RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
MSantoine
Post #1
Friday October 25, 2013 6:11pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 2,051
So Sepp Blatter, one of the most clueless people around has come out on record as saying Asia and especially Africa need more bids to a world cup. Its funny how he doesnt mention concacaf needing more bids when we've had essentially the same success rate (number of teams/number of QF appearances) in the last 3 cycles (really the beginning of Africa and Asian teams not being auto outs). It looks like this could go 1 of 2 ways.

1) CONCACAF loses its .5 bid, maybe CONMEBOL too and Asia gets 5 bids and
a Africa gets a .5 spot extra and the playoff with NZ.

2) UEFA loses some bids to even things out.

Its hard to argue for taking bids from UEFA. They consistently perform in the World Cup. But is that performance because they have more than 33% of the field? Would Egypt, or Tunisia fair better in the world cup than Croatia or Ukraine? Would Uzbekistan or Oman? Panama? Its very similar to the NCAA march madness debate. Do you take 9th place Big east or acc vs 2nd place mid major conference team? If you are the 10th, 11th, etc best team in Europe should you play for a chance at a world cup over the 5th best asian team, or 4th best concacaf team? Its a great question and will be very interesting to watch unfold in the next year

dolcem
Post #2
Friday October 25, 2013 7:03pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,033
Asia certainly doesn't need more bids and Africa probably doesn't either. CONMEBOL definitely deserves more. And honestly I'd be fine with CONCACAF getting 3 bids instead of 3.5. Even with CONCACAF being strong as it has ever been we don't have 4 teams that will do well at this World Cup. Yes Mexico was the fourth team but every once in a while a great team does poorly in qualifying and misses a World Cup (Holland in '02, for example). It doesn't mean that CONCACAF deserves four spots. Costa Rica and Honduras will get steamrolled at this World Cup while teams like Uruguay, Sweden, and Ukraine might not make it (the latter two probably won't and if they do, it'll be at the expense of France and/or Portugal).
NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT WHAT LINEUP YOU USE IN FIFA
2tone
Ten-Towns
Post #3
Friday October 25, 2013 7:30pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 4,850
Besides England, Spain, France, Italy, Germany, Portugal, and the Netherlands, it's hard to say UEFA perfoms consistently in the WC.

And even then Italy and France have had up and down performances in the last few WC's.

I wouldn't mind seeing Uefa being dropped one or two WC spots to 12 or 11.

CONCACAF is fine at 3.5.

Conmebol usually gets half of their confederation into WC's with their 4.5.

Know Nothing
Post #4
Friday October 25, 2013 8:09pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 338
So Blatter is starting his re-election bid by trying to sweeten things up.

When you look at the FIFA rankings, there certainly is no merit to this argument. When you compare CONCACAF's top four teams are rated 13, 24, 31, and 34 they are comparable to CAF's top 4 which are rated 17, 23, 32, and 33. But the top AFC team is rated lower than any of the top 4 CONCACAF or CAF team 44, 49, 55, and 56.

If they want true equity, perhaps revamp the allocations completely. Give UEFA 9 automatic qualifiers, CONMEBOL 5, and CONCACAF, AFC, AND CAF 2 automatic places each. If my math is correct, then that is 20. The remaining 12 places can be derived from a playoff of the 8 best 2nd place UEFA finishers, Oceania Winner, CONMEBOL 6th place, and to appease Blatter, 4 from CONCACAF and 5 each from CAF, and AFC (24 total teams). The top 4 ranked UEFA teams, the Oceania winner, the CONMEBOL rep, and the 2 top ranked teams in the playoff from CONCACAF, AFC, and CAF will be the seeded teams. A home and home series is played and the winner goes. Teams from the same region can be paired against each other in the playoffs.

It's true the tournament in this scenario could end up with 17 UEFA and 6 CONMEBOL teams, but in the end the goal is for the best teams to represent.

MSantoine
Post #5
Friday October 25, 2013 8:20pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 2,051
Original post from 2tone

Besides England, Spain, France, Italy, Germany, Portugal, and the Netherlands, it's hard to say UEFA perfoms consistently in the WC.

And even then Italy and France have had up and down performances in the last few WC's.

I wouldn't mind seeing Uefa being dropped one or two WC spots to 12 or 11.

CONCACAF is fine at 3.5.

Conmebol usually gets half of their confederation into WC's with their 4.5.


9 different UEFA nations made a quaterfinal in the last 3 tourneys. Thats impressive depths. I think what is really ineveitable is expansion of the world cup. With upwards of 60-70 nations (35 UEFA, 5, CONCACAf, 8 CONMEBOL, 8 CAF, 8 AFC, 1 OFC) that would not embarras themselves at a world cup, and are starting to have more and more top class (ie UCL caliber) players I can see a scenario where we go to 40 teams or something.

With the mid tier nations finally developing (ie Panama/Bolivia/Israel/Guinea/UAE caliber teams) I wouldnt be surprised if this is his first bullet towards expansion. Owners (and FIFA is an owner, dont forget it) love expansion as it means more money. More World Cup games mean bigger tv deals and more money. I think this is where Sepp is heading

Know Nothing
Post #6
Friday October 25, 2013 9:05pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 338
Original post from MSantoine

With the mid tier nations finally developing (ie Panama/Bolivia/Israel/Guinea/UAE caliber teams) I wouldnt be surprised if this is his first bullet towards expansion. Owners (and FIFA is an owner, dont forget it) love expansion as it means more money. More World Cup games mean bigger tv deals and more money. I think this is where Sepp is heading


It is inevitable, but I think we are at saturation tight now. The number of matches top players play in a year is becoming staggering and to add more matches puts players safety at risk. Some established players may decide in some instances to become loyal to the club that pays them extravagantly over their country.

The only way I can see meeting expansion with player safety is to expand the tournament to 48 teams but have 16 groups of 3 teams, top team advances. More teams get in but they play 1 less match.

2tone
Ten-Towns
Post #7
Friday October 25, 2013 9:39pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 4,850
Original post from MSantoine

9 different UEFA nations made a quaterfinal in the last 3 tourneys. Thats impressive depths. I think what is really ineveitable is expansion of the world cup. With upwards of 60-70 nations (35 UEFA, 5, CONCACAf, 8 CONMEBOL, 8 CAF, 8 AFC, 1 OFC) that would not embarras themselves at a world cup, and are starting to have more and more top class (ie UCL caliber) players I can see a scenario where we go to 40 teams or something.

With the mid tier nations finally developing (ie Panama/Bolivia/Israel/Guinea/UAE caliber teams) I wouldnt be surprised if this is his first bullet towards expansion. Owners (and FIFA is an owner, dont forget it) love expansion as it means more money. More World Cup games mean bigger tv deals and more money. I think this is where Sepp is heading


Like I stated your big nations are consistent i.e. Portugal, Spain, England, Netherlands, Germany, and France. The only outside country's of the big 6 in UEFA to make the QF's was Turkey and Ukraine.

So really no UEFA is not that impressive. Those big 6 nations are always expected to make it to the latter stages of the WC tournament. Other than that the other UEFA countries are just there to make up the numbers.

Like I said I would like to see UEFA get knocked to 12 or 11 wc spots.

rainORshine
Post #8
Friday October 25, 2013 11:10pm

Joined Dec 2012
Total Posts: 1,770
If it were totally on merit it would go something like this:

uefa - 15
s. america - 6
asia - 4
conc - 3.5
africa - 3.5

last 3 world cups KO rounds - # different countries / % of teams advancing out of group:
- uefa - 15 / .60
- s. america - 6 / .71
- asia - 3 / .38
- africa - 2 / .27
- con - 2 / .50 (mexico 3/3, US 2/3)

this is similar to uefa domestic league discussion - every federation is 'top heavy' - none more so than asia and concacaf. we may NEVER see a team besides s. korea, japan, australia, mexico and US in 2nd round from those regions. adding more than 3.5 to 4 teams from each region just waters down the competition.

in last 2 WC ghana only team from africa to advance, so 3.5 may even be a little high

Jzaval01
Post #9
Friday October 25, 2013 11:56pm

Joined May 2013
Total Posts: 1,382
This is pathetic. Africa doesnt deserve more spots! They some spots. Why? Well out of the last three world cup only one african team has made it to the next round.
AFRICAN PERFORMANCE
2002 1/5 qualified next round - Senegal - R16
2006 1/5 qualified next round - ghana - R16
2010 1/6 qualified next round - ghana - QF
Thats it!. That truly pathetic when you have 5 spots on the line and the rest fail. Then you have Conmebol that has 4.5 spots!!! Less than Africa lol Yet
SOUTH AMERICA PERFORMACE
2002 2/5 qualified next round - Brazil won the world cup, Paraguay R16
2006 3/4 qualified next round - Argentina QF, Ecuador R16, Brazil QF
2010 5/5! qualified to next round - Uruguay SF, Brazil QF, Argentina QF Paraguay QF, Chile R16
I mean only chile stayed in R16 while everyone made it farther and chile had brazil so theres a reason
ASIA PERFORMANCE
The Asian Confederation is just like ConCacaf only 2 or one make it to next round but they get 4 spots. Not only that but Blader want them to get more.
2002 2/4 Japan R16 and South Korea QF note both were host
2006 0/4 no one made it to next round.
2010 2/4 Japan and North Korea both made it to Round of 16

Conclusion Africa should def lose one spot for not performing and give it to Comebol give them 5.5 spots. Asia should lose .5 and give it to UEFA.

