I personally prefer 16 teams being in it. Considering the World Cup (that's the whole world, remember) has 32 teams and even that seems bloated at times, to have 32 teams in the finals for one continent seems way over the top. Look at the World Cup, where utter dross get through and provide entertainment for no-one. How often do these lesser teams actually provide any real shocks or watchability? (Cameroon 90 and Senegal 02 aside, there have been few real upsets and no real value has been added). Yes there are a lot more nations now in europe compared to 20 years ago (the break up of the soviet bloc / independence of several european nations), however, most of these are small in football terms. what have Latvia, Georgia, Belarus et al contributed to the overall European Championships? Nothing more than numbers to be brutally honest. The expansion of a tournament does not make it better as the teams you bring in are theoretically poorer. so there may be a few 'surprises', but generally all that happens is the talent pool becomes diluted and it acts as a bye for the better known teams into the next round. and surely the point of a finals is the pinnacle of the tournament, the best of the best. By letting everyone have a slice of the pie, the cachet of the whole event diminishes. Still, as barney said, more teams = more cash...pure and simple.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: The Sublime and the Ridiculous
Edit
Reply
Quote
