US Men -- Collated Ratings

[Serie Zed]

Just for kicks, I've dug up several seemingly reputable international football team ratings to see where the US sits overall:

FIFA (http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,AllJul2004,00.html?select11=All&cmbMonth=Jul&cmbYear=2004) (7th)
http://www.eloratings.net/ (14th)
http://home.sprynet.com/~ronkessler/currentm.htm (16th)
http://www.elerankings.com/frameworldfootball.htm (http://www.elerankings.com/frameworldfootball.htm) (17th)

I think most of us would agree that 7th is a bit high, but if you look at how consistent the other rankings are (I believe we're in about the same position in some of the homebrew systems the Stats and Metrics guys have worked up as well), I think you can pretty safely say we're in the 2nd ten at this point. And the difference between 20 and 10 is pretty slim.

Anyone else got any to add?

[geordienation]

Just for kicks, I've dug up several seemingly reputable international football team ratings to see where the US sits overall:

FIFA (http://www.fifa.com/en/mens/statistics/index/0,2548,AllJul2004,00.html?select11=All&cmbMonth=Jul&cmbYear=2004) (7th)
http://www.eloratings.net/ (14th)
http://home.sprynet.com/~ronkessler/currentm.htm (16th)
http://www.elerankings.com/frameworldfootball.htm (http://www.elerankings.com/frameworldfootball.htm) (17th)

I think most of us would agree that 7th is a bit high, but if you look at how consistent the other rankings are (I believe we're in about the same position in some of the homebrew systems the Stats and Metrics guys have worked up as well), I think you can pretty safely say we're in the 2nd ten at this point. And the difference between 20 and 10 is pretty slim.

Anyone else got any to add?


The ELO ratings are a bit suspect, I think. They've got France No. 1 after poor performances in both Euro 2004 and WC 02.

[UxSxAxfooty]

As are Ron's, who has Argentina at the top.

[sljohn]

The ELO ratings are a bit suspect, I think. They've got France No. 1 after poor performances in both Euro 2004 and WC 02.Another oddity of the ELO ratings is that the US 1:3 loss to Poland in the last WC was one of the 3 biggest upsets of that tournament.

[Through-Ball]

Another oddity of the ELO ratings is that the US 1:3 loss to Poland in the last WC was one of the 3 biggest upsets of that tournament.


That is really odd. One would think the US victory over Portugal or, moreover, the South Korean victory over Italy would be considered (traditionally) much bigger upsets. I can't see how this "ELO" rating system has much credibility. :rolleyes:

[Serie Zed]

That is really odd. One would think the US victory over Portugal or, moreover, the South Korean victory over Italy would be considered (traditionally) much bigger upsets. I can't see how this "ELO" rating system has much credibility. :rolleyes:
It's slightly adjusted system from the system that the international chess federation uses. Widely considered one of the best ratings tools anywhere.

The issue all of you are having is that since teams don't play 100s of matches a year, any decent system is going to end up counting matches over a long period of time. Which leads to confusion over a team's current form and their overall strength. The alternative is to use a far more subjective method, like a poll.