Clearly the hot, humid weather in Brazil is helping Germany. They won't be proven until the win in Russia.
I think he meant 3 CONCACAF sides in one tournament. In which case this would be the first. Since CONCACAF has really only had 3 qualifiers since 98. Costa Rica were really the first CONCACAF side in 1990.
Happy with COONCACAF getting 3.5, as long as the playoff is against Oceania (New Zealand)! Of course, Mexico even happier!
I meant what he thought, I'd forgotten about CR in 1990. But your point is interesting too, hadn't thought about that.
Concancaf sent 75% of their teams to the 16 and 25% to the quarters, tying a top 4 team. They need to go to at least 4 solid teams.
Totally. Jamaica, Turks & Caicos, Bermuda, El Salvador and Trinidad & Tobago all want to go. They'll feel right at home in Magnetigorsk.
Wolfie - Do you really think Panama would of been a worse team then Iran or Cameroon? The Last team to make the cup from CONCANCAF, and 75% overall made the round of 16. 25% made the quarters.
That makes no real difference to what they have now. If they lose the playoff then their 4th team wasn't good enough, and if the 4th team is good enough it gets through anyway. To make a material difference they need to go to 4 1/2 or 5.
Yeah Panama is crap - after getting scored on by USA like that in qualifying and that was their best squad in years. They are even worse garbage now. Iran would easily manhandled Panama. Iran was close to pull an upset against Argentina - but refs had a hand in their defeat.
Then in that case you have to include Cuba in 38. They made it past the first round, not really a group stage though.
I'm perfectly fine with 3.5 for CONCACAF. It really is the right amount for our region. I just want it so that .5 never has to play CONMEBOL for that spot again. It's just not fair for the two strongest confederations with half spots to play off against each other.
If you get 4 or 4.5 you make the Hex totally lame, and it's already been teetering on the brink of that since they moved to 3.5. The intrigue on the final day of qualifying was between Mexico and Panama, that ultimately combined won THREE matches out of 20 during the Hex. I say move to the "Octogonal" in one of two ways. 1. Have the small teams compete in preliminary rounds to whittle the field down to 24, 8 groups of 3, winner goes to the "Octo". It moves qualifying to 18 games from 16, which isn't that bad but really isn't good either. From Pot 2, the best team one of the power teams would end up with would be a Jamaica, Cuba or Canada, the teams in Pot 1 will be weak enough at the bottom where the round does have some intrigue (Trinidad and Tobago and Haiti are currently 7th and 8th). But it would also be a chance for small countries to have an opportunity to host one of the major powers of the region. 2. Top 4 teams go right into the Octo. 4 groups of 4 to determine the other qualifiers. Those top 4 teams go from 16 games to 14. The 5-8 teams in the Octo would now be playing 20, which Panama did in this cycle. Obviously it's more games from them but it gives them a fighting chance since they've already played competitive qualifiers together as a group where the 1-4 teams have not.
In the event CONCACAF gets exactly 4 allotments, I think Octo seems too large. I think 4 stages work. Stage 1. Two nation playoffs to reduce to 32 nations. 2 dates. Stage 2. 8 groups of 4, according to FIFA seeding in March 2015. Top 2 from each group advance. 6 dates and finished before the 2016 Americas tournament. Stage 3. 4 groups of 4, chosen by results from Round 2. Group A (W1,R2,W3,R4) and so on, where W means winner and R means runnerup. Top 2 from each group advance. 6 dates. Stage 4. 2 groups of 4. GroupM: A1,B2,C1,D2. GroupN: A2,B1,C2,D1. Top 2 from each group advance. 6 dates. Note that this method does not guarantee that Mexico and USA will always be separate. They could easily be in the same final group.
