New CONCACAF Champions League format for 2013

[baulderdash77]

http://www.concacaf.com/page/CL/News...575174,00.html

They're getting rid of the preliminary round. There's going to be 8 groups of 3 and the winner of each group will advance to the quarterfinals.

Pot 1: USA 1 & 2, Mexico 1 & 2, Honduras 1, Costa Rica 1, Panama 1, Guatemala 1

Pot 2: USA 3 & 4, Mexico 3 & 4, Canada 1, El Salvador 1, Costa Rica 2, Honduras 2

Pot 3: Caribbean 1, 2, 3, El Salvador 2, Panama 2, Guatemala 2, Belize 1, Nicaragua 1


This isn't really the best setup for Canada as we're stuck in the 2nd pot and it's going to be a harder draw for us.

[StartingEleven]

To be honest, this really is a good deal for MLS clubs, which any of the Canadian teams are first and formost, at worst any of the three Canadian based teams will have to beat a mexican team to get to the Quarters which is generally the case anyways, no?. The other is that they will match up against another MLS squad and eventually meet a mexican team in the final rounds.

Its just a shorter route to the inevitable Mexican match-up however you look at it.

The down side is less homegames against other lesser teams around the region.

[canucklefan]

If Canada1 doesn't end up with Mexico1 or Mexico2, Canada1 could benefit from this new format. Of course, having Costa Rica1, Honduras1, Panama1 or Guatemala1 could be the best case scenario.

[A_Gagne]

This isn't really the best setup for Canada as we're stuck in the 2nd pot and it's going to be a harder draw for us.

Another way to look at it is that in the group stage, our Canadian team has a 75% chance of avoiding Mexican opposition, a 25% chance of only having to beat another MLS team to advance, and a 50% chance of avoiding either.

I think our team has as good, if not better chances of making the knock-out rounds under this new format. The only catch is that we're completely ditched if we draw a Mexican team.

Fewer games isn't great from a fan perspective, and I would have liked to have seen the preliminary round kept. I think it adds drama and excitement that the group stage doesn't, as well as a sense of accomplishment for teams that don't end up being in contention for moving on from the group. But on the other hand I also think with the expanded number of team it gives a greater likelihood that Canada could one day get a second team in the tournament (e.g., post D2 league and open V's Cup est.).

I'm calling this a win.

[baulderdash77]

Another way to look at it is that in the group stage, our Canadian team has a 75% chance of avoiding Mexican opposition, a 25% chance of only having to beat another MLS team to advance, and a 50% chance of avoiding either.

I think our team has as good, if not better chances of making the knock-out rounds under this new format. The only catch is that we're completely ditched if we draw a Mexican team.

Fewer games isn't great from a fan perspective, and I would have liked to have seen the preliminary round kept. I think it adds drama and excitement that the group stage doesn't, as well as a sense of accomplishment for teams that don't end up being in contention for moving on from the group. But on the other hand I also think with the expanded number of team it gives a greater likelihood that Canada could one day get a second team in the tournament (e.g., post D2 league and open V's Cup est.).

I'm calling this a win.

I agreed with you on first blush, but on 2nd look it's going to be very tough. No matter what, we're going to have to play in the same group as the #1 or #2 US or Mexican team along with a minnow. That's going to mean that we're always going to be in the hardest group in the tournament.

I don't know how the Guatamala or Panama domestic teams can be considered from a stronger league than MLS where Canada's teams are going to come from. As such why shouldn't they be in the 2nd Pot groupings?

[nfitz]

If Canada1 doesn't end up with Mexico1 or Mexico2, Canada1 could benefit from this new format. Of course, having Costa Rica1, Honduras1, Panama1 or Guatemala1 could be the best case scenario.

We can't draw Costa Rica1, Honduras1, Panama1 or Guatemala1 from Pot A.

We can only Draw Mexico1, Mexico2, USA1, and USA2.

The CONCACAF press release clearly states that each group must have either a US or Mexican team in it. As all the other Mexican and US teams are with us in Pot B, then our Pot A team must be either US or Mexican. It also means that a group will never have both a US or Mexican team, so the favourites for the quarter-finals are 4 Mexican teams and 4 MLS teams.

[coppercanuck]

nfitz - I read that also. If each of the 8 groups must have a USA or MEX team then why not put them all in one pot? I swear CONCACAF tries to make draws more complicated. Dear CONCACAF, Look closer at the way UEFA does some of their draws, or just use your head to be fair.

I'll assume the following:
8 groups of 3 " No team will face another club from the same country in the group stage - except in the case of a reallocated or "wild card" berth, and each group will contain either a Mexican or U.S. club."
Also assume that CFU teams are treated as one country

So why not
Pot A - USA 1, 2, 3, 4 MEX 1, 2, 3, 4
Pot B - CRC 1, 2 HON 1, 2 GUA 1, PAN1, SLV1, CAN1
Pot C - GUA2, PAN2, SLV2, NCA1, BLZ1, CFU1,2,3

May own country ranking after the 2010-11 CCL was:
1- MEX
2- HON
3- CAN
4- PUR (CFU)
5- USA
6- PAN
7- CRC
8- GUA
9- TRI (CFU)
10- SLV
11- NCA
12- HAI (CFU)
13- SUR (CFU)
14- BLZ

I might have been tempted to put PAN2 in the same pot as PAN1, at least ahead of GUA1. Maybe Pot B could be CAN1, CFU1,2,3 HON1,2 and CRC1,2 leaving GUA, PAN, SLV (who are all currently in different pots) to be in the same pot (with no chance of being drawn together)

The more I look at it, the more I don't want to do a mock draw ... almost an asterisk on every pick.
i.e. first pick from pot B - MEX3 - can only go into half of the groups.

[canucklefan]

We can't draw Costa Rica1, Honduras1, Panama1 or Guatemala1 from Pot A.

We can only Draw Mexico1, Mexico2, USA1, and USA2.

The CONCACAF press release clearly states that each group must have either a US or Mexican team in it. As all the other Mexican and US teams are with us in Pot B, then our Pot A team must be either US or Mexican. It also means that a group will never have both a US or Mexican team, so the favourites for the quarter-finals are 4 Mexican teams and 4 MLS teams.

Then I prefer a group of 4 with one Mexican club (or MLS club) than a group of 3. Eliminating a Mexican or MLS club in a group of 3 would be harder to accomplish, IMO.

[Redcoatsforever]

If they wanted to drop the preliminary round, they should've just invited 8 more teams for the sake of simplicity. The CSA might even have squeezed a second slot out of the deal.

[Free kick]

If they wanted to drop the preliminary round, they should've just invited 8 more teams for the sake of simplicity. The CSA might even have squeezed a second slot out of the deal.

Some of those teams in the early round can barely play. Watering the tournament down further (with inevitably more clubs from smaler counties) with weaker teams wont grow the tournaments prestige. Unless, you add more Mexican teams, but then again, if it becomes to easy to qualify for you kill the competitiveness to qualify and the value in qualifying. The stadium attendance in the early rounds is pretty poor as it is now so i cant see the point in adding teams.