RECAPS
EXTRA TIME
YANKS ABROAD LOCKER ROOM
 
MSantoine
Post #1
Friday September 16, 2016 12:31pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
SI is reporting that its almost a given that next month they will announce the 2026 World Cup will expand to 40 teams. I personally dont like the idea of expansion as I think the World Cup is awesome the way it is. However they are proposing to have 8 groups of 5 teams so you still have to come in 1st or 2nd in your group. I would have hated if they went to 10 groups of 4 and did something like 24 teams advance to knockout round (cough cough Euro's cough cough).

With the expansion announcement coming there are rumblings of Mexico and USA may look to see if they can move to CONMEBOL so that when they re-distribute the amount of bids CONMEBOL will get more (would likely be somewhere in the 7-9 range with US & Mexico). It doesnt seem likely that CONMEBOL would want a full merger with CONCACAF due to all the small Caribbean Islands. I think that if US and Mexico went to CONMEBOL you could see a distribution of spots something like this:

CONCACAF-2.5 teams (4.5 if MX & USA stay)
CONMEBOL- 7.5 teams (5.5 if MX & USA stay)
AFC-5.5 teams
OFC-.5 team
CAF-8 teams
UEFA- 15 teams
host-1 team

They should just standardize it so CONCACAF always play South America in playoff and OFC & AFC always play. I personally think UEFA should get closer to 20 teams, but no way they expand by 8 teams and give most of the spots to Europe. There's probably a better likelihood that Europe gets no extra spots, or just 1. I think this would be the most fair as you get 10 teams from the Americas (in theory teams like Ecuador, Panama, CR, Venezuela, Honduras battle for 3 spots if the heavy weights take care of business), 6 from Asia (even with NZ they only have 8 or 9 decent teams) & 8 from Africa (very balanced fed with 10-12 teams that are all competitive)

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #2
Friday September 16, 2016 2:46pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
I personally love the idea of expanding to 40 teams IF (big IF) they keep it at 8 groups (of 5).
That would mean 1 more game per team in the group stages. So instead of playing 3, you would play 4. I'm ALL for that. Knockout stages would remain exactly the same.

I think the USMNT and Mexico going to Conmebol would be stupid. You have almost a guaranteed spot right now into the World Cup. You go to Conmebol and even with Conmebol getting more spots, you still aren't guaranteed to advance.

So with USMNT and Mexico staying in the Concacaf I would distribute it like this:

Host - 1 team
AFC - 5 teams
CAF - 7 teams
Concacaf - 5 teams
Conmebol - 7 teams
OFC - 1 team
UEFA - 14 teams

So lets say that the USA gets 2026 (like it SHOULD).
This is according to the ELO rankings:

Host: USA
Concacaf: Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama, Honduras, & Trinidad
AFC: South Korea, Iran, Japan, UAE, & Australia
CAF: Ivory Coast, Senegal, Algeria, Egypt, Cameroon, Nigeria, & Ghana
Conmebol: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay, Peru, & Ecuador
OFC: New Zealand
UEFA: Germany, France, Spain, Italy, England, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia, Switzerland, Turkey, Poland, Wales, and Bosnia.

That gives us the top 25. Which would almost assuredly put in 3 good teams in every group. So groupings could be something like this: (Host and top 7 seeds are the top seeds)

A - USA - Ivory Coast - Uruguay - Turkey - Australia
B - Argentina - Senegal - Honduras - Switzerland - South Korea
C - Belgium - Algeria - Ecuador - Croatia - Iran
D - Germany - Egypt - Peru - Netherlands - Japan
E - Colombia - Cameroon - Trinidad - England - Poland
F - Brazil - Nigeria - Panama - Italy - Wales
G - Chile - Ghana - Costa Rica - Spain - Bosnia
H - Portugal - New Zealand - Mexico - France - UAE

Bolded are top 25 in ELO rankings. Every Group has 3 in the top 25 and 1 had 4.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
MSantoine
Post #3
Friday September 16, 2016 3:41pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Original post from USAGunner

I personally love the idea of expanding to 40 teams IF (big IF) they keep it at 8 groups (of 5).
That would mean 1 more game per team in the group stages. So instead of playing 3, you would play 4. I'm ALL for that. Knockout stages would remain exactly the same.

