None of those 3 things will happen for financial reasons and honestly I don't think theyd change the attitude towards it that much. At the end of day a tourney is mainly judged by its participants
You said there was no way to make it respectable, and I gave you three ways. Whether or not they will happen is a different thing.
1. I don't have a big issue with it every 2 years, its not the first tourney to have multiple editions in a cycle. A 4 year tourney would make it slightly more interesting but IMO the effect would be minimal. I would move the off year edition to the winter before the World Cup so teams can send better squads. 2. It would be nice to see the cup move but the US is by far the best host and I think empty stadiums in other countries would kill the credibility more than anything 3. Having every team qualify would be a bit of a strain on major CONCACAF teams. 2 years of the cycle are already spent on World Cup qualifying and if you had a legit qualifying process, teams like the US and Mecico would waste nearly a whole year playing teams like Montserrat and St. Lucia. They would rarely get chances to play teams out of CONCACAF
Why every 4 years is more "respectable" than every 2? Because that's how Europe does it? Also, having it every 4 years will dramatically reduce CONCACAF revenue. What is going to replace that lost revenue? Or what are you going to cut that CONCACAF currently runs (things like the women's Gold Cup and youth tournaments)? I don't see how playing in front of empty stands on crappy fields in small stadiums is going to help the reputation of the tournament. And, again, this is going to dramatically reduce revenue, so how will that be handled? How is having the US and Mexico obliterating minnows going to help anything? If you want to make Canada qualify that's fine, but it is going to require completely changing how qualifying works, and they are still very likely to qualify. I would also point out that there is no qualifying for the Copa Amercia and it is a "respectable" tournament.
Having it every 4 years would add prestige because teams would actually take it seriously, for that confed cup ticket. As of now you have 2 chances every 2 years to get that half spot, there is no urgency. Nations like Panama and Honduras would have a real shot at winning it if they hosted, this would create huge excitement. The stadiums are empty now, they pathetically use double header numbers to bolster attendance numbers. Mexico is the only one that sells out. If they allowed co-hosting central america would have huge draws, Costa Rica-Panama or El Salvador -Honduras and you would get tons of fans traveling. Give each host time to build 3 nice stadiums each and they can easily host this thing. Not to mention the huge infrastructure boost this would be to these countries. Its pathetic that we are the only confederation to have their tournament in 1 country, even Africa rotates it. Mexico being such a cash cow is hurting the rest of Concacaf. I agree that there should not be qualifying. blacksun, there are only 10 nations in Conmebol, of course they don't need to qualify for a 12 team tournament.
I really believe the Gold Cup should be every 4 years. I doubt that would ever happen though due to a loss in revenue. CONCACAF really need to get on their job and clean out the corruption. It's bad enough we're seen as a 2 bit federation, don't need corruption on top of that. There should be 16 teams in a Gold Cup. USA, Mexico, Costa Rica, Canada, Panama, Jamaica, T&T, Honduras, El Salvador, Belize, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Cuba, Guadeloupe. Plus have 2 of the CFU who've qualified to join. That's not too bad a tournament. Much more exciting than 12 teams if you ask me. I'm pretty sure we will never sell out a 40,000 stadium featurin Canada vs Cuba or Jamaica vs Belize. Regardless if it's the USA or Mexico or Panama. But I'm sure the Gold Cup would be an equal success if held in Mexico or Canada or say a Central American joint bid. That would be exciting and would give a more neutral footing for several nations. I can understand that it's all about the $$$ and logistics with the US hosting, but would be well worth for someone else to host. Make it less of a US-led tournament.
Obviously there are still CFU members loyal to him but given that his puppet candidate couldn't win the CONCACAF presidency and the fact that they published a lot of dirt on him its clear his influence is no longer very big.
In one post you say the gold cup would be more credible if it had different finalist which would be the case if Central American countries could host but then say because a few games would be empty it would kill its credibility. Every non major tournament has attendance issues that has no effect on its credibility. The U20 World cup is no less credible because the stadiums weren't even half full in a lot of games. Only a small set of fans focus on attendence when it comes to football tournments. It is far less credible a tournament now that it has one host and is so rigged for a USA Mex final that even when the USA lost their group last gold cup it was still guaranteed to avoid Mexico until the final
Otaku and LV07 already answered your questions above, but I will go ahead and add my two cents just because. This is a non-answer. All you're doing is giving your opinion of why you like a 2 year cycle, without any reasoning behind why it's better or worse. A four year cycle would mean playing for all the marbles (one ticket to Confed Cup), instead of playing for nothing every other tournament the way it has been until now, or playing for half a ticket as it seems to be the way forward. Uh, you do realize if it wasn't for the double headers the stadiums in the US would be mostly empty as well, right? Besides, I'm not sure how more or less fans makes a competition more credible. Credible to whom? I'm talking here about ways to make the tournament respectable by making it fair without giving the upper hand to the same teams on every edition. Again, this type of reasoning is what makes the GC a joke. A respectable tournament that wants to be considered the top trophy of a confederation should not play favorites.
Fair enough, but I still think it would look piss poor to have 5,000 people show up for our Cup Final. I also agree there should be a draw
1. But we did have a winner take all tourney and people still called the tourney a joke 2. I don't think it'd be bad as another country. When Honduras played Brazil at the 03 Cup in Mexico City, 10,000 people showed. That place would be packed in the US. I do think attendance effects credibility because 5,000 a game in your top level Gold Cup reflects on it poorly. 3. CONCACAF's job is to benefit the confederation, having a long qualification process does not benefit CONCACAF teams.
1- When was this? Are you talking about the old Campeonato de Naciones? 2- Again, this is your opinion, which may or may not be correct. Still, attendance concerns are an indicator of the crappiness of the tournament, and again, attendance in the current format is inflated by the double header schedule. 3- LOL, now you're changing your tune. Good job
1. This is the first year of the Confed Cup playoff format. 1 tourney was a winner take all for the sole bid and the 2nd was a B squad scrub tourney. The important one still wasn't an A list tourney. 2. I'm not denying that the double header format doesn't inflate, but you can't tell me that with the diversity of our population we wont do better than say a country like Panama or Jamaica. Outside of the US the logical 2nd best choice was Mexico and outside of El Tri matches the attendance was piss poor when they hosted matches. I think having nearly 100,000 in the Rose Bowl for the final 2 years ago was fantastic and great for the tourney. 3. I don't understand what you mean by that to be honest. It doesn't benefit CONCACAF teams to have a long drawn out qualifying process which is why the current regional qualifying set up works so well. I do disagree with your qualifying point, but I don't have an issue with your first 2 suggestions. I'm just saying I really think the advantages to them would be very minimal. In my opinion the key issue to this tourney is the level of competition, not the actual structure to it.
Look at the 2005 GC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_CONCACAF_Gold_Cup In group A double headers drew 10k, 17k, and 8k. 8k for a double header?? Group B with the US drew 15k for double headers. 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_CONCACAF_Gold_Cup_group_stage KO round with out Mexico for 2 games 32,00 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_CONCACAF_Gold_Cup Good thing 55,000 showed up for the semifinal, oh wait Mexico was playing after that. The pic above also has many fans that were there for the 2nd game. 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_CONCACAF_Gold_Cup Same thing with the 2011 semifinal. US vs Panama This is with Mexican fans that have tickets to both. @:39 it shows the full stadium. So tell me again how attendance is so great in the US?
1- Yes, but it still was mickey mouse for a bunch of other reasons (same host all the time, direct ticket bs, etc, etc, etc). Just fixing one thing (assuming this 'half a CC ticket ever GC' thing fixes anything - it seems to be a single game playoff and there is a huuuuuuuge chance that it is going to take place somewhere in the US) does not make the whole thing respectable all of a sudden. 2- You can't tell me smaller venues in Panama following a double header format won't fill up either. See how this works? 3- Well, initially you argued that qualifying to the GC would 'not benefit' the US and Mexico, and when I called you out on it you changed your tune to 'CONCACAF teams'. You still haven't explained why it should be a long drawn process, and even if it is, why would it be detrimental to the participants.
Correction, Mexico's attendance kicks the shit out of everyone else's. With out our numbers inflating the stats you would see how pathetic attendance really is. I have already shown you proof. So I guess the qualifiers don't draw well? And having a tournament every 4 years in a region that has 7 nations within a days drive won't draw better than 8k in the US? Plus the nations of Haiti, Jamaica, Cuba, all short flying distances. Added to that the smaller footprint in these nations makes it easier and more cost efficient to get around. Is it a guarantee? No. But I would rather try something new and not be a mickey mouse confederation that has only 1 host.
Now, in all fairness/honesty, do you really expect many Cubans or Haitians to be able to fly to Mexico or any other country to watch GC games?
Not many, but there will always be a handful. Just like in WCQ there is always a little crowd of Jamaicans that made the trip. I would hope as the tournament gained prestige it would make fans actually want to attend. If teams feel like they actually have a chance to win more fans will be interested. No one wants to go see their team go 3 and out. What I would hope is that Concacaf would do something like a rotation. North America, then Central America/Caribbean. Of course the teams would have to put together a bid to host, with Concacaf picking the best one. 2015-Canada 2019-Costa Rica/Panama 2023-Mexico 2027-Honduras/El Salvador or Jamaica/Cuba 2031- US Maybe change things so that the year of the cup fall the in between World Cups. This gives 3 years for the next host to be ready. With help from Concacaf and Fifa this would be a huge boost to local nations, giving them great facilities and stadiums.
1. That's pretty much my point, one thing wont make a difference and IMO neither will a couple changes. The quality of play is the major glaring issue. The OFC Nations Cup is every 4 years and rotates hosts, is it must see TV? 2. Except Central American and Caribbean teams have hosted sub regional tourneys and the attendance has been laughable 3. No I meant top level teams like the US and Mexico, having a legit qualifying tourney like they have in some other confederation really benefits nobody and actually hurts teams like the US and Mexico because it's wasted match days
I agree with your 2nd point. The tourney needs better quality of play top to bottom. The 2 horse race aspect is the biggest problem
Let me just put it this way, if starting next cycle CONCACF said there's only one tourney, it's going to Panama and everyone has to qualify. Would your average football fan in London set his alarm clock to 3 am to make sure he wakes up in time for El Salvador vs Martinique