Oh thank heavens

So do we participate in CONCACAF games at all?

I bet they make us do something. Can you imagine how poor their TV money would be if they didn't have US and Mexico participation?

If they got creative, they'd set something up that makes it worthwhile for us to be involved… like play the 3 auto-qualifiers concept forward. Make the Top 3 finishers this cycle auto-qualify for 2030. That way the big dogs are always a full-cycle ahead, and can get a second chance if they somehow whiff.

But they won't get creative. We'll have to play, and it'll be stupid.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So do we participate in CONCACAF games at all?

---

This is a valid question. Do we have to go through ~12 matches of ankle hacking by low-rent CONCACAF sides and ankle rolling on low-rent CONCACAF pitches?

jeffk said:

---

Before going to the World Cup and getting hacked to pieces by terrible clubs from outside CONCACAF during group?

---

Hey! Leave the Vanuatu national team out of this.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

So do we participate in CONCACAF games at all?

---

Nations League. This is the way.

And Gold Cup

Breaking News: FIFA, soccer’s global governing body, is set to approve changes to the 2026 World Cup in North America that will add 24 games to an event that could take 40 days.https://t.co/DNVaW0AwsH

— The New York Times (@nytimes) March 14, 2023

This should have always been the way after the elected to expand the tournament honestly. The whole idea of 3 teams per group was really dumb. It eliminated drama and also limited several teams to only playing 2 games in the World Cup rather than 3.

Obviously I prefer more world cup, but the "some teams got only two games" thing didn't bother me nearly as much as just the general dynamics of a 3 team group. The teams that were getting "only 2 games" were teams #33 through #48...ie teams that previously played 0 games at the world cup finals, the top 32 that advanced from the groups still got their 3 games just like the current 32 team system.

This is great news. The game theory aspect of three team groups just doesn't work at all.

Hard disagree.

I hate the expansion of the WC. It is a pointless endeavor to hand out participation trophies. Each year it only feels like a handful of teams can actually win the competition, so we are just inflating a perfect tournament with more crappy teams. If a team was good enough to win the world cup, it would have qualified via the normal process. Now all of the groups will be watered down and we will have to endure forced media excitement about an El Salvador v Mali snoozefest.

The excitement of the WC stems from good football, not pretty colors and flags. Nobody watches the gold cup or the asian cup despite the fact they include more smaller countries...its boring, crappy, soccer and there isn't enough talent to keep most people interested.

More games doesn't mean a better experience for the fans, it just fills the coffers of corporate greed.

You used to get 64 cuts of fine steak...now you are getting 100+ pieces of discount hot dog.

EDIT: I will say biggie sizing it to get 4 teams per group is a better solution than the menage trois proposal. I just prefer the previous format to any of this new crap.

AG@RICE said:

---

Hard disagree.

I hate the expansion of the WC. It is a pointless endeavor to hand out participation trophies.

---

I agree entirely, but the expansion is a done deal.

The group stage is the best part of the World Cup, in my opinion, and the three team groups would have ruined it.

AG@RICE said:

---

You used to get 64 cuts of fine steak...now you are getting 100+ pieces of discount hot dog..

---

Like I said, I get a lot of the complaints! Expansion is absolutely about greed at its heart.

But this statement isn't really accurate. You still get the same amount of good cuts of steak, you just have to eat some hot dogs first. There'll be some crap games in group stages, but the best teams should all move on to the knockout rounds… and even if one of the doesn't, I'm okay with that as it'll be incredibly dramatic to see an underdog advance before getting its ass handed to it by a heavyweight.

YokelRidesAgain said:

---

AG@RICE said:

---

Hard disagree.

I hate the expansion of the WC. It is a pointless endeavor to hand out participation trophies.

---

I agree entirely, but the expansion is a done deal.

The group stage is the best part of the World Cup, in my opinion, and the three team groups would have ruined it.

---

This is where I'm at. I don't like expanding it, but thats already happened. I hated the 3 team group idea.

The group games are definitely going to be watered down. You're going to have 12 groups and in the end you'll only be eliminating 16 teams, which theoretically are going to all be the teams that currently arent good enough to even make it. 8 out of 12 third place teams are going to advance.

JJxvi said:

---

The group games are definitely going to be watered down. You're going to have 12 groups and in the end you'll only be eliminating 16 teams, which theoretically are going to all be the teams that currently arent good enough to even make it. 8 out of 12 third place teams are going to advance.

---

There will be pluses and minuses. The structure may encourage more drama on the last match day of the group, since most teams will still have a chance (this structure is essentially a doubled version of the 1994 World Cup, and 4 points is what it took to get out of the group stage that year, so if you get even a draw in one of the first two games you theoretically still have a chance going into the last day).

One downside scenario is if you have a 2-0 team playing an 0-2 team on the last match day, with the other matchup between two 1-1 teams. The 1-1 teams may be content with a boring draw that likely will send them on.

As for the quality of play, this is certainly an issue. There is no need for the 6th best team in CONCACAF to be in the World Cup.

I wonder if Reyna's wife is already writing emails complaining about what this means for Gio because he has to play too much.

I know it's insane, but I will partially miss the insanity of the concacaf qualifying process. There's really nothing else like it in sport. The fans throwing things at the players,, the terrible field conditions, the dives, the referees who have no clue, the near fights every game. It's part of the ethos of American soccer.

I have no doubt Concacaf will make us participate in something.

Can you imagine how much money they lose if the US and Mexico aren't in WCQ?

I'm confused. The WC qualifying process for CONCACAF was announced at the end of February. The hosts aren't in it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_(CONCACAF)

I appreciate that relatively new info and I rescind my statement in light of said knowledge.

TED LASSO VISITS WHITE HOUSE 🇺🇸

Jason Sudeikis and Ted Lasso cast were at the White House Monday to discuss the importance of addressing mental health, a common theme within the show. But not before Ted had to field a footballing question from "fake journalist" Trent Crimm. 🙂 pic.twitter.com/5QR8zsIfog

— Men in Blazers (@MenInBlazers) March 20, 2023

Did anyone see this?

The USMNT's opening game at the 2026 World Cup will reportedly be held at SoFi Stadium.

The final is likely to be held in the Arlington/Dallas Area.

https://x.com/usmntonly/status/1690177079453642752?s=46&t=SDwjtrx4oYg1B7e9RSrEwQ

Interesting. I'll still be shocked if the final isn't in LA or NYC

Out in Left Field said:

---

Did anyone see this?

The USMNT's opening game at the 2026 World Cup will reportedly be held at SoFi Stadium.

The final is likely to be held in the Arlington/Dallas Area.

https://x.com/usmntonly/status/1690177079453642752?s=46&t=SDwjtrx4oYg1B7e9RSrEwQ

---

I've heard from someone who has the contacts in the right places has said the same thing about Dallas likely hosting the final. Of course, until it's announced, it could change.