From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alltime League Table

What does this table mean? Nothing as far as I can tell. It shows the cumulative results of all teams at the tournament, but ranking them makes no sense given the disparity in participation. Recommend remove or restructure so that it isn't set up as a league table (perhaps just shows W-D-L record for each side as a list). 220.253.186.52 ( talk) 04:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC) reply

South Korea

Wait why is South Korea listed there? They arent part of CONCACAF. Are they?

The Gold Cup invites other nations to participate in the tournament hence the Korean participation Thecolemanation 09:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Needs more information on how the tournament works

How are teams eliminated and/or points collected? This is the only thing I could find from the web, but is it the same every year?

The 2007 CONCACAF Gold Cup will consist of three groups of four teams for the first round with the top two from each group, along with the best two third-placed teams, progressing to the quarterfinals with the group stage running from 6-13 June throughout five stadiums in the USA.
Presumably, the quarterfinals on up are single elimination...

It is because the stadiums in the United States are better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.183.52.103 ( talk) 03:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Concacaf believes that it can make more money having the gold cup in the us than having it in another country. The us holds immigrant populations from all of the gold cup nations. Consequently all of the teams (other than canada and cuba) draw well in the us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.194.234 ( talk) 05:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Canada Hosting in '09?

I looked around for a source on this, but I can't find one. If you included it, please give a source. Thecrookedcap 00:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I have been trying to find a source for this and all i've come across is this: http://www.boston.com/sports/soccer/articles/2007/06/06/gold_cup_now_glittering_event/ Famousian 03:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Toronto has been announced as a host city, but I don't think that means that Canada is the exclusive host nation. Mountainhawk 16:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC) reply

