In my 2011 season preview, I predicted that Toronto would struggle for the first few months under its newest leadership structure (new general manager and head coach) but toward the end of the year start to look like a promising team for 2012.  I had no clue that the amount of change they would undergo in a few short months: only two players would start both the first and last game of the season.  The 2012 version of Toronto FC is a new franchise personnel-wise, and I suspect we will see more changes over the next few months.

So is this team now good enough to make a playoff run this upcoming season?  Despite the infusion of  new talent, there are still many gaps that need to be addressed by this franchise.  To continue our series, below are three questions the team needs to address this offseason:

1. Are everyone’s expectations for the team realistic?

Off the pitch questions may overwhelm on the pitch questions this offseason.  In an interview with Alex Labidou, Toronto FC head coach Aron Winter bluntly stated that he would not be disappointed if his 2012 team does not make the playoffs: “We are focused on building something that will have progress not only in the playoffs”.  When you are doing a total rebuild that is the result of some really bad management in the first few years of your franchise’s MLS existence, this kind of attitude makes sense.  To be blunt, Toronto has lived too long off of the good will of its fans in a league where over 50% of teams make the playoffs.

However, the statement does ignore some realities that make this position untenable.  Rogers Communications, the Canadian media conglomerate that part-owns many sports franchises and properties in Toronto, recently bought a stake in the Reds.  Undoubtedly, this makes many fans salivate with the thought of corporate money being able to fund some player acquisitions.

The team is also the victim of its own success.  By advancing past the group stage of the CONCACAF Champions League plus ending the 2011 MLS season on a hot streak, the fans have seen that this team can have success against good opponents.  For the head coach and management to essentially say “let’s not get ahead of ourselves here” especially in light of gaffs like jacking up ticket prices a few years back, there could be a major division between the team itself and its fans.  Setting correct and manageable expectations for the team, players, and fans may define the success of this rebuild more than the on-the-field performance.

2. Is Julian de Guzman still part of the plan?

Dwayne De Rosario was quickly shipped from Toronto to New York to relieve a high-priced problem early in 2011.  Their other high-profile player was forced to shape up while new names were brought in that could compare to de Guzman’s stature.  As a result, de Guzman played better in 2011 and actually became an important part of the Toronto midfield.  However, he was left unprotected in the recent expansion draft, which while it may have been done strategically could send a signal to the player about his future in Toronto.

Undeniably Julian de Guzman is a very good player that can be a critical part of the Toronto attack.  However, with a rebuild overshadowing the team and he being the most visible sign of the old Toronto FC, does he have a role in Winter’s team?  Maybe more importantly, does he want one?

3. How close are they to the three year plan being completed?

This question ties somewhat to the first one, but how close is this team to reaching their goal of being a replenishing playoff contender?  Their 2011 acquisitions paid off big-time in many ways, with Danny Koevermans being their best acquisition by scoring loads of critical goals.  The other designated player acquisition Torsten Frings helped stabilize the midfield and young players like Ashtone Morgan and Joao Plata really shined under Winter.

However gaps do exist and how management chooses to fill these gaps will be a telling sign of how close they believe the three-year plan is to completion (a year early).  Their only big offseason acquisition so far has been Reggie Lambe, a winger who represents Jamaica Bermuda and played in England last season.  However, the team has not locked up Plata for another year (he’s on loan from Ecuador) and has not addressed some of their defensive issues (hello Andy Iro!).  Will they try and sign some established players, or just rely on the growing academy to fill in slots?  The answer may define how quickly this team makes a playoff run, if at all.

CONCACAF general secretary, nemesis of Mohammed Bin Hammam, and tabloid story-filler Chuck Blazer announced today he would step down from his role in the soccer federation at the end of the year.  Blazer had been involved in CONCACAF’s leadership for two decades and his resignation is certainly the end of an era.  He will, however, keep his FIFA executive committee spot, according to Bloomberg, but has not decided if he will run for reelection in 2013.

“My passion for soccer is undiminished and it is time for me to explore new challenges within this wonderful sport,” he said in a CONCACAF statement.  ”Running a governing body has been an incredibly fulfilling job, but there are so many other areas of the sport where as a senior executive, I will make a great impact.”

CONCACAF has not announced who will replaced Blazer but the resignation comes after a tumultuous few months.  As we reported on this site in August, Blazer was under investigation by the FBI for a variety of alleged tax evasions and failures to report income.  This of course came after Blazer’s role as a whistle blower when in June he accused Bin Hammam and then-CONCACAF President Jack Warner of colluding to buy votes from the Caribbean Football Union for the former’s FIFA presidential campaign.  In the aftermath, Lisle Austin of Barbados tried to force Blazer’s removal from the soccer governing body, a move that was later overturned.

I have no doubt Blazer will continue to lurk in the North American soccer landscape, no doubt finding a comfortable place to land and maintain his lifestyle.  If you think this is the last we’ve heard of him, you will be sorely mistaken.  That said, this is the end of an era for CONCACAF.  The confederation saw some massive financial gains under Blazer and an increase in the prestige of its members, mostly driven by the successes of the U.S. and Mexico.  Blazer also was key in securing ESPN’s bid for the 2010 and 2014 World Cups, which has helped drive some growth in soccer viewership in the U.S. as well as a healthy American audience for last year’s World Cup.

However, this is a prime opportunity for CONCACAF to turn the page on this year’s terrible scandals and rebuild itself.  The confederation has at least two top-rate soccer federations (Mexico and, yes, the U.S.) as well as some smaller soccer associations that can be legitimately be described as up-and-coming.  Two countries have already hosted World Cups and a third is a prime destination for a future one (Canada).  In short, while CONCACAF will never be UEFA, it has a chance to be one of the better confederations in FIFA.  Failure to enact some ethics reforms and refocus its priorities will lead to it be passed by the AFC and CAF.

The investigations into FIFA’s corrupt practices continue, and the attention has again been focused on American Chuck Blazer.

Andrew Jennings, one of soccer’s most outspoken reformers, released a new detailed report yesterday with a laundry list of accusations against Blazer and his lavish lifestyle.  Jennings claims the FBI has now begun investigating the FIFA official’s bank accounts for some very suspicious payments and for failure to report income, a very serious charge that the federal government does not take lightly in high-profile cases.  When we had left the FIFA/CONCACAF drama, Blazer had outed CONCACAF’s Jack Warner for bribery on behalf of FIFA presidential candidate Mohamed bin Hamman.  According to Jenning’s report, it seems as though Blazer was more involved with Warner’s wrong-doing than previously understood, if the reports are accurate.

Some of the story’s more juicy details include:

• Blazer received (and repaid) a payment of $250,000 from the Caribbean Football Union, which was controlled by Warner and which Blazer claims Warner was illegally writing checks from the bank account.  This was in addition to large payments made to Blazer in September 2010.
• Blazer allegedly held a retreat in his $3 million apartment at the Reef Atlantis Paradise Island resort last month for Caribbean officials sympathetic to him.  He allegedly owns the resort property which is paid for through a series of companies connected to a Nassau bank where he supposedly has an account.
• He receives a ton of commissions from regional sports marketing companies with connections to Warner, including making $2 million allegedly off one such contract.
• Two of his children have worked for him, including his son who currently works as CONCACAF’s chief medical officer which pays $7,000 a month.
• Including an apartment above the CONCACAF offices in Trump Towers, Blazer has property in North Carolina (farmhouse) and Miami (waterfront apartment).
• Most stomach churning for me, Jennings uncovers a picture of Blazer and his girlfriend chatting with Dr. Ruth Westheimer.

All kidding aside, these are serious accusations that cast new light on the CONCACAF drama that occurred around the World Cup 2022 bid.  Jennings is known for his dogged investigation into the bribed FIFA executive committee members and subsequent exposé which some have blamed for England not even advancing past the first round in the 2018 World Cup voting.  His level of detail is also in-depth and while some of it can be dismissed by supporters as unsubstantiated, his lavish lifestyle is disconcerting.

Of course, this is not the first time we’ve heard of Blazer’s antics, but the fact that the Feds are involved takes it to a whole new level.  The FBI loves to investigate financial crimes and has a high-profile history of successfully prosecuting them.  Expect during the upcoming months to hear drips of leaked information about Blazer and some more of his interesting monetary expenditures, but the biggest take-away from this exposé is kind of what we expected: there’s allegedly more to the story of Chuck Blazer’s attempted FIFA clean-up.

