I posted this in the Concacaf forum but got no responses...so here it is... There have been numerious rumors on how the Cup will be setup for next season, just was posting cuz i haven't heard anything in a while, just seeing if anyone knew anything new? Last I heard it was going to be setup like UEFA's Champions League...which i think would be great for us, but with our confederation and its leaders who knows what will happen, we need a TV deal for it also, maybe the US and Mexico and its leagues can try and work on that, that would be great, start of making this Cup/League into something great... For what its worth I hope "we" go with a Champions League, and the teams that qualify for it have actually won something...(for MLS maybe the Supporters Shield winner, Supporters Shield Runner-up, MLS Cup winner and USOC winner (A-League teams have a chance at getting in with this idea)....
Earlier reports suggested tehre would be TWO round robin stages with four teams each in the (initially) four groups. This is two round robin stages too many. The TFC Champions League strikes me as a big money loser (I could be wrong of course) and simply doesn't warrant all the travel and time expended in travelling around the region. Plus, the roster-size in MLS alone suggests the number of games would be WAY too many. Give me a home and home like it stands now and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe one day the tourney will warrant a round robin stage, but for now, no way.
i think it would be a bad idea for a-league teams to represent the United States. i've seena few a-league matches on FSW and the level of play from MLS to the a-league is a severe drop off.
I don't think it's as big as you make out. Yes, MLS is better. As it should be. I'm not sure I'd call it a "severe drop off" however. Open Cup matches, for example, are almost always tightly contested. I've only seen 3 or 4 games on FSW however so what do I know.
As to the ecomomics of the thing... It's almost certainly true that this tourney doesn't make money right now, but the only way it'll ever grow is for Concacaf to establish a more or less regular format and schedule. There's probably more potential in this tourney than the organizers have been able to reach. Before the BS crash, the Concacaf forum had an attendance thread and the numbers really weren't that bad. And that's with everyone knowing that some teams were fielding their reserves in these matches. The final between Pachuca and Morelia just drew 15,000 - even though it was played on a Weds night in Mexico City. In a group phase, each team would probably get three home matches. If there's a Mexican club plus at least one Central American club in each group, those home matches may draw reasonably well in several MLS markets. Of course, the travel for three road games may still be too much for the Caribbean and smaller Central American clubs (e.g., Tauro) to afford. But if those teams can sell tickets to three home matches against comparatively attractive opponents, maybe that would help. Ultimately, the costs may just be too prohibitive for a league format, but I'm not sure that this tourney has been organized efficiently or scheduled consistently enough for us to really have a good way to estimate. Aside from the economics... I think the real benefit of this tourney for MLS and US soccer consists in playing very difficult road games in Concacaf. US players will have an easier time dealing with the various issues associated with playing WC quals in the Azteca, Mazatenango, or the Monster's Cave if they've played in similar environments a few times with their MLS clubs. Players will also learn how to deal with local officiating, which I think is often quite different than what they see in MLS. Playing Mexican, Costa Rican, and other teams that may have different styles is also just a good thing from a player development perspective. Same benefits apply to MLS coaches.
If the tourney can be taken a little more seriously, I'm all for one group stage. No thanks for two group stages. If nothing is done to improve the competition (tv, increased $, etc.), stick to the current set-up. I thought that the tournament is only for D1 teams, therefore an A-League team might not be eligible. Plus, if we want the strongest teams representing the U.S. as possible, the MLS schedule determines that. The Open Cup, while exciting, doesn't necessarily determine the best team in the U.S. Assuming the 4 U.S. slots, I'd give the first 3 to the top 3 point earners during the MLS reg. season. Then, I'd give the fourth spot to the MLS Cup winner. If that's one of the top three, then have the fourth spot go to the 4th best reg. season finisher. I know it's not perfect because of the scheduling differences, but it's close enough. I'll add that if the FC really does go to a 4x4 group stage, I'd make sure no league/region could have more than 4 teams in the tourney. No league/region in the FC is that deep. So give Central America's two extra spots to the Caribbean. Or one to the Caribbean and the other to Canada. All of our ideas our well intended, but I can't help but think it's just going to be more of the same ol' from FC headquarters.
Azteca America (and presumably TV Azteca in Mexico) carried the Morelia-Pachuca final. Obviously, that featured two Mexican teams and doesn't mean that Azetca will want to carry anything at all next year. But, if they got some decent ratings for a Weds night in the US for Azteca America and/or Mexico for TV Azteca, then, who knows, maybe they'll look into carrying a few games next season. I just disagree slightly with your four team per country/region argument. I agree with no more than four per country, and that would realistically only matter for the US and Mexico. But Central America can easily provide more than four teams that could compete reasonably well in any given year (Honduras - Olimpia, Motagua, Marathon; CR - Saprissa, Alajuelense, Herediano; Guatemala - Comunicaciones, Municipal; ES - FAS, Aguila, Firpo). I think that any of those clubs would be more competitive in most years than Joe Public, W Connection, or any Caribbean club. Also, and perhaps more importantly from an economic perspective, any club from Honduras, ES, or Guatemala is likely to be a better draw in most MLS markets than teams from the Caribbean.
CONCACAF is using the same format next year... 16 clubs Four rounds, 2 legs, aggregate goals. 6 UNCAF Clubs 4 Mexican 4 US 2 Caribe The round-of-16 begins early next year... http://concacaf.com/news/article.page/969?print=true BTW, normally the Supporter's Sheild winner qualifies.
Sure the games have been close, but MLS clubs are still winning a large share of the games... MLS has won 81% of the games involving MLS/A-Lge clubs and have a goal difference of 1.45 goals/game (average score of 2.31-0.86). This is since Rochester embarrassed MLS in 1999 (the 2000, 2001, and 2002 seasons). I don't think the A-League sucks and I think it can claim to be a legit 2nd Division throughout most of the advanced soccer playing world. I've seen English Division 1 and 2 games in person and I would rate A-League clubs mid-to-low table in English Division 1 and without a doubt in the upper half of the English Division 2. You could even take Celtic and Rangers out of the SPL and it would compare closely to the A-League. The A-League plays some good soccer - if you like 2nd Division soccer (I do).