It isn't normal for Africa to get two in the round of 16, 2014 was the first time they have done it. I wouldn't call your best ever effort as a poor performance. We members of Asia however, put in our worst collective effort since the competition expanded to 32 teams.
Well Ghana did almost make semis in 2010 and made quarters. I think that was Africa's best effort. 2014 was second best.
I put the USA in that group because they are one of only eight teams (along with Uruguay, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Germany, the Netherlands, and Mexico) to make the knockout rounds of both WC 2010 and WC 2014, the fact that they will have a vastly experienced manager (Bruce Arena) who already has managed at two World Cups, and the fact that they've made a QF (in 2002), and played very competitively in their other two round of 16 matches, with both losses coming in extra time. Some of the teams you mention (Poland, Sweden, Serbia, Croatia) are without a doubt at the same level as the USA, but others are one shot wonders who you are rating highly just because they performed well at a watered down Euro 2016 (which tells nothing about their strength vis-a-vis other confederations). Heck, not a single one of those teams is even guaranteed to qualify at this point, and only Greece has even made it out of the group stages at either of the past two World Cups.
Disagree. How does 2010 rate #1? Nothing special about it. I would rate it a disappointment actually. They sent 6 teams in 2010, remember. Three of them finished last in their group, and a 4th was the worst host performance ever in a WC. In 2014 not only did 2 advance past the group-stage, but another 2 were very competitive and could've easily advanced as well (e.g. CIV went out on a 93rd minute penalty in the last match).
If USA has a 90 percent chance at qualifying and a 50 percent chance at reaching the Round of 16 if they qualify, they have a 45 percent chance at reaching the Round of 16. If a UEFA team that's better than USA but in a harder qualifying group has a 50 percent chance at qualifying and a 70 percent chance at reaching the Round of 16 if they qualify, they have a 35 percent chance at reaching the Round of 16. If you're talking about contenders to win, USA shouldn't be included, but if you're talking about reaching the Round of 16 or Quarterfinals, you have to include teams not in UEFA who are worse than UEFA teams who didn't qualify.
Conmebol is tougher to qualify from. There is not a single group in UEFA qualifiers with the overall average quality as the ten sides in Conmebol qualifying. Even after removing the worst two sides from each UEFA qualifying group, only one group (A) shows that kind of overall competitiveness and quality.
The teams in SA steal each other the points more because of a somewhat lazy afford by Brazil or Argentina than because they're so strong. They don't have to deal with a lot of pressure though, half of the teams will qualify anyway. It's probably harder to get 1st in SA qualifying but to qualify at all is much easier. You just can't allow to lose points in Europe and qualifying is decided often between the two best teams of a group in their two matchups. It's s real myth that it's harder to qualify from conmebol
To figure out what makes it difficult in Conmebol qualifiers, you don't have to look at the top of the table, but to the last spot that qualifies a team to the WC, and here is where it always gets "blurry", as most of the times even up to the last match date of a long qualifier process, there is always 4 or 5 teams at a very high level, with chances of reaching that final spot or to get eliminated (to finish among the top half of the table, is very hard). You perfectly said it, in Uefa, most of the times it's only a contest between the 2 top teams in the group (also a reason why Uefa shedules their last match between them to be played at the end, because if they play it at the beginning, the rest of the qualifier process becomes meaningless). In Conmebol it's a contest of many teams. That's what makes it more difficult. And btw, even Brazil and Argentina, have to struggle most of the times (keep in mind that currently only Brazil has won its spot, while Argentina whom were the last finalists of the WC, and Chile which is the 2 times Copa America last champions, still are far, from reaching that spot, and every point is highly disputed, as that point may be at the end, the diference between making it or not).
Not quite sure why you think a UEFA team that only has a 50% chance of getting to the world cup has a 70% chance of making the second round. UEFA has only managed 70% of teams go through once since expansion, and the last two times it was less than 50%.
