Moutinho isn't at Deco's level nor do I think he ever will be, but that isn't exactly a slight at him. Deco is one of the best players in the last decade. Moutinho is a world-class player and it's very odd to me how he hasn't been picked up by the biggest clubs by now. He's very consistent and as we saw Tuesday night, he can make passes that many cannot.
This WC coming will be his best chance ... to notify all big clubs if ... he can exert his games and shine for Portugal (now qualified thanks to CR7)
Hindsight is 20/20, but we didn't forget all the talk pre tournament. Just because we made it out of the Group doesn't mean you can say "oh it was only the G.O.D. for CIV" because many were saying Portugal would get tossed and even counting Brazil potentially as an upset for the group stage. It was accepted worldwide and on BS in 2010 as the group of death and the group to watch for upsets. We thrive on the hate though, keep it coming!
Whats the title again? That's my ranking and you cant do anything about it. Bleecher is written by angels
And this is where you are wrong. None of us Portugal fans are hinting that we are better then we are. We are stating an obvious fact: We are not as bad as many of you claim and far better then teams that get credit for nothing. None of us puts us in the top 6 or even 8 but we sure as hell know that the Dutch don't deserve to be there either. To be ranked 10 or lower because of qualifiers is insulting to general football intelligence.
What is funny about your opinion is that first you agree with me that football fans are biased, but then you go by expressing your biased opinion that those specific fans usually overrate their teams. What makes them special? Is it that they are really special or you are getting your feelings in the way of an objective analysis? Clearly, you don't like Portugal and it seems you don't like Mexico, England, and Argentina as well. But you immediately start claiming Chile is better than what others give them credit for. Aren't you doing exactly the same thing as those fans? In other words, everyone is overrating their teams and are not being capable of seeing that.
Tabloid? And even if it did, they're clearly not Portuguese fans so the crap you spew is either a straight faced lie or utter stupidity. You choose.
Everyone? I think each case is a case, and people have good reasons to have picked the spots they did. From the Portuguese, Gooddead was the one who put Portugal the highest (4th in UEFA). But vancity eagle who is not Portuguese put Portugal in 3rd from UEFA and Gorando (Belgium) also put us 4th. Several other non-Portuguese put us 5th and of course many more put us far below that. I think you're overestimating the "positive" type of bias. I think the "negative" bias is much stronger. No matter how overrated you think Portugal is, putting us dead last of all the UEFA teams can only be an emotional decision, rather than a rational one.
My ranking is in another post and I did not put Portugal in the last position. Teams like Switzerland and Belgium have a lot to prove and no way Bosnia or Greece are better. However, in terms of sheer quality I do not think Portugal is better than Netherlands, England, and France.
The last line was a general comment, not aimed at you personally. Bit surprised you rate England that high.
Tier One (the Favorites): 1- Brazil 2- Argentina 3- Germany 4- Spain Tier Two (the other top Contenders): 5- Colombia, 6- Italy, 7- Holland, 8- Portugal, 9- France Tier Three (the Dark Horses): 10- Ghana 11- Chile 12- Japan 13- USA, 14- Uruguay 15- Nigeria 16- Belgium 17- Ivory Coast 18- England Tier Four (On the Cusp): 19- Ecuador 20-Switzerland 21-Russia 22-South Korea 23-Mexico Tier Five (Also Ran): 24-Greece 25- Croatia 26-Iran 27-Bosnia 28-Costa Rica 29-Honduras 30-Cameroon 31-Algeria 32-Australia This is how I had rated the various teams and I think I am right, except I am undecided about Bosnia/Greece both in relation to one another and more generally. On the one hand, Bosnia finished above Greece who they beat 3:1 in Bosnia. That certainly would justify putting them above the Greeks. On the other hand, despite defeating Greece, Bosnia and Greece finished with equal points with the Greeks then surprising me with the relative ease with which they disposed of Romania in the playoffs. And even though Greece has thus far done poorly in the World Cups it has participated in, the surprise 2004 Euro champions are undoubtedly due doing better this time around. Bosnia, on the other hand, despite some good talent, will be in its first World Cup and not exactly in familiar surroundings in Brazil. Its hard to expect them to overcome the first time jitters far away from home and accomplish much. Incidentally, I understand many have rated Iran much worse than I have, including as the weakest in this tournament. I put that to not knowing any better, influenced by general impressions that aren't valid. But I admit that rating might also be more objective than I can ever be, even wearing my objective hat!
England? really England? How many more times exactly do we have to do better then them? I know the teams have changed, but the one thing that remains the same is England get more credit then they deserve due to media, and having all their players in the EPL. I think England always being 3rd to 8th favorite in every tournament might very well be the biggest mystery in sports.
I agree that England haven't done anything to deserve being ranked among either the favorites, or even among the contenders. That is why I have them as a "dark horse" in my list, even though the term doesn't seem to fit them well. But what is clear to me is that England haven't done anything for anyone to rate them highly. Holland versus Portugal is a tough choice. I have Holland at #7 and Portugal at #8 but the sequence could easily be reversed. After all, Portugal seems to have Holland's number. Since 2000, in 7 matches, they haven't lost to the Dutch, beating them three times in this period (including in Euro 2012), while drawing with them 4 other times. And of course Portugal made the semifinal in Euro 2012, while Holland were eliminated in the group stage. On the other hand, the Dutch made the final of the 2010 World Cup despite being pretty lackluster nonetheless, and qualified to this World Cup on top of their group. In comparison, Portugal qualified through the playoffs and, in the last World Cup, had a lackluster performance, even if its exit was at the hands of the same team that defeated Holland, namely Spain. At the end, I put Holland at #7 and Portugal at #8 because Holland is just a bigger name. Whether its a better team, however, is not clear.