Soccer fans this weekend saw the best of the beautiful game pushed aside by the worst.  As Barcelona were dismantling Manchester United with passing and play that was textbook in perfection, the drip-drip-drip of allegations coming out of FIFA’s headquarters in Switzerland was deafening.  Mohamed bin Hamman withdrew from the FIFA president’s race under the dark cloud of suspicion that he had tried to bribe voters in his election campaign.  Then pictures were released allegedly showing (I kid you not) a case with $40,000 in cash that associates of CONCACAF delegate Jack Warner and bin Hamman delivered to a Caribbean delegate to buy their vote in the election.

Then the hits kept coming.  FIFA’s secretary general Jerome Valcke had to deny a report that he wrote an email to Warner saying that bin Hammam thought “you can buy FIFA as they bought the WC” (WC standing for World Cup).  bin Hammam is the head of the Qatar delegation, and Valcke had to issue a statement saying that, while he did write the email, he did not mean to imply the 2022 World Cup had been bought; Qatar issued a similar statement.  Meanwhile, current FIFA president Sepp Blatter (who has his own ethics charges against him) gave a bizarre press conference claiming that none of these reports constituted a crisis and that tomorrow’s election for FIFA president (where he is the only candidate) should continue.

Got that?  Basically, it looks like FIFA corruption (which has always been guessed at) is coming to light at a bad time; upwards of 10 of the 32 members of the sport’s governing body are under investigation for various corruption charges.  The British English and Scottish FAs have publicly called for tomorrow’s vote for FIFA president to be delayed, and the British English FA has said it will abstain from voting due to the current ethics situation. [note - apologies to English and British friends for misidentifying FA.  Mistakes were made]

The United States, which finished second to Qatar for the 2022 World Cup, should feel even more aggrieved than the English that their bid was possibly undermined by corruption, probably even by their own federation’s representative.  So how should USSF and Sunil Gulati respond to the controversy?  Should they follow the English, call for a delay in the election, and refuse to vote unless the current situation is satisfactorily resolved?

Here are my pros and cons, and please vote in the poll below:

Yes, the U.S. should follow the English and publicly condemn FIFA

• The U.S. potentially has the biggest reason to be aggrieved by this corruption.  While the U.K. also lost out on a World Cup (2018), their vote was not even close.  The United States, with a few votes swung their way, would have won the contest for such a lucrative and important event.  If those votes were swayed illegally, then the U.S. has every right to be angry and should be a leader in trying to get to the bottom of the alleged corruption.
• A few months after the results were announced, speculation was rife on the Internet that if Qatar was not ready to host the World Cup by a certain date, the U.S. would be a very viable fall-back option.  Of course FIFA would do everything in its power to prevent their gamble from failing, so this was never a really viable option.  However, if these allegations are true and Qatar and its allies bought the World Cup, FIFA (assuming a change of heart) would want to distance itself from such corruption.  What better way to do that then to give the 2022 World Cup to an outspoken reform proponent – the U.S.  It’s a stretch, but it may be a gamble worth taking.
• An important factor to consider is FIFA’s sponsorship, the heart of their corporate enterprise.  Already, some of the sponsors like Coca-Cola and Visa has expressed discontent with the current process.  These are two American-based companies; if the U.S. came out publicly against current FIFA practices, then their threats may seem more legitimate and give both the corporations and the U.S. a stronger leverage point.
• What if FIFA falls?  Not in the literal sense, but what if the reformers win and a cleaning process begins in FIFA headquarters?  The U.S., by coming out now, can claim to be leaders with England and Scotland of the soccer reform movement.

