villus Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I'm sure this was discussed before but can someone please refresh me on how arguably 3 of the top 4 teams presently in Concacaf end up in the same qualifying group (Mexico 14, Canada 60, and Honduras 37). I mean Costa Rica 75 is on the steady downward spiral since the last WC, and so is T&T 87. Honduras and Canada are big time up and coming and yet we both get in the same group with Mexico. USA's 21 group is such an utter joke, I think this is taylor made so that the US is guaranteed qualification. Their starting group is really weak and on top of that Honduras or Canada is likely going home before the hex. Concacaf needs to find a better system and the corruption in favor of the US needs to end. The Gold Cup is held every year in the US not even shared with any other country, even though Canada has a similar population demographic etc. Obviously nothing can be done for this qualifying round but this needs to be adressed by Fifa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Costa Rica, USA, and Mexico were all seeded based on their automatice qualification for the last World Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I'll agree that the fact that each team playing 6 games in the semifinal round to eliminate 6 teams and then having each team play 10 games in the hex to eliminate 2 or 3 more is pretty stupid. But the big screwup CONCACAF made this time around occurred when they divided the teams into pots for purposes of seeding. USA, MEX and CRC were Pot 1 and deservedly so, but the draw, which happened in November (I believe) used the May rankings to determine pots when the November rankings were available. The team that gained the most from this decision, unsurprisingly, was T&T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ob1 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 What might the groups have looked like had they used those November rankings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villus Posted June 5, 2008 Author Share Posted June 5, 2008 I would prefer they go to a format similar to the South American one. Get the minnows to play a few round of qualifying early, and even do the same home and away series as is going to happen this month then let the 12 teams play down from there to find the last 4. Much more fair that way every team plays every team and no one gets an upper hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonovision Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 quote:Originally posted by ob1 What might the groups have looked like had they used those November rankings? I don't think it would have been possible for Canada and Honduras to have been in the same group had the latest rankings been used. I'm sure it has been discussed here before, some searching could find that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whither Canada Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 How could it happen? What Jack Warner wants, Jack Warner gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSoccerFan Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 I would prefer a 10 team final group run over 2 years. Then there's actually a bit of room for error. Everyone whines about it being too stretched out but it's not if you play 3 or 4 matches in each June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themodelcitizen Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Didn't St. Vincent and St. Kitts end up in the same group last time round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltdownman Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 As said earlier every other confederation used the most recent fifa ranking, except Concacaf which used the ratings from the month that helped T&T the most. Pretty much it was fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I agree that the format is terrible. They tried to change it about 8-10 years ago but, from I recall at the time, everyone had a different agenda and no concensus was reached. The only change that was made is that now everybody has to play in the preliminary round only the non minnows enter at a later date rather than the very beginning. I too think that the south american format is the best in the world. Because it permits match ups of the best teams. Thats not possible even in europe because the strong sides are all spread out into different groups. But in south american qualifying, you are going to see a Bra-Arg matchup. During the last cycle of WCQ, there was no better match up than that Bra-Arg anywhere in the world in terms of quality and build up. Other than the Canada games, that was the only WCQ game that i went out of my way to watch. As far as concacaf, Id like to see both the semi final round and hex rolled up into one round. So that, you have a two groups of six teams play for the 3 and a half spot. It would allow a longer qualifying period and more matches for the fans to enjoy. Which, hopefully grows the sport in the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 I think we need to go to 4 groups of 4 in the SF stage and then have an Octagon round of 8 teams in the final stage. There'd be an increase of 4 games played by the Octagon participants, but the sched. could be tweaked a little to accomodate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 CANADA has the best midfielders in concacaf by far nsaliwa, hutchinson, imhoff, de guzman, bernier, simpson, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Javier CANADA has the best midfielders in concacaf by far nsaliwa, hutchinson, imhoff, de guzman, bernier, simpson, Can we borrow Messi and dress him up as Lombardo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachesl Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by jpg75 I think we need to go to 4 groups of 4 in the SF stage and then have an Octagon round of 8 teams in the final stage. There'd be an increase of 4 games played by the Octagon participants, but the sched. could be tweaked a little to accomodate. Qualifying would have to start at least 3 years before like it does in Africa and South America. I would argue that the longer the process, the more it would hurt teams like Canada that have more players abraod proportionately and would have to further travel further from home. It would necessarily also cut down on the number of friendlies, because Canada for the same reasons would have to limit the friendlies with more actual WCQ competition, whereas the other nations in CONCACAF would still maintain the number of firendlies, especially the latinos who earn big bucks having their friendlies in the US. Canada would be better to play fewer WCQ's,, but have more preparatory friendlies like they have just seemed to have started to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by beachesl Qualifying would have to start at least 3 years before like it does in Africa and South America. No problem there, the teams that would start earlier would be the caribbean minnows. The SF round would start earlier, as in during the spring and end in Sept. Then we'd have the first 4 rounds of the Octagon in Oct and Nov and then 10 games next year. Prelim. - Fall 07/Spring 08 SF - Spring/Summer/Sept. 08 Octagon - Oct 08 - Nov 09 (4 games in Oct/Nov 08, 10 games between Feb 09 - Nov 09) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by jpg75 I think we need to go to 4 groups of 4 in the SF stage and then have an Octagon round of 8 teams in the final stage. There'd be an increase of 4 games played by the Octagon participants, but the sched. could be tweaked a little to accomodate. But your proposal just means more games than are necessary for the strong heavily favoured sides ( as well as the sides who have no hope or realistic ambition to qualify) and the same our fewer games for the up and comming emerging sides with an outside shot. And it would not promote soccer in the region. If you are a developed country in the region ( eg.: USA), its really difficult attract new fans to game if you are pitted against opponents that consists of tiny island republics with population the size of a city block and whose GDP is less than the annual income of some CEO's. Thats not being elitist its just the reality of the region, in some ways Concacaf is like Oceania only that instead of having one decent team, we have half a dozen to a dozen. Many FA's in this region dont have the money to play in competion that extends beyond 3-4 games. A few years back , when the US had to pay the return travel expenses for their opponent. Does Belize, Puerto rico, or Nicaragua honnestly think that they will qualify for the WC? The competition format should allow for healty competition and good games that are as evenly played as possibly. And they need to be drawn out over a longer period than current so that interest can build. That way, if you are a side like canada, you need to have enough games to play beyond the current four months as has been the case in the past three WCQ cycles. And if you are a side like US, Mex or CRC, more game against Bermuda, St Vincent, or belize is not going to sell more tickets or attract more interest. Sorry, but i would view your proposed format worst ( if thats even possible) than the existing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 Here's a crazy question: Why is it okay to give the North American countries a buy into the Gold Cup and make everyone else qualify? I believe the official line is that they are all past winners, but the fact of the matter is that there are only 3 coutries in North America, making a qualification tournament redundant -not to mention these countries are the biggest in the region. I think we should do basically what we do for the Gold Cup and then follow the South American model: Canada, US and Mexico go straight to the group stage Central America has a qualifying tourney for three spots The Carribean has a qualifying tourney for two spots So Panama, Guatemala, Cuba & Haiti may be in tough and, if necessary we can make it 3-4-3 to accomodate them, I don't care. At the end of the day, we should see this: Canada USA Mexico Guatemala (and/or Panama) Honduras Costa Rica Jamaica T&T (and/or Cuba/Haiti) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Free kick But your proposal just means more games than are necessary for the strong heavily favoured sides ( as well as the sides who have no hope or realistic ambition to qualify) and the same our fewer games for the up and comming emerging sides with an outside shot. And it would not promote soccer in the region. If you are a developed country in the region ( eg.: USA), its really difficult attract new fans to game if you are pitted against opponents that consists of tiny island republics with population the size of a city block and whose GDP is less than the annual income of some CEO's. Thats not being elitist its just the reality of the region, in some ways Concacaf is like Oceania only that instead of having one decent team, we have half a dozen to a dozen. Many FA's in this region dont have the money to play in competion that extends beyond 3-4 games. A few years back , when the US had to pay the return travel expenses for their opponent. Does Belize, Puerto rico, or Nicaragua honnestly think that they will qualify for the WC? The competition format should allow for healty competition and good games that are as evenly played as possibly. And they need to be drawn out over a longer period than current so that interest can build. That way, if you are a side like canada, you need to have enough games to play beyond the current four months as has been the case in the past three WCQ cycles. And if you are a side like US, Mex or CRC, more game against Bermuda, St Vincent, or belize is not going to sell more tickets or attract more interest. Sorry, but i would view your proposed format worst ( if thats even possible) than the existing one. You know what's worse then my proposal? Having 2 of Canada, Honduras and Jamaica sitting at home while the HEX has one of Guatemala/T&T and Panama/Haiti in it. Atleast with my proposal the chance of the some of the Top 10 teams in CONCACAF being dumped earlier than necessary is greatly reduced. Plus it means more $$ from gate receipts which the suits love. Here's what a possible setup for this year would have looked like: Group A - Mexico, Canada, Haiti, Guyana Group B - USA, Panama, Jamaica, St. VAG Group C - Costa Rica, Guatemala, ES, Puerto Rico Group D - T&T, Honduras, Cuba, Barbados Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 quote:Originally posted by Free kick But your proposal just means more games than are necessary for the strong heavily favoured sides ( as well as the sides who have no hope or realistic ambition to qualify) and the same our fewer games for the up and comming emerging sides with an outside shot. And it would not promote soccer in the region. If you are a developed country in the region ( eg.: USA), its really difficult attract new fans to game if you are pitted against opponents that consists of tiny island republics with population the size of a city block and whose GDP is less than the annual income of some CEO's. Thats not being elitist its just the reality of the region, in some ways Concacaf is like Oceania only that instead of having one decent team, we have half a dozen to a dozen. Many FA's in this region dont have the money to play in competion that extends beyond 3-4 games. A few years back , when the US had to pay the return travel expenses for their opponent. Does Belize, Puerto rico, or Nicaragua honnestly think that they will qualify for the WC? The competition format should allow for healty competition and good games that are as evenly played as possibly. And they need to be drawn out over a longer period than current so that interest can build. That way, if you are a side like canada, you need to have enough games to play beyond the current four months as has been the case in the past three WCQ cycles. And if you are a side like US, Mex or CRC, more game against Bermuda, St Vincent, or belize is not going to sell more tickets or attract more interest. Sorry, but i would view your proposed format worst ( if thats even possible) than the existing one. You know what's worse then my proposal? Having 2 of Canada, Honduras and Jamaica sitting at home while the HEX has one of Guatemala/T&T and Panama/Haiti in it. Atleast with my proposal the chance of the some of the Top 10 teams in CONCACAF being dumped earlier than necessary is greatly reduced. Plus it means more $$ from gate receipts which the suits love. Here's what a possible setup for this year would have looked like: Group A - Mexico, Canada, Haiti, Guyana Group B - USA, Panama, Jamaica, St. VAG Group C - Costa Rica, Guatemala, ES, Puerto Rico Group D - T&T, Honduras, Cuba, Barbados Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jeffery S. Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 They decided the cut-off date for groups for qualifying early on when the ranking favoured T+T, simple as that. Instead of taking the ranking as it was on the day of the draw, where we were higher. This indeed is a Concacaf-Warner manipulation, but since the CSA thought it was just fine, said nothing, what can we do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 quote:Originally posted by jpg75 here's what mine would look like Group A - Mex, CRC, Can, T&T, Hai, Sur Group B - USA, Hon, Gua, Jam, Cub, Pan - each group winner automatically qualifies for the WC. - second place teams in each pool play a two-leg play off to determine the third WC qualifying side. - the loser of the playoff for second place, goes to the playoff for the half spot against Conmebol fifth place team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpg75 Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 ^ Yor proposal eliminates the 2 USA-Mex matchups and neither federation would agree to that and neither would $Jack Warner$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.