P.S. At the very least, if anti-playoff people think that those big 3 competitions have to go to knockout rounds, wouldn’t you argue that only the group winners should advance from the group stage?
Crap, now I am curious as to how many winners of those 3 won their group. I am guessing it is a large percentage. I feel like there is no payoff but not sure I can resist looking this up.
Why would those competitions necessarily have to be 32 (or 24, whatever the Euro is) teams? There was a time when Olympic hockey was a single table round robin. Should it go back to that instead of the knockout competition it is now?
If knockout tournaments (which is what playoffs are) are so inherently boring/stupid/sacrilegious/whatever negative word you think is appropriate, then why are the 3 most popular soccer competitions (the ones I mentioned above) all knockout competitions? Shouldn’t they be less popular than single table balanced schedule competitions? Apologies if the EPL is more popular than one of those by some measures, but even if it is my point remains.
For me I like each of regular season and playoffs for different reasons. Regular season is about the long haul, the percentages. Playoffs is about winning the big game, best teams against best teams. Both are great accomplishments with different merits/downsides.
I consider myself more of a Canadian supporter nowadays, than a Canadian fan. In other words, I want to see the men's national team do well, but I can't really say that I have ever been a very big fan of the Canadian style of soccer.
I find too many in this country have adopted the American mentality of ""Winning isn’t everything; it's the only thing!" And it's not exactly like we've done a whole lot of winning, either in the past or the present. I would rather lose and have played well, than end up with a poorly played victory. Fear of losing has always been the Achilles heel of the Canadian soccer community, which is very evident in your post above. Fear to play against a better, whether the opponents are more athletic, better technically-school, or whatever, is precisely the reason I believe why soccer has never really caught on with the youth in this country. Canada needs learn how to lose and play well before it is ready to win and be successful. There is no shame in losing to countries like Egypt or Nigeria, as they are simply better than we are at this point in time. However, the benefit and experience our players would derive from competing against a Mo Salah or a Vincent Enyeama would be priceless, as well as inspiration and captured imagination of our youth. Neither players or fans will remember anything about games against the likes of Barbados, Iceland and Trinidad and Tobago other than a few FIFA-ranking points gained that may or may not get us to the HEX. However, a well-fought loss to Mo Salah and Egypt will live on in their minds forever.
I'm a reading that right?
This non stand out from a Winnipeg house league, this teenager playing in that very manly CPL "pro" league does well enough by himself, and of course his family connections, to be in the right place and the right time to claim a half dozen with a bottom-of-table team but we should be suspicious of claims of broader interest in the young man. You know, because for the last 30 years or so the whole world hasn't been constantly scoured every...single...day... for young goal scoring talent that can be had on the cheap.
Just asking because I sometimes misunderstand the meaning in the things that I read. (Its my own fault, high school drop-out).
Not one of your better comments Kent. How on earth could the 32 teams in each of those competitions play a balanced schedule?
Those two competitions are necessarily CUP competitions. When you have played a full balanced LEAGUE schedule, the winner is already decided.