New CONCACAF Qualifying Proposal Levels Playing Field

Members Login

Chatbox

Please login or register to participate in the chat

djromie (Mzja Dj) posted in:

Zambie , Attomatic Dam Sky - Squeeze (Raw) 2024

djromie (Mzja Dj) wrote
11 days ago

blessed new year

tallboss876 wrote
November 16th

hail

dj brown posted in:

Zambie , Attomatic Dam Sky - Squeeze (Raw) 2024

djromie (Mzja Dj) wrote
October 15th

anyone dehya

djromie (Mzja Dj) wrote
October 15th

mi di ting up like7 again

Topic: New CONCACAF Qualifying Proposal Levels Playing Field

Wide (rest of width)

Narrow (200px)

jubalson

**EYE*ZA*BLEED**

Status: Offline

Posts: 12076

Date: 18:45 08/31 2010

New CONCACAF Qualifying Proposal Levels Playing Field

Permalink

By going away from the six-team Hexagonal, Goal.com's Luis Bueno says the U.S.-Mexico duopoly is correctly broken apart.

For several years now, the United States and Mexico have had a stranglehold on CONCACAF. Aside from the Gold Cup, where only Canada has been able to unseat the region's top two sides, the U.S. and Mexico have been unstoppable, particularly in World Cup qualifying. Since CONCACAF went to the six-team Hexagonal in 1998, the U.S. and Mexico have finished in the top three and have qualified directly to all four World Cups since.

Now, though, the playing field might start to level out.

Under a new proposed qualifying format, the Hexagonal would go the way of the VCR. Instead of one six-team group, the final round would feature two four-team groups, each team playing their group rival home and away. Group winners would advance directly, runners-up would play each other with the winner claiming the third and final direct berth. Playoff loser would then play a team from another confederation for another World Cup spot.

It's a radical idea in that it breaks up the format and the U.S.-Mexico duopoly while creating more opportunities for more countries. But is it a viable option?

Certainly, for teams not named United States or Mexico, this idea is great and possibly the best idea to come around in years. After all, for teams like Costa Rica and Honduras, the battle in the Hexagonal has been essentially for one spot. And for other recent Hexagonal participants such as El Salvador and Panama, the road has been way too tough to even consider the possibility of a top-three finish. On their worst days, with their worst teams and under the worst of conditions, the U.S. and Mexico will not lose to the likes of El Salvador at home and are a good bet to escape Central America with a point.

So most teams enter the Hexagonal knowing that the U.S. and Mexico have a good shot of taking 15 points from their respective home games. Where's the intrigue in that? How does that motivate the likes of El Salvador, Trinidad or even Costa Rica or Honduras? And nevermind teams like Canada or Jamaica, who have had a tough time even getting into the final six.

Sure, the U.S. and Mexico can point to many things such as history and Gold Cup success as reasons for their standing atop the region. And while it is true that the U.S. and Mexico have reached World Cup after World Cup and have claimed one Gold Cup title after another, things have certainly been in their favor for some time. After all, when was the last time the Gold Cup was played in Central America? Or Canada? Or the Caribbean? Never, actually. The Gold Cup has been played exclusively in either the United States or Mexico. And the "draw" for the tournament is absurd, setting up the U.S. and Mexico to meet in the final of every single edition.

This new format would instantly level the playing field. With eight teams in the running for three direct World Cup berths, the chances of the U.S. and Mexico reaching the World Cup drop while the opportunties for others increase. It's simple math - the U.S. and Mexico each have a 50 percent chance of finishing in the top three of the Hexagonal, while under the new format would have just a 25 percent chance of nabbing a direct berth.

Since it would be more difficult for the United States and Mexico of reaching the World Cup under this proposal - at least statistically - few will feel sorry for the region's two powers. Qualifying for the World Cup, after all, is supposed to be difficult. The World Cup is supposed to be a reward for having survived, overcome and battled through qualifying. Nowhere in FIFA's bylaws does it say that teams outside of the host nation are entitled of reaching the World Cup. Even Spain, the reigning World Cup champions, will have to qualify for the 2014 World Cup.

Somewhere along the way, U.S. and Mexico fans have gotten a sense of entitlement, as if the World Cup is not a privilege but rather a right. And now that the sense of entitlement is being threatened, suddenly the complaints arise. If anything U.S. and Mexico fans should be thankful that their less-challenging path to the World Cup lasted as long as it did.

And besides, if the U.S. and Mexico are really the dominant forces in the region, then proving it in a four-team group should not be too much to ask for, right? After all, consider these groups:

Group 1: United States, Costa Rica, Canada, Jamaica.

Group 2: Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, Trinidad & Tobago.

Surely the U.S. and Mexico would be favorites to advance from those groups, right?

The rest of the region would be glad to offer them the chance of proving so under those circumstances.

-- Edited by jubalson on Tuesday 31st of August 2010 06:46:18 PM

__________________

Nico-T