Since ConCaCaf and AFC perform the same in WC they both get 3.5 while Africa gets 4 even though they havent been performing should not have that much. and Comebol should get what they deserve after South Africa performance. Just a justification of federation performance in WC. It doesnt matter how big the continent is it's about how the continent performs with representatives

bbakerxyz
Post #10
Saturday October 26, 2013 2:55pm

Joined Oct 2012
Total Posts: 237
Not sure where some of the nonsense is coming from on this thread. Obviously, based on merit, UEFA and CONMEBOL would get more, probably at the expense of Asia and Africa (or possibly even CONCACAF or New Zealand).

I don't think anyone makes the claim that the current federation allocations are "fair," the point is to make it more of a "world" cup so it's not just Europe vs. South America.

dfw_fan
DfW
Post #11
Monday October 28, 2013 9:23pm

Joined Apr 2013
Total Posts: 413
It must be that time of the year, Qatar must have released a couple more Billions to Blatter and Platini's charitable organizations.

hamsamwich
Post #12
Monday October 28, 2013 10:21pm

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 434
Original post from 2tone

Like I stated your big nations are consistent i.e. Portugal, Spain, England, Netherlands, Germany, and France. The only outside country's of the big 6 in UEFA to make the QF's was Turkey and Ukraine.

So really no UEFA is not that impressive. Those big 6 nations are always expected to make it to the latter stages of the WC tournament. Other than that the other UEFA countries are just there to make up the numbers.

Like I said I would like to see UEFA get knocked to 12 or 11 wc spots.


I agree with this however, you forgot Italy in that list. also seeing as how Yugoslavia no longer exists they aren't on the list any longer either, so while it is true that UEFA is very strong, some teams appear stronger than they are. its a self fullfilling prophecy when UEFA gets the most teams in the competition and the most teams the farthest, oh wait, they were out performed for the most part by CONMEBOL, who I may add, are pressuring to get 6 out of 6 thru to the knockout rounds this year

MSantoine
Post #13
Monday October 28, 2013 11:18pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 2,051
Original post from MSantoine

9 different UEFA nations made a quaterfinal in the last 3 tourneys. Thats impressive depths. I think what is really ineveitable is expansion of the world cup. With upwards of 60-70 nations (35 UEFA, 5, CONCACAf, 8 CONMEBOL, 8 CAF, 8 AFC, 1 OFC) that would not embarras themselves at a world cup, and are starting to have more and more top class (ie UCL caliber) players I can see a scenario where we go to 40 teams or something.

With the mid tier nations finally developing (ie Panama/Bolivia/Israel/Guinea/UAE caliber teams) I wouldnt be surprised if this is his first bullet towards expansion. Owners (and FIFA is an owner, dont forget it) love expansion as it means more money. More World Cup games mean bigger tv deals and more money. I think this is where Sepp is heading


Not to toot my own horn or anything but...

http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1597339/mic...

hamsamwich
Post #14
Tuesday October 29, 2013 12:47am

Joined Oct 2013
Total Posts: 434
Would that be 8 groups of 5 teams??? would be a little awkward. might as well go to 48 team world cup 8 groups of 6 teams, top 4 in each group go to knockout rounds??

MSantoine
Post #15
Tuesday October 29, 2013 2:15am

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 2,051
Original post from hamsamwich

Would that be 8 groups of 5 teams??? would be a little awkward. might as well go to 48 team world cup 8 groups of 6 teams, top 4 in each group go to knockout rounds??


If they "only" went to 40 teams I would expect something like 10 groups of 4. 10 group winners would probably auto make round of 16 then all runner ups and top 2 3rds play new "1st round" to get other 6 for the 16. Something like that would be my guess

Page 1 of 2
1 2  Next »

Conor O'Brien could finally make his Austrian debut for Wiener Neustadt on Saturday.
RECENT POSTS
Europa qualification rolls on
No O'Brien debut this weekend
Dooley facing Azkal squad strife
USMNT ratings vs. Belgium