CONCACAF considered that format in qualifying for World Cup 2014. FIFA might require the draws to use FIFA Rankings rather than what place teams were in in the previous group. Back when the top teams had to play a two leg series before the Semifinals, Mexico won an aggregate 18-0. U.S. Virgin Islands scored 2 goals and allowed 40 in the Second Round of qualifying for World Cup 2014. Imagine what their goal differential would have been if Mexico, USA, or Costa Rica was in that group. My point is that when the best countries start there should be fewer than 32 countries left. How about this: Top 4 countries start in Round 3 and everybody else (about 30 countries) starts in Round 1 Round 1: 8 groups of 3 or 4. The 8 winners advance to Round 3 and the 8 second place teams (excluding results against fourth place teams) advance to Round 2 Round 2: The 8 teams are divided into 4 pairings for two leg series Round 3: The 4 teams starting here, 4 teams advancing from Round 2, and 8 teams advancing from Round 1 play in 4 groups of 4 Round 4: 2 groups of 4 A team that played in all 4 rounds would play 20 games (22 if it played an interconfederational playoff after that), but a team that couldn't win its Round 1 group would be unlikely to reach Round 4. I also have no problem with the format used for World Cup 2014 remaining in place. One thing I like is that each round happens entirely within one calendar year.
A few lopsided results are going to happen in CONCACAF (as they do in every confederation except CONMEBOL). I think FIFA & CONCACAF does have the goal of allowing small nations to play more qualifiers, preferably participate in group stages so they are not eliminated right away in a two-leg tie. They believe this helps them improve, it fills their ground and gives them experience against good teams. On the other hand, you don't want power teams to have to play more matches. We are certainly in agreement that we want 8 teams in the final round if there are 4 or 4.5 spots to go around. I just don't think you can continue with a Hex with that many bids because it makes for a lot of useless matches at the end. The problem that I really have is with Round 4. One of the reasons qualifying captures so much interest is because of these long term rivalries that develop and playing a team 2, and sometimes 4, EVERY four years. As a top heavy confederation, the entertainment comes from seeing the big boys go at it on every cycle, it's one of the few advantages we have over, say, UEFA.
It is a balancing act for sure. The lower ranked nations might like to play the powers in games that count. I don't know. Better crowd draw. More money to work with afterward. Like I said, I don't know. If the allotment stays at 3.5, then the Hex is good. If it goes to 4.5, it seems foolish to play 10 games to eliminate one team and place one other in a playoff, so something what needs to happen. I think 4.5 will not happen for many more cycles. So we are talking about a 4 team allotment. I see your point that the round of 32 might not be competitive. If they want to let the powers skip the two legged preliminaries and one group round, then I think they could finish with 2 hexes, and the top 2 from each qualify. So, 12 teams advance to the last round. Second to last round would be 24 teams in 6 groups of 4. First 2 rounds either two legged or 3 team groups with winners advancing to reduce to 24 teams. Basically, in your suggestion, the powers would only play 12 games. I prefer more. I will edit to address to the recent post as well. To me, it will be interesting to see what Costa Rica has to offer in the next cycle. I think we are soon going to see 3 CONCACAF powers. That is the reason for going to 4 allotments. With 3 powers, if some miss each other in WC qualifying it is not as big a loss if it balances out in Gold Cup, etc
Well... Honduras was at this World Cup and they were decidly worse than Iran and probably just as poor as Cameroon, with the difference being that Honduras didn't self-destruct. They just played poorly. In World Cup rankings opinion polls the worst team would be Cameroon, while the second worse be Honduras. Why would Panama, a team weaker than Honduras, have performed any better at this World Cup? Either they wouldn't or you open up a can of worms.
