Thank You. Thank You very much for the information. I have been following the qualifying for the Caribbean & UNCAF qualifying for the Gold Cup. It should be interesting.
gold cup 03 field and venues The rumor is that Brazil will compete as a guest in the gold cup this summer. I would love to play Brazil, after all the United States beat Brazil in the 98 edition on top of a stellar performance from kasey keller. Does anyone know the venues for the gold cup? I heard they were playing in the summer so as to have matches in cold weather cities ie Seattle, Columbus, New York, Boston. Anyone have a clue?
There was another thread devoted to this. The cities look to Miami, D.C. Foxboro, and mabye Giants Stadium. The Revolution are selling as part of their season ticket package tickets for at least two Gold Cup games.
Ideal Gold Cup Qualifying/Tournament Format If you were in charge of CONCACAF , how would you organize the Gold Cup? Here's one idea. I think I posted something like this a few crashes ago, but I'm not totally sure. Tournament Proper * 16 teams, all from CONCACAF (no guest teams) * Structure similar to Euro Championships * Held every four years, same as Euro Qualifying - Teams divided into 2 zones, North/Central America and Caribbean. No automatic bids. North/Central America (10 teams, including USA/MEX/CAN) * 2 Groups of 5, top 6 seeded (3 per group) * League format * Top 3 in each group automatically qualify for Gold Cup * 4th Place in each group enter playoffs Caribbean (30 teams) * 6 Groups of 5, 1 or 2 seeded teams per group * League format * Group winner qualifies automatically for Gold Cup * Group runners-up enter playoffs Comments * I never liked the idea of the U.S. and Mexico automatically qualifying. Even if the process is a formality, I think it only helps the U.S. to actually go through with it. * Each team plays 8 games in qualifications (10 if in playoffs), comparable to European Championship qualifying and thus able to play on international dates. * This format does not take into account host automatically qualifying, if the host can’t qualify in this system they don’t deserve to make it. * North/Central America will have 6-8 teams, and the Caribbean 8-10, depending on the playoffs. * Biggest drawback I see is perhaps some of the Caribbean teams not having the finances to compete, but I'll leave that to the experts to solve. * Eventually I would like to see inter-zonal qualifying, but that may not be totally realistic for a few cycles.
The problem with your format is that you are trying to equate in importance the EuroCup and the Gold Cup. Participants and specially the TFC see this tournament as friendlies. If this was not true, why wouldn't the rest of the countries complain that it is always held in the US or as you so well put the qualifying format or why we have guests. There is no real validity to this tournament. And until we all accept that this tournament is of at least some importance, they will not go through the hassle of all the qualifying format that you propose. Specially the US and Mexico.
Like the last guy said, 16 teams is too many for this tournament, plus the competetive countries don't really take the tournament seriously. Your qualifying format is too much. Consolidate Gold Cup qualifying into World Cup qualifying. The teams that make the final hexagon (6), qualify + host + defending champion (8 teams in all). If either the host of defending champion are in the hexagon already, than the next best (or two next best) countries should qualify or play a home and home to decide the remaining finalists. For example, under the last qualifying for World Cup, these teams would make it: Let's assume we give the host bid to Canada (I'm sick of the US always hosting this tournament), now we have defending champion United States, plus Mexico, Honduras, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and Trinidad & Tobago. Since that's seven, we also give a pass to Guatemala, the best of the teams who didn't make the hexagon. Remember up until 96 (or 92 was it), that the European Championships only had 8 participants, obviously they can field a quality tournament with 16, but I don't think CONCACAF is at that level.
Ideal Gold Cup Qualifying/Tournament Format I have a bit of the "If you build it, they will come" theory in here. Which of course is how the World Cup started. If you treat the tournament seriously, maybe the countries will take it more seriously. May take a couple tournaments, but it can certainly get there. I think holding it every 4 years is a start. I agree 16 teams may be a bit much for now, but why not give the Caribbean teams a shot. Maybe it will be an incentive to improve. 12 is a lousy number because it gives you groups of 3, but I fear 8 is too small because it shuts out some of the smaller nations that deserve a shot. As for the hassle of qualifying, the U.S. and Mexico don't even have to take it super seriously to qualify. The games could just replace the friendlies we would play in it's place, just entice the U.S. to travel a bit more, better preparation for World Cup qualifying when it really counts. Obviously this isn't a perfect solution, but there isn't one of those so maybe this could work.
leave it as it is...just switch the BS guest teams with other CONCACAF squads. Honduras and Jamaica were left out last go around for Ecuador and South Korea...I also have a little problem with Martinique being able to compete as they aren't able to qualify for the WC..