Gold Cup Results vs. CONCACAF Championship Results

This is the article for the CONCACAF Gold Cup, so only results for Gold Cup tournaments (1991 and forward) should be reflected in the table. Perhaps the CONCACAF Championships prior to the Gold Cup should be split off into their own separate article. Any thoughts? - 70.254.243.14 02:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I agree- why has someone changed it back once again to "All Time Results" after it was restored to Gold Cup Results?? -- Zippyt 13:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC) reply
I think someone is mad that the USA has finally caught up to Mexico in wins so they are putting the all time results so that it looks like Mexico is still leading in championship wins. Nygiantboy 16:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC) reply
No, im not mexican. im from costa rica living in the usa. congratulations for a successfull title defense. we hadnt had anyone win the gold cup twice in a row in quite a while. you have to understand that the concacaf championship was basically the same thing like the gold cup. the gold cup is just a more revised version of it. just like the Euro cup and the copa america. the euro cup used to be known as the European Nations Cup until 1968 and the copa america used to be known as the South American Championship of National Teams until 1967. 8 years later, the tournament was reborn as the copa america. those 2 continents still count the titles countries have won before their current format so why shouldnt we. i gave a pretty detailed story of how the championship of north america has evolved. im sorry if i offended anyone but i wasnt trying to make mexico look better. as a matter of fact, i was happy when you brought the mexicans back to reality. im going to work on detailing the NAFC and the CCF in a few hours. thanks for your understanding.
The fact remains that you continue to change the results without any kind of a consensus. That is incredibly rude behavior. - 70.233.233.121 18:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Personally, I think we should split the old championship out completely and then link to it, the old CCCF and the old NAFC tournaments. On top of that, I think we should have a combined stats page, and also link to it in the results section. My reasoning is that the tournament wasn't simply renamed - it is completely different. If you look around, that seems to be how other tournaments were handled. For example, the Intercontinental Cup and the FIFA Club World Cup are separate, but they both link to a combined stats page as they are basically the same ( Intercontinental Cup and FIFA Club World Cup statistics). By following this example, we will preserve all data, but will still be able to discern all the information logically (ie 2007 was the 9th edition of the Gold Cup tournament...not the 19th...but is the 19th CONCACAF Championship overall). I hope this helps the discussion. -- otduff t/ c 01:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC) reply
all those cup like the fifa club world cup, intercontinental cup, etc. are all invitationals. yes, they want thte champion of whatever region they are on but some times the champion does not go and it goes to the runner up or whatever. plus, those tournaments are club football. you should know world football is completely different. that is a whole different subject. if thats the case, then all the titles south american and european teams won before their current edition shouldnt count. once again, THIS ARE CONTINENTAL CUPS, NOT CLUB FOOTBALL. club football are sponsored and financed by private companies (nissan, toyota, etc.). continental cups are done by their respective organization.
Which doesn't make them the same event...all it means is that they have the same PURPOSE. As for the other articles, perhaps that simply means this needs to be referred to the football project for further discussion. In the meantime, a board discussion on this topic is taking place right here, which means that the article should be in the condition it was before the controversy arose -- in other words, Gold Cup titles only. Please stop reverting. - 70.233.233.121 02:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC) reply
Well I do see his point and if you look at the OFC version of the Gold Cup ( OFC Nations Cup), they have a unified page because of historic likeness - despite being different tournaments, the confederation used it for the same purpose. However in that case there were only two previous tourneys and it was a very short article as is. I don't think those same criteria apply here. Again, I still have an issue with not splitting as the infobox says the tournament started in 1991 and yet we have champions from before this date. On top of this, there were only two actual CONCACAF tournaments before the Gold Cup - the others were not real championships as there were no tournament and they just named a champ based on World Cup qualifying match results. The US and many other CONCACAF nations did not even participate for many of those years. They just do not seem to have the same weight to me as a legitimate champion via a knockout tournament like the Gold Cup, where all 40 CONCACAF national teams have a chance to participate. Again, this is just my opinion. But despite my bias, I still say this article is about the Gold Cup tournament. I think it would be best to change the CONCACAF Championship page from a redirect and put the combined history/stats there, along with more detailed historical info on how CONCACAF has selected their champion over the years. We can then crosslink the two articles and let it fill out that way. I still see no reason not to do this, so unless I see another reason why, I will be splitting the article and linking accordingly in the coming week. -- otduff t/ c 09:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC) reply
That looks to be a moot point. The title of the article would tend to agree with you, but the lead paragraph clearly involves the whole history of the CONCACAF "championship", regardless of changes in name or format from time to time in the scope of the article. Kevin McE 23:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC) reply
The Gold Cup is the direct descendant of the CONCACAF Championship: I do not think there is any real debate about that: the inclusion of results from the former tournament, and the text of the lead paragraph atest to this being consensus. This creates a situation largely similar to that of the King Fahd Cup and the Confederations Cup: the results of these two tournaments are usually integrated. Given that there is no separate article at CONCACAF Championship, and considering that there has been no voice raised here against the 1963-89 tournament results being included, an integrated table of cumulative results seems most appropriate.
However, although I have a suspicion that some editors, on both sides of the argument, might be motivated by the desire to see their team at the top of the table, I can understand, given the title of the current article and the change in format that took place in 1991, the desire for a Gold Cup only table. Thus the sensible compromise seems to be to include both tables, which I have done.
In the process of making this change, I also changed the section headings. Not only did the previous capitalisations go against the MoS, they also misdescribed the information: these sections do not record the best finish by each of the nations that have acheived a top 4 finish, it records their cumulative records. Kevin McE 09:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC) reply
See my argument above about the difference between a bonafide tournament champion involving all 40 CONCACAF teams and a paper champ named based on qualifying matches for the World Cup. Particularly damning of these "championships" is that they involved at most 6 teams ( 1973, 1977, 1981, 1989) and only possible to be won by the 6 teams playing in WC qualifying games. In some cases, there were AS FEW AS 3 TEAMS INVOLVED ( 1985). Even the real tournaments of the time had few teams invited - only 6 in the last actual tournament which occurred way back in 1971. And during this time the teams who played were generally not what we consider CONCACAF powerhouses - ie most years excluded Costa Rica, US, Guatemala, Canada, etc. Face it, the Gold Cup is the first time there is qualifying such that all CONCACAF nations are involved in a true championship format and thus should have some differentiation from previous champion selection methods used by CONCACAF. -- otduff t/ c 09:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Frankly, your opinion of the competitions is irrelevant here. If CONCACAF considers a competition, regardless of its format, to be their championship, then their championship it is. For what it's worth, according to the evidence here, 16 teams entered the 1985 tournament and the first two Gold Cups had only eight teams in each. Kevin McE 23:12, 2 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Again, I agree we should keep all CONCACAF Champions info but just move it to that article. The Gold Cup should discuss the Gold Cup tournament, which is currently used to determine the CONCACAF Champion. Does this better explain my position?
And I completely jumped the gun on those other tournaments (not noticing the 1985 CONCACAF Championship qualification article, etc). But as for the low number of teams in the Gold Cup, the difference is the Gold Cup uses the UNCAF Nations Cup and the Caribbean Cup as qualifying tournaments. For instance, in 2007, 31 teams participated through those tournaments plus the 3 invitees (US/CAN/MEX). Again, it's a moot issue - shouldnt have used wikipedia for soapbox ranting.
So again, I think we should add more detail by splitting the info into a CONCACAF Championship article (which would then probably be the most important of the two). And until someone convinces me of why this would be a bad thing, I will continue to argue we do split them up. -- otduff t/ c 06:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC) reply
I really can't see the Gold Cup as anything other than a re-branding of the CONCACAF Championship: I would find it far easier to argue for splitting up the King Fahd Cup and the Confederations cup than I would these two. The format did not only change at the time of change of name, it has changed several times since then. Kevin McE 21:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Well that's fine - if that is the consensus then we will just leave per the way you combined them. It still seems odd to state the tournament started in the 90's and then count/list championships from before this date.-- otduff t/ c 07:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC) reply
The second sentence of the article says When it was held for the first time in 1963,: where does it state that the tournament started in the 90's? Kevin McE 18:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC) reply
In the infobox it lists as founded in 1991. And think it used to say elsewhere but with the edit wars who knows what it says now.-- otduff t/ c 09:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC) reply
One last point on my argument we should separate the Gold Cup article and the CONCACAF Championship article is that when I go to concacaf.com and click on their link to goldcup.org and look under the previous edition and history section, there is no mention of ANY of the tournaments/champions prior to 1991. It just seems if CONCACAF considered these two as the same (as is claimed), you would think they would mention it somewhere on their website! It just seems you guys are ignoring the facts which the tournament organizers say their own history is. I'm interested to see what you guys think. I mean it's possible I just cannot find it on their site and someone will be kind enough to post a link to disprove me. -- otduff t/ c 23:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC) reply
Apparently I scanned right over it...seems they have a small section called CONCACAF CAMPEONATO DE NACIONES’ ERA where they discuss the previous tournaments and the old CCCF, etc tournaments prior to the creation of CONCACAF. When searching I also found an interesting link at concacaf.com where they showed the results of all the regional champions going back even before CONCACAF was formed so I still think this justifies that we split the Gold Cup section out - even if it will have some duplicate content for 91-present. This would fix the inaugural event being in 1991, 2007 being 9th GC (not 19th), etc - not to mention solving the overall result edit wars that has been going on. Either that or you think CCCF, etc articles should be merged here also. Based on the edits, it seems others think it should be kept together too, but nobody is really commenting here.... -- otduff t/ c 00:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC) reply
I'm telling you go to CONCACAF Gold Cup Real. type that in search exactly. I already have the Gold Cup chart on theiralready. We can split this since I already made a new article. Nygiantboy 15:23, 16 July 2007 (UTC) reply

Most recent champion

Why USA is posted as Most recent champion ? in fact Mexico is. they won 7 times. Ammar ( Talk - Don't Talk) 02:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC) reply

Because the USA won the last Gold Cup 2007. Mexico and USA has 4 Gold Cup titles each, but Mexico has also 3 CONCACAF Championship titles. JC 21:21, 25 July 2007 (PST)

Splitting CONCACAF Championship Results from CONCACAF Gold Cup results

I know this subject was covered above, but it looked so messy I wanted to start this down here instead. As proof that an article for the CONCACAF Championship needs to be created and split from this one: FIFA recognizes the U.S. victory in the 2007 Gold Cup as " their fourth overall, bringing them level with arch-rivals Mexico." So if FIFA only recognizes four Mexican Gold Cup titles, and CONCACAF lists the champions in different ways on their website, identifying only Gold Cup champions as such, in my mind that means only Gold Cup results should be included here in the Gold Cup article. Thoughts? -- 74.192.3.135 ( talk) 14:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC) (This post was RESTORED from vandalism that took place on 28 November 2007) reply

The confusion here arises from the fact there this is one article for two different competitions. The Gold Cup replaced the Championship, but FIFA and CONCACAF distinguishes them from one another. I would suggest a separate article for the Championship, where those results can be recorded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.241.124 ( talk) 12:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC) reply

I think is a simple case of name change...so this table can remain here... Maybe we can add other two§:one with only Champioship and another with Gold Cup... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanza13 ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC) reply

Why split if the article states that the CONCACAF Championship is "renamed" to the CONCACAF Gold Cup? Despite the name change, the Gold Cup remains as the top championship of the entire region. KyuuA4 ( talk) 18:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC) reply

Regardless of what the article states, CONCACAF clearly recognizes the events as different. So does FIFA. Follow the links above. The Gold Cup is not a "renamed" Championship; it is a separate event which serves the same function. The articles need to be split. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.25.240 ( talk) 07:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC) reply
Yet, the fact that the two serve the same function is reason enough to keep the two tournaments together. The amount of content for either is not enough to mandate an article split. KyuuA4 ( talk) 22:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC) reply
The headline clearly states that this is a CONCACAF Gold Cup article. It says nothing about "Various CONCACAF tournaments that fulfilled the function of determining the continental champion." If you insist on keeping them together, then we need a clearer indication of this, complete with separate tables for each tournament. -- 74.192.25.240 ( talk) 15:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC) reply
Well, if necessary, that headline can be changed to "History of CONCACAF Championships". The premise would be similar to History of National Football League Championship. The NFL had undergone a similar change back in 1970 where its main championship changed name to the Super Bowl. The same idea can be used here. I seem to notice other championships, like the Central America championship. After the title change, that can be merged here too, as a title change like that would incorporate every soccer tournament with some kind of association to CONCACAF. KyuuA4 ( talk) 21:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC) reply
Ah, the classic "We can always change the headline" argument. "If a Gold Cup article shouldn't incorporate prior championship material, then let's just call it a History of CONCACAF Winners article instead." No way! Why not just split one of those off from this one, and make this one a 1991-and-up article dealing solely with the Gold Cup? If the issue is that we need more material to make two separate articles, then let's get more material...I volunteer. The analogy with the NFL is a bad one, by the way, since the main championship didn't "change names." There had already been four Super Bowls before the NFL and AFL merged under the new NFL banner, and during those years the Super Bowl didn't decide the championship of the NFL--instead, the NFL champion went on to play in the Super Bowl. -- 74.192.25.240 ( talk) 01:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC) reply

I think this section it's poor!! And this is bad!! Take a look to Copa America, European Championship, Asian Cup, Oceania Cup, African Cup....each is very complete...CONCACAF Gold Cup and Championship NOT!!! I think that we have to do a section with both competition....but we can search a compromise! Stanza13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stanza13 ( talk • contribs) 19:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC) reply

Top Scorers Table

Is it reasonable to recommend a Top Goal Scorers table? This is presuming data for such exists. KyuuA4 ( talk) 23:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC) reply

About CONCACAF championship I can't find the topscorers of 1963,1965,1967,1971 tournaments...I think do a overall topscorer is very difficult with incomplete records.... Stanza13

Table completed for this page and for the CONCACAF Championship one. 15:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC) Stanza13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.3.27.68 ( talk)

1985 Concacaf Championship

The final round of CONCACAF Championship 1985 is composed by the second and third round of world cup qualifying as reported on RSSSF archive...and so the fourth position is for El Salvador due to better goal difference... Stanza13

Good catch. -- 74.192.25.240 ( talk) 15:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC) reply
As a Canadian I almost feel guilty claiming the 1985 win, as Mexico didn't take part in WCQ due to their hosting the finals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.236.93.210 ( talk) 20:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Recent Additions

When I talk about distinction between Championship and Gold Cup in the same page, I means as I do on the table for Host and Apparences....I think is the better solution... Stanza13 ( talk) 15:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC) reply