In 2010, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay (four teams) qualified to the quarter-finals and Chile in the round of 16 (who knocked out by SA team btw). 5 out of 5 conmebol in the second round MOST IMPRESSIVE 6 out of 13 UEFA in the second round EMBARRASSING Conmebol beats UEFA easily in the South Africa 2010 (in the World Cup, not the qualification system!). In 2014, Argentina, Brazil and Colombia qualified to the quarter-finals, with Chile and Uruguay in the round of 16 (both knocked out by 2 SA teams). 5 out of 6 conmebol in the second round GREAT 6 out of 13 UEFA in the second round in 2014 AGAIN! more opportunities than others and the results THE SAME less than half! So, the final result is CONMEBOL (2) UEFA (0) Even that result does not seem fair since the conmebol (overall) dominated the action on the pitch and produced by far the best performance in the last two World Cups. You really need flowing updates. Yes, Brazil and Argentina was, is and always will be the top two in South America. But the gap has closed with the rest of conmebol teams. Because since the post-1990, conmebol teams has much improved with the rise of such as Colombia and Ecuador. Chile and Paraguay that used to be good teams in the past, now transformed into great teams in the modern era. And there were signs of Uruguay return (partially) since 2005, showed and proved they can once again produce top quality players worldwide.
Only 3 out of 9 UEFA groups have the top two seeds ending against each other. You could be right. I wasn't saying that based on calculations. I was just trying to say that a team that has a better chance at advancing if they qualify may not have a better chance at qualifying and advancing.
To add to what has already been said there are factors that make South American intrinsically more difficult than Europe. Extreme travel, and climate and altitude changes must be accounted for. It takes its toll. It is brutal for a team to have to play in 90 degree "Summer heat" heat of Colombia one day and then Travel all the way to Buenos Aires 4,000 mies and play in 49 degree "Winter" five days later. Or a team that plays at sea level in Venezuela one day and then has to go to Bolivia 5 days later which is almost 12,000 feet high. (These are just hypothetical examples of how things can be scheduled.)
I think UEFA is probably the hardest confederation to analyze simply because the gap between the "powers" and everyone else has pretty much disappeared. For example, is England still a "power"? They failed to make it out of their group at WC 2014, finished 2nd in their group behind Wales at Euro 2016, and were eliminated by Iceland. What about Holland? Failed to qualify for Euro 2016, and look highly unlikely at this point to even qualify for WC 2018, but made the semis of each of the last two World Cups. Italy didn't make it out of the group stage at either WC 2010 or WC 2014....Spain didn't make it out of the group stage at WC 2014, and went out tamely to Italy in the round of 16 at Euro 2016....are they still powers? Belgium is supposed to be up and coming, but got dumped by Wales at Euro 2016. At this point, probably the only sure thing that can be said about UEFA is that Germany are head-and-shoulders above everyone else. After that there isn't a single team that you can be certain is going to make it out of the group stages of the WC.
San Marino will always be a minnow, but you're right that UEFA teams can move up up and down a lot. Wales moved up from 37th to 9th in the FIFA Rankings in five months. Israel fell from 26th to 98th in eighteen months and two months later they were up to 54th. Ireland moved up from 54th to 31st in two months. Russia fell from 27th to 53rd in five months. Croatia fell from 4th to 18th in four months. Hungary fell from 33rd to 57th in July 2017, which is their worst ranking since August 2010. All of that happened since 2013.