Ideal Gold Cup Qualifying/Tournament Format The more the merrier, why not. Plus it's a good argument against using WC qualifying for Gold Cup so I'll take it. One other possible advantage is that it may be easier to sell qualifiers for the U.S. to TV then another meaningless friendly. "The road to conquer North America begins Saturday in ...."
Beg/plead/bribe commebol into guaranteeing the only way for a Concacaf team to enter Copa America is through making the final of the Gold Cup and you'd suddenly have a real tournament. The format of the tournament is irrelevant as long as nothing is on the line....
Why is the Copa America the holy grail? It's a South American tournament, let them have it. If you want to create a one game American championship between the Gold Cup and CA winners, that's fine, but I see no need to cross-enter tournaments.
For the growth of soccer in the Concacaf region, having qualifying and a 16 team final is probably a very good thing. For those of you saying that it doesn't MEAN anything, take a look at the FIFA rankings and their coeficients for the federations. Games for a confederation championship count bigger than friendlies. So if we played more games to get to the federation championship, then our federation's teams would improve their rankings in FIFA. This would lead to having better seedings in the draw for the World Cup. So expanding the Gold Cup COULD be valuable from that standpoint. However, as a US fan, wanting the US to continue to upgrade its program, I want us playing more games against the powers of the world like our game with Argentina. I'd rather we played fewer games against the second or third tier of our own federation.
Why is every Gold Cup in the USA? Can't any other country host it? How about Mexico or Cananda? How about playing some games in each country? It just seems too much like a formality having every tourney in the states.
Agreed. I would love to see Canada or Mexico host it. Perhaps El Salvador and Honduras can co-host. Kidding, kinda Sachin
gold cup 2003 Only in the US would there be crowds which would make the tournament remotly feasible. The tournament is run by CONCACAF and they set the location. Most of the game are played historically in either LA or Miami because of the wide ethnic populations there. If the games were played in Canada, how many people would show up for a Guatemala vs. Dominican Republic game? Or Mexico vs. US. I think what CONCACAF hopes is for the US and Mexico every tournament to play in the finals. That way they are assured of the largest crowds, which means the most money. If you look at most of the CONCACAF tournaments, there is no hiding the fact that many are set up for a Mexican team to play a US one in the Final. It is economics.
Re: gold cup 2003 Then again, how many people would turned out for the semis and final last 2 editions? 6 games, probably less than 100,000...
Re: Re: gold cup 2003 The last final in the US pulled a cool 10k In 1993 Mexico co-hosted the gold cup and the Aztec stadium was packed to the Max for 3 games 300,000 to 330,000 fans payed good money.
But look who was in the last two finals. US vs. Costa Rica, and Canada vs. Columbia. My point was that CONCACAF sets up the tournament so that the US and Mexico can play in the finals. In 2002, Mexico lost in the quarter-finals and the fans who would have come to see them did not come. Does anyone honestly think that Canada vs. Columbia game would have drawn more than 7k in Mexico or Canada? Or Costa Rica vs. US more than 10K in Mexico or Costa Rica? The Euro Championship works because people in the Host country will watch the games no matter what team is playing. Also there is a fairly large group of supporters who travel to the games. CONCACAF teams do not have that following out of their countries, except here in the US. Most of the ex-patriot citizens of the Central American root for their national team of birth, not the US. These people can take the place of the traveling supporters. If CONCACAF wants to make money on the event, they will hold it in the US. If not, they will rotate it. I have no problem with using a rotation, but I think that CONCACAf does.
MattBurlew said Why is the Copa America the holy grail? It's a South American tournament, let them have it. If you want to create a one game American championship between the Gold Cup and CA winners, that's fine, but I see no need to cross-enter tournaments. -------------------------------------------------- THANK YOU MATTY! Thank you very much. That's the same feeling that I have had since the arguments of cross-entering tournaments. If the Mexicans want to pretend that they are South Americans let them be the perminant Guests of the Copa America. Besides I understand that some of the South Americans are upset that this actually happened.
Matt's format pretty much hits it on the head, but as he said, the ability of the smaller nations to pay for traveling is what could be the deal-killer. The other option is to have more groups, but smaller (3 or 4 teams) and just one team makes it from each group. Yeah, you'll pretty much determine who makes it just by which nations are seeds, but you're more likely to get the St. Vincent's and Nicaragua's involved if they only have to pay for 2 or three trips over an 18 month period.