I read the entire discussion page, and I got the impression that there was a consensus that this article would be treated as dealing with The Gold Cup as starting in 1991 as a result of CONCACAF only considering the Gold Cup to start as of 1991 as shown here http://www.goldcup.org/competitions/goldcup/ . Also, it seemed to me as the consensus was that the article should make a clear distinction between the Gold CUp and the period of World Cup qualifying, also that the tournament winners table would only include results from the Gold Cup. Could somebody please comfirm this for me. I the article should be reverted to the Revision as of 16:25, 14 April 2008 in accordance with the consensus' that was reached in the discussion page, as the current form is contradictory to the previous consensus. NeilCanada ( talk) 07:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC) reply

I concur with NeilCanada. -- 74.192.46.234 ( talk) 19:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Agreed. Let's go ahead and change it back if there's no objections. Themodelcitizen ( talk) 05:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Tournament table appearing at the bottom of the page

Don't know if it is just my web browser, but for me the half the tournament results page appears at the very bottom of the page, instead of where it should be. I can't seem to get it back where it is supposed to be. Has this happened to anyone else? -- Differentgravy ( talk) 13:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC) reply

Gold Cup vs CONCACAF Championship

This has been brought up multiple times on this page but nothing has ever come of it. I think we really need to separate the two articles because it's obvious that they are two distinct tournaments. Really the only evidence that is needed is here: [1] Scroll down to Gold Cup Winners and notice that it only goes back to 1991. CONCACAF clearly recognizes that Gold Cup as being distinct from the CONCACAF Championship (i.e. not simple a renamed tournament), otherwise the results would go back much further. Eightball ( talk) 16:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC) reply

CONCACAF Championship vs World Cup qualifiers vs Gold Cup

I believe there is a distinction that needs to be made here as to the three phases of the main national competition for CONCACAF nations. I posit what I believe is the correct interpretation that should be given.

The first chapter in the history of a competition for CONCACAF national teams came with the original CONCACAF nations' cup. This much is clear - just as there is a European cup of nations and a Copa America, CONCACAF had it's own version.

Afterwards came the period when the World Cup qualification format supposedly doubled as the CONCACAF competion for national teams. What this means is that since the format became that of a final group in a single venue, there was no need to host another separate competition as this winner became the de facto CONCACAF Champion.

It is my position that these competitions should not be counted as CONCACAF championships as they were only World Cup qualifiers. The proof I can offer for this is shown on the country profiles for countries in the FIFA website, where for example Mexico is shown with only 6 continental championships (4 Gold Cups and 2 CONCACAF Championships, while ommiting the single top position Mexico achieved in one of those single-venue World Cup qualification final rounds).

This is in sharp contrast to the situation in OFC, where the OFC Nations' Cup is specifically used as World Cup Qualification.

Lastly, the fianl chapter is the Gold Cup itself, where a new competition reactivated the main CONCACAF national team competition (thus leaving behind, with it, the era of single-venue World Cup qualification tournaments).

As such, the situation of whether the Gold Cup needs to have a separate article than the CONCACAF Championship is not that critical, as ultimately it does crown the confederation champion

What I do believe merits more thought is the situation as to whether those single-venue World Cup qualification tournaments count as confederation championships. According to the FIFA website, they do not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.172.55.126 ( talk) 02:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Count me as another vote for fixing this article by spliting off anything that is not related to the Gold Cup. Fifa and Concacaf clearly consider the Gold cup to be a different thing from the earlier championships. The limited number of teams involved, and the use of WC qualifying matches before the gold cup, show that this is not merely a semantic difference. I have no objection to including Gold Cup results in an article about Concacaf Championships, but the pre-1991 results do not belong in an article about the Gold Cup. 71.243.119.32 ( talk) 02:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Folk seem to be changing the page (in both directions) without adding anything here in discussion. 71.243.119.32 ( talk) 22:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Permanent Host

How has the US become the permanent host of the CONCACAF Gold Cup ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.21.214.42 ( talk) 22:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Wins count in specific articles

Given that the CONCACAF championship in both its incarnations are treated under this united article, it would seem consistent to me that the numbering of wins is inclusive of both titles. The articles are inconsistent. Canada's only Gold Cup title (2000) is listed as their second (fair, considering their 1985 title), and Mexico's 2009 win was for a long time (until this morning) recorded as their 8th title (which includes CONCACAF titles from 1965, 1971 and 1977 as well as 4 previous Gold Cups), but Mexico's 93/96/98/03 titles are listed as 1st/2nd/3rd/4th wins. This is untenable. I cannot see how non-inclusive count can be valid when the status of this article so clearly established the principle that one title is the successor of the other, but I seek consensus here before making changes. Kevin McE ( talk) 18:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC) reply

According to FIFA, the official editions are only those from 1991 on. The editions of the Concacaf Championship are not mentioned by FIFA. -- VAN ZANT ( talk) 09:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Concacaf Championship - Gold Cup

According to this official FIFA press kit, FIFA only recognizes the Gold Cup as the official Concacaf continental competition. FIFA doesn't mention the Concacaf Championship. So, was the Concacaf Championship an unofficial competition? I would like to know your opinion. I don't agree with FIFA. -- VAN ZANT ( talk) 09:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)-- VAN ZANT ( talk) 09:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC) reply

FIFA's inconsistency: their page for Mexico, for example, includes their 1965 and 1971 titles, but not 1977, as well as their Gold Cup wins under Continental titles. Kevin McE ( talk) 09:46, 20 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Most Gold Cup Titles

I think that for the table that has the current champion and the team with the most titles we should only add the team with the most titles. If there are 2 or more teams tied for the most titles we should add them as well. The S in parentheses that appears on the part The Most Successful Team(s) means that the team with the most titles be added, should there be a tie in most Gold Cup titles won then you add all the teams that are tied for the most titles. If you check, this is how it's done for other similar international soccer tournaments like the UEFA European Championship wiki page and the Copa America wiki page. Vegeta87 ( talk) 02:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC) reply

Perhaps the tables for the other tournament pages could be changed to reflect all historical winners instead. Boilersrock ( talk) 10:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC) reply
All tournament pages both club and national team have the info table with current champions and with the team with the most titles (the world cup page does it like this as well). In my opinion I think we should do it like all the other pages for soccer tournaments do it. Vegeta87 ( talk) 00:01, 31 July 2013 (UTC) reply
I didn't see this talk section before, but I edited it as above to show only the most successful team. It previously showed all three teams that ever one, which defeats the purpose of the "most successful" section and which information is already included later in the article. IPs keep reverting these edits, so I'll make a request for article protection if it's reverted again. ~ Araignee ( talk • contribs) 16:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC) reply
This continued reversion of correct content is ridiculous. Put in a request for semi-protection, as it's from IPs and they aren't even trying to explain. I just now looked at the history and saw it's been going on far more than I thought. ~ Araignee ( talk • contribs) 04:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC) reply
I appreciate you having protection being put in for the Most Successful team info box. I had been reverting it and explaining why It was incorrect to add all teams that have won the tournament. I even started this talk page to see if anyone would discuss it. Thank you again. Vegeta87 ( talk) 23:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC) reply

Map of winning CONCACAF countries

The map featured in this article and in the template does not include the most recent results. Can we possibly get an updated Map, which correctly displays the United States as holding 5 titles instead of the four that it currently displays. Thank you. Regards, Subzzee ( talk) 22:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Edition of page

Someone did major edits and I'm upset that it occured. There is no evidence in his claim neither. Bluhaze777 ( talk) 14:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Why are CONCACAF Championship results combined with Gold Cup results?

This has been debated on this talk page before, years ago. But apparently whoever changed the page needs reminding -- the CONCACAF Gold Cup and the CONCACAF Championship may have served the same purpose, but they are not the same event. The current Wikipedia page for the Gold Cup says that it was founded in 1963, and that Mexico has won the most titles with eleven. Both these statements are directly contradicted by CONCACAF's information page about the history of the Gold Cup, which states clearly that the inaugural Gold Cup championship was held in 1991, and that Mexico has won the most titles with eight. Thus, the statement that the Gold Cup "was previously referred to as the CONCACAF Championship before being renamed" is unsupported by the tournament's organizers. The CONCACAF Championship information and results need to be segregated from the CONCACAF Gold Cup information and results, and the difference between the two needs to be made clear. -- 71.156.28.98 ( talk) 21:51, 18 July 2021 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:CONCACAF_Gold_Cup&oldid=1201089816"