(Soccer) International Tournaments between now and 2010

[Huckleberry]

My question, of course, is focused on the USA team. Obviously the Gold Cup is next year. It's importance is a little greater for us than usual simply because the winner of the 2007 version will play in the 2009 Confederations Cup in South Africa. We obviously need more experience against top nations away from home, even if they want to call it their "B Team" before and after the fact. Therefore I hope we play to win it next year.

We have already declined to play in the 2007 Copa América, which I'm not as upset as I may have been because of the Gold Cup situation. Copa América usually starts the week after the Gold Cup ends. So competing in both may stretch us too thin. That being said I certainly hope they play it again in 2009 and that we agree to participate. I think I heard it may be hosted in Mexico. But then again it may interfere with the Confederations Cup. Anyone heard anything about all this? Either way I hope we agree to play in the Copa América moving forward, even if 2011 is the next one.

All that being said, I really wish that we could have a true Copa América by combining CONCACAF with CONMEBOL. I'd like to see the final CONCACAF group join CONMEBOL in a 16-team tournament in non-World Cup even years. That way the first two phases of WC qualifying for CONCACAF could also serve as Copa América qualifying. Or a separate qualification if so desired with considerations given to previous WC qualifiers.

[Crapshoot]

I really think they ought to take part in Copa America - talent wise, you have the Argentinians and Brazilians, which alone makes it as top level as the European championships. Besides, it gives you top quality football at opportunities other than once every 4 years.

[KevinNU7]

I'm all far a Cup that includes in some part includes North and South America. As long as it is not a building ground to remove the CONCACAF from WC qualifing. I have no interest in seeing the USA actually in the CONMEBOL.

[ice4277]

I think a big part of the problem with the U.S. team is the lack of quality international opposition outside of the World Cup. You can only learn so much by playing Mexico a dozen times, and the quality of the rest of CONCACAF is piss-poor (sorry Trinidad). It is disappointing to see the Federation pass up the chance to play quality opposition like you would find in the Copa America.

[Huckleberry]

I guess in my perfect world the rotation would be:

Year 1 - World Cup
Year 2 - CONCACAF Gold Cup & Copa Sudamericana
Year 3 - Copa América (new version combined with CONCACAF)
Year 4 - Confederations Cup

Year 4 would also include the final qualification stages, of course.

[fantastic flying froggies]

I wish the qualification stage for the world cup was worldwide instead of regional, just to get rid of all the piss poor countries that make it to the final stage.

But it will never happen, FIFA has too much money involved, especially in Asia.

[bulletsponge]

they should increase the # of teams in the wc to 40 also. 5 teams in the groups. that way it would be possible to have multi-host countries

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by fantastic flying froggies

I wish the qualification stage for the world cup was worldwide instead of regional, just to get rid of all the piss poor countries that make it to the final stage.

But it will never happen, FIFA has too much money involved, especially in Asia.

Soccer is still at a point where you have to balance the game's development against fairness.

Worldwide qualification would result in probably 20 UEFA teams at the World Cup. While that would likely reflect true strength, it would give less incentive to other nations and regions to develop their programs.

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by fantastic flying froggies

I wish the qualification stage for the world cup was worldwide instead of regional, just to get rid of all the piss poor countries that make it to the final stage.

But it will never happen, FIFA has too much money involved, especially in Asia.

euro snob

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by bulletsponge

they should increase the # of teams in the wc to 40 also. 5 teams in the groups. that way it would be possible to have multi-host countries

Why? I hate the idea of multi-host countries. Takes away spots from teams who have to grind through the WC and deserve to make it.

As for the expansion to 40, it would be a scheduling nightmare (groups of 5 teams would cause unfair scheduling conflicts).

[fantastic flying froggies]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

euro snob

I was expecting that.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by fantastic flying froggies

I wish the qualification stage for the world cup was worldwide instead of regional, just to get rid of all the piss poor countries that make it to the final stage.

But it will never happen, FIFA has too much money involved, especially in Asia.

The World Cup is designed to include all of the top teams from each region. You still have the Euro, Copa America, ect.

[Galaxy]

Wasn't there talk of making the World Cup every two years?

[fantastic flying froggies]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

The World Cup is designed to include all of the top teams from each region. You still have the Euro, Copa America, ect.

Oh, I know.

I just wish the top 32 teams made the World Cup, and I really don't care at all where they come from.

I'm sure the numbers by region would vary greatly from one year to another anyway, and also it would be a better chance for lesser teams to improve themselves.

I'll give you an example I know, the smaller european countries, such as Cyprus, Luxemburg, etc... used to be blown away every single game they played. Now, they have improved a lot, and while still not at the level of other bigger countries, they still manage to get the occasional upset win or tie, and lose in a more 'decent' manner now.

You can also take the USA as another good example. They have improved every world cup game they've played, and are now level with most major soccer nations. This simply would never have happened if you'd only played Mexico and the other CONCACAF teams all the time.

[ISiddiqui]

You can also take the USA as another good example. They have improved every world cup game they've played, and are now level with most major soccer nations. This simply would never have happened if you'd only played Mexico and the other CONCACAF teams all the time.

Exactly! Which is why I'm happy that we don't take the top 32 teams regardless of geographical location .

[MrBug708]

Wasnt the last time we were in the Copa America we beat Brazil?

[Joe]

Originally Posted by bulletsponge

they should increase the # of teams in the wc to 40 also. 5 teams in the groups. that way it would be possible to have multi-host countries

No they shouldn't. I really wish the WC went back to the old format of 24 teams.

[tanglewood]

Originally Posted by George W Bush

No they shouldn't. I really wish the WC went back to the old format of 24 teams.

Really? 32 is much, much better than 24. For a start, you no longer have the ridiculous best-third-placed-teams-qualify situation. Also in the last 15 years or so the gap between the traditionally elite nations and the smaller ones has closed a lot, so a larger tournament is desirable. That said, ther is no way I would recommend expanding to 40. The tournament would become to large logistically and take too long so cut into the domestic season.

[Joe]

If there were 24 teams, we could have (possibly) avoided the crap that was Switzerland-Ukraine.

[tanglewood]

Originally Posted by George W Bush

If there were 24 teams, we could have (possibly) avoided the crap that was Switzerland-Ukraine.

USA 94 was the last tournament to have 24 teams.

Fed --- 94 places / 06 places

UEFA - 13/13
CONEMBOL - 3.5/4.5
CONCACAF - 2.25/3.5
CAF - 3/5
AFC - 2/4.5
OFC - 0.25/0.5

So, you'd lose 2 African teams, a couple of South American teams, a CONCACAF team and a few Asian/Oceana teams.

So Switzerland and Ukraine would still have qualified, as would have Poland and Serbia & Montenegro, all mediocre European teams. Paraguay, instead of Uraguay, would have played Australia in the play-off. Ghana and Angola would've missed out (they and the 4th and 5th best records of the African qualifiers). South Korea and Iran would've been cut from Asia (whilst the pooerer Japan and Saudi Arabia would still have qualified). Costa Rica would not have made it from CONCACAF. Basically, I think the quality of the teams you lose by cutting it back to 24 is just as good if not better than the continual rewarding of fairly mediocre European teams. UEFA is the strongest federation, but after the top 8-10 teams there is a swathe of mediocre sides who are no better than your average African or Asian team, but get to go to World Cups far more often due to the traditional bias UEFA gets.

[ice4277]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Wasnt the last time we were in the Copa America we beat Brazil?

That was the Gold Cup, Brazil was invited as a 'guest team' if I recall correctly.

[Joe]

Originally Posted by ice4277

That was the Gold Cup, Brazil was invited as a 'guest team' if I recall correctly.

Yep, 1998 gold cup. Last time we were in the Copa America, Brazil beat the US.