July 2015

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

First Division Club Maps

« CONCACAF to drive for four | Main | Guatemala last in, Honduras-Costa Rica in UNCAF final »

January 22, 2011

Comments

Dave Clark

Two federations that perform worse than CONCACAF get more slots than CONCACAF. Isn't that an issue?

Eric

@Dave Which two confederations are those? As Howard pointed out, the reason CONCACAF's number looks good in 2002 is because Mexico and the US played each other, guaranteeing a spot in the quarterfinal. If they had played teams from a different confederation and both had lost (something that wouldn't really have surprised), the number would be more in line with the other two 'worse' confederations. Then for '06 and '10, you have only ONE confederation worse than the US. Yes, it's a different one each time, but it's not possible to say, with certainty, that there are two confederations that are worse and get more slots.

I actually like some of the analysis I've seen by some people on Big Soccer. Using the 'last place teams' method. Because, really, that's what we're wondering. It's the borderline teams that we're quibbling over here. For '10, for example, did Costa Rica deserve to get in over North Korea (0 points, -11 GD)?

Howard Hamilton

Eric, that's a good point, and I had thought of analyzing the teams in the bottom 25% of their confederations, but I couldn't decide on how to handle UEFA teams. Now that I think some more about it, I could have just created a "composite" team from the bottom 3-4 European teams.

It's not just the bottom Asian and African teams that a fourth CONCACAF berth would compete against, it's the bottom (and possibly next-to-bottom) European team as well.

The comments to this entry are closed.

HexagonalBlog on Twitter

Blog powered by Typepad

Tracker