- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: World Cup expanding to 48 teams in 2026
Posted on 1/10/17 at 10:21 am to Bad Medicine
Posted on 1/10/17 at 10:21 am to Bad Medicine
quote:
qualifying completely irrelevant now
This is a thinly veiled money grab.
No more. No less.
1
Posted on 1/10/17 at 10:24 am to BamaCoaster
I mean this sucks, but I'm kind of just putting all of my eggs in the 'World ending before 2026' basket.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 10:39 am to cwil177
Our federation outside us and Mexico most years doesn't warrant shite
That doesn't mean I'm vouching for others to get spots
That doesn't mean I'm vouching for others to get spots
Posted on 1/10/17 at 10:54 am to McCaigBro69
I agree. This is a bad move.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 11:30 am to bbap
quote:
Martyn Ziegler
@martynziegler
Fifa members close to consensus on distribution of new World Cup places - final decision on that likely in May
Think the Aussies will try to bully their way back into Oceania?
This post was edited on 1/10/17 at 11:31 am
Posted on 1/10/17 at 11:39 am to TN Bhoy
If Australia can't qualify with 8.5 AFC spots...
Posted on 1/10/17 at 11:43 am to WarSlamEagle
Agree. Don't think they'd risk losing to New Zealand for the only berth.
In other news, congratulations to New Zealand on qualifying for World Cup 2026.
In other news, congratulations to New Zealand on qualifying for World Cup 2026.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 11:45 am to TN Bhoy
Africa and Asia with that many new spots are laughable. Africa always shits the bed come WC time.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:14 pm to EastNastySwag
I don't mind expansion in theory. We've been at 32 teams since 1998, and overall quality around the world may have improved. The problem is the one no one really wants to admit:
Europe is woefully under-represented. They had 13 bids back in a field of 24 and now that the field has literally doubled, they get 16 teams, just one more than they had in the first 32-team field (14 + 1 host France)? That's bullshite. Going by the ELO rankings, UEFA has 26 teams in the top 48 right now and 28 in the top 50.
There is no universe in which Africa and Asia should get more combined bids than Europe based upon actual on-field results. And CONCACAF getting 6.5 is absurd. That's the whole Hex PLUS a half bid.
This is a transparent pay off to Asia, Africa, and Oceania which has more federations and thus voting power but not actual quality. I'd rather watch a 24-team World Cup only including UEFA and the Americas.
Europe is woefully under-represented. They had 13 bids back in a field of 24 and now that the field has literally doubled, they get 16 teams, just one more than they had in the first 32-team field (14 + 1 host France)? That's bullshite. Going by the ELO rankings, UEFA has 26 teams in the top 48 right now and 28 in the top 50.
There is no universe in which Africa and Asia should get more combined bids than Europe based upon actual on-field results. And CONCACAF getting 6.5 is absurd. That's the whole Hex PLUS a half bid.
This is a transparent pay off to Asia, Africa, and Oceania which has more federations and thus voting power but not actual quality. I'd rather watch a 24-team World Cup only including UEFA and the Americas.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:22 pm to StraightCashHomey21
This is a horrendous decision.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:31 pm to apfour21
This is a worse idea than the ranter who comes in and posts "they should make the goals bigger".
This will only dilute to the quality of the teams in the cup and qualifying is literally useless for almost everywhere outside of Europe and South America. I don't want more crap teams like Trinidad, Malaysia, or China. The only teams to include are the respectable European and South American sides missing the cut.
This will only dilute to the quality of the teams in the cup and qualifying is literally useless for almost everywhere outside of Europe and South America. I don't want more crap teams like Trinidad, Malaysia, or China. The only teams to include are the respectable European and South American sides missing the cut.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:37 pm to Baloo
quote:
We've been at 32 teams since 1998, and overall quality around the world may have improved
32 is a perfect number... Not too watered down, but it still allows for dark horses, plus it created uniformity with the groups, considering it eliminated the third place standings.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:43 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
When it should get two max
And a third through a playoff
Thanks for reminding me why I rarely post here anymore.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:55 pm to Sheep
Posted on 1/10/17 at 12:56 pm to Sheep
"If the World Cup expands to 48 teams, Europe should get all the extra spots. It's just different over here, you wouldn't understand."
Posted on 1/10/17 at 1:15 pm to WarSlamEagle
"And BBC should get exclusive rights world wide... its cameras are better"
Posted on 1/10/17 at 1:15 pm to WarSlamEagle
I saw an interesting idea of having like two-legged playoffs (or just a single game) between the last 16 qualifiers. The groups would remain at four countries, and the winners of the playoffs would fill in the final spot for all eight groups. Essentially, it would be like the NCAA tournament's "First Four" round.
But this groups of three shite is terrible. Tournaments need to have a square number of competitors. Look at the Euros last year. Portugal was abysmal, finishing third in its group, after three draws; qualifies for the knockout rounds, and wins the tournament.
But this groups of three shite is terrible. Tournaments need to have a square number of competitors. Look at the Euros last year. Portugal was abysmal, finishing third in its group, after three draws; qualifies for the knockout rounds, and wins the tournament.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 1:18 pm to StraightCashHomey21
RIP Hex 
Posted on 1/10/17 at 1:19 pm to thenry712
quote:
I saw an interesting idea of having like two-legged playoffs (or just a single game) between the last 16 qualifiers. The groups would remain at four countries, and the winners of the playoffs would fill in the final spot for all eight groups. Essentially, it would be like the NCAA tournament's "First Four" round.
Yeah, that would've been the way to go.
Posted on 1/10/17 at 3:09 pm to thenry712
The math works, too. Not just a good idea, but feasible! 12 groups of 4 (12x4=48). Top 2 teams from each advance, that's 24. We have room for 8 more teams to get a knockout round of 32. You have two options here. Top 4 3rd place teams advance and the other 8 have a play-in game, giving us the 8 teams. OR all 12 play each other, 6 winners advance, and then 2 of the losers advance on some criteria like most goals scored. Those last 2 get matched up with the top 2 teams from the group stage automatically.
But honestly, I think this is the beginning of UEFA and CONMEBOL thinking of seceeding from FIFA and making their own World Cup in which voting power is determined by quality not quantity. It's absurd that Africa and Asia dictate policy.
But honestly, I think this is the beginning of UEFA and CONMEBOL thinking of seceeding from FIFA and making their own World Cup in which voting power is determined by quality not quantity. It's absurd that Africa and Asia dictate policy.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News