PDA

View Full Version : Euros - increase to 32 teams?



Diclonius
27-06-2016, 05:49 PM
Despite the odd nature of qualification for the round of 16, the new setup has been a success - not only have we had "smaller" teams in it but they've done very well (Wales, N. Ireland, Iceland etc).

Given this, I'd advocate a step up to a 32 team tournament as soon as possible. UEFA is by far the strongest member organisation so the quality wouldn't falter, and the eight group first round would remove the odd 3rd place qualifying mechanic.

Plus, we might just scrape qualification ourselves..

H18 SFR
27-06-2016, 06:10 PM
Despite the odd nature of qualification for the round of 16, the new setup has been a success - not only have we had "smaller" teams in it but they've done very well (Wales, N. Ireland, Iceland etc).

Given this, I'd advocate a step up to a 32 team tournament as soon as possible. UEFA is by far the strongest member organisation so the quality wouldn't falter, and the eight group first round would remove the odd 3rd place qualifying mechanic.

Plus, we might just scrape qualification ourselves..


Success? It has been a snoozefest and will be remembered for that reason.

Diclonius
27-06-2016, 06:13 PM
Success? It has been a snoozefest and will be remembered for that reason.

That isn't an indicative of the quality - I would wager that the average quality of the 32 qualifiers for most WCs will be on par with 32 that qualify for the Euros.

It's more an indictment of modern football "don't lost at all costs" tactics.

jgl07
27-06-2016, 06:14 PM
UEFA has 55 members if you include Gibraltar and Kosovo who haven't a stadium to stage home matches and Liechtenstein who do not run a domestic league. There are other microstates such as San Marino, Andorra, etc.

Expansion to 32 teams would make the qualifiers a farce unless, for example, the top 20 countries were seeded through to the finals and the other 35 battled it out for the remaining 12 places.

Of the current top 20 ranked teams (2015 Rankings) only two - Holland and Bosnia - failed to make it to France. The lowest ranked team to qualify were Northern Ireland at 33.

It would declutter the international fixture list for some teams. Not Scotland at the stage!

Pete
27-06-2016, 06:22 PM
Have a few more tournaments with this format and then let's see. Any less is maybe a backwards step and any more would be mental.

Carheenlea
27-06-2016, 06:28 PM
I've watched the odd game, and all that has really done is confirm my fears that I am not really a big football fan anymore. Just can't get interested enough watching games that don't involve Hibs. Will watch England tonight but I know I'll spend most of the game reading posts on Hibs.net. A 32 team tournament sounds like torture, even if Scotland managed to qualify!

Steve20
27-06-2016, 06:28 PM
Should have stayed at 16. This tournament has been awful.

Billy Whizz
27-06-2016, 06:30 PM
We'd be playing all summer with 32 teams

RoxburghHibs
27-06-2016, 06:36 PM
Despite the odd nature of qualification for the round of 16, the new setup has been a success - not only have we had "smaller" teams in it but they've done very well (Wales, N. Ireland, Iceland etc).

Given this, I'd advocate a step up to a 32 team tournament as soon as possible. UEFA is by far the strongest member organisation so the quality wouldn't falter, and the eight group first round would remove the odd 3rd place qualifying mechanic.

Plus, we might just scrape qualification ourselves..

Can't agree I'm afraid.

Too easy for the big teams to qualify - just needed 3 points - so too many negative group games.

Getting better in the knock out stages but has to go back to 16 next time.

jgl07
27-06-2016, 06:41 PM
We'd be playing all summer with 32 teams
It will be exactly the same as for 24 teams. Two extra groups running in parallel with only the top two qualifying for the knock out rounds.

number9dream
27-06-2016, 06:42 PM
Should have stayed at 16. This tournament has been awful.

The group stage was pretty dreadful (Poland - Germany a case in point) but it's already been agreed to stick with 24 for 2020, with some of the games in Glasgow.

I'd like to see it go back to 16 but smaller nations will be dead against it, as will sponsors & TV companies.

There's talk of expanding the World Cup to 40, which is a nonsense!

Onion
27-06-2016, 06:58 PM
Success? It has been a snoozefest and will be remembered for that reason.

:agree: Most of the games have been instantly forgettable.

Andy74
27-06-2016, 07:00 PM
Should have stayed at 16. This tournament has been awful.

Yep. It made the group stages largely pointless. Too many teams going through. No real drama in third round of games.

KWJ
27-06-2016, 07:03 PM
:agree: Most of the games have been instantly forgettable.

Think that's the case at all big tournaments though.

I reckon they need to change the group stage a bit, maybe bigger groups or even less teams qualifying and going straight to the quarter finals.

ballengeich
27-06-2016, 07:09 PM
I'd like the European finals to go back to 8 teams and the World Cup to 16. The serious contenders have largely been coasting in the sections to save themselves for the later games. Some of the less able teams have put up a good fight, but have only been of real interest to their own supporters.

Italy v Spain earlier this evening was superb. With fewer entrants and more games like that the tournament would be a real showcase.

majorhibs
27-06-2016, 07:22 PM
England 1 Iceland 2 tournies coastin for me. Really like bigger formats. Worlds got much much mair competitive countries nowadays, & since when can ye have too much football?

jgl07
27-06-2016, 07:29 PM
[QUOTE=RagingReality;4744090]Despite the odd nature of qualification for the round of 16, the new setup has been a success - not only have we had "smaller" teams in it but they've done very well (Wales, N. Ireland, Iceland etc.).
QUOTE]
The qualification of Northern Ireland, Wales, Iceland and, for that matter, Albania was nothing to do with the expansion of the tournament. Northern Ireland won their and would have been in a 16 team tournament. Wales, Iceland, and Albania were runners up so would most likely have qualified.

I think it should either expand to 32 teams or revert to 16.

KWJ
27-06-2016, 07:44 PM
I'd like the European finals to go back to 8 teams and the World Cup to 16. The serious contenders have largely been coasting in the sections to save themselves for the later games. Some of the less able teams have put up a good fight, but have only been of real interest to their own supporters.

Italy v Spain earlier this evening was superb. With fewer entrants and more games like that the tournament would be a real showcase.

The same Spain who didn't make it out of the World Cup group stage 2 years ago?

Do you never want to see Scotland qualify again? :greengrin

(((Fergus)))
27-06-2016, 07:58 PM
Would it be possible to bin the qualifiers as they stand and create a league system with promotion and relegation, say six teams in each, then you take the top four leagues to the summer cup championship every four years? The leagues that don't qualify for the Euros could maybe have a tournament too, maybe in the same country, maybe elsewhere. Stagger the dates so the lesser tournament is in the knockout stage (with lots of rest days) while the main tournament is in the groups. Thoughts?

ballengeich
27-06-2016, 08:02 PM
The same Spain who didn't make it out of the World Cup group stage 2 years ago?

Do you never want to see Scotland qualify again? :greengrin

Why shouldn't we make it? I went to the finals in Sweden in 1992 - 8 teams so every game meant something and I've great memories of the whole holiday (what I can remember of it:greengrin).

I just feel that too many of the early games are little more than glorified friendlies, as the best teams are saving themselves for the later stages.

The_Exile
27-06-2016, 08:20 PM
32 team straight knockout without groups and you've sold it to me!

majorhibs
27-06-2016, 08:53 PM
How good is it watchin the engloid anti euoropeans departing the euros fi Iceland? This yins got miles & miles tae run!

gogsy23
27-06-2016, 09:23 PM
No thanks 3 teams from a 4 team group made the group stages very boring for me.

allezsauzee
27-06-2016, 09:39 PM
I'd prefer it went back to 8 teams but it's never going to happen.

MKHIBEE
27-06-2016, 09:59 PM
Make it 20 teams, 4 groups of 5 with only the winning teams going on to the semi finals

Michael
27-06-2016, 10:02 PM
I'd prefer it went back to 8 teams but it's never going to happen.

It happened tonight!

Nutmegged
27-06-2016, 10:26 PM
Make it 20 teams, 4 groups of 5 with only the winning teams going on to the semi finals

Meaningless games galore

Speedy
27-06-2016, 10:34 PM
UEFA has 55 members if you include Gibraltar and Kosovo who haven't a stadium to stage home matches and Liechtenstein who do not run a domestic league. There are other microstates such as San Marino, Andorra, etc.

