Euro 2016 Thread

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Isn't the point of the article that the problem is the format, not the teams? Which btw many have been complaining about on here since day 1.

It isn't that they let in minnows, it is that there is no push to win because so many teams make it to the knockout round, you just have to avoid being the worst, not worry about trying to be the best.

I can't think of a great way to make 24 work without increasing the number of group games, which in itself means teams either play too often or the tourney takes too long. Or by giving top teams a by to the QF which is problematic because then they may have as much as 7-10 days off.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Isn't the point of the article that the problem is the format, not the teams? Which btw many have been complaining about on here since day 1.

It isn't that they let in minnows, it is that there is no push to win because so many teams make it to the knockout round, you just have to avoid being the worst, not worry about trying to be the best.

I can't think of a great way to make 24 work without increasing the number of group games, which in itself means teams either play too often or the tourney takes too long. Or by giving top teams a by to the QF which is problematic because then they may have as much as 7-10 days off.

And that the teams that you'd give a bye to are the teams that generate the most revenue and that everyone pays their money to see.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Very true.

At the end of the day, the format does reward some teams who have not performed their best to make the knockout round, but it is the best format for 24 teams. Only having 16 or 32 teams fixes that.

My only beef is I don't like how they determined which groups get to play 3rd place teams. They need to rethink that. I mean, maybe the fact that every good team in the tourney save for a couple ended up on one side of the bracket was just bad luck. If England and Spain won their groups as expected it would look different. Still a bit loaded on the one side but not as bad.

[SuperMatt18]

If you really want to go with 24 teams you could take a bit of a crazy approach.

Go with 8 groups of 3 teams in each group. Only the top team in each group makes it to the quarterfinals.

The group stage games would be crazy since each team is only playing two games and a loss pretty much mean you are eliminated. Can't play for two ties either since it will only take one team to win to eliminate you then. Potential for some crazy goal differential scenarios on the final match day too.

Probably doesn't work that way but I would kind of be interested to see it.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

If you really want to go with 24 teams you could take a bit of a crazy approach.

Go with 8 groups of 3 teams in each group. Only the top team in each group makes it to the quarterfinals.

The group stage games would be crazy since each team is only playing two games.

You want to reward the teams that make the tournament with some games and give the fans a reason to show up for as long as possible.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Itse

You want to reward the teams that make the tournament with some games and give the fans a reason to show up for as long as possible.

Yeah I already think it is pushing it that teams play 10 or 12 qualification games over 2 years, only to show up to the tournament and be eliminated in 4 days with b2b losses.

[GirlySports]

the format is fine, they been using it for every 24-team tournament since it was introduced at Mexico 86. Every tournament U23, U20, U17, Women's World Cup in Canada last year.

[SuperMatt18]

Really if they just want to expand the tournament they should just go to 32 then and run it like the world cup - IMO the whole 3rd place qualifier thing makes no sense.

Only issues is that UEFA would hate that since it ruins the whole qualifying tournament if 32 of the 53 national teams in qualifying make it to the tournament.

The teams are there though.

Netherlands
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Slovenia
Denmark
Norway
Greece
Serbia
Bulgaria
Finland
Scotland
Belarus

Can easily add 8 of those teams and it likely doesn't hurt the overall quality of this tournament.

[GirlySports]

you might as well have a 53 team tournament then

[Cecil Terwilliger]

As per this article from earlier in the thread:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/290626039...Group-E-effect

Group E is the worst and has a mathematical disadvantage. A/B/C are the best and have the most advantage; D,F are 2nd best because they have advantage over E but not as much as A/B/C.

Also, as per the article, the only real way to fix it is to re-seed after group stages but this results in unpredictability of who plays where in the round of 16 which is bad for fans traveling and would cause a lot of chaos and hard to plan trips.

Bottom line is that the group draw shouldn't have so much of an effect on your chances of winning, considering that the groups are determined by bribery...er I mean random draw.

[GirlySports]

but for 3rd placed teams, DEF play after ABC so they know what they need. This really hurt Albania having to play first.

On the last day they even have E play after F (a slight advantage)

There have been 4 major tournaments played in this format (86, 90, 94 World Cup and 2016 Euros)
3 teams from E made it every time

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

but for 3rd placed teams, DEF play after ABC so they know what they need. This really hurt Albania having to play first.

On the last day they even have E play after F (a slight advantage)

There have been 4 major tournaments played in this format (86, 90, 94 World Cup and 2015 Euros)
3 teams from E made it every time

Huh. Good point.

The article doesn't really account for that as far as I can tell, only who the knockout opponents are and how they are determined.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Huh. Good point.

The article doesn't really account for that as far as I can tell, only who the knockout opponents are and how they are determined.

Cause the article doesn't research as well as we do!

Group F has had 3 teams make it all 4 times too (i know it's a small sample size)

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Locke

On those points we can agree.

I just find that its been lacking in quality. And thats the last I'll say about it. Knockout rounds now.

a lot of the 'smaller' teams qualified on their own under the old format

Wales finished 2nd in the group

Czech/Iceland finished ahead of the dutch

Albania finished ahead of Denmark and Serbia

plus the qualifying was really entertaining this round

[VladtheImpaler]

As Locke and I concluded at the buffet - go to 32 - this tournament needs more Belorussia.
You watch all the games, but you are still left with that nagging feeling - if only the Belorussians had been here...

[GirlySports]

Rahim Sterling could not vote in the UK referendum today because he could not put a cross in the box

/i'll show myself out

[Locke]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

As Locke and I concluded at the buffet - go to 32 - this tournament needs more Belorussia.
You watch all the games, but you are still left with that nagging feeling - if only the Belorussians had been here...

A tournament without Belarus is a tournament not worth watching.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Rahim Sterling could not vote in the UK referendum today because he could not put a cross in the box

/i'll show myself out

He's not even the worst performing Sterling in England right now

/sorrybrits

[polak]

Someone needs to show the Polish team where the goal is on the map.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by polak

Someone needs to show the Polish team where the goal is on the map.

Milik mostly. Blastguyowski puts it in on his first try.

Poland looking good overall, as expected. Also nice to have some decent football weather for a change.