Around the web, though not on this site, there has been a lot of consternation over the proposed change to CONCACAF qualifying. Most of this has centered around the probable loss of the home-and-home between the US and Mexico, though some has extended well beyond that. The changes have ramifications for nearly every soccer federation in CONCACAF. Viewing the effects of these changes in their entirety paints a different picture than the quick-draw initial judgments likely created. Different countries will be affected in different ways. Countries are group by similar effect from the bottom of the CONCACAF world to the top.
Tier 11
Teams (3): Monserrat, Anguilla, US Virgin Islands
Average FIFA Rank: 200
Matches played under old system: 2
Matches played under new system: 2
Likely FIFA ranking* under new system: 200
Tier 10
Teams (3): Aruba, British Virgin Islands, St. Lucia
Average FIFA Rank: 190
Matches under old system: 2
Matches under new system: 8
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 170
Tier 9
Teams (5): Dominican Republic, Turks and Caicos Islands, Belize, Dominica, Bahamas
Average FIFA Rank: 180
Matches under old system: 2
Matches under new system: 6
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 170
Tier 8
Teams (8): Cayman Islands, Puerto Rico, Netherlands Antilles, Nicaragua, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Bermuda, St. Kitts and Nevis, Grenada
Average FIFA Rank: 160
Matches under old system: 4
Matches under new system: 6
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 150
Tier 7
Teams (4): Haiti, Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Suriname
Average FIFA Rank: 130
Matches under old system: 4
Matches under new system: 12
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 120
Tier 6
Teams (3): Guyana, Guatemala, Cuba
Average FIFA Rank: 120
Matches under old system: 8
Matches under new system: 12
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 110
Tier 5
Teams (1): Canada
Average FIFA Rank: 100
Matches under old system: 8
Matches under new system: 12
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 85
Tier 4
Teams (2): Panama, Jamaica
Average FIFA Rank: 85
Matches under old system: 8
Matches under new system: 18
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 75
Tier 3
Teams (2): El Salvador, Trinidad and Tobago
Average FIFA Rank: 80
Matches under old system: 18
Matches under new system: 18
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 75
Tier 2
Teams (2): Costa Rica, Honduras
Average FIFA Rank: 50
Matches under old system: 18
Matches under new system: 18
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 50
Tier 1
Teams (2): USA, Mexico
Average FIFA Rank: 20
Matches under old system: 18
Matches under new system: 18
Likely FIFA ranking under new system: 20
The new system funnels its matches and ranking advantages to the middle tiers of teams. Under the new system, tiers three through ten should see an average increase of about 10 spots in the FIFA rankings due to these changes. Those changes are enough to offset the loss of points that the top tiers lose by not playing each other as often.
Canada should get the largest bump with the new system. Because Canada does not play in a qualifier for the Gold Cup, it misses out on points collected by the Central American countries in the Central American Nations Cup and the Caribbean nations in the Caribbean Championship. Beating Aruba in WC qualifying is about equal in points as beating Iceland in a friendly. In fact, it’s worth more points than drawing Spain in a friendly would be. Because Canada’s only realistic chances at the higher multipliers matches come in the Gold Cup and World Cup qualifying, maximizing the number of these games is critical to raising their ranking.
The new system also gives a bit more equality to those nations that will be most important to the growth of CONCACAF. There is a core group of ten countries that have shown some ability to sustain at least decent quality soccer programs; USA, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, El Salvador, T&T, Guatemala, Panama, Jamaica, and Canada. The countries include every country to make the hex round of qualifying, every Gold Cup winner, every confederation Gold Cup runner up, every UNCAF (predecessor to the Central American Cup) winner, and 9 of the last 10 Caribbean Cup winners. By nature of the hex format, four of these countries played less than half the games of the other six. In the new format, likely 8 of these ten teams will play the full 18 matches and the 2 who do not make it will play 4 more matches than they would have under the old system. For these countries, player exposure, gate receipts, and meaningful matches are critical for their development into strong regional competitors.
Another area of group is with tiers seven and eight. Tier seven sees an extreme jump in matches from 4 to 12. Tier eight are teams on the FIFA line of irrelevancy. Under the FIFA ranking formula, a team ranked lower than 150 is given a ranking of 150 for purposes of calculating points. Moving up teams near the 150 line has a positive effect for the entire system. Hopefully, this reduces the number of teams under the 150 mark from around one-half of the confederation to around one-third.
The bulk of the advantages in the new system are targeted at tiers 4 through 8. While there is a short term disadvantage to the preparation of US and Mexico for a World Cup, if the new system can stabilize and grow the middle tiers of CONCACAF the long term advantages outweigh the short term losses. In ten years, a final group of USA, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and Canada has the potential to be a challenging group. If the price of that is the diminishment of the Mexico rivalry, it may be a price worth paying.
* A note on methodology: The “likely FIFA rankings” were calculated by determining the countries current average match score, multiplying that by the number of matches played, subtracting the points from the old system, adding the predicted points from the new system, and dividing by the new number of matches played. The “likely FIFA ranking” is not predictive, but an estimation of what a country’s current FIFA rank would be if the qualification from last cycle had been done in the new format.
