Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Copa de Europa, EURO

Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:17 pm
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:17 pm
Some things should be sacred, this is definitely one of them.

Expansion will kill this shite. 24 sides are too much.

Pretty soon, advertisers will be bitching about the Nielsens, because nobody is tuning in until the round of eight.

This tournament is super intense, always has been, it is superior to the WC in viewing pleasure precisely because the field is so reduced.

This is a bad, bad decision, all made in the name of the almighty pasta unit (currently denominated Euro).

Some things should be sacred, this is definitely one of them.
Posted by Keys Open Doors
In hiding with Tupac & XXXTentacion
Member since Dec 2008
33034 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:20 pm to
Going from 8 to 16 in 1996 was the right decision. So was expanding the World Cup field to 32 in 1998.

Expanding the Euro to 24 teams is awful. There are only 15 or so teams worth watching. This dilutes the Euro and the qualifiers.
Posted by Draconian Sanctions
Markey's bar
Member since Oct 2008
88509 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:21 pm to
Just wait till they expand the Champions League to 64 teams
This post was edited on 6/15/12 at 8:22 pm
Posted by BraveTiger225
Atlanta, GA
Member since May 2008
17662 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:23 pm to
4-team playoff. Make it happen.
Posted by WarSlamEagle
Manchester United Fan
Member since Sep 2011
24611 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:27 pm to
68 team field, with the preliminary rounds on TruTV.
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:43 pm to
quote:

the qualifiers.

I don't think so, the clubs aren't going to want more international dates for their players, they'll probably just up the number of sides taken from each qualifying group, or make more groups with less sides per group (in the end, the same exposure to injury, which is what the clubs worry about).
Posted by IAmTheHatOnMilesHead
Team 31™
Member since Nov 2008
25971 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 8:58 pm to
quote:

Some things should be sacred, this is definitely one of them.

Expansion will kill this shite. 24 sides are too much.

Pretty soon, advertisers will be bitching about the Nielsens, because nobody is tuning in until the round of eight.

This tournament is super intense, always has been, it is superior to the WC in viewing pleasure precisely because the field is so reduced.

This is a bad, bad decision, all made in the name of the almighty pasta unit (currently denominated Euro).

Some things should be sacred, this is definitely one of them.


Agreed ... the field is perfect as is. 24 will be awful. I can't fap to this.
Posted by Crede15
Member since Jun 2009
17251 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:37 pm to
A bit of an overreaction, it would still be a great tournament that we'd all watch, but I agree that it's a bad move. It's great that it's a smaller tournament with all (relatively) quality teams.
This post was edited on 6/15/12 at 10:38 pm
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:38 pm to
quote:

A bit of an overreaction

would be a MAJOR watering down
Posted by Crede15
Member since Jun 2009
17251 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:40 pm to
I agree, I'm totally against it, but it wouldn't kill it (even if that's hyperbole), it would still be a great tournament, albeit a lesser one.
This post was edited on 6/15/12 at 10:41 pm
Posted by BraveTiger225
Atlanta, GA
Member since May 2008
17662 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:41 pm to
The following would have (hypothetically) qualified in 2012:

Montenegro
Estonia
Armenia (possibly)
Hungary

Etc.etc.

Gross.
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:42 pm to
quote:

it would still be a great tournament, albeit a lesser one.

exactly, how do you sell a WC equivalent which is only regional in scope?
Posted by Crede15
Member since Jun 2009
17251 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:46 pm to
We'd still watch and it would still be great, just not as great. The group stages would be less interesting, but you'd still get some great group games, and some amazing quarters/semifinals.

I'm worried about a college football playoff for similar reasons. 4 teams is fine, but how often have you seen playoffs that didn't evolve and grow into larger ones? It will be 8 at some point and then who knows.
Posted by flvelo12
Palm Harbor, Florida
Member since Jan 2012
3623 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:50 pm to
quote:

it would still be a great tournament, albeit a lesser one.


Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:51 pm to
I agree, further on with the hijack, four teams are too little a number.
Posted by WarSlamEagle
Manchester United Fan
Member since Sep 2011
24611 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 10:54 pm to
quote:

I'm worried about a college football playoff for similar reasons. 4 teams is fine, but how often have you seen playoffs that didn't evolve and grow into larger ones? It will be 8 at some point and then who knows.

Wow. Haven't thought of it like that. Posted that on the SECr before?
Posted by Bho
Lexington
Member since Dec 2007
24814 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 11:18 pm to
They are perfect with 16, 24 is too much. These groups are all tight right now. Wouldn't be the same.
Posted by Dandy Lion
Member since Feb 2010
51416 posts
Posted on 6/15/12 at 11:20 pm to
tight
is
good
Posted by Jumbeauxlaya
LSU
Member since Jan 2011
18083 posts
Posted on 6/16/12 at 9:06 am to
quote:

I'm worried about a college football playoff for similar reasons. 4 teams is fine, but how often have you seen playoffs that didn't evolve and grow into larger ones? It will be 8 at some point and then who knows.


The college tournament is already basically eight if you take conference championships into account
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram