This is a poor comparison. To start, some of the games you listed were not elimination games. OSU and Michigan both made it to the playoff. Second, we're not going to 8. 12 teams is already confirmed. Finally, expanded playoffs means far, far more interest in college football. A 12 team field means many, MANY more games that actually matter throughout the course of the regular season. The games you listed, for example, all involve a handful of elite programs. Yes, Alabama-LSU was the game that effectively eliminated Alabama. Yes, that wouldn't happen in a 12 team field. This is countered, however, by the fact that there are no longer major conference championship games without any post-season implications, more Bowl Games actually count for something, and many more regular season matchups will have post-season implications. We also get the entire Group of 5 into relevance - right now, none of the G5 games (that's half of FBS football) really count, because in a 4 team model theres almost never room for a G5 team. In a 12 team model, it is going to matter who the Sun Belt or AAC Champion is. Those games get more intriguing, not less. In short: we get far, far more meaningful football in the regular and post-season from playoff expansion, not less. And last point on this: The comparison to college basketball is a bad one. 68 teams make that tournament. College football is allowing 12 out of over 135. If they were proposing a 32 team playoff model this regular season devaluation argument would have legs, but they're not and it doesn't. I've seen some of the projections for group stage games in a 48 team model. A couple of them are right here in this forum. Here's one below: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/pots-for-the-2026-world-cup.2124023/ Group J looks like a brick, and I might say the same for Groups A and G. The rest? Plenty of solid middleweight matchups. Group K is a bit mid too but Brazil is a big enough draw that it likely won't matter. But in Group L? Ghana vs Germany, South Korea vs. Argentina, Argentina vs. Germany. Group F? Spain vs. Senegal. Chile vs. Spain. Group D? France and Japan, France vs. Sweden. Group B? Belgium vs. Colombia. Algeria vs. Colombia. Group H? Nigeria vs. Portugal or Peru Group E? England and Croatia. Australia is a solid middleweight. Obviously there are more here, but you get the idea. There's still more than enough intrigue in the group stages, especially since not all third place teams will make it - certain groups of death will still lead to intrigue on the final match days. Here's another realistic proposal: Obviously you have Italy and Spain here in group E, with solid middleweights in Mali and South Korea. Groups I, J, H, C, D, K, L and B all have at least one solid matchup. Group A is a brick unless you're american, although Morocco's run in 2022 may change that. And beyond Peru vs. Ghana there's not much in Group F for a neutral, but this is very far from the nothing that's being proclaimed. Suffice it to say, this idea that there won't be any matchups even between middleweights in a 48 team tournament is tenuous, at best. There will be more than enough of those matches. And this is before a much bigger, more intriguing knockout stage really reels folks in. The 48 team model will do very, very well, far beyond its first two or three iterations. Some people aren't going to like that, but it will come to pass regardless. I'd be at least mentally prepared for a 20 to 24 team Copa America. If the rest of CONCACAF isn't lobbying for that now, they'll start soon. And they might get it.
NEW: The Copa America will very likely be in the USA in 2024, multiple sources tell ESPN, as conversations between Concacaf & Conmebol have advanced considerably.Still a few potential obstacles but this is on the doorstep. Big games ahead for #USMNT.https://t.co/Vnv5ZXZUg3— Sam Borden (@SamBorden) January 27, 2023 Getting close
Again, the only thing that was an issue was for CONMEBOL to get past their "feelings" on how much money USSF pocketed in comparison to them Copa America. This tournament makes sense for everyone at all levels. The players, their European clubs, CONMEBOL, CONCACAF and FIFA will all see this as a good thing.
Seems official? 1619001539342860288 is not a valid tweet id Also interesting Also announced … CONMEBOL / Concacaf launching a “final four" style club competition: two from each confederation will qualify through existing tournaments, and the two confederations are working towards the first edition of this new competition being played in 2024.— Steven Goff (@SoccerInsider) January 27, 2023
It's official. It also feels like it could grow to something permanent. I think the pair of Confederations can rbing a lot to each other as they compete with the 900 lb gorilla of UEFA. The '23-24 Nations League will qualify teams for Copa America, so next year's becomes important. Expanding to the women is great. I love the club competition playoff as well.
I have to say, I've never understood it, it ended up sounding like some cartel battle over control of particular streets. I can't understand why the lawyers weren't iron clad and clear on exactly what amounts/percentages went to everybody at the time. I'm baffled at how that could've been so screwed up considering how much $$$ was involved. It seems simple enough to me. Makes me wonder just how shady we are, or they are or both. HOpefully the bs ends w/this tournament because we absolutely have to have copa america relationship connections every cycle going forward w/where were headed and the ceiling of our confederation in terms of comp and where Nations League seems to be going.
Not exactly excited for Hudson to be in command for those matches in March, otoh, if we can't collect 6 from those matches, well, it goes w/o saying but man, Hudson in terms of cv seems like the worst guy in charge since Sampson circa 1994-1995 when he became interim. Waiting for another 6-8 months for a coach seems kind of nutty considering potential consequences.
Its really simple. CONMEBOL has the history/tradition, but needs the money. CONCACAF has the money, but lacks the history/tradition.
The next important action item is to get the tournament on the FIFA calendar for all participants, including the "guest teams."
Well we don't need 6 points in March either. Obviously it'd be better if we won both games, but as long as we at least tie Grenada all we'd need is a tie against El Salvador to advance. And I know Hudson was pretty terrible during his stint in MLS, but his history as a national team manager with New Zealand and Bahrain wasn't actually that bad. When he left New Zealand people said he was the best coach they had ever had and the team had never played the way that it had under him. And they didn't get embarrassed in the Confederations Cup either. He obviously should not be under consideration to be the full time coach, but he's fine as far as interim coaches go. It's not like we can do much better for an interim, and he has fairly extensive experience managing a national team.
Yeah, Hudson should be fine. To cite a much better coach than Anthony ... "Lads, it's Grenada and El Salvador." The only risk I see is if the US soccer drama somehow infects the team and leads to a Couva-type deal. But that might go both ways -- the players might be so annoyed by the gossip and so on that they just drill both teams to prove a point.
Thanks for the international background brush up. I take some solace in the knowledge that home and away games against El Salvador and Grenada in march simply shouldn't be a problem, and that nobody in Concacaf right now is very good besides us and Canada (I should probably credit Costa Rica, after the prat fall against Spain, they were fantastic against Japan and to some extent against Germany). So we really shouldn't be in the business of fearing a Costa Rica that probably has retirements, an El Tri that couldn't even advance out of that joke of a group, even Canada had their struggles (though they're definitely overblown, they dominated Belgium and were deeply unlucky in that game, and gave a better game against Morocco than nearly anyone who played them all tournament (beat them on xG 1.00 to 0.61, on xG they won 2 of 3 games, I know, I know, but the xG is more predictive of future results than the scorelines are). But I am concerned. I don't know how players will respond to him or each other, otoh, they've got to be excited to be playing In Copa America in 18 months. We've only played that tournament once since we sent a B team down there 15 years ago, and now they'll get they're shot too, and so long as they handle their business, they should be a Pot 1 team, so a run to the quarters and Semi's can be in the cards. With some luck and strong performances we should be able to duel with 2-4 South American sides in that tournament in a legit competition. Pretty cool.
I hope that all matches will be played on regulation fields, that the renovations for the WC are that far along. Let's make the competition as true and meaningful as possible.
Interesting point about having to qualify through the next NL: Jonathan Tannenwald @thegoalkeeper So, to clarify: The Anthony Hudson Nations League that the #USMNT is in is NOT what qualifies them for the 2024 Copa América. The *next* Nations League, which starts in the fall, is the qualification path.
Are we seriously about to see yet another Nations League, instead of international friendlies against more challenging opponents? That's facepalm-worthy.
My issue with Hudson more revolves around him tossing his players at Colorado under the bus as having no quality, then watching as the next guy came in and won the Western Conference with the same players. I don't love the public blaming on talent that he clearly couldn't figure out but others could.
I think there's no defense of his record in Colorado or that he threw his players under the bus there. I will say that he took that job at the age of 36 and maybe that contributed to some of the mistakes he made as a young coach there. And hopefully those are things that he's learned from. In the end all I'm saying was that he was a perfectly ok national team coach for New Zealand, and while we shouldn't consider him for the permanent coaching job, he's fine as an interim. And the alternative is someone like Caleb Porter.
Wasn't Germany trying to play some friendlies in the US this fall as well? I'd hate to miss the chance to play Germany in a friendly because of yet another round of Nations League. It basically means we'll have Nations League three times this cycle.
CONMEBOL wasn't in a good position at that time but I have no sympathy for them. Their officials got caught pocketing bribes from Traffic. When SUM was brought in things were a lot more above board but I am pretty sure that negotiations were skewed.
Nation's League starts again in Fall 2023? Bleeech. And it's apparently over before the Summer of 2024 when the CA is? How?
The 2022-23 NL only involves 6 potential matches for the US: 4 group stage matches & 2 potential matches in the finals. Now that the groups are set, you don't have a ton of matches for teams in League A.
A PSA: Nations League or a similar format isn't going away anytime soon. Voting power in FIFA and CONCACAF is dominated by smaller nations. For many of those nations, the only competitive matches they got previous to Nations League was 1-2 in World Cup preliminary qualifying ... every four years. Nations League is going to be like 80% of their competitive matches, and given the expense and difficulty of getting friendlies, a big % of their total matches. It ain't going away. It's also exactly 3 total windows, so I don't really get the angst. The other federations have their versions which means there are that many friendlies available, anyway. And friendlies are also friendlies. Playing Grenada is useless but playing Honduras and Mexico in a competitive match is absolutely better than many higher profile friendlies. People always seem surprised that it is here, as if the point of it is for the US. It's not, we don't have the power to change it, and it's not nearly the big deal people make out.
Yep. SUM/USSF/CCAF offered a deal where they guaranteed revenues and CONMEBOL took it. I expect they had little to no idea the potential, and Traffic, which was always a hack outfit, probably had no idea how to realize them. The thing made a fortune, and CONMEBOL was mad they sold their upside. We all make choices. The reality is that there's both a lot of money to be made AND the US, Mexico and now Canada actually do bring some level of competition to South America. Only Argentina, Brazil and Urugay are consistently better than the US and Mexico, and in any given year, I think a Concacaf team would pretty consistently finish in the Top half of CONMEBOL. Columbia, Ecuador, Chile and Peru are all good at times, but almost never all at once. They are obviously deeper in their solidity, but we can hang now and over time, I think we perhaps don't get up to Argentina and Brazil for a while, but Uruguay? I could see us compete there -- and especially as this most recent generation starts to fade.