CONCACAF's hosting monopoly

[narduch]

Personally think the USMNT is totally overrated. 

 

 

[gigi riva]

3 minutes ago, narduch said:

Personally think the USMNT is totally overrated. 

 

 

They have made strides in recent years you cannot ignore that  but yes they are a totally different team when they play on the road , And Yes I do believe the Yanks are a bit overated

[PastPros]

8 minutes ago, narduch said:

Personally think the USMNT is totally overrated. 

 

 

Ranked higher than they should be (FIFA rankings) - but not over-rated for CONCACAF.

Certainly the best/most consistent team in CONCACAF (regardless of venue).

Winning away in CONCACAF is hard af. Most teams would be happy with draw away, win at home.

Edited November 21, 2023 by PastPros

[Kent]

I feel like FIFA should do something about the hosting issue in CONCACAF. USA (and Mexico to a lesser extent) are essentially FIFA Ranking Point doping by hosting everything. Either force a hosting change or dock USA ranking points. Not that it's USMNT's fault they always host, but because it's not fair to whoever they force into a lower pot at World Cups due to their better results because of always hosting "neutral" competitions.

Edited November 21, 2023 by Kent
I fully missed writing "Mexico".

[Watchmen]

This is why the US shouldn't actually want to host every event. It hurts the team as well, as there's fewer experiences for them to play competitively on the road.

[gigi riva]

1 minute ago, Kent said:

I feel like FIFA should do something about the hosting issue in CONCACAF. USA (and to a lesser extent) are essentially FIFA Ranking Point doping by hosting everything. Either force a hosting change or dock USA ranking points. Not that it's USMNT's fault they always host, but because it's not fair to whoever they force into a lower pot at World Cups due to their better results because of always hosting "neutral" competitions.

It will never happen Unfortunatly , lets face it The USSF is making some money 

[PastPros]

1 minute ago, Watchmen said:

This is why the US shouldn't actually want to host every event. It hurts the team as well, as there's fewer experiences for them to play competitively on the road.

Yes but... $$$.

[Watchmen]

Just now, PastPros said:

Yes but... $$$.

But those $$$ are for CONCACAF.

[Kent]

5 minutes ago, PastPros said:

Ranked higher than they should be (FIFA rankings) - but not over-rated for CONCACAF.

Certainly the best/most consistent team in CONCACAF (regardless of venue).

Yes, regardless of venue, provided the venue is in the United States of course.

Seriously though, Mexico is still number 1. More Gold Cup wins, even if you want to only look back x number of years and pick the number of years, it's either the same number of wins as USA, or it's more for Mexico. And that is despite USA hosting all of those Gold Cups. The only 2 times the final was hosted outside USA, they failed to win it (Mexico won both finals that were in Mexico, way back when).

Number of trophies won in a foreign country.
Mexico - 7
Canada - 1
USA and the rest of CONCACAF - 0

Mexico has also been more consistent in the World Cup, although USA did better than Mexico in the last World Cup.

[Kent]

2 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

But those $$$ are for CONCACAF.

I am certain the USMNT is profiting from constantly hosting. I don't know if they directly profit from it but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. There is likely some amount of prize money for results in the Gold Cup and Nations League, so hosting would be boosting their earning potential there. Not to mention being able to build up a fan base, test out potential venues for other games where they WOULD profit from big crowds, or even just testing the waters for potential new pro teams which has value to the USSF as well.

[gigi riva]

37 minutes ago, Watchmen said:

This is why the US shouldn't actually want to host every event. It hurts the team as well, as there's fewer experiences for them to play competitively on the road.

Lets hope in burns them in the ass come 2026 . while Canada and Mexico have a better tournament , (Why not dream big)

[Watchmen]

21 minutes ago, Kent said:

I am certain the USMNT is profiting from constantly hosting. I don't know if they directly profit from it but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. There is likely some amount of prize money for results in the Gold Cup and Nations League, so hosting would be boosting their earning potential there. Not to mention being able to build up a fan base, test out potential venues for other games where they WOULD profit from big crowds, or even just testing the waters for potential new pro teams which has value to the USSF as well.

Oh there's definitely indirect benefits for them. No disagreement there. I just think most of the direct revenue from hosting goes to CONCACAF. But, this is why the US shouldn't always eager to host everything. They desperately need more experience playing abroad in competitive games.

[gigi riva]

28 minutes ago, Kent said:

Yes, regardless of venue, provided the venue is in the United States of course.

Seriously though, Mexico is still number 1. More Gold Cup wins, even if you want to only look back x number of years and pick the number of years, it's either the same number of wins as USA, or it's more for Mexico. And that is despite USA hosting all of those Gold Cups. The only 2 times the final was hosted outside USA, they failed to win it (Mexico won both finals that were in Mexico, way back when).

Number of trophies won in a foreign country.
Mexico - 7
Canada - 1
USA and the rest of CONCACAF - 0

Mexico has also been more consistent in the World Cup, although USA did better than Mexico in the last World Cup.

In a way its kind of sad that Mexico doesnt host a GC  they have built some beautiful Staduims in places like Monterray, and Guadalahara 

[Floortom]

6 hours ago, Kent said:

Yes, regardless of venue, provided the venue is in the United States of course.

Seriously though, Mexico is still number 1. More Gold Cup wins, even if you want to only look back x number of years and pick the number of years, it's either the same number of wins as USA, or it's more for Mexico. And that is despite USA hosting all of those Gold Cups. The only 2 times the final was hosted outside USA, they failed to win it (Mexico won both finals that were in Mexico, way back when).

Number of trophies won in a foreign country.
Mexico - 7
Canada - 1
USA and the rest of CONCACAF - 0

Mexico has also been more consistent in the World Cup, although USA did better than Mexico in the last World Cup.

Those Mexico wins aren’t really in a foreign country though. They outdraw the U.S. in many states and get home fan support in almost every match (at worst they split against the U.S.). The tournaments being held in the U.S. supports the two dominant teams in the region (Mexico and US) to the detriment of all others. 

[Kent]

2 hours ago, Floortom said:

Those Mexico wins aren’t really in a foreign country though. They outdraw the U.S. in many states and get home fan support in almost every match (at worst they split against the U.S.). The tournaments being held in the U.S. supports the two dominant teams in the region (Mexico and US) to the detriment of all others. 

Yes I agree. I meant to mention Mexico in my post about FIFA ranking point doping. Mexico playing in USA isn't really an away game, with maybe some cities that are exceptions (like Columbus). It's still not as big an advantage as if the games were actually in Mexico though. If every Gold Cup had been played in Mexico instead of in the USA, Mexico would have several more championships, and the USA would have fewer (we would likely have fewer as well).