No, the U.S. cannot afford to condemn FIFA and Sepp Blatter

• Right now, the big names calling for an election delay and reforms are England and Scotland.  England is despised by FIFA leadership right now due to their investigations that started the controversy, but England will always be the country that invented soccer.  As such, they will always be an important part of the soccer landscape.  The U.S. is still an upstart whose soccer league is at best the fourth most important sport in the country.  Coming out in front of the reform movement now could seriously harm any progress the U.S. has made in the international soccer community.  In short, gambling and winning may give a very good payoff, but gambling and losing would be a huge loss.
• It’s a moot point.  The FIFA elections will be held tomorrow, Blatter will be named president for a fourth term, and any consequences will take place quietly and in the future.  The U.S. cannot make an impact on the process, so why lose any future clout just to make a point that will go no where?

Happy New Year to all our readers and best wishes in 2011!

The past year was a big one for American soccer.  A good but not great World Cup run, a highlight goal from Landon Donovan, and the controversial rehiring of Bob Bradley after the World Cup.  A first MLS Cup win by Colorado, the signings of Rafa Marquez and Thierry Henry by New York, but maybe more importantly the rise of young players like Tim Ream, Teal Bunbury, Juan Agudelo, and Andy Najar.  The retirements of Jaime Moreno, Brian McBride, and Taylor Twellman as well as the reinvigorating of Kevin Hartman.

And 2011 looks to be another interesting year, with MLS well represented in the CONCACAF Champions League as well as welcoming two new teams into the league.  Will LA be able to finally turn their strong regular seasons into an MLS Cup?  Will the young superstars continue their development while a very strong Superdraft be able to contribute right away?  And will the Eastern Conference, especially a healthy New York team, be able to even the playing field with a stronger Western Conference?  At the national level, can Bob Bradley begin to turn his Gold Cup team into the beginning of the 2014 qualifying team?

We here at MLS Talk are always looking to improve the site and make it the premier destination for discussions about American soccer.  The Gaffer, Randy, Daniel, and all of the MLS Talk contributers all contribute great content to the site, but it is never good to stand pat at a website.  So I open the floor to you, our dedicated community:

What content do you want to see from the site in 2011?

As part of the EPL Talk Network, we are a part of a number of great sites that present many different features for different leagues.  For example, EPL Talk contributer Jesse Chula offers a “Player of the Week” every week while Niccolo Conte at Serie A Talk has a weekly “Five Things” column, among many other features.  What kinds of new content would you like to see on the site in 2011?  Share your thoughts in the comments section, and we look forward to a soccer-filled 2011!

The list of the 2011 Gold Cup sites was unveiled yesterday and there were two story lines coming out of the announcement: the number of venues that would be hosting their first Gold Cup matches and the number of cities that were inexplicably left off the list.

As a reminder or, if you are new to the sport, an explanation, the Gold Cup is the tournament where in 2011 the winner advances to the 2013 Confederations Cup.  It does not impact World Cup qualifying directly.  What a win in the 2011 Gold Cup does do is allow a team a series of matches against other federation champs in a World Cup-style format.  The United States used a great Confederations Cup run in 2009 (we beat Spain!) to create positive momentum for the 2010 World Cup.

The first round takes place June 5-14, and some of the venues are no-brainers to be on the list.  The Dallas Cowboys’ mammoth stadium will host the first match on June 5, and repeat hosts include Soldier Field (Chicago) and the Home Depot Center (Carson City).  The other four new hosts are Ford Field (Detroit), Raymond James Stadium (Tampa), KC Soccer Stadium (Kansas City), and Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte).  While Detroit and Tampa are huge media markets that make sense for international soccer, CONCACAF seems to be looking to build the culture in Charlotte and Kansas City, and I will be curious to see the crowds for the matches.

The quarterfinals will be held June 18 at the New Meadowlands Stadium and June 19 at RFK Stadium (Washington DC).  The semifinal matches will be held in Houston on June 22 and the final held in the Rose Bowl on June 25.  None of these sites are a surprise except for maybe Houston having the semifinal over the New Meadowlands.

What is a surprise may be the cities left out of this list.  Philadelphia and Foxborough, MA on the East Coast both have MLS teams but failed to get the nod.  Columbus, Denver, Salt Lake City, and San Jose are other MLS metropolitan areas that were not selected.  But the biggest shaft may have been the West Coast, which has two hosts both in California, and none in the Pacific Northwest.  Sounders fans will miss out on the opportunity to see Gold Cup matches next year.

