FIFA International Match Calendar: Proposed Changes & General Discussion

It would be harder sell now that these confederations are expecting an additional 5-6 guaranteed spots on top of their current allocation as a result of the 48 team expansion, but I don't think it would a hard sell at all if the choice was between the current 32-team allocations on the one hand. and what I mentioned for a 48-team expansion on the other hand.

 

As for the biannual World Cup proposal, I prefer instead an interim tournament (e.g. "FIFA World Championship Cup") along the following lines.

Specifically, running contemporaneously with the EURO, two other tournaments as follows:

1- a 24-team (8 groups of 3) "FIFA Cup of the Americas" for Conmebol- Concacaf combined
1- a 32-team (8 groups of 4) "FIFA Africa-Asia-Oceania Cup" for CAF-AFC-OFC teams

The winners of the EURO plus the winners of these 2 tournaments along with the defending World Cup champions would then each play an additional 2 games (semifinal/3rd place/final) a few weeks later to determine the winner of the "FIFA World Championship Cup". This would not adversely affect the EURO and UEFA's financial stake in it, but the other two tournaments plus the semi-final/final could generate additional funds for FIFA (to hopefully properly disburse between member associations) while giving us more intercontinental games and all these sides more experience playing them.

 

True but I'm guessing Germany, Italy, France and Spain will cancel their winter breaks.

Also I suspect that domestic cup competitions will be competed for by lots of reserve teams to save "tired legs", notably the FA Cup where EPL teams will debut two weeks after the World Cup final.

 

Well, I'm certainly not proposing 16 teams based on any love for your hemisphere But for the very first 48-team World Cup, co-hosted by 3 teams from the region (host allocations would be included in the 16), I would be fine with an equal split between the 3 regions I have outlined considering that 12 of the top 50 ranked teams come from the Americas and the 4 who aren't among the top 50 (Venezuela, Jamaica, Panama and Bolivia) are more or less competitive too and (except for the highest ranked among the 4, namely Venezuela) have qualified to the World Cup before. In subsequent World Cups not coo-hosted in the Americas. you can then adjust the allocations in favor of CAF/AFC at the expense of Conmebol/Concacaf.

 

Yeah, now that I think about it, 16 does seem a bit excessive (for CONCACAF + CONMEBOL). Even though 3 CONCACAF teams are hosting, those 3 teams probably would qualify on merit so a lot of spots would wind-up going to scrub CONCACAF teams that won't be competitive, not even in a watered-down 48 team WC.

 

The top 16 ranked teams in each of Conmebol/Concacaf and CAF/AFC/OFC along with UEFA are right now as follows:

Conmebol/Concacaf:
1-Brazil 2- Argentina 3- USA 4- Mexico 5- Colombia 6- Uruguay 7- Peru 8- Chile 9- Canada 10- Paraguay 11- Ecuador 12- Costa Rica 13- Jamaica 14- Venezuela 15- Panama 16- Bolivia
CAF/AFC/OFC:
1- Senegal 2- Iran 3- Japan 4- Morocco 5- Algeria 6- Tunisia 7- S.Korea 8- Australia 9- Nigeria 10- Egypt 11- Qatar 12- Cameroon 13- Saudi Arabia 14- Ghana 15- Mali 16- Ivory Coast
UEFA:
1- Belgium 2- France 3- England 4- Italy 5- Spain 6- Portugal 7- Denmark 8- Netherlands 9- Germany 10- Switzerland 11- Croatia 12- Sweden 13- Wales 14- Serbia 15- Ukraine 16- Poland

 

to be honest that is a decent set of teams. I dont really see that as being "watered down" at all.

 

Top 48 teams in the FIFA rankings:

AFC 5
CAF 6
OFC 0
CONMEBOL 8
CONCACAF 3
UEFA 26

 

yes, but the additional UEFA sides (17-28) already get to play most of the top 10-15 teams which (except Brazil and Argentina) are from UEFA in various settings (EURO Q, EURO, UEFA WCQ, UEFA Nations League etc). I think they are (metaphorically) liable to choke (or get indigestion) if you gave them even more bites to the apple, while there are a plethora of comparable sides who don't get a meaningful match against such teams at all. The format I have suggested won't really water-down the tournament, but will give us diversity and plenty more intercontinental matches.

