I believe that each Confederation should receive at least one spot with other spots allocated on relative strength. The real crime is that OFC is a Confederation at all.
The question is who has the better confederation. Yes everyone knows that the US and Mexico are probably more talented than any african team. But africa has 5 decent teams. Nigeria, Senegal, Tunisia, Cameroon, and Cote D'Ivoire. BTW, using stats from from over 10 to 20 years ago for Cote D'Ivoire is pointless. They are ten times better now than back then.
Im in interested in knowing who thinks will win a world cup first? CAF or CONCACAF. I know most people will be biased..(USA all the way) but I truly think an african team will win it first. With the top teams becoming more on the same level worldwide, africa has a better chance because of having more decent teams.
nice but id put it like this 1. South America 2. Europe 3. Africa 4. Asia 5. CONACAF 6. OFC = ) i know that list is untrue and i even disagree with it, but thats how i see it.
I'd have to agree. South America has Brasil and Argentina - arguably the two top teams in the world, but size of country and quality quickly drops off. North America has Mexico and USA, and the quality quickly drops off (Costa Rica in 90 and 01 was an anomaly). Europe has many smaller countries that play at a very high level with the economic basis to support national teams and clubs. Africa has amazing balance (or inconsistency). The five qualifiers from 4 years ago are all in jeopardy of not qualifying this year. Some of the third place teams are still vying for a spot. I can't imagined the 11 or 15th best team in CONCACAF having a chance against USA Mexico or Costa Rica.
There is an old horse racing rule of thumb that says the closer the race the lesser the quality of horse. Whilst this doesn't necessarily apply to football I will point out that in the last 4 World Cups CONCACAF has averaged 1.5 sides through to the second round whilst AFrica has averaged 1. This is a 50% better performance even though Africa has had more teams in each of these tournaments than CONCACAF. WHilst you can try to judge how you think teams will perform in the same situation as each other, I prefer to base my opinions on results when the teams are in the same situation. In this case CONCACAF outperforms AFrica at full international level.
Actually if you go by percentages and not all out results South America would be on top. Percentage wise the list would be changed. 1. South America 2. Europe 3. North America 4. Oceania 5. Africa 6. Asia
asias last lol u got to be kidding me wasn't it korea who whipped germanys ass a few months ago, or japan tying brazil and beating greece? or iran winning bosnia and top 2 to qualify to world cup, 17th ranked right now. asia owns now
and concacaf? the big 3 thats it kinda like africas big 5 and south americas big 4 only europe has alot of teams, quantity doesnt count in this case
That's population and teams compared to how the whole conference goes. 3 Billion people in Asia have failed to produce more than one semi-finalist and that was at home.
actually spectreman is right. us asians have the right to be embarassed.. asia makes up like 50% of the world population and we havent been able to produce superstars.. countries in Asia like S. Korea, Iran, Japan have produced good players though. in 2004 korea beat germany 3 to 1, it was a fair clean game, but i was even suprised with the result, i would've been satisfied with a tie but we got the win. maybe someday asia will have great players like England, Brazil, Argentina, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, etc.. produced, but Asia is getting embarassed and we need to get our focus back
i agree with what you said about asia, but oceania above africa and asia is impossible.. australia's going to asia so i see oceania as hopeless unless somehow Fiji Islands can produce a Kewell..
I figure that S. America, Europe and CONACAF exceed what someone would assume by looking at there non-football statistics, oceania is right on everyone's expectations, everyone thinks they suck and they do. Asia and Africa should be better with their huge populations and amount of teams.
1. South America 2. Europe 3. Africa 4. North America 5. Asia 6. Australia I don't understand how Europe is above South America in any way... Brazil? Argentina? Uruguay? Paraguay? Ecuador? Venezuela? Colombia? Peru? You don't think those teams are strong enough to match up to Europe teams? lol, in my opinion, those are probably some of the best teams in the world... Europe has... U.K., Portugal, Germany(Although I don't appreciate German soccer, for the fact they play it dirty), Spain, Italy, Sweden, and Ukraine at the moment... Now lets match those up against eachother... Europe wouldn't even get past the first two teams... By the way... Why do people think U.S. is any good? lol U.S. sucks... the only team that holds up against Africans is Mexico. and why do people keep trashing Africa like their no good? Africans are among the most talented soccer players in the world... look at Pele, he was African-American descent, had an African Parent... and Jay-Jay Okacha? Didier Drogba? Roger Milla? Eusebio?
oh yeah if you want to look at it that way then the whole brazil team is pretty much of african decent. Africa is above concaf no doubt.
venezuela, peru, uruguay and ecuador some of the best in the world? now ur post lost all credibility...3 of those are last in the table of the WCQ...
We don't trash Africa at all. We just state that most of their teams don't seem to perform at full international level as well as those from Europe, South America and North America.
YES they are some of the best teams in the world... If you're playing GOOD CLEAN QUALITY FOOTBALL... get the ******** out lol, where do you think football began at? ********in Europe? Helllll no... It began in Uruguay buddy