DS Forums

 
 

Should the euros be expanded / shrunk


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-06-2016, 13:24
jeffiner1892
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.
jeffiner1892 is online now   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-06-2016, 13:29
Draca_Noir
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 767
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.
Agree!!
Draca_Noir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 13:32
Sattrega
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.
Sattrega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 13:35
Nova21
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,401
Nah... All that trouble to qualify and then out after one game!
Nova21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 13:39
swingaleg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,816
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.
That might be feasible if they went back to the 60s version of home and away two leg ties for the earlier rounds with the last 8 or 4 meeting up for the tournament section

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
swingaleg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 13:54
Sattrega
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.
Sattrega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 19:36
Bizza
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.
Bizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 20:10
tiger2000
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
tiger2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-06-2016, 20:33
alfamale
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
alfamale is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:37.