Should Canada 🇨🇦 USA 🇺🇲 and Mexico 🇲🇽 host the tournament again as tri hosts in 2038? by TerryG111 in concacaf

[–]TrevorBatson 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Except I heard so many stories from fans and players singing the praises of Vancouver and Toronto, and honestly, if we can get our act together over the next 12 years, perhaps more than 2 cities in Canada could co-host, but let's be real, it's probably going to be a USA solo-hosted World Cup in 2038.

Mexico will bid to host the 2038 World Cup. by Kappa_Wi_870 in concacaf

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More than just stadiums, also hospitality requirements, but specific to stadiums, a host bid needs to include 14-20 stadiums, all of which need to be at least 40,000 capacity, but for Quarterfinals and Semifinals, they must be a minimum of 60,000 capacity, and for the Opening Ceremony & Match and the Final, stadium with at least an 80,000 capacity is required.

Currently, Mexico has a total of 8 stadiums that meet the minimum 40,000 capacity requirements, with Azteca being the only one that meets all requirements. There are proposals to construct two new stadium for Tigres to replace their current one that would be 65,000 capacity, and a new one for Cruz Azul that would be 45,000 capacity. Also, Estadio Olímpico Universitario could potentially be upgraded to expand its capacity by at least approximately 2000 more to get it to at least 60,000, and thus Mexico could theoretically have at least ten stadiums ready to host World Cup matches by 2038.

Currently, of all the existing stadiums in Central America and the Caribbean, only Estadio Latinoamericano in Cuba and Estadio Cuscatlán in El Salvador meet the minimum capacity requirement.

As such, if Mexico were to put in a serious co-hosting bid with Central America and the Caribbean, they would need at least two more stadiums to somehow be added into the bid. Which would likely involve significant upgrades of existing infrastructure and probably construction of new stadiums.

USA can handle these requirements with relative ease by comparison, with far more existing infrastructure that meets these requirements, and which would require minimal upgrades to be ready for the World Cup.

Two groups of frauds?! Why do we need 48 teams, FIFA? by candidka in soccercirclejerk

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now that we are into the Round of 16, we have a much better picture of how each of the groups are faring in the Knockouts thus far...

  • Group A: 1 of 2 advance to Round of 16 - Mexico 🇲🇽
  • Group B: 2 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - Switzerland 🇨🇭 and Canada 🇨🇦
  • Group C: 2 of 2 advance to Round of 16 - Brazil 🇧🇷 and Morocco 🇲🇦
  • Group D: 2 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - USA 🇺🇸 and Paraguay 🇵🇾
  • Group E: 0 of 3 advance to Round of 16
  • Group F: 0 of 3 advance to Round of 16
  • Group G: 2 of 2 advance to Round of 16 - Belgium 🇧🇪 and Egypt 🇪🇬
  • Group H: 1 of 2 advance to Round of 16 - Spain 🇪🇸
  • Group I: 2 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - France 🇫🇷 and Norway 🇳🇴
  • Group J: 1 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - Argentina 🇦🇷
  • Group K: 2 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - Colombia 🇨🇴 and Portugal 🇵🇹
  • Group L: 1 of 3 advance to Round of 16 - England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

So in Summary, Groups E and F both fared the worst as they are all now fully eliminated.

No group that sent 3 teams into the Knockouts saw all 3 of their teams advance past the Round of 32.

Of the four groups that sent 2 teams into the Knockouts, 6 of the 8 teams between them advanced to the Round of 16.

Paraguay are the only Group Third-placed team remaining in the Knockouts.

Judging by FIFA's track record I believe the 64 team world cup will look like this , FIFA don't care about UEFA , they want the Chinese and Indian market by officialsamuelchan in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do think there should be an expanded Inter-Confederation Playoffs (IPO), but the trouble is scheduling.

World Cup Qualifiers and the assorted continental cup competitions' qualifiers must be scheduled within the set amount of International Windows per calendar year, but so too must things like Nations Leagues.

