Talk:2019 Canadian Championship

Bracket
The bracket as it currently appears seems to indicate that the second and third qualification rounds will take the direct successors of the previous rounds in a hard-set format. However, each round is described in the sources as being newly drawn each time.

Thus, I think the bracket should not have solid horizontal lines between those rounds, but a more loosely-indicated transition of some kind. I think I've seen a vertical dashed line used for this in the past, but I do not have sufficient experience with these templates.

Any takers? Radagast (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I get what you're saying, and I'm also unsure of a way to have a dashed line or other way to indicate this. If no one has any way to do this then maybe it's best to only have a bracket for the semi-final and final rounds.UmpireRay (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It is possible, because I've seen it before in the MLS Cup Playoff bracket here. If it is not trivial to do, I think the bracket should still remain with a disclaimer that matchups are re-seeded after every round. BLAIXX 23:43, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So, it can be done, but as far as I know it cannot be done using the roundN module being used to create this bracket, and a new bracket template would need to be made from scratch, something which is too technical for me. However, with the MLS brackets, they only use dashed lines before the reseeding takes place, and then fill in the bracket and revert to solid lines with no mention of reseeding. So, this bracket can still work if we only add in teams once the draws for each round have taken place, and in the meantime leave it blank like it is now, and we'd achieve the same end result.UmpireRay (talk) 01:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It doesn't need to be don at all. We don't stipulate where the teams are placed in the subsequent rounds until in after the draws for those rounds. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Given the technical hurdles clarified above, I can see this is no easy request. Thanks for the feedback. Radagast (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You've introduced errors. You've made it seem as though the winners in round one will move on to play a specific, seeded team in round two. For instance you have the winners of the Wanderers v Vaughan series playing Valour. It's my understanding that the winners of round one will be drawn against the seeded team in round two, and this continues until the semi-finals. This is how it is done in other national cups, so it would surprise me if Canada Soccer would do it any differently. Granted, in past years, the higher seed was always drawn against the lower seed coming into that round. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * , all I did was move the bracket up on the page, I haven't touched it's formatting. Not sure if you've pinged (pung?) the wrong person. Madg2011 (talk) 20:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Right. Sorry. Your change was made here and the brackets were already stuffed-up by then. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

I hadn't seen this discussion previously, but the format current displayed in the bracket is correct. There are no re-draws for subsequent rounds. See the draw video posted by the CSA here and the graphic here. For example, FC Edmonton was drawn explicitly against the winner of Match 3 (York - Blainville), not a TBD first-round winner. Paging:, , etc. Madg2011 (talk) 20:58, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure. Seems odd. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:39, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, this later became clear as the draw format; at the time I started this thread, it was not. In a way they made things easier for us! Radagast (talk) 21:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Team names in bracket
Can I ask why we are only using team names in the bracket? I'm not entirely sure why this is being done, considering that most brackets on Wikipedia tend to use either the city name, or the team's full name (including past editions of this tournament). I can't find a single example of using team names alone.

Canadian Championship articles: Full team names: 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2018 City names: 2013, 2017

Other notable cup/playoff articles: Full team names: MLS, US Open Cup, FA Cup, USL City names: NHL, NBA, MLB, NFL

I understand the desire to address width issues with the bracket, but I feel like it's better to align with Wikipedia convention and use city names if we're going to do that (especially when teams without names are already being listed by their city name). I should note (for interests' sake) that WP:NCST states that full names should be used for North American sports teams, partly because using nicknames alone may make articles unclear for those unfamiliar with the subject. -Gopherbashi (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. I think shortening team names to cities would be appropriate, as seen in this revision. BLAIXX 00:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The shortening is so the bracket displays cleanly without any names wrapping to a second line, which creates a poor display look. I agree that teams which have their city in the name in addition to a nickname (Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal, Vaughan) should display the city per policy above. Radagast (talk) 01:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I would love to call Forge and Valour by their city name... but have to admit that you're probably right in keeping those with their club names (I'll call this the Arsenal Precedent). Same would go for Cavalry and Pacific I suppose. -Gopherbashi (talk) 20:32, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Cities would be fine. I shortened it to club name because of the wrapping of the Whitecaps name made it odd on a large monitor. On a mobile device, it all wraps oddly everywhere. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

I've changed Wanderers to Halifax in the bracket - I feel like a contraction (HFX vs Halifax) is sufficient for establishing a city name as per the above. -Gopherbashi (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your change. The goal of choosing a short-form was to use what is the most recognizable. "Halifax" is not part of the team's name - at least in print, so it doesn't make sense in the bracket. <b style="color: #329604">B</b><b style="color: #FD8F42">L</b><b style="color: #0096FF">A</b><b style="color: black">IXX</b> 22:06, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

"FC"
Is there any particular reason this article (and others) refers to "Vancouver Whitecaps FC," "Toronto FC," "Cavalry FC," etc. but changes "Ottawa Fury FC" and "HFX Wanderers FC" to just Ottawa Fury and HFX Wanderers? Seems inconsistent. Madg2011 (talk) 20:23, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The FC is part of the Whitecaps and Toronto official names. It is not part of Ottawa's name. The other teams haven't officially started so I can't say if it is or is not part of those team names. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How are you determining official names? It certainly seems like "Ottawa Fury FC" is their official name. <b style="color: #329604">B</b><b style="color: #FD8F42">L</b><b style="color: #0096FF">A</b><b style="color: black">IXX</b> 20:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How they are commonly used in the media. Whitecaps and TFC are almost always called by their full name first and then other monikers are used in articles. Ottawa has changed tiers and so their name has changed over time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Their logo says Ottawa Fury FC and their website is ottawafuryfc.com. A Google News search for "Fury FC" also returns many headlines such as Haworth becomes club's all-time goal leader as Ottawa Fury FC continues impressive start in the Ottawa Citizen and Fury FC turns to arbitration in sanctioning dispute in TSN. In fact it seems like team is always referred to as Ottawa Fury FC in Postmedia coverage (both local papers). Madg2011 (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no problems using that name. I lost that debate when the team moved to NASL and editors voiced their opinion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I give up
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2019_Canadian_Championship&diff=889462872&oldid=889304351 adding the previous round winners is not necessary. Anyone who has ever looked at a ladder will understand who is going to advance. I'm tired of reverting so if someone else agrees, they can revert. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't understand what you are talking about. All I did in that edit you linked was update a rescheduled match. Perhaps you linked the wrong edit? <b style="color: #329604">B</b><b style="color: #FD8F42">L</b><b style="color: #0096FF">A</b><b style="color: black">IXX</b> 21:33, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So you did. I guess I gave up earlier. We still don't need the winner of the previous round identified in the next round. And the home field advantage goes to the team already seeded in the subsequent round so you've moved them to the wrong location. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure what the problem is, if you are referring to the bracket, I added 'winner match x' per the draw, as is commonly done on Wikipedia. Also, it is standard to list teams in the 'First leg host vs. Second leg host' format (see all continental club competition articles). S.A. Julio (talk) 22:05, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, typically the seeded team gets home field advantage, although the schedule now indicates that the order of legs has been reversed and the match has been rescheduled 1 day earlier. <b style="color: #329604">B</b><b style="color: #FD8F42">L</b><b style="color: #0096FF">A</b><b style="color: black">IXX</b> 22:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not necessary, that's the problem. Thanks for explaining the reodering. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)