The Euro snobs are at it again. Many of the club coaches have threatened to not allow their players to participate in the Confed Cup this year. This comes on the heels of their refusing a world Club Championship. They claim too many games, not a new complaint. Here is the link to the demise of the Confed Cup: http://www.planetfootball.com/article.asp?id=132573&cpid=219&title=Confederations+Cup+to+be+scrapped Here is the best idea for reducing games. Lower the number of teams in each league. The Premier league has what 20 teams? If you were to lower that to 16 teams, you would have 30 games instead of 38. But that would loose four home games a season and loose money. Another point, Platini in the article said that FIFA would replace the Confed Cup with a Club cup. How does FIFA expect to pull this off with UEFA just recently saying no to it. How does this affect the US? No more Confed Cup. More time for players to play with their MLS teams. A possibility for a US team to play in a World Club Cup.
I am hping all the players are there, it will be a much better comptetition.....You are right, the number of games is too many....look at the EPL, league matches, FA Cup, Worhtington Cup and then internationals and Champion's League.....MLS doesn't have that many games.....I think that someone needs to sac up... -PB20
It's not just the European clubs that don't support these bogus competitions. The fans aren't interested and either are the players. There are plenty of competitions and games already. Obviously in North America (especially in Canada) we are starved for matches, but in the rest of the world it simply isn't the case. There was no demand for these competitions and there is no need for them. North American clubs and federations should concentrate on improving the Gold Cup and creating a CONCACAF club competition and stop worrying about the rest of the world.
That's backwards thinking. We've got the Gold Cup why do we need the Confederations Cup. The Gold Cup crowns the 'best' team in CONCACAF and the Confederations Cup does nothing.
Yes. Technically the Gold Cup is the region's competition, much like the Copa America is for South America and UEFA's tournie that's coming up in 2004 in Portugal.
I'd be disappointed if they cancel it, since I was looking forward to seeing how we look there. But at the same time, I don't see why they need this competition either. It's basically World Cup Lite.
Why not debate the Confederation Cup on its merits (or lack thereof) rather than throwing tedious labels around? There is nothing 'snobbish' about opposing this tournament. It is simply completely redundant - we already have confederation championships and a World Cup for the best teams from each federation. What does the Confederations Cup add to that except more clutter to the fixture list? And why should the Premier League reduce to 16 teams just so a tournament few people want can be held? League football is the bread and butter of the game and with attendances increasing _every_ season since the formation of the Premier League, there is clearly a demand for it - something that hasn't been the case for the Confederations Cup.
Well, if it's too dangerous for Japan to come to the USA, it's CERTAINLY too dangerous for the USA to travel to a country that despises us and indeed favors our terrorist enemies, and faces terrorist threats at least as imminent as our own. I think we should pull out completely. There's no way we should contribute even $.01 to the French economy IMO. Maybe they can invite thier friends the Iraqi's, or Russians, or Chinese to take our place? Better yet, how about Algeria? Kevin
No worries about this year's competition - it will go ahead as planned. I still believe that the best players will show up, probably because they'll know that this is the last go-around for the Confed Cup. It's true that CONCACAF is trying to make sure these competitions live because, besides the WC, it's our best chance to gauge ourselves against top competition outside of our region in "meaningful" games. But Europe and South America really do have such a full schedule that it makes sense for them to not want any part of MORE matches. I don't like it either, but I understand them. We just can't even begin to understand how inundated their schedules are unless we're there. I say we close out the Confederations Cup history by winning it. If we end up getting a club competition out of it in the future, so be it. It'll be nice to finally see the Galaxy get to play the matches they should have when the FIFA World Club Championship was cancelled.
This won't be the last Confed Cup. Platini and many others have said that the competition will be scrapped after 2005 because they have contracts through 2005.
Until they get invaded by somebody then expect us to show up and bale them out..... Confed Cup should just be done away with after this year.
I don't care if any other teams aren't taking their best players -- we'll deal with whatever they throw at us. I still want the US to take the best team possible. The competition is more meaningful than friendlies and will provide great competition for blooding some noses and getting ready for qualification. I say take our best team ... and win it! Remember, national pride will get the best of the teams in the future (after we win this one ) and I think we'll see even better competition next time! If teams don't want to compete because they feel their schedule is too full, then they can bow out like Germany did this time and let someone go in their place. I believe there would be plenty of teams that would love the chance to be involved...