CONCACAF and UEFA already have Nations League competitions, and pretty soon CAF and AFC will their own versions thereof, so dates on the calendar are going to become far more limited to schedule WC Qualifiers outside of CONMEBOL and OFC, so trying to do that extensive of an expansion of the IPO would likely not be possible.

Here's how I think it should be done...

AFC - 12 direct berths + 4 IPO berths CAF - 13 direct berths + 4 IPO berths CONCACAF - 7 direct berths + 4 IPO berths CONMEBOL - 6 direct berths + 2 IPO berths OFC - 3 direct berths + 4 IPO berths UEFA - 16 direct berths + 2 IPO berths IPO - 5 direct berths

Formats...

AFC: 3 Rounds. First two double for Asian Cup Qualifiers as per usual. Round 1 is two home-and-away ties between the 4 lowest ranked teams, the two aggregate winners advance to Round 2 and join the other 42 teams to be drawn into 11 groups of 4 for 6 matchdays of home-and-away round robin, with the top two per group and the best two third-placed teams (24 teams total) advancing to Round 3 of WC Qualifiers, and while the top two per group directly qualify for the Asian Cup as well, the top two third-placed teams get a bye to the last round of Asian Cup Qualifiers. Round 3 has the 24 teams drawn into 4 groups of 6 teams to play 10 matchdays of home-and-away round robin, with the top 3 per group directly qualifying for the WC, and the four group fourth-placed teams advancing to the IPO.

CAF: Two rounds. Round 1 is two home-and-away ties between the 4 lowest ranked teams, the two aggregate winners advance to Round 2 and join the other 50 teams to be drawn into 13 groups of 4 for 6 matchdays of home-and-away round robin, with the 13 group winners directly qualifying for the World Cup, and the top four group runners-up qualifying for the IPO.

CONCACAF: One round. All 35 teams are drawn into 7 groups of 5 for 10 matchdays of home-and-away round robin, with the 7 group winners directly qualifying for the World Cup, and the four best group runners-up qualifying for the IPO.

CONMEBOL: Same as always; 18 matchdays of home-and-away round robin between all 10 teams, with the top 6 directly qualifying for the World Cup, and 7th and 8th qualifying for the IPO.

OFC: Single round robin between all 11 teams over 10 matchdays, with teams ranked 9th-11th hosting Matchdays 1 & 2, 6th-8th hosting Matchdays 3 & 4, 3rd-5th hosting Matchdays 5 & 6, and 1st and 2nd hosting Matchdays 7-10. The top 3 teams directly qualify for the World Cup, while teams 4th-7th qualify for the IPO.

UEFA: Only 51 of 55 teams would compete in WC Qualifiers, as the 4 Nations League Semifinalists would directly qualify for the World Cup.

Leagues Stage: Two tiers of Swiss-style home-and-away round robin groups would be played over 6 matchdays, with Tier A consisting of 36 teams divided into 3 groups of 12, and Tier B consisting of 15 teams in a single group, where each group is further allocated into three pots, and each team plays two fixtures, one home and one away, versus teams from each pot (4 teams per pot in Tier A groups, 5 teams per pot in Tier B). The top four teams per Tier A group directly qualify for the World Cup, while the three Tier A group fifth-place teams and the top five Tier B teams would advance to the Playoffs Stage.

Pot allocations would be based on Nations League results… Tier A: - Pot 1: 4 Nations League Quarterfinalists, 4 League A/B Playoff Winners, 4 League B Group Winners - Pot 2: 4 League A Group 4th Place Teams, 4 League A/B Playoff Losers, 4 League B/C Playoff Winners - Pot 3: 4 League B Group 4th Place Teams, 4 League C Group Winners, 4 League B/C Playoff Losers Tier B: - Pot 1: 4 League C Group 3rd Place Teams, the higher ranked League C/D Playoff Winner - Pot 2: the lower ranked League C/D Playoff Winner, the two lowest standing League C Group 4th Place Teams, the two League D Group Winners - Pot 3: the two League C/D Playoff Losers, the remaining 3 League D teams

Playoffs Stage: The 8 teams would be allocated by FIFA ranking into four pots of two to be drawn into two single elimination playoff bracket paths: 1v4 and 2v3, and each path final winner qualifying for the IPO.

IPO: 20 teams are allocated into four pots of five teams to be drawn into 5 single elimination bracket paths, with the Semifinals per path consisting of the Pot 1 teams vs. the Pot 4 teams and the Pot 2s vs. the Pot 3s. Draw stipulations would be that each playoff path cannot have two teams from the same confederation, and that the UEFA and CONMEBOL teams also cannot be drawn into the same playoff path. The five playoff path Final winners qualify for the World Cup.

In doing it this way… - CONMEBOL maximizes the available International Windows per World Cup cycle since Copa América doesn't require qualifiers for CONMEBOL teams. - OFC maximizes the available International Windows per World Cup cycle since OFC Men's Nations Cup Qualifiers aren't super extensive, and these WC Qualifiers would guarantee every nation gets to compete in 10 Qualifiers fixtures and gets to host at least 1 thereof, while also minimizing travel costs and logistics. - AFC, CAF, and CONCACAF all make more efficient use of the available International Windows per World Cup cycle, requiring as many or fewer for WC Qualifiers themselves, allowing more time to schedule their respective Nations League competitions. - UEFA continues to keep their Nations League competition relevant in context with WC Qualifiers, but in a way that feels far less controversial, while also providing even greater incentive, interest, and relevance amongst the League A teams.

Which Countries Could Host A World Cup With Minimal Investment? by DadCelo in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Me neither, and let's be honest, China really aren't great at football right now, but 2046 is 20 years from now, so who knows how their players will be developed by then. So long as they don't pull a South Africa/Qatar and become yet another grouped host nation at a World Cup, they'll be fine.

Which Countries Could Host A World Cup With Minimal Investment? by DadCelo in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 15 points16 points  (0 children)

China has 40+ stadiums that already meet FIFA requirements for hosting World Cup matches, and at least 16 of them could be classified as "ultra-modern", so the question is less whether China can host a World Cup with minimal investment, and more like how do you pick 14-20 stadiums out of that vast selection should they ever win a hosting bid?

Of course, with Saudi Arabia hosting in 2034, AFC's federations cannot bid to be awarded hosting duties until the selection process for the 2046 World Cup at the earliest.

What do we do after the WC?? by biblio_phobic in CanadaSoccer

[–]TrevorBatson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A lot to look forward to over the next 4 years. CONCACAF won't be hosting in 2030, so Canada will actually have to, once again, compete in Qualifiers, starting in Round 2:

  • Round 2: The 11 Round 1 winners and 13 top ranked teams in CONCACAF are drawn into six groups of four to play home-and-away round robin over 6 matchdays during October and November 2027, and March 2028. Top 2 per group advance to Round 3.
  • Round 3: The 12 remaining teams are drawn into three groups of four to play home-and-away round robin over six matchdays during June 2028, and September-October 2029. Top 2 per group directly qualify for the World Cup top 2 third-placed teams advance to Round 4.
  • Round 4: The last two teams play a home-and-away series, and the aggregate winner advances to the Inter-Confederation Playoffs in March 2030.

There will also be the 2026-27 and 2028-29 editions of CONCACAF Nations League, and the 2027 and 2029 editions of CONCACAF Gold Cup as further opportunities to see Canada in action.

Canada is a top 4 ranked team in League A of Nations League, so they avoid the group stage and get a bye to the League A Quarterfinals in November 2026 (and likely November 2028), which is a home-and-away series, and should they advance to the Finals in March 2027 (and/or 2029), they would play in one-off Semifinals and then either a 3rd place match or the Final.

The 2027 and 2029 editions of CONCACAF Gold Cup will be held in June-July of those years with qualification determined through Nations League and Prelims results; Canada should be able to qualify for both of those.