Expansion to 32 teams would make the qualifiers a farce unless, for example, the top 20 countries were seeded through to the finals and the other 35 battled it out for the remaining 12 places.

Of the current top 20 ranked teams (2015 Rankings) only two - Holland and Bosnia - failed to make it to France. The lowest ranked team to qualify were Northern Ireland at 33.

It would declutter the international fixture list for some teams. Not Scotland at the stage!

Were they 33rd at the start or end of qualifying?

If it's that the end then they probably climbed a good few places as a result of qualifying.

Geo_1875
28-06-2016, 08:57 AM
Lopsided qualifying from the groups really spoiled it for me. Any competition where a team has played all their games and don't know if they are in or out is too contrived.

If they must have 24 teams why not play 4 groups of 6 with 8 or 16 going through.

MacBean
28-06-2016, 09:36 AM
Think theres a difference between this year's format and having 32 teams.
This year teams knew if they got 3 point there was a big chance of them making it through to the knockout stages, hence why you had really cagey matches in the group stages.
If it was a 32 team tournament with only 2 teams going through in each group then teams would need to be more expansive in every game rather than holding out for a point.

jacomo
28-06-2016, 09:47 AM
Can't agree I'm afraid.

Too easy for the big teams to qualify - just needed 3 points - so too many negative group games.

Getting better in the knock out stages but has to go back to 16 next time.

I think the biggest problem has been allowing a number of third place teams in each group to qualify.

If it was 32 and only the top two teams from each group progress (as in the WC), it would be more competitive.

Phil MaGlass
28-06-2016, 10:25 AM
worst championships I have ever seen, and I have only seem a few games, the quality is very very poor, too many teams.

patlowe
28-06-2016, 12:58 PM
Can't agree I'm afraid.

Too easy for the big teams to qualify - just needed 3 points - so too many negative group games.

Getting better in the knock out stages but has to go back to 16 next time.

I may be wrong but I think that's not too far away from the OP's point. It's been fun seeing new countries compete at this level but the format encouraged negative tactics in group stage and IMO is nowhere near as 'clean' as the previous format. A 32 team setup would solve that problem in terms of the arithmetic - whether it risks diluting the quality is another question...depends what you want from a major international tournament I guess.

Future17
28-06-2016, 01:07 PM
Why shouldn't we make it? I went to the finals in Sweden in 1992 - 8 teams so every game meant something and I've great memories of the whole holiday (what I can remember of it:greengrin).

I just feel that too many of the early games are little more than glorified friendlies, as the best teams are saving themselves for the later stages.

You mean except the last two games in our group - as the qualifiers had already been decided by that time.

ScottB
28-06-2016, 02:27 PM
I believe it's 24 rather than 32 because FIFA didn't want the tournament being as big as the World Cup...

G B Young
28-06-2016, 03:35 PM
Increase the number of teams?? They should REDUCE it down to eight teams as it was until the nineties. I gave up watching last week as the quality has been dismal. Beggars belief that Scotland still can't qualify for a major tournament when you witness the mediocrity on show.

Finn2015
28-06-2016, 03:38 PM
Increase the number of teams?? They should REDUCE it down to eight teams as it was until the nineties. I gave up watching last week as the quality has been dismal. Beggars belief that Scotland still can't qualify for a major tournament when you witness the mediocrity on show.

Yip and while attendance figures look to have been great for this competition it feels a long, drawn out completion and tbh, I'm looking forward to ending and the football season drawing ever nearer

Keith_M
28-06-2016, 05:21 PM
For me, 16 teams is about the right amount. and means you don't have the nonsense of some of the 3rd placed teams qualifying and some not.


I can understand why 8 teams is no longer enough, given the number of new nations that have joined UEFA in the past 20+ years. Conversely, 32 sides would just be stupid and the tournament would go on for ever. 4 weeks is already crazy.

lugz
28-06-2016, 05:46 PM
32 teams straight knockout, names in a hat none of this seeding nonsense. :aok: