Top Stories

Klinsmann on board with potential Gold Cup, Copa America merge

Jurgen Klinsmann USMNT 78

It turns out the U.S. Men’s National Team may have many more opportunities to face South American opposition in the future after a report on Monday revealed CONCACAF and CONMEBOL are looking to merge Gold Cup and Copa America.

The new competition, which would be held once every four years in the United States, would allow the USMNT to face the likes Argentina, Brazil and Chile on a more regular basis, as well as their familiar CONCACAF foes.

What were Jurgen Klinsmann’s thoughts on the matter?┬áHe likes the idea.

“I would be totally up for that one, Klinsmann said. “I think that would be huge for our region to play every four years in the Copa America in the format that it is played right now. It would be, for us, and I’m sure speaking on behalf of Mexico and Costa Rica as well, it would be huge for the CONCACAF teams. It would be huge to have that type of a competition every four years. For us to grow and compete with these top nations in South America, it would be absolutely fantastic.”

Surprised to see Klinsmann be on board with the idea? Do you agree with Klinsmann’s view, or think it’s a bad idea?

Share your thoughts below.

Comments

  1. All this talk about how this is just a money grab forgets that the National federations fund tons of projects that only lose money. The men’s national team is only a small part of what they do. If it means more money to fund development initiatives or women’s teams how could anyone be against this idea.
    The poorer federations should be the ones who are for this the most because they have way more to gain then anyone.

    Reply
  2. Though I like the chance to play higher quality competition but the US can’t consistently beat Guatemala. So

    This tournament is basically a giant money grab. Any other’s in it’s vein will be the same. If the Confederations’ Cup bids were on the line therefore forcing the stars to play perhaps I’d be more interested, until that time, meh.

    Reply
    • It’s official, not just an exhibition, and we have quite a number of stars involved (after initial worries that many would not be). Presumably future versions would revert to the regular CA schedule and not conflict with the Summer Olympics (as of course this one does only because it’s a special one-off to celebrate its 100th anniversary), eliminating a possible motivation for some others on the young side to sit it out.

      Reply
      • The Euros and Copa America (at least in its original form) are far more important tournaments than the Confederations Cup, which is the ultimate money grab!

      • If you say so. Confed Cup sure serves as a good bit of warm-up for the WC, though, for the teams that get to it.

        That wasn’t the claim I was replying to, however, if you’re trying to dispute something I said…

  3. Having a combined tournament is a no-brainer and, although I think it would be better to have it staged in different countries, money talks and it’s a lot more lucrative to have it here.

    Reply
  4. It would be cool but obviously you have to figure how to do the confederations cup, and how to qualify only 12 concacaf teams.

    Reply
  5. I got these numbers from another forum, the numbers are not confirmed but it would mean a financial windfall for SA

    After eight games–

    Copa America 2015:

    Opener, Chile – Ecuador = 46,000 (Estadio Nacional 100% full)
    Mexico – Bolivia = 14,987 (Sausalito has capacity for 22, 360; so, 67% full)
    Uruguay – Jamaica = 8,653 (Antofagasta has capacity for 21,170; so 41% full)
    Argentina – Paraguay = 16,281 (La Portada has capacity for 18,243; so 89% full)
    Colombia – Venezuela = 12,387 (El Teniente has capacity for 13,849; so, 89% full)
    Brazil – Peru = 16,342 (Temuco has capacity for 18,413; so 89% full)
    Ecuador – Bolivia = 5,982 (Playa Ancha has capacity for 21,113; so, 28% full)
    Chile – Mexico = 45,583 (Estadio Nacional 99% full)

    Total attendance for first eight matches in Chile: 166,215

    Copa America 2016:

    USA – Colombia = 67,439 (Santa Clara has capacity for 68,500; so, 98% full)
    Costa Rica – Paraguay = 14,334 (The Citrus Bowl has capacity for 65,000; so, 22% full)
    Haiti – Peru = 20,190 (CenturyLink has 69,000 capacity; so, 29% full)
    Brazil – Ecuador = 53,158 (Rose Bowl has 92,542 capacity; so, 57% full)
    Jamaica – Venezuela = 25,560 (Soldier Field has 61,500 capacity; so, 42% full)
    Mexico – Uruguay = 60,025 (U of Phoenix has 63,400 capacity; so, 95% full)
    Panama – Bolivia = 13,466 (Citrus Bowl only 21% full)
    Argentina – Chile = 69,451 (Santa Clara was full to the brim)

    Total attendance for first eight matches in USA: 323,513

    Reply
    • And that’s just the gate. I went to the USA-Col and Arg-Chile games. These were expensive tickets. My friend who went with me went to the Copa America final in Argentina last cycle and marveled how he paid far less for the final in similar seats than we paid for group games.

      I am guessing that the US TV rights have gone up significantly in value by having the tournament in the USA. The USA grew to be the most lucrative single-country, TV rights market for the men’s and women’s WC’s. Given the value of the US TV rights market and the fact that it is growing in value as the country becomes less soccer-hostile, I can only imagine how CAF and CONCACAF are salivating about growing this thing into the world’s No. 2 or No. 3 soccer event.

      Reply
      • True, having the US and Mexico in this competition every time will greatly increase the US TV revenues as well.

  6. Can only be good from the US perspective, though it begs the question of how precisely the CONCACAF representative at the Confederations Cup is decided…

    Reply
  7. I was at the US v Col game on Fri and am at the Chile v Argentina game right now at Levi’s.

    In both games there were a ton of people supporting Col, Chile and Arg. I think both games were sellout or close to it. Lots of passion.

    I would be in favor of it as it will get the USMNT to the next level and it’s the next best thing to the WC.

    I am surprised that the Carribean and Latin American countries would be in favor of dropping the Gold Cup. That’s their chance to play the US and Mex.

    Reply
  8. What does he care? He’ll be gone in two weeks. By the time the next one rolls around he’ll be coaching the Fire.

    Reply
    • Yep. The Fire. No, not that one. Hopefully, the Santa Monica Wildfire of the SoCal under-9 league, where he will blame his numerous losses on children being tactically inept.

      Reply
  9. It is all about the money and this makes the SA countries ALOT more money when we host it. Simple dollars and cents.

    Reply
  10. No. If how this tournament is being run is any indication of future Copa’s, just no. Ticket prices too high. Empty seats. The wrong anthem. CA is a SA tournament and it would be a shame to take it from a SA host and their supporters, to stage it in the States every four years.

    That said, JK would have a better excuse for not winning.

    Reply
    • There are empty seats in SA for the smaller teams that aren’t so great to watch. This copa is beating the last one by almost double through 8 matches played

      Reply

Leave a Comment