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.

If CONCACAF's proposed changes to World Cup qualifying go through, and we know the reports are legitimate now with Sunil Gulati commenting on them during the "four more years" presser today, it's very possible that the United States and Mexico will not face each other on the road to Brazil '14.  With two groups in the final round, the chances of the region's two biggest powers being split up is very likely, if not inevitable.

According to Honduran outlet La Prensa, by way of USSoccerPlayers.com for us non-Spanish speakers, CONCACAF is set to present to FIFA their plans for a new World Cup qualification process. The most significant changes are the elimination of the home and away series beyond the first round and a shift from the single group final round (aka, the Hexagonal) to a two group final round.


The structure as parsed by USSoccerPlayers.com is this:


The six lowest ranked nations play off against each other, leaving three standing and reducing the total field to thirty-two teams.


From here, groups kick in, with the thirty-two teams drawn into eight groups of four. The two top teams from each group advance. Those sixteen teams are drawn into four groups of four, again with the top two teams in each group advancing. The final eight teams play in two groups of four, with the winner of each group automatically qualifying. If CONCACAF receives a fourth World Cup spot, then the second place finishers will also qualify. If not, the two runners-up will play off to determine the third qualifier, with the loser going on to play for a spot against a team from another confederation.


The total number of games for the top thirty-two teams, not including any needed play offs after the final round, is eighteen. That's the same number of games as in the previous set up.


Seeding will play a major role in this process because of the final round moving to two groups. If the United States and Mexico are the top ranked teams in the region, does that guarantee that they will be drawn in different groups? If CONCACAF does not use rankings in the final round and draws teams together randomly, a possible group with the US and Mexico together would unbalance qualification significantly; add in the possibility of the second place finisher in such a group having to play off against a nation from another region just to qualify, and things could get very interesting.


Keep in mind that if seeding is used throughout, and the US and Mexico are not drawn into the same final round group, they could both qualify without ever having to play each other.


*UPDATE*

I'm moving Jason Kuenle's comment into the post because it provide a likely reason for why CONCACAF is changing things:


My guess is this has to do with two things; money and rankings. While the number of games played by the top teams will not change from 18, the number of games played by lesser CONCACAF teams will go up, in some cases dramatically. Matches for these second tier teams obviously bring in revenue, but they also should increase the FIFA rankings for those CONCACAF teams.



Take Jamaica - last cycle they played 8 matches, two against Bahamas in the second round and then in the group, two against each of Mexico, Honduras, and Canada. They totaled 5 wins, 1 draw, and 2 loses. Under the new system, they would be in Pot A, and play against a Pot B team like Haiti, Guatemala, or Cuba, a Pot C team like Suriname, Puerto Rico, or Belize, and a Pot D team like Bahamas or Aruba. They should move out of this group with a record of around 4-1-1. They would then move to a group that looked similar to the Mexico, Honduras, Canada group, where they went 3-1-2. Even if they did not make the final groups, they would have played 4 additional matches, including two home gates for the federation. An additional two teams making the final round gives even more chances to play all 18 matches.



Matches played in 2010:

20 - 1 team

18 - 5 teams

10 - 1 team

8 - 5 teams

4 - 9 teams

2 - 14 teams

Total matches played - 112



Under the new rules:

18 - 8 teams

12 - 8 teams

8 - 3 teams

6 - 5 teams

2 - 3 teams

Total matches played - 150



Because World Cup qualifier matches have a 2.5 multiplier on them compared to friendlies, more qualifiers means more points, which means a higher ranking for midlevel teams. It's akin to fattening these teams up as a sacrfice when they play the US and Mexico. The US and Mexico have been just on the outside of being seeded for the last several world cups. The new qualification route means avoiding loses to each other while increasing the points gained by beating other teams. Also, the new qualification procedure takes advantage of the new confederation rankings giving CONCACAF a slight edge over AFC and CAF.



It is sad that there will no longer be a "winner" of the qualification and that we may not face Mexico in qualifying, but it's a good move by CONCACAF. The mid-tier nations need to be the backbone on which CONCACAF grows. Getting those federations a greater number of competitive matches and more money (if it's not wasted or embezzled) will help the US in the long run.