to be there, in service of League B teams, is absurd. I would suggest a 12-16 team playoff of teams either side of the red line. Last 8 League A + 4-8 League B at top. That gives both rounds merit.