Creating a Better Club World Cup
Imagine if the World Cup was every single year, but it only featured the best team from every region. Imagine that the best nation from each of Europe and South American entered in the semis of a knockout bracket.
Stop imagining.
You essentially have the Club World Cup. A tourney so minor it makes the Confederations Cup look like a big deal. A tiny 7 team tourney that takes a few regional champions, let’s those in "growth" regions look to play maybe two games against major world teams, and crowns the team at the end the best in the world.
Except that most people don’t really care. Inter Milan had a cake walk, and while they won, do you really think they wanted this trophy more than Serie A, the Cup or Champions League? Would an English team care more about the Carling Cup? Probably.
Can FIFA do anything to make this thing matter more? Almost certainly, and the answer isn’t more prize money. The answer is more teams, and less frequency. Make it a marquee tourney with several of the best teams in the world.
First, cut it back to once every cycle for the summer after the World Cup. This gives more time to actually host the event, and mitigates concerns over interrupting the precious European league calendar. Yes, there will be some tourneys then - Euro qualifiers, the Gold Cup, etc. But not as much stuff going on as there is in early December. Shoe-horning something into a two or three week stretch shouldn’t interfere too much and the sides taking part are scattered over the World. There will never be a perfect time.
Second, take the Champions of the last two regional club championships for everywhere but Oceania. They’ll get only one, as they don’t have any pro teams that take part. This puts the entries at 11. The host nation gets their league champion for 12. Sure, a small tournament could be done with 12 teams in 3 groups with winners and a best second advancing. But would the Euro sides really take it any more seriously with just two of their teams taking part?
So let’s add four more teams. To respect that South American sides have done well in the tourney so far let’s give each of UEFA and CONMEBOL two more. One could give those two slots to the non-winning finalist of the regional championships, but that would not do one of FIFA’s favorite things - growing the game.
Instead, let’s take the last two Europa League and Copa Sudamericana winners. For Europa several winners have come from non-traditional soccer powers, and for Sudamericana it would provide an additional reward to winning a touch tourney generally dominated by teams from Argentina and Brazil. Oh, and those FMF sides that get into Libertadores and Sudamericana? If they win, they go to the new Club World Cup.
That’s 16 teams, which fits into a very tight two weeks, or a relatively easy three. A week for pre-tourney training in the host nation(s) would mean that soccer fans in say Canada (if they hosted) would get to see 4 top Euro sides, 4 top South Americans, 2 Asia, 2 Africa, 2 North American, 1 Oceania and their league/cup winner.
How would such a tournament look?
|
Group A |
Group B |
Group C |
Group D |
|
Inter Milan |
Barcelona |
Internacional |
Estudiantes |
|
LDU Quito |
Independiente |
Shakhtar Donetesk |
Atletico Madrid |
|
Pachuca |
Seongnam Ilhwa Chunma |
Atlante |
Pohang Steelers |
|
Al-Wahda |
Hekari United |
TP Mazembe |
Esperance ST |
That puts the two UEFA CL winners with the "easiest" seeding facing off against host nation’s best and Oceania’s best. It also looks a lot more interesting to a European viewer. That’s if this year’s tourney happened at this time of year.
The hypothetical with Eastern Canada as host would have either their last V-Cup winner (Toronto FC) or the MLS Cup Winner (Colorado Rapids) depending on the small detail of the odd Canadian status.
How does that fit into just two weeks?
Group Stage
Sat with two double-headers (Groups A and B)
Sun with two double- headers (Groups C and D)
Monday Off
Tuesday A&B
Wed C&D
Thursday off
Friday A&B
Sat C&D
Knockouts
Sun off
Mon A v B quarters
Tues C v D quarters
Wed, Thurs off
Friday Semi Finals
Sat off
Sunday Final
The heavy double-header schedule would result in just a two week tourney, with only 10 days off for Finalists. But these teams have many more players on roster than the 23 of the World Cup. It would also put the most important matches on weekends, which are best for TV.
By having greater overall quality in the tournament it would increase interest in the developed soccer regions (particularly UEFA), and by the emerging regions having the opportunity to see two (or three) of their participants play multiple games and maybe get some wins it would be a point of honor.
If Inter Milan won a tourney where they had to fight their way through that compressed schedule beating the likes of al-Wahda, Pachuca, LDU Quito, Independiente, Atletico Madrid and Shaktar Donetsk (let’s just say the UEFA teams win out) that would be quite a title. If a team like Mazembe made a run to the Final as they did this year they would have to be better than Atlante, Shaktar Donetsk, Internacional (Brazil), Atletico Madrid and Barcelona. That would be a hell of a historical run.
While the Club World Cup is a good idea, it needs to get much closer to the real World Cup. More teams of higher quality with significant time dedicated to the event. This is one way that FIFA could do it, while continuing to grow the sport in the non-traditional regions. Particularly by awarding hosting rights on a rotating basis between CONCACAF, AFC and CAF. This would mean a real Club champion is crowned not just in Tokyo/Dubai, but in other regions that deserve to see the world’s best.
