I can't believe that any team in the top 12ish would prefer to play for the 0.5 playoff instead of a guaranteed spot. After all, you are still getting a shot at that playoff if you finish 4th in the Hex. And with the extended knockout round for the others, 1 bad game and you're still out. I don't think that the new format is a 'shortest route possible' for an underdog. That's likely 16 games - most all of which need to be wins to qualify. I'd rather take my shot at finishing 4th in the hex And with the multiple playoffs required (vs Hex4 and Interconfederation) - it's really like a 0.25 spot for the 7-35.
TBF - Canada is disadvantaged by any format that discourages coin flips. But more seriously, I agree this format is stupid - the point about El Salvador is the obvious one - is it better to be 6th or 7th in this scheme? Australia effectively faced a similar "choice" back in 2005 - do we stick with the OFC where we get easier matches but then a cut-throat last phase where you can be thrown off course by something as weird as a crazy person trying to cut down the nets on the goal, or do we go into Asia where the process clearly involves a lot more trickier stages, but has a more tangible goal at the end. Our choice was the second one - whereas you have been forced to become the new New Zealand. Still, look on the bright side - in the recent past once the Hex was going Canada had nothing left to play for - now they will still have a chance. J
"Better" will obviously depend on how you think your team sits at present. (And, as I've noted elsewhere - I'm not arguing this system is anything but insane - my country spent 20 years trying to escape this sort of garbage so I wouldn't wish it on anyone who seriously wants to progress). In this case I would clearly fight for the Hex spot if I felt I was in the top 8 or 9 in Concacaf or (probably more crucially) if I felt there was any possible weakness in 2 or more of the current Hex likelys. However, if I didn't make that I wouldn't be 100% gutted, particularly if was 10-12 in the list at present. J
Those results are accounted for (you can verify on the 25th when FIFA publish the ranking): http://www.football-rankings.info/2019/07/fifa-ranking-july-2019-final-preview.html He's trustworthy. He also posts updates so you can keep track of how e.g. upsets or friendlies (that have yet to be scheduled) change things.
Lets not count chickens. Still a decent chance that Canada gets eliminated a full 2 years before the WC kicks-off with this new format.
Thanks! I'm still shocked that Jamaica and Costa Rica are 100% - in even if they go winless in Nations League. That really highlights that if this format was going to be chosen, it should have been announced a year ago. Would Panama have played a B side against the USA in the Gold Cup if they knew this?
OK, I just really looked into the Math. There really isn't much room for movement, mostly due to FIFA valuing the Nations League matches so little - only worth 15 vs a friendly at 10, and a gold cup or world cup qualifier at 25. Basically, it's going to take a long time to move up or down. The USA can lose to Cuba twice in Nations League, and only lose @ 27 points. Likewise, Canada beating the USA twice only gains them about 20 points, and they trail El Salvador by 30. I don't think that FIFA allowed enough sway in the factors when calculating results. The rankings formula really protects the status quo. Having said that, if the 5th and 6th place teams in the Hex this cycle get hammered/very few results, it will likely be very difficult for them to get back to a top 6 ranking for the 2026 'hex' unless they do quite well in the Gold cup (assuming formats hold). Likewise, the 7-10 teams can really boost their rankings.
He calculates predictions of scheduled matches. E.g. friendlies (that have yet to be scheduled) can't be included at this point. In his updates he'll revise his projections. Still those 4 Hex spots are pretty much decided already. PS yes, movement in FIFA's rankings is indeed very slow.
Yeah, ELO ratings change much faster. If the point of Nations League was supposed to be to provide more meaningful matches for smaller teams, they really should have been worth more - maybe even equal to the qualifiers.
Whch means they really rigged the 2022 qualifying in CONCACAF. It would be bad enough dreaming up such a format without knowing the six teams getting favored, but they only decided on the format when the six were basically cemented. I wonder if CONMEBOL will be tempted to copy this format starting 2026 I think most of us agreed that a single 10-team group / 18 match round doesn’t work well when 6.5 teams qualify.
CONMEBOL could use the 10 team group as their nations League and adopt some other system for WCQ. That way they still get a 10 team league, a copa america and a smaller WCQ system every four year cycle.
