Emerald City Supporters

Proud Supporters of Seattle Sounders FC

No Change in World Cup Allocations

Talk about US Leagues and the US National team here.

Unread postby Clockwork Orange » Thu Mar 3, 2011 5:51:08 pm

Goonda wrote:
Clockwork Orange wrote:I think asia has too many spots at 4.5...

The difference between AFC and CONCACAF for this is the number of teams in each tier.

Tier 1 - AFC 3 - CONCACAF 2
Tier 2 - AFC ~8-10 - CONCACAF ~3-5

I think they probably deserve one more than us. Besides, they have about a dozen more countries than us.

That is true, I wasn't suggesting concacaf should get it, I just think asia has too many, but I don't know who I would give one of their spots too, South America seem most deserving, but with hosting it next year, they already have a shot to get 6 in, 7 would be way too much, so I came to the conclusion that it's pretty much good the way it is.
User avatar
Clockwork Orange
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:45:29 pm
Location: Redmond, WA

Unread postby Goonda » Thu Mar 3, 2011 11:56:10 pm

Clockwork Orange wrote:
Goonda wrote:
Clockwork Orange wrote:I think asia has too many spots at 4.5...

The difference between AFC and CONCACAF for this is the number of teams in each tier.

Tier 1 - AFC 3 - CONCACAF 2
Tier 2 - AFC ~8-10 - CONCACAF ~3-5

I think they probably deserve one more than us. Besides, they have about a dozen more countries than us.

That is true, I wasn't suggesting concacaf should get it, I just think asia has too many, but I don't know who I would give one of their spots too, South America seem most deserving, but with hosting it next year, they already have a shot to get 6 in, 7 would be way too much, so I came to the conclusion that it's pretty much good the way it is.

Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?
User avatar
Goonda
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:24:10 am
Location: Mercer Island

Unread postby SP The Ghost » Fri Mar 4, 2011 9:41:55 am

Ultimately, CONCACAF doesn't deserve another team.
User avatar
SP The Ghost
ECS Member 2020
 
Posts: 6131
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:33:58 am
Location: Location Location

Unread postby Clockwork Orange » Fri Mar 4, 2011 11:09:56 am

Goonda wrote:
Clockwork Orange wrote:
Goonda wrote:The difference between AFC and CONCACAF for this is the number of teams in each tier.

Tier 1 - AFC 3 - CONCACAF 2
Tier 2 - AFC ~8-10 - CONCACAF ~3-5

I think they probably deserve one more than us. Besides, they have about a dozen more countries than us.

That is true, I wasn't suggesting concacaf should get it, I just think asia has too many, but I don't know who I would give one of their spots too, South America seem most deserving, but with hosting it next year, they already have a shot to get 6 in, 7 would be way too much, so I came to the conclusion that it's pretty much good the way it is.

Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?

Well I said no in my post, so my answer is still no :)
User avatar
Clockwork Orange
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:45:29 pm
Location: Redmond, WA

Unread postby C.How » Wed May 18, 2011 7:56:32 pm

User avatar
C.How
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Aug 6, 2008 8:29:56 pm
Location: Lacey, WA

Unread postby USASoundersFan » Wed May 18, 2011 8:15:07 pm

Goonda wrote:Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?


Yes. I believe that we should have each confederation send as many teams as is appropriate given how highly ranked its teams are in comparison with the rest of the world. If CONMEBOL's 10 members were each ranked in the top 15 of the world, I would be fine with sending all of them. Why punish a top team just because of where it is located in the world?
User avatar
USASoundersFan
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:10:42 pm
Location: In Transit

Unread postby Goonda » Wed May 18, 2011 8:40:42 pm

USASoundersFan wrote:
Goonda wrote:Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?


Yes. I believe that we should have each confederation send as many teams as is appropriate given how highly ranked its teams are in comparison with the rest of the world. If CONMEBOL's 10 members were each ranked in the top 15 of the world, I would be fine with sending all of them. Why punish a top team just because of where it is located in the world?

But then you get locked into the the same issue the college football has here in the US with the BCS system with strength of schedule. Not long ago, teams like Hawaii were screwed over in rankings because they couldn't get any higher level opponents to play them, despite the fact that they were arguably one of the best teams.
User avatar
Goonda
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:24:10 am
Location: Mercer Island

Unread postby finnfan » Thu May 19, 2011 1:49:11 am

USASoundersFan wrote:
Goonda wrote:Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?


Yes. I believe that we should have each confederation send as many teams as is appropriate given how highly ranked its teams are in comparison with the rest of the world. If CONMEBOL's 10 members were each ranked in the top 15 of the world, I would be fine with sending all of them. Why punish a top team just because of where it is located in the world?

The FIFA ranking is useless in comparing teams in two different confederations. Therefore your idea would not work at all.

Even with the updated formula the rankings often include several oddities and are constantly disputed.
User avatar
finnfan
ECS Leadership
 
Posts: 16819
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 3:09:04 am
Location: Center of the Universe

Unread postby USASoundersFan » Sat May 21, 2011 7:30:55 pm

finnfan wrote:
USASoundersFan wrote:
Goonda wrote:Keep in mind with CONMEBOL, they only have 10 member nations. Yes, they are all ranked high (all in the FIFA top 100 right now), but can you really justify sending 60-70% of one confederation to a world cup while others get none (oceana)?


Yes. I believe that we should have each confederation send as many teams as is appropriate given how highly ranked its teams are in comparison with the rest of the world. If CONMEBOL's 10 members were each ranked in the top 15 of the world, I would be fine with sending all of them. Why punish a top team just because of where it is located in the world?

The FIFA ranking is useless in comparing teams in two different confederations. Therefore your idea would not work at all.

Even with the updated formula the rankings often include several oddities and are constantly disputed.


If we are going to ignore rankings, then we might as well have the same number of teams qualify from each confederation. We need some kind of ranking system - maybe have it based completely on World Cup and World Cup Qualifying results from the past eight years or something similar to how UEFA determines how many clubs qualify from each country for Champions League and Europa League play. But whatever system is used, it should be okay for South America to qualify as many teams as are - on average - good enough to play in the World Cup.

Also, I just noticed this early post in this thread ...

LittleBlood wrote:Fair enough, agreed. One thing thats kinda lame is that beyond qualifying, the only major tourney most of the CONCACAF teams see is Gold Cup, which is a joke of a competition. Most teams don't send their best players and no one really cares about the outcome. Every other continent seems to have a better, more respected tourney in the off-years. So with Gold Cup being such a deciding factor for these teams, it can really make the rankings a bit wonkier than normal.


Really? I thought that in the four-year periods of 2007, 2011, etc., everybody sent pretty close to their top teams - maybe the Gold Cup doesn't receive much attention/respect from outside this region, but the nations participating have appeared to take these Gold Cups very seriously. These are also the ones that determine a Confederations Cup berth for that event two years later.

The 2009, 2013, etc., tournaments are different, however, partly because I believe that whoever competes in the Confederations Cup is not allowed by FIFA to call up anybody they want for the Gold Cup and even for those countries that do not play in the CC they are very wary in tiring out their top players when they are in the middle of a long 10-game qualifying group throughout that calendar year to determine who will make the World Cup.

With that said, games that do not have everybody's "A" team - such as the 2009/2013 Gold Cups and the Caribbean and Central American championships (not played on FIFA dates) can definitely skew those rankings from where they would be if everybody's "A" teams participated in those contests.
User avatar
USASoundersFan
Past ECS Member
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:10:42 pm
Location: In Transit

Previous

Return to US Soccer

cron

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest