the past 3 world cups plus the current ranking go into an algoritm, with germany and the top other 7 qualified nations being #1 seeds.
And somebody please explain to me, again, what Mexico has done to warrant such a lofty ranking? I mean, besides be 1-6-1 against us the past five years.
So, if FIFA decides to do the same thing for 2006, even though these rankings are considered "crap", a hugely successful run through qualifying could get us to the top 7? And a seed?
if usa can win concacaf, I like usa chances to be a number one seed... this debate went on a few months ago, and a few posters had very expert analyses on what is needed... do a search, and I'm sure the thread can be located. mexico is ranked highly due to the past 3 world cups, and COPA AMERICA... big brownie points there, which usa doesn't get
Thread (well one at least) found. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=135020&page=11&pp=15&highlight=fifa+ranking+world
https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=164282&page=1&highlight=world+seeds I think this is the one I had in mind..
At this stage, probably not -- 5/6 of the rating is already determined. I think we have no chance at catching up to the top 8 due to not enough points being available, so the more appropriate goal would be to get past the Dutch for first in line in case one of the prospective seeds fails to qualify.
One of 7 teams to advance to 2nd round in last two world cups. quarterfinalists, Copa America 2004 (including win over Argentina) champions, Gold Cup 2003 (including 2 wins over Brazil) runner-up, Copa America 2001 (including win over Brazil) champions, Confederations Cup 1999 (including win over Brazil) 3rd place, Copa America 1999 champions, Gold Cup 1998 3rd place, Copa America 1997 In the rankings, continental championship final tournament matches are weighted 1.75 times that of friendlies. Mexico plays has played in a continental championsip tournament every year in the ranking period, which gives them a boost over European teams which can play in at most one such tournament every four years, and they have usually won several games each time, including several wins over Brazil and Argentina, which yield huge points. Add in some Confed Cup success (also weighted 1.75), 3 wins at the World Cup, and some WCQ road wins, which yield good ranking scores even against poor opposition, and their FIFA ranking isn't hurt much by a few friendly losses to the USA. Their competitive record against the USA is quite even--the record is only lobsided when you add in the friendlies.
From the ongoing WC seedings thread on the FIFA and Tournaments board comes this interesting quandry: I'll wait for El D to complete the whole analysis. I only note that the US went up one position in FIFA/Coke (tied with Italy), Neth down one, making us only 2 net spots away from being tied in the seeding formula. Interestingly enough, if the US does well against Mexico this week, it could reverse that gain. We'd break the tie with Italy but still remain tenth, but Mexico could drop a spot below Neth, resulting in Neth having a gain.
Obviously there is a formula for this stuff, but there are about six teams on that list that are not one of the top twenty in the world, and another six who are ranked generously high.
COPA AMERICA is no brownie......don't tell me Argentina is a pushover.......What about the little team that wears the yellow jerseys(Brazil)....as a reminder...they also play in COPA AMERICA......only won 5 world cups.......what about the other team which has won 2(in the 30's) and currently has as many stars as Argentina in Europe(Uruguay)......then there is Paraguay, Chile......c'mon dude......don't tell me the U.S is better than MEX they don't compete in important tournaments outside the WC which i'll remind you, so does MEX.....the U.S stays in CONCACAF and beats everyone......they play good against big teams...but in friendlies...not official games(outside WC).....If the U.S wants to rank above Mexico they have to start participating in important tournaments.....when they are invited to COPA AMERICA they should take the opportunity.......don't get me wrong..the U.S is a good team but what counts is official and important tournaments.......
Where to begin . . . Let's do it this way, I'm simply going to ignore the second part of your post where you appear to claim that Mexico is a better team than the US apparently becaus the US does not compete in important tournaments. The logic here does not merit discussion. That said, I will point out that I think you are misinterpreting the meaning of "brownie points." Here is a link for edification as I think it may simply be a translation/language issue: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-bro3.htm
As I said in my rep comment - and if ever a post was rep worthy, this was it - thanks for a thorough answer. All the success Mexico has had the past eight years only underscores how big it is for us to do well against them, though as you point out, it's even in games that matter the past eight years, 2-3-2 by my count. 97 qualifier @USA 2, Mexico 2 97 qualifier USA 0, @Mexico 0 98 Gold Cup @USA 0, Mexico 1 99 Confederations Cup USA 0, @Mexico 1 (OT) 01 Qualifier @USA 2, Mexico 0 01 Qualifier USA 0, @Mexico 1 02 World Cup, USA 2, Mexico 0 (@South Korea) Am I forgetting any non-friendlies over the past eight years? (And eight years is the amount of time FIFA uses to calculate the rankings, correct?)
Well thanks for pointing that out....and thanx for trying to make me look like me an idiot....."the logic here does not merit discussion"....LOL..please...read some of the posts of other people who DO know about soccer...people who are stating that Mexico's participation in so many tournaments give Mexico more points than the U.S and a better ranking overall...
Fine. I will explain it to you. 1) Mexico has indeed earned a higher FIFA ranking based on its victories in various competitions over the years most notably in prevailing over Brazil in several occasions including Gold Cup Victories. I have no argument with those who correctly point out how Mexico has earned a higher seeding in the FIFA rankings than the USMNT. 2) Your post asserts the following: You explain the basis for the above premise: 3) Simply put, Mexico's higher FIFA ranking and the fact it plays in more tournaments outside of CONCACAF fail to make El Tri a "better" team than the USMNT. I will concede that the point could be debateble but your presumption that the fact that Mexico has played "better" teams does not prove your point. 4) There are several reasons for this. Primarily, the two teams have played on, I believe, at least 5 occasions over the past 4 years. During that time, not only has Mexico failed to win any of the matches but they have not even scored a goal (I believe its over 400 minutes without a goal at this point). 5) Adam's Point, I believe, was that Mexico gets valuable FIFA points for playing against opponents in competitions in which we do not compete. Not that any of top COMNEBOL members are pushovers as you take time to clarify for our edification. 6) Last, but certainly not least, I think that the people who "DO know about soccer" were not attempting to assert or even suggest that El Tri is "better" than the USMNT due to a higher FIFA ranking; rather, they were correctly explaining the basis for the ranking. If you truly believe Mexico is "better" due their higher FIFA ranking, kudos to you -- but I don't think the point is worth debating.
The fact that I mentoines Chile is because they are an important team in CONMEBOL and a rival in COPA AMERICA...... I also never said the rankings were accurate...if anything Mexico and the U.S should not be in the top 10.......
I will say one thing if the US can beat Mexico in Mexico in a game that matters, and this game matter we be moving up after a win for sure.
The rankings are based on the last eight years worth of results, and I think it's fair to say that Mexico has been better over that entire period.
I know this has pointed out numerous times before, but the US really should start competing in Copa America again. The excuse that it goes on during the MLS season just doesn't make sense anymore since we can easily have a squad of all European players. If we made it to the semifinals in '95 we can do at least that well, imagine watching the US in the final game. Also if we become a regular participant I suppose it could be possible that we might host the tournament one day.