The total list of sites is after the break, but what are your thoughts on which cities were selected and which were left off?  Should the West Coast or the Rockies gotten more matches?

2011 CONCACAF Gold Cup Schedule and Venues

First Round

June 5 – Cowboys Stadium (Arlington, TX)

June 6 – The Home Depot Center (Carson, CA)

June 7 – Ford Field (Detroit, MI)

June 9 – Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte, NC)

June 10 – FIU Stadium (Miami, FL)

June 11 – Raymond James Stadium (Tampa, FL)

June 12 – Soldier Field (Chicago, IL)

June 13 – Red Bull Arena (Harrison, NJ)

June 14 – KC Soccer Stadium (Kansas City, KS)

Quarterfinals

June 18 – New Meadowlands Stadium (East Rutherford, NJ)

June 19 – Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium (Washington DC)

Semifinals

June 22 – Reliant Stadium (Houston, TX)

Final

June 25 – Rose Bowl (Pasadena, CA)

A week after the US loss of the 2022 World Cup, much ink and internet type has been spilled on whether the U.S. deserved the bid or was robbed, whether we American soccer fans have a false sense of entitlement or a shady process overwhelmed everything, and even whether U.S. soccer is ok without the Cup or seriously set back.  Now is the perfect time for Sunil Gulati to come forward and address the issue, and lay the groundwork for the future of U.S. soccer.

Why now?  The federation needs to be dragged out of its grief cycle and begin to focus on the future.  Gulati needs to reassert his leadership and, most importantly, show FIFA and the world that U.S. soccer is a mature organization dedicated to working toward the future together with FIFA.  So if I were in the USSF press office, I would have my organization president hold a press conference, and at this press conference have him deliver the following speech:

Thank you everyone for assembling here today.  I would like to discuss in a formal way the 2022 World Cup bidding process and the subsequent awarding of the World Cup to Qatar.  I have spoken to many of you on the record in a variety of formats, but I felt it was important to not only make a formal statement before everyone, but to address the future of U.S. soccer.

First, I would like to congratulate Qatar on winning the World Cup bid.  After viewing their presentation and their grand ideas for the event, I feel that a worthy location has been chosen.  Their progressive and forward-thinking ideas for building state-of-the-art stadiums that can then be donated to less fortunate countries were excellent and the kind of innovation that sometimes we think only America is capable of doing.  The nation, which will host the 2011 AFC Asian Cup, deserves to host the world in 2022.

In a larger sense, I would like to commend FIFA for having the foresight to place the World Cup in the Middle East.  Civilization began on the bank of the Mesopotamia, and the fact that the region has never hosted a World Cup is unfortunate, a wrong that we will right in twelve years.  I do not want to delve into politics, which has little place in soccer, but too often Western contribution to the region has been warfare and weaponry.  This time, we will bring peace and unity, the kind I know the region will welcome.

I’d be remiss if I did not mention the rumors of corruption in the bid process and its impact on the Qatari selection.  Having seen no evidence of collusion or foul play with the selection, I wholeheartedly reject any notion that the selection was compromised.  To assume based on innuendo would be a disservice to our Qatari friends.  FIFA took action on the delegates that were accused of wrong doing, and without concrete evidence of other wrong doing I refuse to give credence to any other rumors.

That said, the FIFA selection process for too long has been cloaked in unnecessary secrecy and confusion, the kind that allows these type of rumors to exist.  I offer USSF and CONCACAF’s assistance to Mr. Blatter and the FIFA Executive Committee in reforming the selection process for two reasons.  First, at the end of the bid process, we all want there to be no doubt that the World Cup was fairly awarded.  Secondly, there is too much money wasted in the bid process.  England spent £15 million on their bid, money the country could have used elsewhere, only to garner two votes.  FIFA should be upfront as to the criteria and selection thought process to allow countries to spend their money wisely and economically in selling their country as a possible site.

Now, as for the future of U.S. soccer, we will place a bid for the 2026 World Cup, assuming FIFA rules make us eligible.  Instead of our past emphasis on being “soccer ready” and how much money an American World Cup will make (and it will make money), our slogan will be “one world, one nation.”  Our bid will emphasize the fact that Americans come from all over the globe and root for many different national teams, and our borders contain a microcosm of the world.  What better way to celebrate the world’s game than by holding it in a place where the world is represented, and can easily visit.  In fact, the U.S. is willing to make the 2026 World Cup more international by holding one match in the group stage in Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean each (3 total matches outside the US), to allow our neighbors to benefit from the World Cup while still leaving the logistics and cost to us.

Finally, I will address the U.S. men’s national team.  There had been discussion that a U.S. World Cup in 2022 would allow the USSF to have an “end date” for the American soccer building project.  This discussion is a valid one, and I am announcing here today that USSF still has 2022 as the end date for a new building project: The American World Cup Project.  Our goal is to have the U.S. be a serious contender for the 2022 World Cup, even though it will not be held in America.  Instead, we plan to make the Qatar World Cup ours in everything but location.  We will build the USSF infrastructure as if we were hosting the event (which means new training grounds for many clubs) and make every decision with 2022 in mind.  This does not mean we will not compete in 2014 and 2018, but we realize the fallacy of the old 2010 project and pledge to put everything into a competitive 2022 team (and beyond).  Will it be easy? No, but the last year has taught us America can be a soccer power if we set our minds to it, and I pledge to do that today.

Thank you, and I will now take questions.

In the wake of Thursday’s loss to Qatar in maybe the only place U.S. soccer can lose to them (the FIFA boardroom), many American soccer fans tried to rally their spirits by immediately turning their focus to the 2026 World Cup process.  An initial glance at the state of play right now for the World Cup suggests 2026 could be an even better opportunity for a United States World Cup than 2022.

CONCACAF would be long overdue to host the event (the last one being 1994) and by FIFA rules Europe and Asia would be ineligible to host.  South American would be unlikely because FIFA would probably want the 2030 World Cup in Uruguay/Argentina to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the tournament.  And out of North America, Oceania, and Africa the U.S. bid would look very promisingly, especially since it would then have been 32 years since the last American World Cup.

But upon further reflection a U.S. 2026 bid is in no way a slam dunk, despite our advantages.  Here are the top five reasons to not get your hopes too high about the 2026 bid:

1.  China – Yes, FIFA rules prohibit a federation from hosting consecutive World Cups, so China could not follow Qatar.  However, FIFA could change them between now and the next bid process if the right situation presents itself.  Chinese interest in a World Cup checks many of the boxes for FIFA: guaranteed profit, an infrastructure perfect for hosting such an event, a growing (or by 2026 grown) soccer market, and government assurances for a successful event.  Imagine the best of the U.S., Australia and Qatar bids, and you have China.  Such a cash cow might be hard to turn down.

2.  Canada – Mexico would be a prime place for a World Cup, but they have already hosted twice.  Canada, however, would be a compelling location for a World Cup and a perfect foil to a U.S. bid.  Again, Canada is a rich nation that has hosted Olympics in the past.  Soccer exists and has support, but a World Cup could really push its growth in the country.  The women’s team is already good.  If the Canadian team makes progress over the next few cycles, then Canada becomes a very attractive first-time bid.

3.  A first-time African nation bid - South Africa plus Qatar equals a dream scenario for FIFA.  Right now it’s hard to find a stable enough African country that’s not South Africa to be a really strong contender for a World Cup.  It is a long time between 2010 and the bid process, however, and there are a bunch of countries that could be viable for the next cycle.

4.  Map changes – There are some odd anomalies in the soccer federations.  Some, like Israel, are for cultural and geopolitical reasons while some (like Australia) are for competitive reasons.  The point is that the federations can be changed for a variety of reasons.  Why is this a factor?  Say FIFA reconsiders and decides Oceania needs to be beefed up as a federation; they put Australia back in Oceania.  Now Australia is eligible for the 2026 World Cup without a rules change.  Or what if India or the Middle Eastern nations show vast improvement prior to the 2018 World Cup, in anticipation of Qatar in 2022?  Would it make sense to add Japan and Australia to Oceania (since they are both Pacific islands)? Or maybe split Asia and merge half of it with Oceania?  All of these are unlikely scenarios, but a map change over the next five to ten years could damage another U.S. bid., especially if FIFA wants to give a World Cup to Australia or Japan.