For Perspective: A - Sweden (18), France (9), Netherlands (32), Bulgaria (54), Belarus (71), Luxembourg (135) Group B has Switzerland (5) and Portugal (4), but then you have Hungary (57), Faroe Islands (90), Andorra (129) and Latvia (130). Group C - Germany (1) Northern Ireland (22), Czech Rep (40) , Azerbaijan (80), Norway (88), San Marino (204) Group D - Serbia (42), Ireland (37), Wales (20), Austria (39), Georgia (112), Moldova (158) Group E - Poland (6), Montenegro (55), Denmark (47), Romania (43), Armenia (73), Kazakhstan (106) Group F - England (13), Slovakia (21), Slovenia (53), Scotland (58), Lithuania (99), Malta (191) Group G - Spain (11), Italy (12), Albania (63), Israel (73), Macedonia (134), Liechtenstein (192) Group H - Belgium (10), Greece (38), Bosnia (30), Cyprus (95), Estonia (98), Gibraltar (206) Group I- Croatia (15), Iceland (19), Turkey (33), Ukraine (25), Finland (110), Kosovo (177) As Compared To: Mexico (16), Costa Rica (26), USA (35), Panama (52), Honduras (72), Trinidad and Tobago (78) IMO the CONCACAF Hex is way more balanced except for Group A... And playing in the heat and poor fields makes it even harder.This narrative that CONCACAF Hex is a cakewalk is just dumb. UEFA IMO Is highly overrated. Only reason they got teams ranked as high as what they do is because they play more qualifying games which results in more FIFA ranking points. I mean look at 214- Costa Rica won their group of England, Uruguay and Italy, Mexico advanced, and US came in 2nd in the Group of Death. With Costa Rica advancing to Final 8 (shouldve been final 4)
CONMEBOL is by far the hardest to Qualify Brazil-2 Argentina -3 Chile - 7 Colombia - 8 Peru -14 Uruguay - 17 Ecuador - 31 Paraguay - 40 Bolivia - 67 Venezuela - 69 Current WCQ Standings: Brazil - 33 Colombia - 24 Uruguay - 23 Chile - 23 Argentina - 22 Ecuador - 20 Peru - 18 Paraguay 18 You have 6 points separating 2nd from 8th.
Certainly amusing that your "perspective" ignored the fact that in Group I you have to finish 1st to get in definitely - and 2nd gives you a (near enough) 50% chance. In Concacaf top 3 all get in definitely - and 4th gives you a (near enough) 50% chance. Yet 4th in the UEFA Group is higher ranked (For what that's worth) than 3rd in the Concacaf one. J
I think there is no true favourite this time. any of big teams might win. If I had to choose one, I'd take Brazil
I think it was former Bayern Munich striker Elber who said recently that Brazil is to reliant on Neymar to win the World Cup. I think there is some truth to that. If he goes down they are in big trouble. Unlike some European Favorites who can plug and play guys at most positions. That said if Neymar is healthy Not many teams can beat them.
I think UEFA is harder. Yes CONMEBOL might have higher ranked teams, but the format of UEFA makes it a lot harder. CONMEBOL is just one group of all their teams, kind of like EPL format. UEFA teams are divided in groups and the draw can make a huge difference with the medium teams on who qualifies and who doesn't.
I think on average Conbmebol is harder, but the nature of the European system means there will always be one or two very tough groups and usually one or two groups that are pretty easy.
I think it will be a very interesting World Cup in 2018. Pressure does weird things to teams. It was just too much pressure for Brazil in 2014. I think the pressure for Germany this coming year is their demise. I am still not sold on Germany's FB play. If they play someone with elite wings,they'll be vulnerable. The team I am keeping my eye on for a sleeper is Spain. No one is really talking about Spain but with the emerging youth of guys like Dani Ceballos, Saul, Asencio, Isco, Morata, Castillejo amoung others will make them a very intriguing team to watch.... and they wont have the pressure on them. If they beat Italy, they will win their group. They'll be a dangerous team outside of the top 10 to keep an eye in in Russia.
Spain seems to fall asleep in the back lately. I can see a team that knows how to counter and knows how to be dangerous on set pieces knocking them out. But they are in my top 5 as favorites nonetheless.
Doubt, there will be much pressure on Germany. All the pressure was relieved by 2014 triumph. Now they are No 1 favorite to win, and are taking it quite easy, nevertheless seriously as usual. Surely, you cannot underestimate Spain though, as well as France, Italy and Brazil.