IFFHS Leagues ranking,

wow


we're 46th and mexico is 8th


a bit to be expected that rankings would come out like this, but still

 

the top 10 is accurate in my opinion except for chech republic. Replace it with holland and you got my list.

 

at least we're ahead of "slovensko" (is that slovokia?)

i didn't actually clink on the link; does it say what these ratings are based on? international tourneys? we didn't perform particularly well in the CCC last year if i recall correctly.

 

I thought this board was for news.....

Unreal. Bet they've seen lots of MLS matches.

 

Slovenia -- you know, the former chunk of Yugoslavia, as opposed to Slovakia, the former chunk of Czechoslovakia.

It's all math. Here's what their site says about the rankings, I emphasised the math part:

So Mexico dominates because they had three of the top four in the CONCACAF Champion's Cup and they also get to take part in the Libertadores Cup. European countries do really well because they have so many damn games to choose from. USA does poorly because we only had one cup to play in last year, and MLS teams only played about 8 games all together in the CCC.

 

A large part of the reason that MLS does poorly is the short season. The club ranking, for some incomprehensible reason, does not take into account the number of games played in a league...therefore Costa Rican teams accumulate points over a 44-game season, while MLS teams only get points for 28 games plus playoffs.

Also, Central American teams get to rack up points in the earlier qualifying round of the CONCACAF Champions Cup. This is somehwat counterbalanced by MLS getting four teams in the competition.

As a result, it seems like there are always a few Central American clubs ranked ahead of the top MLS clubs, and the effects are just going to be magnified when they add five clubs together to make a league ranking.

The top Mexican teams play a longer domestic season than MLS, plus they get to play two continental cups as you pointed out, so they are way ahead of MLS.

These rankings are pretty silly IMO.

 

23. Israel
32. Iraq

 

Notice Mexico and Greece (Hellas) are ranked over Brazil.

 

Because Brazil didn't wanted to play in La Copa Sudamericana.

 

That wasn't so much directed at Mexico as it was Greece. Still, neither has any business being ranked over the World Cup champion in anything soccer-related 6 months later.

 

One important part of those ranking are the performance of teams from each league on international competitions. If those teams didn't wanted to participate, why they deserve those points?

 

Again... it seems VERY disingenuous to compute rankings by "total points earned by top 5 teams in all competitions"...

 

Guys, that's a German website. They don't have the least bit of respect for US soccer.

And, any computer based ranking has flaws. It's just too hard to encorporate all of the variables and compensate for differing data points. If the Club World Championships had come off, we would have had a better reflection of the relative merits of the top teams in each league. While that's not neccessarily a correct evaluation of the league as a whole, it would have been more true than the mishmash of competitions that are being considered in this ranking.

-Tron

 

Who cares?

I mean, really, is this MLS News and Analysis?

 

You know, people bash the FIFA rankings, but they're a good starting point for discussion. I mean, you take any group of 10 teams, and put them in a round robin against any lower ranked group of 10, and the higher grouping would dominate every time.

But these league rankings...do you really think that the leagues ranked 6-15 are better than those ranked 16-25? Even if you think 6-15 are better, you have to admit, it's close.

Plus, there's an inherent stupidity in saying that League X is better than League Y because the teams at the bottom of League X really suck, allowing the top 5 teams in that league to rack up points in the league. By definition, league play is a zero sum game, so basing any ranking of leagues on league play is dumb beyond description. It's really stunning how stupid it is. Geez, I thought Germans had more sense than this.

This ranking system is like saying Eric Montross is better than Barry Bonds because Montross scores more points in a season.

 

Every six months or so some rankings like these come out. And innevitably somebody posts them here and a bunch of people get upset. Over what? These mean nothing. Who gives a damn.

 

Digital, these two sentences are at cross purposes. If it's a computer ranking, then any German bias is irrelevant.

BTW...does anyone else think it's really silly how people plop the word "computer" in discussions of this, or the BCS rankings, or the FIFA rankings, in order to dismiss them? I've never seen anyone on bigsoccer write, "what a stupid computer post."

If someone uses a slide rule to come up with these, does that make it a slide rule ranking?

Mike Lupica is the worst, on Sports Reporters. He seems not to understand that computers are programmed by humans. Computers are not independent, self aware, self starting entities. Data on Star Trek is a fictional character.

DT, it's not a computer ranking. It's a formula ranking.

OK, rant over.

 

Not at all. Whether it is a computer ranking or a formula ranking, it uses a formula of some sort, so the distinction is essentially meaningless, unless you're implying that there is bias in the actual process of applying the formula by the human doing it.

The bias is in the derivation of the formula to be used itself. Doesn't matter if a computer is applying it or if a person is applying it (so long as they do it consistently). The formula itself is bad, and the interpretation was that the bad formula was derived by someone attempting to validate their worldview.

I have no problem with that interpretation of events, although there isn't much evidence aside from the rankings themselves to support it.

 

Umm, that's my point. If the ranking is stupid, it's not because of the compter compiling it, it's because of the person who created the formula.

 

From the website:

How the Club World Ranking is made

The World Club Ranking was started monthly since January 1st, 1991 and the information is globally distributed early in the following month. This ranking takes into consideration the results of twelve months of continental and intercontinental competitions, national league matches (including play-offs) and the national cup. In those countries having several national cup competitions, only the one organised by the national federation is included. Since the cup competition systems are diverse at the preliminary stage level, we assign only the points won in eight-finals, quarter-finals, semi-finals and the final. The points are assigned based upon a rating system of the level of performance of each national league. In the case of matches decided by penalty-kicks, each team receives half of the points in contention.
All national leagues are rated at four levels based upon performance. In this grouping, each country (where the club plays) is assigned a number indicating the performance level of each national league. Clubs in the highest level leagues receive 4 points for each match won, 2 for a draw and 0 for a defeat. Level 2 is assigned 3 pts. (win), 1.5 (draw) and 0 (lost), and so on with the next lower levels. The same system applies for the play-off matches.

In the continental competitions, all clubs receive the same number of points at all stages regardless of the performance level of their leagues. In the case of draws each team receives 50% of the points in dispute and 0 points for a lost match. The points are distributed equally to teams in matches decided by penalty-kicks. All Asia, Africa and CONCACAF continental competitions have the same point-assignment system: 8 points for a win, 4 for a draw; in the preliminary tournament phases for The Caribbean and Oceania zones, only 4 and 2 points are assigned for win and draw. In the South American competitions the clubs receive 12 points for a win, 6 for a draw; and in the European 14 and 7 points, respectively. Competitions between two continents are evaluated depending upon their importance. In the FIFA World Club Cup, the awarding system for wins and draws is determined by averaging the number of points assigned for wins and draws in each of the other continental competitions.

Those competitions not organized by a continental confederation, or any intercontinental events not recognized by FIFA, are not taken into consideration for the World Club Ranking. Any competition cancelled before completion alters the point system. In order to equalise the chances of South American and European clubs we do not consider the result of previous matches already played in said tournament.

The World Club Ranking is a precise classification showing the real level of the clubs free of any subjective influence. It is the result of a profound analysis that allows us to fairly report the level of international performance for each country.

 

IOW, the club ratings are weighted based on the supposed strength of the league. Then they add the club ratings together and determine, shockingly, that the leagues with the highest weightings have the highest point totals. Brilliant.

 

Give me 5 decent A-League teams and I'll construct what IFFHS thinks is the 5th-best league in the world...

 

The FIFA rankings do something similar. There are competitive weightings for different regions.

 

As I read it, no, not the supposed strength of the league, but on the performance of that league in international club competitions.