Toronto Sun: Changes are afoot with Canadian championship

[nolando]

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2010/04/26/13730626.html

"But the real problem is that, in a round-robin format, there is no true championship game to decide the winner. There is no cup final. Now, with four teams in the tourney, the CSA could adopt a new format that allows for a true championship game."

[masster]

I have said it before and I will say it again, I do not want to see the Nutrilite tournament become a knockout cup competition. We need to send the best Canadian team to the Champions League. Last year notwithstanding, Round Robin Competitions are much better than knockout tournaments at determining the best teams. At 4 teams, a round robin is only 2 additional games per team. This means more ticket revenue and is not overly taxing on the players. Distribute this extra revenues to the teams based on performance so the squads always have something to play for. In addition, if the CSA is successful in getting a second birth as mentioned in the article, it will ensure that teams won't consider themselves 'out of it'.

[Jeremy]

If we get a second spot in CCL, the team that finished first will be qualified to group stade immediately, right?

[RJB]

Do people honestly think that we deserve two spots in the CCL? The addition of Edmonton lends nothing to the argument that we deserve a fourth team. We have no national league, and only four teams competing in the Voyageurs Cup(in 2011), so a second CCL team is out of the question.

[Joe Keeper]

I have said it before and I will say it again, I do not want to see the Nutrilite tournament become a knockout cup competition. We need to send the best Canadian team to the Champions League. Last year notwithstanding, Round Robin Competitions are much better than knockout tournaments at determining the best teams. At 4 teams, a round robin is only 2 additional games per team. This means more ticket revenue and is not overly taxing on the players. Distribute this extra revenues to the teams based on performance so the squads always have something to play for. In addition, if the CSA is successful in getting a second birth as mentioned in the article, it will ensure that teams won't consider themselves 'out of it'.

I dont think we will ever see the tournament go to a strait knock-out competition. At most I think that a final will be instituted in wich say the top two teams square off for the title.

I too hope the tournament never looses a round robin format no matter how many teams are added over the years. If we ever got to eight teams, the organizers would split it into two groups. Even with four teams I would be in favour of a seperate final with the 1st place team getting to host it as a reward.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

We have no national league,....

It may only be 6 games in total but the NCC is effectively our national league. Hence the reference by Richard Scott of the CSA to a gap between 1992 when the CSL folded and 2008.

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/soccer/2010/04/26/13730626.html

“We are still the new kids on the block,” said CSA spokesman Richard Scott. “We didn't have a professional championship form 1992 to 2008.”

[yomurphy1]

Do people honestly think that we deserve two spots in the CCL? The addition of Edmonton lends nothing to the argument that we deserve a fourth team. We have no national league, and only four teams competing in the Voyageurs Cup(in 2011), so a second CCL team is out of the question.

Yes we deserve 2 spots. El Salvador, Guatemala, and Panama each have 2 spots. Belize and Nicaragua have the same numbers of spots as us.

[RJB]

^But how many professional clubs do they have? And how many games are played in their national league?

Also, BBtB, Scott alluded to a national championship, not a national league. I love the Voyageurs Cup, but people need to be aware that a six game mini-tournament does not constitute a league. I'll be the first to say that it is league-like however until there are more clubs involved in a similar format, we can't be expecting more berths into what is the premier tournament on the continent. In fact, I'll go out on a limb and suggest that until our national championship has more games played per team than what it currently takes to win the CCL(12), we shouldn't even be considered for a second team.

[youllneverwalkalone]

When justifying the inclusion or denial of a second CL club by way of comparison to other teams or leagues, you need to be careful. In terms of stadium size or fans support, I'm sure Olimpia, Marathon, & Motagua can say 'Hey, Canada, you don't deserve 2 spots because you don't have 7 minnows to beat the **** out of every week.' That's true. But if you compare the financial infrastructure of our 3 clubs to Central America and the Caribbean, then I think we could justify all three clubs entering the CL. I mean, Celtic and Rangers are also in a two team league in terms of revenue, and player and infrastructure budgets. You could say this about many leagues. CONCACAF surely wants Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver in this competition. If we had to, in theory, we could expand the NCC to 8 clubs for the sake of 'legitimacy.' But I'm not sure that TFC playing Victoria United really makes the competition any more legit? I would argue that 2 spots out of 4 is fair. Scotland gets what, 4 UEFA spots for a 12 team table? That's 33%. We're asking for 50%. Not such a big deal. Although I wouldn't mind if CONCACAF put us under a little pressure to bring the competition up to 6 to get our 2 spots, as long as those two other teams were legit NASL clubs. I'm just not sure it's in CONCACAF's best interest to hold us back.

[MM2]

I don't think that the decision to give Canada a second berth will be based solely on the # of teams involved in the Voyageurs Cup but by our results in the Champion's Cup. If the Canadian Rep consistently makes it to the group stage and beyond then we will get an automatic berth to the group stage, that then opens up the possiblilty of a 2nd team in the competition.

Montreal got us off to a good start but TFC blew it last year.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

The biggest problem in keeping the round robin is what we saw last year. The problem of teams having nothing to play for at the end gets worse with a 4th team and still only one title. On top of that, playing more games is a big ask. The winner still has to play as many as 8 more games in the fall. Add various club friendlies in the summer (Mtl vs fiorentina, carlsberg cup etc.) and the fixture list gets too much. Toronto already has to play sunday-wednesday-saturday this week to kick off a hectic month.

My prediction is two-legged ties to keep the game count at 4

[Rivaldo]

I'll go out on a limb and suggest that until our national championship has more games played per team than what it currently takes to win the CCL(12), we shouldn't even be considered for a second team.

Are you suggesting that Canadian teams should play 13+ games to qualify for the CCL? Once Canada has three teams in the second best league on the continent, a second spot is a possibility.

[Macksam]

When justifying the inclusion or denial of a second CL club by way of comparison to other teams or leagues, you need to be careful. In terms of stadium size or fans support, I'm sure Olimpia, Marathon, & Motagua can say 'Hey, Canada, you don't deserve 2 spots because you don't have 7 minnows to beat the **** out of every week.' That's true. But if you compare the financial infrastructure of our 3 clubs to Central America and the Caribbean, then I think we could justify all three clubs entering the CL. I mean, Celtic and Rangers are also in a two team league in terms of revenue, and player and infrastructure budgets. You could say this about many leagues. CONCACAF surely wants Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver in this competition. If we had to, in theory, we could expand the NCC to 8 clubs for the sake of 'legitimacy.' But I'm not sure that TFC playing Victoria United really makes the competition any more legit? I would argue that 2 spots out of 4 is fair. Scotland gets what, 4 UEFA spots for a 12 team table? That's 33%. We're asking for 50%. Not such a big deal. Although I wouldn't mind if CONCACAF put us under a little pressure to bring the competition up to 6 to get our 2 spots, as long as those two other teams were legit NASL clubs. I'm just not sure it's in CONCACAF's best interest to hold us back.

Great post. In all honesty, we could add 7 teams from the CSL or PDL to make a ten team league and it would mirror about 85% the leagues in the world where three financially big clubs can lay waste to the rest of the league. However, there is literally no point in that. I'm all for having more teams in the Voyageurs, just as long as they are professional. I think when we get at least 6 fully pro clubs, we should get 2 CCL spots.

[alberta white]

I dont think we will ever see the tournament go to a strait knock-out competition. At most I think that a final will be instituted in wich say the top two teams square off for the title.

I too hope the tournament never looses a round robin format no matter how many teams are added over the years. If we ever got to eight teams, the organizers would split it into two groups. Even with four teams I would be in favour of a seperate final with the 1st place team getting to host it as a reward.

If we did get to the Eight team -two group tournament, would this not be seen By FIFA and CONCACAF as a defacto Canadian League?

Although as you say this could be a long way off.

The Idea of the First Place team getting the Hosting Rights is similar to The Australian 'Grand Final' play off system.

[nfitz]

Do people honestly think that we deserve two spots in the CCL?

Of course we do. CONCACAF is all about money. Attendance at Champion's League games are significantly higher than any other country. We are clearly the only country that takes the competition this seriously So increase the revenue, and give Canada two spots, with one into the group stage.