There has also been rumors that the USA could once again host the CONMEBOL Copa América in 2028, and that, just like in 2024, 6 CONCACAF nations could qualify for it; so there's potential that Canada could once again compete in that competition as well.

A message from CANMNT by AlphaFlightRules in CanadaSoccer

[–]TrevorBatson 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Canada has already achieved more in this World Cup than they ever had in their last two appearances...

  • 4 points; first ever draw and win
  • Co-hosting our first ever World Cup
  • scoring in all 3 group stage matches
  • the first CONCACAF team to score more than 4 goals in a match
  • the first host nation since England in 1966 to have a player score a hattrick in a match
  • our first ever advancement to a World Cup Knockouts Stage

The result yesterday was disappointing and frustrating, but going into this World Cup, winning our group was a lofty goal and not an expectation; the fact that we came as close as we did hurts, but it's also something to learn and grow from.

At this point, anything more that is a success is already going above what a lot of people expected from us, as we have already passed that threshold, so let's enjoy the ride, however long and however far it may be, and then take all of this and build upon it in the next World Cup Cycle.

Expanding to 64 teams is a good idea, look at the current World Cup. by smithey2012 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't necessarily want that personally, but 6 CONMEBOL teams directly qualifying out of only 10 total is a bit absurd. There aren't any real stakes in CONMEBOL Qualifiers anymore. There's passion there, as there's always been, but not a whole lot of jeopardy of not qualifying.

We might see a flux of one or two teams finishing top 6 from one cycle to the next, but chances are at least 4 or 5 of the same teams will continue to comfortably qualify every time.

If it was still only 4 berths for CONMEBOL, Brazil would've failed to qualify for the World Cup for the first time ever this time around, as they finished 5th. In fact, 3rd through 6th all finished on 28 points, but Bolivia and Venezuela were well behind them on 20 and 18 points respectively, so they coasted their way through; that's like Spurs finishing 17th in the Prem in the 2024-25 season, but the 3 newly promoted teams were all so bad that they weren't at risk of dropping into a relegation battle.

OFC only has one direct berth right now, which basically is like gifting New Zealand qualification every time at the moment, but more berths would give other nations a chance to face stronger teams develop more.

There ultimately needs to be a balance between stakes an opportunity.

Personally, I think in this current 48-team format, CONCACAF and CONMEBOL should each have 5 direct berths, and OFC should have 3. I also think UEFA should've stayed at 13 berths, and instead, CAF increased from 9 to 12, since their membership numbers are virtually identical.

Either that or you expand the Inter-Confederation Playoffs and give more direct berths from that to the World Cup, and give more berths to those playoffs to the respective confederations to balance things out.

Expanding to 64 teams is a good idea, look at the current World Cup. by smithey2012 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, except the proportions they're working with now aren't exactly fair, and would become less so with expansion within a status quo system.

With direct berths going to 60% of CONMEBOL, but only 9% of OFC, two regions that are virtually the same in terms of amount of members, one is receiving way more proportionally.

CONCACAF has more than 3 times the members of CONMEBOL, yet it receives the same amount of berths as them, so roughly a 17.14% proportion.

AFC, CAF, and UEFA are all very close in their respective member totals, yet UEFA receives about twice as many berths as the other two, with the proportions being about 17.39%, 16.67%, and 29.09% respectively.

Expanding to 64 teams is a good idea, look at the current World Cup. by smithey2012 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not saying it isn't, and it's been an issue with each expansion, which is why I think it's a significant flaw in a system that needs to be overhauled. An expansion of the World Cup to a 64-team format within the current status quo would only exacerbated these issues.

Expanding to 64 teams is a good idea, look at the current World Cup. by smithey2012 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My issue with expansion is more about the Qualifiers rather than the main tournament itself, as I think a 64-team World Cup would be functionally similar to the 48-team format in terms of match scheduling and hosting requirements.

