ThiKu Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Just had a thought while watching Euro 2012. Pre-Qualifying (Central America and Caribbean): Remains as currently set-up First Group Stage: Remains as currently set-up (or run concurrently with major world tournament over 3 week period, 2 games per week). Second Group Stage: Played as 3 week tournament concurrent with Euro. Can't have 1 country host. Must rotate matches as per required home-away qualifying. Continue to have 3 separate groups. Play 6 required home-away group stage matches and done. Hex: Remains as currently set-up (or run over consecutive 5-6 weeks, 2 games per week if another major tournament is happening - ie, Copa America?). Benefit: Games are finished over shorter period of time. Players travel is reduced significantly. Increases performance levels of the big teams as they are together for longer and players don't have to travel across the Atlantic or Pacific (the smaller nations tend to have players located in this region already). Benefit: Exposure of teams, "groundswell" opportunities for support. Benefit: FIFA dates moving forward are available for high-exposure (aka, income-earners!) friendlies and training camps (cost savers-earners) Downside: Injured players can miss entire qualifying. Downside: Cost? Would this cost associations a lot more as they'd have to house their players? (not sure) Off-set by the ability to have training camps @ reduced costs and income-earning friendlies on other FIFA dates. Benefit: Region now would have two "major" tournaments (Gold Cup and 2nd Group stage). Downside: Central Am & Carib teams gain major temperature advantage if playing games solely in spring/summer months (you can be sure the Canucks and Yanks are looking forward to those fall home games). Benefit: Canada could more easily justify rotating games through various home cities. Although I am a Vancouver guy I am in favour of all games being held in Toronto based on the current qualifying make-up. It's easier on players to get to Toronto not only from Europe, but also from the countries they are traveling to and from qualifying for than it is to Vancouver, for example. ??? I don't know all the ins-outs of qualifying but it just seems logical to me to have all the players on this side of the world, get the games done, and move on. People might say "but players need a rest." Well I doubt anyone complains about playing Euro, World or Copa. The players also would have opportunity to rest on future FIFA dates (either not participate in friendly/camp or country doesn't play at all), and players would have the other summer(s) available for breaks. Look forward to hearing other people's opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmonte Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Just had a thought while watching Euro 2012. Pre-Qualifying (Central America and Caribbean): Remains as currently set-up First Group Stage: Remains as currently set-up (or run concurrently with major world tournament over 3 week period, 2 games per week). Second Group Stage: Played as 3 week tournament concurrent with Euro. Can't have 1 country host. Must rotate matches as per required home-away qualifying. Continue to have 3 separate groups. Play 6 required home-away group stage matches and done. Hex: Remains as currently set-up (or run over consecutive 5-6 weeks, 2 games per week if another major tournament is happening - ie, Copa America?). Benefit: Games are finished over shorter period of time. Players travel is reduced significantly. Increases performance levels of the big teams as they are together for longer and players don't have to travel across the Atlantic or Pacific (the smaller nations tend to have players located in this region already). Benefit: Exposure of teams, "groundswell" opportunities for support. Benefit: FIFA dates moving forward are available for high-exposure (aka, income-earners!) friendlies and training camps (cost savers-earners) Downside: Injured players can miss entire qualifying. Downside: Cost? Would this cost associations a lot more as they'd have to house their players? (not sure) Off-set by the ability to have training camps @ reduced costs and income-earning friendlies on other FIFA dates. Benefit: Region now would have two "major" tournaments (Gold Cup and 2nd Group stage). Downside: Central Am & Carib teams gain major temperature advantage if playing games solely in spring/summer months (you can be sure the Canucks and Yanks are looking forward to those fall home games). Benefit: Canada could more easily justify rotating games through various home cities. Although I am a Vancouver guy I am in favour of all games being held in Toronto based on the current qualifying make-up. It's easier on players to get to Toronto not only from Europe, but also from the countries they are traveling to and from qualifying for than it is to Vancouver, for example. ??? I don't know all the ins-outs of qualifying but it just seems logical to me to have all the players on this side of the world, get the games done, and move on. People might say "but players need a rest." Well I doubt anyone complains about playing Euro, World or Copa. The players also would have opportunity to rest on future FIFA dates (either not participate in friendly/camp or country doesn't play at all), and players would have the other summer(s) available for breaks. Look forward to hearing other people's opinions. I personally like the idea of having the teams stay together longer and developing some coherency on the pitch. No I didn't mean cohesiveness. I mean coherency. They are together for such short spurts that their play sometimes doesn't even make sense lol. One con to point out: Some of the Nielsen ratings results others were pointing out in other threads show that a huge tournament in conjunction with Team Canada playing actually can work to take away interest instead of building on it, because sadly many were turning in to the Euros INSTEAD of Team Canada (not both). Personally I ignored the Euros completely for the Canada team games, but apparently the ratings don't lie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThiKu Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 ^hmmm, ya, that's a pretty big downside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSoccerFan Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I wouldn't mind seeing the hex expanded to 8 or 10 teams. The biggest flaw in the current format is the lopsided semi-final groups. Every time they're uneven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 This solution (in the thread starting post) only addresses things like costs and travel. which is only a problem for the minnow countries in Concacaf. Its doesnt address the biggest problem we have in Concacaf and its that only six teams get to play an appropriate amount of games that will allow the team to gel, build famiarity, test and use various player to come up with the best mix, and assure continuity for the national teams. If canada is eliminated in this round, it will miss out on playing ten additional games that six other sides get to play. So how do you improve for 2018 and catch up to those countries who (or always) play in the Hex? You dont and thats the biggest problem with the current format. The format used now is already designed to minimize costs and displacement. Thats for the benefit of the St Lucia's of the world. Not side like Jamaica, El Salvador, Canada etc. You need to eliminate the hex and current semi final round and and merge both into one ( one group or two groups ... Whatever) or expand the Hex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I think what CONCACAF should try to work towards is a pre-qualifying round that eliminates teams more quickly so that we can move towards something that mirrors the South American model more closely. Maybe an 8-team final round. The home/away ten team league format that CONMEBOL uses for qualifying is the most exciting in the world IMO. It works well because you get those big competitive matches (ex. Brazil-Argentina, and Mexico-USA in CONCACAF) that never happen in European qualifying, but at the same time you let the middling nations build up their programs by consistently playing in the final round of qualifying. I think that adding more teams to the final round of qualifying would only serve to make the region stronger and the qualifying itself more exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaub Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Agreed with above post... Using this WCQ for international dates Use rankings from January 2011 as a base February 2011: two legged playoffs between ranks 26-35 (not on international date) March 2011: two legged playoffs between ranks 11-20 (seeded) and 21-25 + 5 winners of Feb playoffs June 2011: old two legged playoff system between ranks 1-10 (seeded) and winners of March playoffs September 2011 onwards: South American WCQ system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianSoccerFan Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 June 2011: old two legged playoff system between ranks 1-10 (seeded) and winners of March playoffs That would interfere with the gold cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theaub Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 That would interfere with the gold cup Good call. I don't really think its feasible then based on FIFA match dates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Not a bad idea, but I think MLS wouldn't like the extended time their better players are off on National Team duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.