Just imagine Cascadia hosting such an event. Or Eastern Canada. Or Texas. Or the American South. Huge teams with huge draws coming to play games that matter.
14 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hell, just about anything would be better than the current Club WC, this idea is the best alternative I’ve seen yet.
Not that I’ve seen many others.
The Doctor Jones fanclub: Active for more games than Jones himself.
"Just Do Something" - Nike’s new logo for Bills apparel.
Paul McCartney Can't Play Piano
Burgundy Wave - SBnation's home for the MLS Cup 2010 Champion (!) Colorado Rapids
Glory, Glory, Colorado. The 'Pids go Marching on!
Great idea to improve a tournament with so much potential.
I love seeing the best the world has to offer broken down by country, but a tournament full of quality teams that get to choose how they want their side to look,that is not constrained by nationality, would be amazing.
It would be fun.
Then countries could go for the “world double,” World Cup and Club World Cup.
Well, they can do it now
Inter Milan just won the CWC. No one really cared.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Hmm?
Make it a marquee tourney with several of the best teams in the world.
What, the UEFA Champion’s League?
coz that’s the problem. Pretty much all of the best teams in the world already play each other regularly.
Also I totally forgot the club world cup happened
Go figure.
by Thomas Beekers on Dec 19, 2010 4:22 AM PST up reply actions
That's the point
The Club World Cup exists, and no one cares.
This would add more high quality teams.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Which of the two formats would you care about more
The one that just ended where you have likely only heard of 1 to 3 teams (and that only because you may know Mexican soccer through MLS) of the 7 in a simple knockout
or
a 16 team tourney with at least 4 teams and maybe up to 10?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Well, my point is this
You can’t make European clubs care about the Club World Cup. Because for us, it’s not a question of how many teams compete, how good they are or what format it is in. European fans will never have heard of these clubs regardless, but mostly we already have what we consider the absolute topflight competition in the CL, and adding international clubs doesn’t change that.
On top of that, this is simply highly impractical for European clubs. Our schedule is already very dense (except for a few countries that have different competition spreads). Competition, national cup and European cup already puts them at a full schedule, with breaks filled up by international play. A longer world clubs cup would be a very unwelcome addition for most European topflight teams.
So yeah, this format might make it more interesting for you guys, but it makes it annoying for us, and I don’t think it’ll make people care.
by Thomas Beekers on Dec 20, 2010 9:38 AM PST up reply actions
Point by Point
European fans will never have heard of these clubs regardless
Except under this concept that isn’t true.
we consider the absolute topflight competition in the CL
Routinely losing to South American sides does not mean you are better
Our schedule is already very dense
This concept puts it in a less dense time period and only once every four years, rather than a very dense time every single year.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Them's some stretched points
European fans won’t suddenly know and care about Mexican football clubs because you introduce this concept.
“Routinely losing” is a meaningless statement since there are no meaningful games being played here. Besides, I didn’t claim we’re better, I said European fans consider the CL the absolute topflight, and it’s a hard sell to tell them that including Al-Wahda will make it much better.
And finally, schedule density: density is not just about how many games you play, it’s about how many relevant games you play. The club world cup is currently slotted in B or C-priority for most team, low-intensity games for the B-teams to roll with. You can’t really force them to care, so I don’t see how that’d change. Clubs aren’t looking for more relevant games. Not unless there’s a metric ton of money involved.
by Thomas Beekers on Dec 20, 2010 11:51 AM PST up reply actions
Stetch?
Going from one Euro team to 4 is an increase in teams about which Euro fans know.
Increasing from 1 to 4 South American teams increases chances that one of them are a team about which a Euro fan is aware.
And yes, this tourney structure would have more money involved.
"Routinely losing" is a meaningless statement since there are no meaningful games being played here. Besides, I didn’t claim we’re better, I said European fans consider the CL the absolute topflight, and it’s a hard sell to tell them that including Al-Wahda will make it much better.
You do realize that I’m not suggesting to add al-Wahda? They ALREADY TAKE PART. Euro teams haven’t done great at the CWC, that’s a historical fact. In fact this paragraph has so little to do with what was written here, and the current state of the CWC it only indicates how little Euro fans know of the current tournament.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Little bit of snobbery here
- Who says that Euro fans have to care about this tournament? American basketball fans don’t care squat about the FIBA Championships, nor do most MLB fans care about the World Baseball Championship – and they hold them anyway, and they’re watched much more outside the US. And everybody wants to beat the US.
- Relevant games? Please. Clubs play for hardware. The biggest ones may well do it with hungry B- or C- sides, but so what? If these clubs are as strong as their fans believe they are, then if they get beaten, it’s pure snobbery for fans to claim they didn’t really lose because “it was the kids playing.”
- The idea of schedule density with a club like say, Man U, is a joke compared to anyone outside of Europe. And if you push the tournament to summer, then how’s it any different from the WC or Euros?

by 
















