|
||||||||
Should the euros be expanded / shrunk |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 8,723
|
I'm not sure about Slovakia, yes they played for what they had to but they're currently the highest of the 3rd place finishers.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 767
|
Quote:
Back to 16 will never happen so I'm coming round to the idea of going to 32 as anything is better than this awful format with 24 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Kingdom of Arnor
Posts: 78,227
|
I'll throw an idea in - why even have a group stage?
32 teams for the Euros, 16 seeds, 16 unseeded, straight knockout from the word go. |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,398
|
Nah... All that trouble to qualify and then out after one game!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,804
|
Quote:
I'll throw an idea in - why even have a group stage?
32 teams for the Euros, 16 seeds, 16 unseeded, straight knockout from the word go. But you don't really want 32 teams turning up for a tournament with all the logistics, security, ticket sales etc........then 16 of them go home after one game |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Kingdom of Arnor
Posts: 78,227
|
Fair point about the one games.
What they should have done originally was expand it to 20 teams and not 24. 5 groups of 4 with the group winners and 3 best ranked runners-up qualifying for the Quarter-Finals. 1st ranked group winner Vs 3rd ranked runner-up 2nd ranked group winner Vs 2nd ranked runner-up 3rd ranked group winner Vs 1st ranked runner-up 4th ranked group winner Vs 5th ranked group winner Points, GD, goals scored etc to determine rank. Yeah, you run the risk of dead rubbers again in the 3rd set of group games but you would still get that in a 16 or 32 team tournament. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,049
|
The old 16 team format was perfect, no going back now unfortunately. May as well make it 32 teams so this 3rd place nonsense it avoided. It's led to some awful games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Stoke-On-Trent
Posts: 7,158
|
Just have 64 Teams, throw in a few National League North ones to make up the numbers
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,854
|
I'd be really losing interest if this tournament had another 8 teams worse than the 24 here and another 12 group matches
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:31.