I think the USMNT and Mexico going to Conmebol would be stupid. You have almost a guaranteed spot right now into the World Cup. You go to Conmebol and even with Conmebol getting more spots, you still aren't guaranteed to advance.

So with USMNT and Mexico staying in the Concacaf I would distribute it like this:

Host - 1 team
AFC - 5 teams
CAF - 7 teams
Concacaf - 5 teams
Conmebol - 7 teams
OFC - 1 team
UEFA - 14 teams

So lets say that the USA gets 2026 (like it SHOULD).
This is according to the ELO rankings:

Host: USA
Concacaf: Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama, Honduras, & Trinidad
AFC: South Korea, Iran, Japan, UAE, & Australia
CAF: Ivory Coast, Senegal, Algeria, Egypt, Cameroon, Nigeria, & Ghana
Conmebol: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Uruguay, Peru, & Ecuador
OFC: New Zealand
UEFA: Germany, France, Spain, Italy, England, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia, Switzerland, Turkey, Poland, Wales, and Bosnia.

That gives us the top 25. Which would almost assuredly put in 3 good teams in every group. So groupings could be something like this: (Host and top 7 seeds are the top seeds)

A - USA - Ivory Coast - Uruguay - Turkey - Australia
B - Argentina - Senegal - Honduras - Switzerland - South Korea
C - Belgium - Algeria - Ecuador - Croatia - Iran
D - Germany - Egypt - Peru - Netherlands - Japan
E - Colombia - Cameroon - Trinidad - England - Poland
F - Brazil - Nigeria - Panama - Italy - Wales
G - Chile - Ghana - Costa Rica - Spain - Bosnia
H - Portugal - New Zealand - Mexico - France - UAE

Bolded are top 25 in ELO rankings. Every Group has 3 in the top 25 and 1 had 4.


I see what you're saying but no way they give 4 of the 8 new spots to the Americas. I think we'll be lucky to get 2. They've all but said expansion would be to benefit Africa & Asia the most. I think in the long run we'd benefit from being in CONMEBOL. Going forward if us and Mexico joined CONMEBOL and there were 8 spots for the 12 teams it meas we just ned to be better than 4 teams. If we cant finish ahead of 4 of Bolivia, Venezuela, Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Paraguy, Colombia then we wouldnt deserve to be in the world cup. Now if we joined CONMEBOL and there were only 5 or 6 spots then it would be a bad idea but with all the wink wink, nod nod that goes on in FIFA you'd think they could talk beforehand and find out where the new spots are going and see if they can sway them. Because otherwise there is no way CONCACAF needs 5 bids, its arguable we even need 4. Europe should have more bids. Here are the top 20 ranked teams in Europe based off FIFA rankings (I know but gotta start soemwhere)

Belgium, Germany, Portugal, France, Wales, Spain, England, Italy, Croatia, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, Turkey, Bosnia, Netherlands, Austria, Iceland, Slovakia, Ukraine, Northern Ireland.

Notice that doesnt include Sweden, Norway, Russia, Greece, Denmark, Albania, Scotland, Serbia, Kosovo, Ireland, Czech Republic.

You can find about 30 euro teams that would qualify if they were in CONCACAF over Honduras, Panama, T&T. I want more of the good teams, not more island minnows. No one like watching Germany beat Saudi Arabia 7-1. We dont want more of those kinds of games

kernn63
Post #4
Friday September 16, 2016 4:10pm

Joined Feb 2013
Total Posts: 298
Agree about keeping the number of groups the same. Knockout stage is fun, but making that bigger lessens the chance that you're identifying the best team. ....likewise adding a weaker team to the group means more group matches and increases the odds of better teams making the knockout because we increase the sample size of games.

The downside is that it takes away the drama of qualifying, but qualifying also suffers from a problem of sample size so more teams in the World Cup isn't necessarily a bad thing....just different.

admsghs27
Post #5
Friday September 16, 2016 4:28pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 6,060
If USA and Mexico go to conmebol concacaf would dissappear. The region will eventually dissolve.

MSantoine
Post #6
Friday September 16, 2016 5:16pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Original post from admsghs27

If USA and Mexico go to conmebol concacaf would dissappear. The region will eventually dissolve.


Not necessarily. OFC did not dissolve when Australia left. They actually got an extra World Cup bid because of it. 2014 best case scenrio was Australia or New Zealand and Australia was in, and in 2010 they both were in which couldnt have been possible if Australia was still in OFC. Add in the fact that Tahiti made a confederations Cup (something only Australia and New Zealand did before) and this past OFC cup Papua New Guinea lost in PKs or they would have been in next years Confed cup. And if you look at New Zealand's roster they have more U25 guys who play in Europe than over 25 guys showing how they are starting to send guys to European leagues, thus proving they've gotten better.

Also they could make provisions like only leave if Copa becomes a combined event once a cycle with increased CONCACAF teams, make Mexico and/or US be a guest to Gold Cup for ticket sales. Also with UEFA increasingly shutting their doors to the rest of the world South America and North America countries will pretty much only be playing against themselves in friendlies so they will still have those opportunities.
Its the onus on the other nation's to improve, its not US or Mexico's responsibility to make Trinidad or Aruba a good soccer nation.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #7
Friday September 16, 2016 7:37pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
MSantoine I see what you are saying. I fully agree that most of the expansion SHOULD go to UEFA, but we both no it won't.

To get the best teams in you can probably have it like this (based on current affiliations):
Host - 1
Asia - 3.5
Oceania - .5
Africa - 7
So Am - 7.5
No Am - 3.5
Europe - 18

Asia v Oceania
So v No America

Host nation is subtracted from the total of the hosting confederation. IE if the USA hosts then North America would only have 2.5 spots up for grabs in Qualifying.
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
dolcem
Post #8
Friday September 16, 2016 8:44pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 1,805
Moving to CONMEBOL would be a huge mistake. I think most World Cups neither the US nor Mexico would qualify out of CONMEBOL.
GET A CLUB TEAM
2tone
Ten-Towns
Post #9
Friday September 16, 2016 11:08pm

Joined Jul 2012
Total Posts: 10,452
No way Europe should have 18 spots. That's ridiculous.

tylercocinas
Post #10
Friday September 16, 2016 11:14pm

Joined Aug 2012
Total Posts: 1,151
Original post from 2tone

No way Europe should have 18 spots. That's ridiculous.


Glad someone said it. People like to downplay the rest of the world in comparison to UEFA member nations simply because they are in UEFA.

admsghs27
Post #11
Friday September 16, 2016 11:32pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 6,060
If anything Europe should get 1 less spot with the current set up. I think they have to many teams as it is.

MSantoine
Post #12
Tuesday October 4, 2016 3:39pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
Not sure if anyone saw this but the new FIFA president unveiled his World Cup expansion outline. No full details but the gist of it is he wants 48 teams to "make" the world cup. There would be 16 auto qualifiers and then 32 play in games. The 32 play in games would be held in the host country then we'd end up with the current 8 groups of 4.

I will say it's a radical idea. My guess is Europe will be opposed as logistically you'd imagine the 16 auto spots would go to the host, and a couple in each fed (save ofc). I'd imagine it'd be something like 5-6 auto bids for Europe and then 10-12 play in game teams.

I don't think any expansion will be great but I like the new idea.

USAGunner
West Palm Beach
Post #13
Tuesday October 4, 2016 8:48pm

Joined Jul 2013
Total Posts: 1,322
Original post from MSantoine

Not sure if anyone saw this but the new FIFA president unveiled his World Cup expansion outline. No full details but the gist of it is he wants 48 teams to "make" the world cup. There would be 16 auto qualifiers and then 32 play in games. The 32 play in games would be held in the host country then we'd end up with the current 8 groups of 4.

I will say it's a radical idea. My guess is Europe will be opposed as logistically you'd imagine the 16 auto spots would go to the host, and a couple in each fed (save ofc). I'd imagine it'd be something like 5-6 auto bids for Europe and then 10-12 play in game teams.

I don't think any expansion will be great but I like the new idea.


I'm not particularly a fan.

But lets put this down so we can see how it would likely work (Using the 2014 World Cup Qualifying results). I'd imagine that most of the extra spots would go to Asia and Africa, with maybe one extra to Concacaf, Conmebol, and maybe a spot or 2 to UEFA.

Automatic 16 (host Nation is included in AQ's for their confed)
AFC (2) - Iran, Japan
CAF (3) - Ivory Coast, Algeria, Ghana
Concacaf (2) - USA, Costa Rica
Conmebol (4) - BRAZIL, Argentina, Colombia, Chile
UEFA (5) - Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Bosnia, Spain

Play-in 32
AFC (5) - South Korea, Australia, Uzbekistan, Jordan, Oman
CAF (7) - Nigeria, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Ethiopia, Tunisia, Egypt
Concacaf (4) - Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Jamaica
Conmebol (3) - Ecuador, Uruguay, Venezuela
UEFA (12) - Italy, Swiss, Russia, England, Portugal, France, Greece, Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine, Romania, Iceland
OFC (1) - New Zealand

You would draw for match-ups. Seed the top 16. So you would get something like:
Have Match-ups like this in that first round (Play-in)...seeded teams first...Winners in bold.

Italy v South Korea
Switzerland v Tunisia
Portugal v Australia
Greece v Venezuela
Croatia v Uzbekistan
England v Ethiopia
Uruguay v Jordan
France v Senegal
Mexico v Oman
Ukraine v Burkina Faso
Ecuador v Iceland
Russia v Cameroon
Sweden v Jamaica
Egypt v Honduras
Romania v New Zealand
Panama v Nigeria

End up with
AFC - 2
CAF - 6
Concacaf - 4
Conmebol - 7
UEFA - 13

I actually like that. Those 16 Play-in Matches would be fantastic. Have 4 a day over a 4 day period. a Week later the Group matches would start. Each group to have 2 from the Automatic Qualifiers and 2 from the Play-in games.

Group A: Brazil, Ghana, Italy, Swiss
Group B: Germany, Chile, Portugal, Nigeria
Group C: Argentina, Costa Rica, Croatia, England
Group D: USA, Spain, Venezuela, Burkina Faso
Group E: Ivory Coast, Bosnia, Honduras, France
Group F: Iran, Belgium, Mexico, Uruguay
Group G: Netherlands, Algeria, Romania, Ecuador
Group H: Colombia, Japan, Sweden, Russia
www.westpalmbeachchurchofchrist.com
MSantoine
Post #14
Wednesday October 5, 2016 1:17pm

Joined Nov 2012
Total Posts: 3,723
I think anyway they break it down numbers wise it will end up with 16 teams in the playin round from UEFA/CONMEBOL and 16 "others". Force the African/Asian/NA teams to beat a good team to get in.

Again if Europe is going from 13 guarenteed spots to something like 5 guarenteed spots with a maximum of 16-17, but a chance for 8-10 Im not sure if they'll be very happy about it.

A lot of this will depend solely on the breakdown of auto spots vs play in spots. I could almost see a breakdown like this:

Auto spots (I like host counting towards that federation):

CONCACAF x2
CONMEBOL x3
UEFA X 6
AFC X 2
CAF X 3

Then for playin spots you'd get:

4 CONMEBOL & 12 UEFA (seeded)
vs OFC , 4 CONCACAF, 5 CAF , 5 AFC

Your end results for each fed are as follows:
OFC - 0.5 to max 1
AFC -4.5 to max of 7 (min 2)
CAF - 5 to max 8 (min 3)
CONCACAF - 3.5 to max 5 (min 2)
CONMEBOL - 4.5 to max 7 (min 3)
UEFA - 13 to max 18 (min 6)

Mojofc
Post #15
Wednesday October 5, 2016 1:42pm

Joined Jan 2013
Total Posts: 966
Anyone else think the bid for a larger world cup is simply a bid for more power by Infantino?

The amount of nations always close to the bubble is massive, this will give him plenty of continuous votes for years to come plus removing teams would be extremely difficult in the future.

Not furiously against it, but do believe it's simply a power play with the way FIFA voting works.
Rain, rain, go away Come again another day - USMNT, MUFC
Page 1 of 2
1 2  Next »

With Jesse Marsch and David Wagner at the helms of teams in the top flight, YA will cover their exploits this season.
RECENT POSTS
YA Transfer Tracker
Yanks Face Relegation in England
Tale of Two Young Yanks in Europe
Wagner Nears Premier League Goal