5.  New Zealand or a CONCACAF island – Laugh all you want, but if a nation as small as Qatar can win why not New Zealand?  This is the same country that almost advanced from group stage in this year’s World Cup, although they did qualify against weaker competition.  Oceania has never had a World Cup and it would be a landmark event, something the Executive Committee obviously likes in a bid.  It has beautiful scenery and is economically advanced.  What about a more-open Cuba?  What a great way to show its reemergence to the international stage with a World Cup, either solo or jointly.  Is this reason so hard to believe?  Yes, both New Zealand and Cuba are odd choices, but they are both larger in land size and population by far than the 2022 host.

Once again, MLS executives prove they are not in tune with their product.  The Gold Cup provided the perfect opportunity for MLS to expand their fan base.  Collaboration with CONCACAF representatives could have brought doubleheaders featuring one MLS game and one Gold Cup game from the first game through to the final (This year’s format does provide doubleheaders, two Gold Cup games/one stadium, except for the final).  

A collaboration among organizations would have allowed for more stadiums to get an opportunity to host the Gold Cup, which in turn, allows more people overall to see live soccer action.  By spreading the wealth, Soccer gets more promotion and more exposure.

What this would have accomplished is good for both CONCACAF and for MLS.  By having an MLS game take place for fans who might not be familiar with the MLS product, there is a possibility of enhancing the significance of the CONCACAF Champions League.  Fans of different heritage would get the chance to see teams which may play in the Champions League.   

MLS would  have benefited by getting their product to their easiest fans to win over, soccer fans.  A game between Guadeloupe and Nicaragua in Reliant Stadium on the 9th of July with an MLS game as part of the attraction is a marketing wet dream for the Houston Dynamo.  

The biggest dilemma for the organizers of these events would have been which game becomes the headliner.  This is a problem you want to have.  Some may argue the MLS game may have more broad appeal than the Gold Cup game or visa versa.  Regardless, there are still two games to be played and to be enjoyed for fans. 

There’s also the possibility of marketing to the sports fan and getting them more heavily involved.  With 2 games to see, there’s a stronger likelihood they’ll see a great game and be pulled in more to soccer as an entertainment option.  (International doubleheaders tend to attract a specific audience already familiar with Soccer). 

Scheduling MLS games could have been made easier by getting all the teams involved during this 3 week period of 25 matches.  They could have scheduled just 25 MLS matches during this time. 

Among the 25 matches to be slotted to accompany Gold Cup matches, another brand could also fill the void.  With sufficient planning and anticipation from U.S. Soccer and CONCACAF, some U.S. Open Cup matches could have been included. 

It’s dissappointing this is not transpiring because it would have made for great theater and discussion for soccer fans.  It also seems that this idea would have garnered more national attention from ESPN.

The inaugural CONCACAF Champions League is now over after a short delay, due to swine flu. Atlante are the first evcer CCL Champions, and will be the region’s representative at this year’s FIFA Club World Cup. This was the club’s second continental title(first in Cancun), after winning the Champions Cup in 1983.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the event. Sure, it doesn’t come close to UEFA or CONMEBOL in the level of play or grandeur. However, it’s OUR region’s championship. It’s only gonna mean something if people care about it. I’ve heard that certain teams, especially Mexican and MLS teams didn’t take it seriously.

On the Mexican perspective, perhaps there was disinterest because of the level of competition. I don’t know if this is the case. Certainly the FMF as a whole is the best league in CONCACAF. While the Costa Rican league as a whole doesn’t match up with FMF, their top teams have the ability to compete with any Mexican club; as they have proven in past Champions Cups. Even if some FMF teams weren’t starting all their first squad, they still had 3 of 4 teams make the semifinals. Only Pumas didn’t make this round, and they were eliminated by fellow FMF club Cruz Azul, in the quarterfinals. Also, 3 of 4 were atop the tables in group play. Only Cruz Azul was bested there, by Honduran power Marathon. While, this isn’t a true barometer of the club’s ambition in this competition, it doesn’t exactly shout disinterest.

As for the MLS perspective, it was very disappointing. Sure, the same old script played out between Mexican and US based clubs. But even more disturbing was the way NE Revolution and Chivas USA were eliminated in the preliminary round. Joe Public of Trinidad absolutely hammered New England, winning 6 – 1 on aggregate, including a disgraceful 4 – 0 drubbing in New England. And Chivas USA didn’t put up much of a fight against FC Tauro of Panama (1-3 agg). Injuries did play a significant role, especially for DC United. Though consistently fielding what amounted to reserve teams and being in the so called group of death; only gaining 1 point in group play is an extreme letdown.

If anything, the onus is on MLS to field better squads and achieve more satisfying results. Certainly having an MLS team win the regional championship for the first time since 1998, would make it more interesting here in the States. And might make the title more meaningful to FMF clubs.

The new born tournament wasn’t without excitement and some great cindarella stories. Marathon went through the preliminary round, won their group and played in the quarterfinals. Both qualified USL – 1 teams made it to the last eight. It would have been two if not for yet another tragic last minute defeat to a Mexican club, as Impact imploded against Santos Laguna. Though the match displayed some sloppy defense, it was genuinely exciting.

And of course, Puerto Rico Islanders were the story of the tournament. They qualified by defeating San Juan Jabloteh of T & T,finishing 3rd in the CFU Club Championship. They went on to defeat Costa Rican legend CD Alajuelense. Then advanced out of their group, including a 3 – 1 victory over Santos Laguna at home. Colin Clark’s squad took care of Marathon in the quarterfinals and came oh so close to advancing to the finals. They lost in the semis to Cruz Azul. The match went to extra time. Both teams struck home in the added periods. Though Puerto Rico had scored more away goals; in the CCL, they don’t matter after regulation. With this rule, it was decided on Penalties, which Cruz Azul won 4 – 2.

Considering it was a first effort in the expanded preliminary and group stage format, it seemed a good start. While there were matches that were so lopsided as to be unwatchable, there were also several entertaining gems. At times, many stadiums seemed virtually empty, but these were on weekdays. Qualification is already underway for the second CCL.

2009/2010 CCL Qualified Teams

US: Columbus Crew, Houston Dynamo, DC United NY Red Bulls

Mexico: Toluca, Cruz Azul (2 spots open)

Canada: (1 spot open)

Hounduras: Marthon, Real Espana, Olimpia

Costa Rica: Deportivo Saprissa, (1 spot open)

El Salvador: Isidro Metapan, (1 spot open)

Guatemala: Comunicaiones, (1 spot open)

Panama: Arabe Unido, (1 spot open)

Nicaragua: (1 spot open)

CFU: W Connection (T&T), Puerto Rico Islanders (PR – USL1), San Juan Jabloteh (T&T)

So we already know 16 out of the 24 participating clubs. With the Central American seasons coming to a close, the rest of the field should fill out shortly. Many of the teams will be entering for the second year in a row, but there are several new faces.  Belize has been taken off the docket for this competition, because of poor stadium conditions.  For now, this spot has been awarded to Honduras, giving them 3 teams.

The Nutrilite Canadian Championship is already underway, with Toronto FC posting a pair of 1 – 0 victories over their USL1 counterparts. The CFU Championship just finished, with W Connection defeating Puerto Rico in the finals, both advancing. San Juan Jabloteh dispatched Haitian side Tempete FC, to claim the 3rd and final Caribbean spot.

There has been some talk about reallocating an MLS spot.  I personally don’t see this as necessary.  If you look at the quarterfinals, there was 4 Mexican teams, 1 MLS team, 2 USL1 teams and a Honduran club.   Honduras has already been taken care of.  Mexico has 4 spots and the US based leagues had 3.  The only scenario that seems to make sense, would be either granting the FMF one MLS slot, or having a playoff between these leagues for the final position. Personally, I think 4 is enough for FMF, after all this is a CONCACAF competition.  With 3 semifinalits, any more would make it seem like a Mexican tournament.

The preliminary round is set to begin in late July, with the group stage kicking off towards the end of August. Hopefully the CCL will only continue to grow and be sought after passionately by all CONCACAF teams. Let’s hope for a little more diversity in the final four teams. UEFA constantly has an influx of English teams at the end, it’s appearing like CONCACAF may be no different with Mexican squads.