I didn't think about that, and I would like the powers to play more than 12 qualifiers. If USA played 12 qualifiers and reached every Gold Cup Final, that would combine to be 24 games per four years which would be the same as a CONMEBOL country that played 18 qualifiers and reached the Copa America Final (excluding the special the 2016 Copa America). I do think that Americans playing on clubs in Europe might consider it a waste of time to have to fly to the Americas to play teams ranked 25th to 32nd in CONCACAF. I'm fine with CONCACAF keeping 3.5 spots and the same qualifying format.
an example of your end group Group 1 USA Honduras Jamacia Guatamala Group 2 Mexico Costa Rica Panama Canada No and for one simple reason it will be the end of Mexico vs USA in qualifying every cycle which is a huge no no. I know that most federations don't care about the rivalry between Mexico vs USA but it is a big deal to us. Qualifying wouldn't be good if we don't get to battle it out vs our main rivals to the south. I am in favor of an Octagon if we go to 4. spots Octagonal top 4 advance USA Mexico Costa Rica Hoduras Jamacia Panama Guatemala Canada I'd take this over the two groups any day
I'd also be in favor of an Octagon. Having one large group is the fairest way of determining which teams should go to the World Cup.
Octo sounds great, until you try to figure out how to get to 8 teams. Octo takes 8 more dates than 2 groups of 4 teams. 8 dates is a lot to fit into the calendar. I agree if CONCACAF gets 4.5 teams it would be perfect. Probably 4.0 teams as well, but it is hard to fit the calendar. If the CONCACAF allotment stays at 3.5, then the Hex is fine. Something else is needed if we go to 4 allotments. To those who think that US will never play Mexico again if we go to 2 groups of 4, I offer the idea that Costa Rica is strong enough that they could easily be the 1 or 2 in the confederation, and then US/Mexico could be drawn together. Also, I offer the idea that US and Mexico have less pull than all the smaller island nations do. What happens will depend on their wishes more than on US/Mexico fans. Let's play with the math a little: 2014 cycle: Round 1 - 2 dates Round 2 - 6 dates Round 3 - 6 dates Round 4 - 10 dates Intercontinental - 2 dates That is 26 dates altogether. If CONCACAF gets exactly 4 spots, then there is no intercontinental playoff, so those dates are available. If we go Octo, that takes 14 dates, leaving only 12 dates to reduce to 8 teams. Let's try having the prior round be 16 teams, in 4 groups of 4. That takes 6 dates. Now, we have 6 dates to reduce from 35? teams to 16. If the top 4 get byes into the 4x4 round, then we have to go from 31? to 12. You could do 3 rounds of two legged playoffs. I can't see another way. 3 rounds of legged playoffs seems unlikely. One round of 2-legged playoffs and then 6groupsx4? Maybe. It would require 2 more dates. Could you get that approved by FIFA? Maybe round 3 could be 6 groups of 4, with the winners plus 2 highest runnersup advancing. We would still have 6 dates available. And, we would be trying to reduce from 35? to 24. Again, though, the same scheduling problem comes up. Now, maybe you could do 1 round of 2-legged playoffs, and then a round of 3-team groups, with winners advancing. Not sure if you like that, though. See my point? Octo is great, but leaves scheduling problems. Worse so if you have 4.5 teams, because then you need to leave 2 dates for the IC playoff.
They were the last place qualifier from CONCACAF, not the last place team. Getting from 31 to 12 requires 2 rounds of two leg series, not 3 rounds. The top 17 of the 31 would skip Round 1. Round 1 would have seven pairings to reduce the 31 to 24. There would be enough matchdays, but I don't want countries having to play 20 games (6 in the Semifinals and 14 in the Octagonal) to qualify. If 12 games (6 games in each of two rounds with 4 team groups) is too few qualifiers, I would be open to two leg series reducing the number of teams to 24, then 6 groups of 4, then 2 groups of 6. The problem with that is the travel might get expensive for a country like Antigua and Barbuda to play 16 qualifiers. I like the USA-Mexico WCQs, but taking them away would put more emphasis on USA-Mexico Gold Cup games, and there are no longer any Gold Cups that don't help the winner get to the Confederations Cup. Playing an Octagonal would be simple if CONCACAF had 20 countries in qualifying but is much harder with about 35 countries. Having three group stages isn't possible if the last one requires 14 games each.