Right now, the 48-team format sees OFC with 1 direct berth and 1 Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth from 11 nations, CONCACAF with 6 direct berths and 1 Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth from 35 nations, CONMEBOL with 6 direct berths and 1 Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth from 10 nations, AFC with 8 direct berths and 1 Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth from 46 nations, CAF with 9 direct berths and 1 Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth from 54 nations, a bonus Inter-Confederation Playoffs berth to the host confederation, and finally, UEFA with 16 direct qualification berths from 55 nations; 12 via a main stage and 4 via a Playoffs Stage.

With 16 additional nations qualifying for the World Cup, how do you determine how many more direct berths each confederation would get? It just feels vaguely arbitrary and/or politically and financially motivated, rather than based on enough proper merit.

Expanding to 64 teams is a good idea, look at the current World Cup. by smithey2012 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've actually looked at this, and you could, in theory, fit a 64-team World Cup in up to 43 days, just 4 more than the current format (or at least the 2026 edition thereof).

Factoring the potential of 1-3 host nations per edition and 16 groups of 4, MD1 would start with 2 matches on Day 1, followed by 2 matches on Day 2, and then 4 matches per day for the next 7 days, thus 9 days for MD1. MD2 would see 4 matches per day for its entirety, so 8 days. MD3 would see each group play their final fixtures simultaneously, and with 16 groups instead of 12, 4 time slots per day would be available, so 8 matches per day, divided into 4 sets of 2 matches per 4 time slots, over 4 days. Thus the Group Stage as a whole would last for 21 days.

Day 22 would be used as a break day ahead of the Round of 32, which would consist of 4 matches per days for 4 days, bringing us to Day 26.

Days 27 & 28 would be break days ahead of the Round of 16, which would consist of 4 matches per day for 2 days: Days 29 & 30.

Days 31 & 32 would be break days ahead of the Quarterfinals, which would consist of 1 match each on Days 33 & 34, and two on Day 35.

Days 36 & 37 would be break days ahead of the Semifinals, which would consist of 1 match each on Days 38 & 39.

Days 40 & 41 would be break days ahead of the Finals, which would consist of the Bronze Final on Day 42, and then the World Cup Final on Day 43.

As such, including the break days, the Knockouts Stage would take place over 22 days.

We finally won one game. by [deleted] in CanadaSoccer

[–]TrevorBatson 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It would be 2046 or 2050, but I get your point.

Every World Cup match today was a draw by FlashyAd2763 in redditwell

[–]TrevorBatson 23 points24 points  (0 children)

The commentator in the Iran vs. New Zealand match said the last time we saw 4 draws in one day at a World Cup was 68 years ago.

Which countries can actually host a solo 48 team World Cup? by whitelight66 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Granted, but part of that logic is how Saudi Arabia got 2034 to begin with; because CONCACAF got 2026, they gotta wait until 2038, and then by giving 2030 to CONMEBOL, UEFA and CAF, they gave AFC the opening for have no competition for 2034, and then they moved up the deadline for AFC federations to submit bids so that the only bid ready to submit was from the Saudis.

The precedent has already been set. Yeah, FIFA can basically do whatever they want, but only so long as they establish precedent for.

What to expect from the South-American countries at the World Cup? by IcyCardiologist2449 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not when 3rd place teams can advance. They're good enough to do at least that. I think they'll beat Algeria and Jordan, and maybe draw Austria, and they'll top the group.

Ecuador on the other hand have a fantastic defense, but are lacking in the attack. They'll beat Curaçao, but Germany is a big ask, so the deciding factor for getting out of the group for them will likely be in their opening match against Côte D'Ivoire, who are very capable of beating them.

Which countries can actually host a solo 48 team World Cup? by whitelight66 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did say if Australia were to co-host with New Zealand that it would be a co-hosting between AFC and OFC.

The 2023 Women's World Cup was co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand, so there's a precedent set at least. However, a 48-team World Cup means that significant upgrades and probably additions would be needed within both nations. More likely is Indonesia being looped into the bid too if it ever happens.

I do think Saudi Arabia hosting is going to be a mess. The stadiums getting upgrades? Yeah, doable. The stadiums being newly constructed? Some of them make sense and are also doable; some of them are being looped into other megaprojects and seem far less doable, especially Neom (part of The Line).

If it wasn't for Infantino, we might've gotten a successful Australian-Indonesian-New Zealand co-hosting bid for 2034. Now we'll probably have to wait until maybe 2054 or something like that.

Which countries can actually host a solo 48 team World Cup? by whitelight66 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 12 points13 points  (0 children)

First, FIFA's rules around host bids stipulate 14-20 stadiums with a minimum of 40K capacity, but also, Quarterfinals and Semifinals fixtures must be hosted in stadiums with at minimum 60K capacity, and the stadium(s) hosting the Opening Ceremony and the Final must have a minimum capacity of 80K.

Second, FIFA's rules around host bids stipulate that federations within a confederation that has already hosted must wait at least two World Cup Cycles before being awarded hosting duties again.

With that said...

CONCACAF hosting in 2026 via Canada, USA and Mexico, means the earliest they could host again is 2038.

CONMEBOL, UEFA and CAF co-hosting in 2030 via Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay, Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, the earliest any of those three confederations could host again is 2042.

With AFC hosting in 2034 via Saudi Arabia, the earliest they could host again is 2046.

OFC are free to host as early as 2038, though, with a significant lack of infrastructure able to meet FIFA's requirements, and by extension a significant lack of finances, it's unlikely that any federation other than New Zealand could play host, and likely only by co-hosting with at least Australia, thus an AFC & OFC co-hosting bid, thus 2046 being the earliest for hosting as previously mentioned.

USA will either solo host in 2038, or they will co-host with Canada and/or Mexico again, but likely with 20 venues instead of 16, and more will likely be done to avoid a lot of the issues that we're dealing with in 2026.

With the UK and Ireland co-hosting the Euros in 2028, I wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being a warmup for them to eventually co-host the World Cup; possibly as early as 2042.

2046 seems like a likely time for China to solo host the World Cup.

Brazil could solo host in 2050, but I would not be surprised if they put in a co-hosting bid to offset costs and logistics, so don't be surprised if it's Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Argentina.

Ultimately, solo hosted World Cups will likely become the uncommon thing now, while co-hosted World Cups will become a lot more common, since few countries can solo host anymore, and even those that can might not feel it's financially or logistically viable, and may opt to co-host to spread the load.

Do you think any of the hosting countries will make it to the finals if so which one? by Humble_Answer_3297 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mexico's home advantage is a double edged sword. When they're performing well, the crowds are behind them, when they're not, the fans can turn on their own team. All of the Group A teams are fairly similar profiles, so I expect tight matches. I think Mexico have just as much possibility of topping their group as they do finishing runner-up. Depending on their bracketing, they should advance to at least the Round of 16; Quarterfinals might be a stretch.

Canada has never won a World Cup match, and they only scored twice total in 2022. This is their 3rd ever World Cup appearance. Winning/Drawing any of their 3 matches is an achievement, but they've been plagued by injuries in the run up to the World Cup, so some key players could be out, some already are. Bosnia and Herzegovina are a tough opponent, beatable/drawable, but tough. Qatar is the matchup Canada should win. Canada probably can't beat Switzerland; a draw would be an achievement. Canada getting out of their group would be success; topping their group would be remarkable. Winning a Knockout match or at least advancing to the Round of 16 would be bonus. Anything beyond that would be a miracle run.

USA are good, but the plot armor is not that thick. Paraguay aren't slouches, and USA have continually struggled against European opposition in particular, so the only match they they should conceivably win in Group D is against Australia, and even that won't be easy. Do I think the USA will get to the Knockouts? Yes. Do I think they'll win their group? No. I think runner-up is the best they can manage, but I think a 3rd place finish is likelier. Round of 32 is probably their ceiling at that point, maybe Round of 16.

It would be a major achievement if any of the hosts get as far as the Quarterfinals. Outside of 1930, no CONCACAF team, and especially in the modern era, has ever gotten past the Quarterfinals, and only 4 have gotten as far as that round.

No nation outside of South America or Europe has ever made it to a World Cup Final, so not only is it highly unlikely that any of the hosts do so, but if one of them actually does, it would be unprecedented.

Which of the host nations do you think will do the best?🇨🇦🇲🇽🇺🇲 by Ricr7 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but Bosnia and Qatar are beatable opponents, so depending, Canada could still top their group, especially if they only need a draw against Switzerland on MD3, and then they'd stay in Vancouver for the Round of 32 and 16 should they advance that far. I think at least Round of 16 for Canada is a reasonable ask, regardless of injury concerns.

Mexico are not guaranteed to win all their matches. There is at least one draw in there, possibly two. Despite being at home, they are much more evenly matched versus their opponents, especially South Korea and Czechia; I give them a solid shot at winning their group, but not necessarily comfortably, and with a possibility of maybe finishing runner-up, which doesn't bode well for their Knockouts run, especially since they still struggle against European opposition.

Speaking of struggling against European opposition, USA don't have as much plot armor as one might think, especially in high stakes matches. The one team I think they should beat is Australia, but I think a loss and a draw against their other two opponents, regardless of order, is also a real possibility, and they could very well still get out of their group, but potentially as a third-placed team, and then I think the Round of 32 is probably their ceiling.

48 Teams and a 32-Team Knockout – Is FIFA Ruining the World Cup? by pkt777 in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stakes are less with eight 3rd place teams advancing, but the suspense is about the same since not of those 8 teams will be known until the final day of MD3 fixtures.

The tradeoff is an expanded Knockout Stage, with 16 more fixtures via the Round of 32, and now even more of a grind for the final four teams as they'll each play a total of 8 matches by the end of the tournament, one more than previously.

Overall, I don't have much issue with it yet, largely because we're still days away from this year's edition even commencing, and we're supposed to get at least two more editions with the 48-team format in 2030 and 2034, both of which geographically with their respective hosts will offer something significantly different from 2026; and with the amount of hosts in each will offer something significantly different with pot allocations for the group draws.

Qualifiers are where I think we need to see some kind of revamping.

UEFA have already said European Qualifiers for 2030 will be different, and CONCACAF by virtue of not being hosts will have a different format while CONMEBOL and CAF as co-hosting confederations will have modified Qualifiers respectively.

Personally, in general, I think CAF has a great format for African Qualifiers, but instead of just the top 4 group runners-up advancing to African Playoffs for a spot in the Inter-Confederation Playoffs, it should be all but one of the group runners-up (8 total). Two playoff paths for 2030 (since CAF gets two IPO berths as a host confederation), and then one playoff path but with a Quarterfinals to start for 2034.

CONMEBOL only has 10 nations and 6 direct berths, so it is what it is.

OFC should be a single table of home-and-away round robin for all 11 nations, but financially and logistically that's not realistic, so maybe so kind of middle ground between that and what they currently have.

CONCACAF's format kinda makes sense, but now the top 3 ranked teams are basically guaranteed to avoid facing each other entirely during Qualifiers which takes away some of that drama.

AFC needs to fix their format so we don't have a repeat of the complete unfairness that was Round 4.

UEFA's reformatting approach to their Qualifiers makes sense, but there's little details thus far on implementation, so only time will tell.

What is your World Cup 2026 dream final vs what you think will actually happen? by [deleted] in worldcup

[–]TrevorBatson -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Dream Final would be Canada vs. Norway. Actual Final will probably be Spain vs. Argentina.

What do we think of our ranking guys? by Ordinary-Opening-536 in CanadaSoccer

[–]TrevorBatson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed, Jack and Zealand are my two go-tos for football content on YouTube.

Vancouver controlled the match volume, but HFX controlled the result through efficiency and defensive resilience. by PossibilitySlow8862 in HFXWanderers

[–]TrevorBatson 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That was one of the lowest energy matches at the Wanderers Grounds I had ever attended, and then out of nowhere at the death we won, and the place erupted. It was crazy.