I didn't see this posted elsewhere, so I thought I'd bring it here: http://www.foxsportsworld.com/content/view?contentId=921562 Quakes are 23rd in the World According to FoxSports! Just one spot below Donovan's Leverkusen, and better than Bayern Munich, Santos, and Locomotiv! ...Now there's some fodder for discussion! (MODS: if this is being discussed elsewhere please delete this post.)
apparently... The FSWCR are compiled from votes by FSI writers and commentators from the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Chile, and Argentina. The world club rankings are published every other Thursday. these type of discussions usually don't get much of anywhere because not that many people watch all of these teams on a consistent enough basis to make any real claims. It's a fun list though.
Says on the page... The FSWCR are compiled from votes by FSI writers and commentators from the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Chile, and Argentina. The world club rankings are published every other Thursday. So basically, just around the Americas. ESPN.com's Top 25 doesn't have the Quakes or any MLS teams listed-- but mind you, while a Euro-bias debatedly seems to exist there, the 25 teams on that list are selected on a much more complex and stringent formula. But the Fox Sports list, that shows a bit of respect. We'll take it, bit by bit...
Re: apparently... Right.. This same poll had the Galaxy in that territory last year. Then polls in other parts of the world where they don't see any MLS have teams like LA and the Quakes down at around 509th place.
Re: apparently... real claims? On BS? Frankly, I'm happy to see the Quakes show up on the list, but I wouldn't make them favorites to beat any of the teams listed below them. But you should probably throw my opinion out the window because I haven't seen any of Locomotiv, Bayern, or Santos play this year.
on the basis of San Jose's playoff performances, they were deffinitely of the highest quality...whether or not the LA game is seen as a collapse...San Jose still has to score 5 goals to win regardless... As for KC, San Jose have to come from behind twice in the second half at home to win it in overtime for the second week in a row after an equally, if not moreso, draining match the week before... Only then to practically cruise to victory over their decidedly most deifficult opponent of the post season, and put 4 goals past a side that hadn't given one up in the playoffs... now maybe it's just me but those were world class performances that deserve to be ranked highly.
At the IFFHS, the highest ranked MLS team is Chicago, who skyrocket from the 627 place to the... 234 http://www.iffhs.de/main/ranking/clubweltrangliste/?sprache=englisch
I would go by this one. They're usually pretty accurate, but I think the system they use makes it harder for U.S. teams to rise through the rankings. Mind you, it doesn't make it impossible, just harder. A good showing in the CCC could really do wonders for us.
This list depend much on the time of the year which is made. For example, during Copa Libertadores, the Mexican teams are often ranked in the Top 40, at 2002 we even had 2 teams on Top 20. But at this time of the year, our teams aren't playing any International Competition. Our league is very tight, so our top teams doesn't get much points from the local championship (unlike Uruguay and Scotland). While The Europeans are playing CL and UEFA Cup and the Sudamericans have La Copa Sudamericana, so we are relegated out of the top 40. I would rank Tigres ahead of Nacional from Urugay right now. Now imagine how unfair is for the MLS, a tight league and poor international schedule all the year. Although San Jose is closer to the 234 place than the 23, we often can appreciate in this list teams from Iran or India higher ranked than a MLS teams, which is laughable. As I said before, this ranking is designed to work on one place, Europe, and I believe it makes a reasonable job there. Chelsea just at 19 place? They had only won one highlighted match, If they continue to win on the EPL and CHampions Cup, they will eventually get higher ranking.
Other than the fact that MLS teams probably shouldn't be in the top 100 I think the Fox ratings are better than the IFFHS ratings. I mean, they've got Irish teams ahead of San Jose. Even Irishmen don't play in Ireland.
The IFFHS discloses its methodology. Check the methodology, and you will see that it is moronic. It blatantly and openly favors teams that simply play a lot of games. MLS teams will always be at a massive disadvantage in those rankings based on the relatively short season.
Not to spoil any parties, but for comparisson on the official UEFA ranking number 23 in Europe is Panathinaikos, 24 is Leeds United, 25 is PSV Eindhoven. If the Quakes is 23 in the WORLD that implies the Quakes are better than for example the forementioned. On that list is Chelsea by the way number 22 in Europe as of 2nd December 2003. See: http://www.supportersites.com/club_ranking.html
True...consider the fact that the Irish league's brightest young player has recently said he wants to make a move to MLS (implying that the standard of play in MLS is higher than it is in the Irish league). ...I forget the player's name, but I saw the story recently on www.ussocceruk.com
This thread promped me to do a quick google search of "football club world rankings" and the first hit that came up was http://www.worldfootballrankings.com/ I found it interesting that this site has a section that ranks the WASHINGTON REDSKINS as #1 for the second consecutive year. (Basically this site has top rankings of all "football" sports--soccer, American football, Aussie Rules, rugby). Whoever came up with the idea of saying the Skins are the best is a moron.
Re: Re: Quakes number 23 in the WORLD? well that site is a bunch of molarchy. any site that ranks munich #2 has got to be out of its mind.