 

To simulate/illustrate what the groups for the 48-team WC in the format I have proposed could be like using the current FIFA rankings, with exactly 1 team from each wider region in each group, you could get the following groups:

Group A:
1-Belgium 2- S. Korea 3- Paraguay
Group B:
1- Brazil 2- Wales 3- Nigeria
Group C:
1- France, 2- Algeria 3- Ecuador
Group D:
1- England 2- Morocco 3- Costa Rica
Group E:
1- Argentina 2- Poland 3- Ivory Coast
Group F:
1- Italy 2- Chile 3- Saudi Arabia
Group G:
1- Spain 2- Peru 3- Qatar
Group H:
1-Portugal 2- Iran 3- Panama
Group I:
1- Denmark 2- Senegal 3- Bolivia
Group J:
1- Netherlands 2- Uruguay 3- Mali
Group K:
1- USA 2- Serbia 3- Ghana
Group L:
1- Germany 2- Colombia 3- Cameroon
Group M:
1- Switzerland 2- Japan 3- Venezuela
Group N:
1- Mexico 2- Sweden 3- Australia
Group O:
1- Croatia 2- Tunisia 3- Jamaica
Group P:
1- Canada 2- Ukraine 3- Egypt

 

Costa Rica, Bolivia, Venezuela not watered-down? A WC group where Canada is the best team in it not watered-down? Come on, mate....

And that list is assuming the best 16 qualify from those regions which never happens in reality.

 

Those teams are no worse than the regular worst teams at a 32 team world cup.

For example the worst team in 2018 is Panama.

Venezuela, Costa Rica, Bolivia are really no worse than Panama. Roughly the Same level.

Plus you have added teams in the 48 team format that are actually better than some of the teams in 2018 WC.

Teams who missed 2018 like Algeria, Chile, USA, Ivory Coast, Ecuador, Paraguay, Italy, Holland, Canada, Turkey, Ghana are all better than some of the teams that made that tournament.

No I don't think it is watered down at all. Just more teams.

 

Then why is Costa Rica well behind Panama in qualifying? And Jamaica even further behind?

And even if it were true that those teams are no worse than the weakest team in a 32-team WC field, adding several of those teams is literally the definition of "watered down".

 

If you add a few of those weaker teams that are on roughly the same level.

You are also adding quite a few quality teams as well like I already mentioned.

Italy, Holland, USA, Algeria, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Wales, Ukraine, Chile, Ecuador, Paraguay, Czech Rep.

This in its totality actually makes the competition MORE competitive.

 

Though Costa Rica barely failed to make the semi-final when they were ranked #30.

 

Nope. It's like adding 10 teams at the level of Watford to the English Premier League. It results in an average decline in quality. That is the definition of "watered down".

It doesn't work like that. For starters, UEFA only gets 3 additional WC spots and you've listed about 5. You also listed a bunch of teams that probably qualify for a 32-team WC anyway, and left out teams like Lebanon and Oman which is, in reality, the sort of teams we will see starting in 2026.

Anyway, "competitive" can be interpreted in different ways so I won't disagree with you final point. But we were talking about whether it gets watered down.

 

@BocaFan If you look at the simulated groups I have listed, you will see that in at least half of the groups (and more), you honestly can't be even reasonably assured which side will grab the top spot and advance to the R16. I think the format I have proposed would actually mitigate against some of the sides you mentioned qualifying, unless they have become pretty good and deserve to.

 

The point is ratings by nature are a backwards looking number.

 

I agree with that. Then again, it is tougher to predict the winner of Spain's Segunda division than La Liga, so .....

 

I like the groups.

 

https://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-wo...iennial-world-cup-means-euros-every-two-years

These folks are crazy! If they do the World Cup and continental tournaments on alternating years, it would be chaos.

 

I think we soon will see star players contracts with fines for playing NT matches above a certain number.

 

Drop the Olympics and have a proper FIFA U23 World Cup with players released for qualifying and the tournament proper.