Television Networks probably like this format way, way better. You go straight into the nitty-gritty sooner without having to broadcast Mexico 11 -0 over Barbados type matches on Telemundo/Bein or whoever purchases the rights The Lower seed rounds will probably just be relegated to online/ digital platform distribution but the matches involving El Salvador if they fall in the rankings and Guatemala will probably put on actual television (here in the USA).
I dunno. Okay, the timing of the HEX is different/earlier (not sure why TV networks would think earlier - better) but you lose the 6-game semifinal group-stage. Those were interesting games - okay, each group would have one minnow, but the other 2 opponents were competitive.
I like that idea. Top 4 teams qualify directly for WC and also compete for NL title (and spots in the Global NL championship if it exists). And you have a very short WCQ => Like maybe a 4-team knockout tournament between the 5th-8th place NL teams, with winners also qualifying for WC and the 2 losers going to the inter-continental playoff.
Verifying the predictions from above. Top 4 are virtually locked (maybe if Jamaica loses all 6 Nations League games they could fall out?). T&T is out. Haiti would need to win the Nations League. Canada & Curacao likely need to almost do as well (finals of Nations League, or at least semi's?) to qualify. Barring extraordinary results, the 6 spot is likely down to El Salvador or Panama. Examples: El Salvador losing to Montserrat costs them 13 points Curacao defeating Costa Rica earns them 9 points Honduras losing to T&T will cost them 9 points Canada defeating Cuba earns them only 3 points Panama defeating Bermuda earns them 3 points Panama defeating Mexico earns them 11 points Order matches/prior results could +/- a point or 2 from results. However, I think based on examples above and current buffers, you can see how little is really at stake any more - which is incredibly disappointing and seems to contradict the stated intent of the Nations League.
Evaluating the rankings: the higher value on World Cup games really hurts teams to qualify and then go 0-3 in the World Cup (Panama). They dropped 18 spots in the August 2018 rankings - putting them in easy striking distance of El Salvador. I feel that the point values of 'match types' are an issue. I'm fine with the 5 for non-FIFA date friendlies, and 10 for the other friendlies. However, I would suggest 25 for all Nations League games, 35 for any Confederation/World Cup qualifier or tournament games (no variances for group vs knockout rounds).
Yea that would be my main issue with the new FIFA rankings, they are really slow to adjust. Of course that shouldn't be surprising as that was the whole idea behind the change. A common criticism of the old rankings was that a few good/bad results could move a team up/down too much (if disturbed peoples sensibilities when teams like Wales or Romania was top 10 but Netherlands or Italy weren't ). Huh??? The FIFA ranking is an ELO based system, that was the big part of the change last year.
I was referring to ELOratings.net (the old ELO rankings site that has been around for years). They weight matches somewhat differently, and include matches for non-FIFA members (Martinique, etc).
Yeah, I am not sure what is better for TV ratings. You still have the Hex, so that is a wash and I am sure TV networks are happy about it (vs say a 2 group final stage that could split the USA and Mexico into different groups). You do lose the pre-Hex groups, they are replaced by Nation league games. I guess that I do not know how Nation league games TV rights are being awarded, are they similar to friendly games? In the pre-goups you have a chance of a Mexico vs Cuba set of games, in the Nations league you don't, Mexico rivals would be better than Cuba, so that may be a thing TV executives like.
Concacaf and Conmebol have their Nation league games (in Conmebol it is the 10 team slug fest every 4 years). Then WC qualifying is combined with all FIFA spots up for grads in multiple groups with mixed Concacaf and Conmebol teams; Think UEFA qualifying. Let's say that a combined Concacaf/Conmebol get 10 WC spots, you could do 10 groups of 4 where only the winners advance. Or perhaps 7 groups of 6 teams, winners qualify directly then the worst 2nd place team is eliminated, the other 2nd place teams (6 teams) play for the last 3 spots. In those scenarios all 10 Conmebol teams could end up in a world cup (in theory).
Concacaf gave the Eng-lang rights (not including US games) to Flo Sports. Presumably Univisión would pick up the Spanish-language rights...or some other major network, b/c SUM clearly had a hand in setting up the schedule with the US and Mexico playing double-headers each matchday in October and November.