Marla_Singer
United in diversity
This Elo ratings indeed sound more credible than the FIFA rankings, despite France being 3rd which is obviously totally underserved. Anyway I still reject rankings by principle.Shabbaman said:
Top 20 national football teams
- Thread starter Verbose
- Start date
farting bob
ThEy MaDe Me Do iT.
The whole ranking system is crazy. No serious football fan would rank USA 7th best in the world, and netherlands 2nd best in the world (just as examples). The only weay to tell who is better than who is to make them play each other. USa and mexico dont have any other big competition apart from eachother in north/central america, and they rarely play outside the continatn (only in world cup and qualifiers probably).
I think either adopt a clearly better and fairer system, or scrap it.
The ELO ratings seem better, but still not perfect (iran currently ranked 16th best in the world? come on..)
I think either adopt a clearly better and fairer system, or scrap it.
The ELO ratings seem better, but still not perfect (iran currently ranked 16th best in the world? come on..)
naervod
My current user title
I personally think ELO is the best type of ranking system aside from the World Cup, which happens only once every four years.
HourlyDaily
Man-o-Mercy
Yes its crazy, but people keep bringing it up. Australia floats between 45 and 70 in the world because we are a long way from the rest of the world, don't play many qualification games, used to be a F.A. managed basket case.
In reality the side is probably 25-30 in the world.
The USA is not that good, but neither are they as bad as I have read people who suggest the rankings are flawed, think.
Asian teams who aren't very good, but play each other alot (excluding Japan, S.K., Saudis, Iran and China) go up the rankings, as do weak CONCACAF teams. The more these sides play each other, the more points a win against each other is worth. The system is seriously flawed.
Unfortunately the ranking system is used for FIFA tournament seeding.
In reality the side is probably 25-30 in the world.
The USA is not that good, but neither are they as bad as I have read people who suggest the rankings are flawed, think.
Asian teams who aren't very good, but play each other alot (excluding Japan, S.K., Saudis, Iran and China) go up the rankings, as do weak CONCACAF teams. The more these sides play each other, the more points a win against each other is worth. The system is seriously flawed.
Unfortunately the ranking system is used for FIFA tournament seeding.
Verbose
Deity
Sweden's position looks a tad weird regardless of system:
Nr 10 Fifa, nr 8 Elo.
Much as I like to see the team do well, I don't quite believe either figure.
Nr 10 Fifa, nr 8 Elo.
Much as I like to see the team do well, I don't quite believe either figure.
willemvanoranje
Curitibano
well.. it's a little bit a Swedish thing (as it is a Dutch) to underestimate and overcritize the own team.. Sweden has a nice team. Maybe not 8th or 10th of the world, but top 20 for sure.
HourlyDaily
Man-o-Mercy
And part of that is about getting results, and Sweden seem to be able to do that without the biggest names - just a few champions like Larsson and Ibrahimovic, some class and hardwork everywhere else. I respect them far more than a side with big names and no results.
willemvanoranje
Curitibano
me too..they don't have big world stars, but they do have players that are nice to watch.