Portugal is the Netherlands bogey team, but I believe the Netherlands have more quality overall. France has performed poorly for a few years now, but the quality is there and I also believe overall a better overall team then Portugal, just have to get their sh*t together. England, neither the quality or the performances, many,many,many years of the same old same old is why I can't believe people keep making the same mistake.
Personally I would rate Portugal over Holland for a few reasons. 1) Hollands defence sucks, while Portugals is pretty good. I saw Japan cut them to ribbons the other day, and there has long been a question mark over their defence. I think they will be much more vulnerable at the WC than Portugal. 2) I fear Ronaldo much more than Robben, who is far past his best IMO. I think Holland is an aging team tbh, I honestly don't expect that much from them in Brazil, while Portugal IMO could do very well. I'll give the Dutch RVP, that's the only area they are superior to Portugal, perhaps in goalkeeping as well.
Based on this, and in no particular order inside each group, I got: The Contenders, the four strongest sides at the moment plus Italy, because Italy: Brazil Argentina Germany Spain Italy The Dark Horses, I would be very surprised if any of these won the WC but I believe they've got what it takes to go far, with a little luck one might even be a finalist: Colombia Chile Netherlands Portugal France The "I bet you they won't reach the semis" group, self explanatory. Most will make it past the group stage: England Ghana USA Uruguay Belgium Ivory Coast The "Going for the Knockout Round" group, will fight for a spot in the knockout rounds, but will unlikely make it any further: Ecuador Switzerland Russia Japan South Korea Mexico Greece Croatia Bosnia and Herzegovina Costa Rica The "Enjoy your time in Brazil" group, I would be very surprised if any of these came out of its group: Iran Australia Honduras Cameroon Nigeria Algeria Note: Almost anything might change with the draw.
You got none of the Asian teams in the R16, not even Japan, who are deserving of going at least that far. Its possible Japan won't accomplish as much, particularly if they get a bad draw, but to put them in the category you did is unfair to Japan. They are better than that. Besides, I prefer the categories I had listed: I) Favorites II) The Other Contenders III) Dark Horses IV) On the Cusp and V) Also Ran. In the first category, you have teams whose fans expect them to win the tournament and would look at anything less than a top 4 finish as failure. These are teams who are considered among the favorites by neutrals as well. In the second category are teams whose fans won't be satisfied with anything less than a top 8 finish, and who probably are hoping to finish among the top 4. These are teams that neutrals ordinarily would expect to see in the quarterfinals as well. Although not favorites to win the whole things, advancing that far, they are contenders too. The third category are teams who set for themselves the goal of finishing among the top 8 and who aren't going to be satisfied with anything less than making the second round. Neutrals expect them to be in the second round as well and these include sides that many might look to make surprise run. They are basically the tournament Dark Horses. The fourth category are teams whose fans would also be disappointed if they don't qualify to the knock out rounds, but whose expectations in this regard are far more tentative and tempered. Neutrals give them a decent chance to make the R16, but obviously not all of them will succeed in that feat. Many, in fact, won't. The teams in this category are on the cusp and while they might end up flopping completely, ordinarily they are ones that you don't expect to finish last in their group. The last category are teams whose fans certainly would like to see in the R16, but who are given little chance of going that far by neutrals. Some of them might surprise and come closer to the R16 than expected, avoiding a last place finish. Maybe 1-2 of them will even really surprise and make the R16. But more likely than not, most of them will finish last in their group. They are the teams that also ran in the race, but will be soon forgotten.
I wrote that Japan and South Korea are amongst the teams that will fight for a spot in the R16. Some of those teams, like Japan and South Korea, might make it there, some might not. And I prefer my take on yours.
I really don't get it. I've seen so many people saying that Portugal is overrated. If most people think that, then we aren't overrated at all (it's like a self-contradiction). I'm assuming here that an overrated team is a team claimed to be stronger by the vast majority of football fans, than they actually are. But that doesn't happen in this case. Portugal seems to be hated and bashed by many fans, which can mean two things: 1. People are fair when they say we suck, 2. We are UNDERrated. Basically, this is the point i want to enhance here: Many people think we suck, so we can't be overrated. Of course i'm no statistician. I have no idea about the number of fans that think we're crap. But still, from what i read here everyday i think it's something good to be pointed out. And as some people have said here, keep the hate coming. You see, the Portuguese seem to enjoy proving other people wrong about their value. If you keep saying we suck, it makes us stronger. Ask Ronaldo The guy gets so much hate and he turns every bit of it in goals and terrific performances. So i say it again, keep the hate coming.
I saw the Dutch against Colombia last week. Even with 10 men, due to an early red card, they did very well. And all the key players were not playing. And there were good wins against Romania and Turkey away. But still the defense is something to worry about. Netherlands need a miracle to win from Portugal. Verstuurd van mijn GT-I9100 met Tapatalk
I disagree England in my opinion is the weakest European team other than BH, and Greece. I hope Ghana can go far, that the Ivory Coast doesn't get another group of death. Argentina is the strongest SA team IMO.
Yes and no, I don't like Portugal (which is not the same as to say, I hate them), I do like Argentina (which is not the same as to say, I love them), the others I'm indiferent towards them. But what I like or dislike has nothing to do with how I make my rankings. This is not about what countries you like the most or not. It is about how each of us rate the 32 teams of next WC, which no matter how you want to see it, biased or not biased, it still is our personal point of views of the issue. And nothing anyone can say, can change how each of us, rates the 32 teams of the WC. Who is right ?, actually all are, but at the same time, no one is. They are personal.
What really insults general football intelligence, is to asume that you are the only owner of the truth. And yes, the Dutch belong there, while you guys don`t.