For those who have been following along, The year end FIFA rankings have been released (see www.fifa.com for details). The past two world cups used the same formula to determine which countries would be #1 seeds. It is a complex formula based on the three prior world cups AND the year-end FIFA rankings for the 3 years leading up to the world cup. Basically, this months FIFA ranking is about 17% of the formula. Assuming that FIFA uses the same formula for Germany '06, here are the projected seeded teams: 1. Brazil (63.67 pts) 2. Spain (51.17) 3. Germany (49.83) 4. England (46.5) 5. Italy (46.5) 6. Mexico (46.5) 7. France (45.67) 8. Argentina (45.33) Note that Germany will be seeded regardless of points due to hosting. Also, if Brazil qualifies it will be seeded regardless of formula points because of being the current world champion. The following teams are close, but will need a lot of help to become seeded: Netherlands (43 pts) USA (40.33) Turkey (40) Denmark (39.83) Although the World Cup is still more than 2 years away, the above 8 teams appear to be locks for seeds. Of course that is contingent upon 2 things: One is that they qualify. And Two is that FIFA doesn't change the formula. Looking at the recent draw for qualifying groups, it would really be amazing if any of the 8 teams in question fail to qualify. Another important point: Many on this board feel that there is no way that Mexico would be given a seed. After all, no CONCACAF team has been awarded a seed before. I am not arguing that Mexico deserves a seed. I am simply plugging in the numbers to the formula and presenting the results. Many believe that Holland would be granted a seed over Mexico. Keep in mind, that argument is primarily based on subjective opinion rather than "objective" data. One should also note that FIFA has never awarded a seed to a team that did not qualify for the most recent world cup. However, using the formula and assuming all other 8 teams qualify, Holland could possibly squeak out a seed by continuing to increase their FIFA ranking. The main way for them to do that is to win Euro2004.
USA closed almost any possibility being seeded by rejecting Copa America. Now, their only chance is that 3 teams from above doesn't qualify for World Cup.
When I get more time I will update my rankings, but until then eldiablito has done a very good job. I agree with both his numbers and his anlysis of the seeding. I further predicted that the USA, as one of the top ranked unseeded teams, will be in the Group of Death at the next WC. We will get one of the seeded teams..a good, but unseed UEFA team, and an African team in our group. It's going to get ugly.
Thanks for the compliments. All groundwork is credited to you of course. I agree with you regarding USA in a group of death. It certainly looks like that's how it will shape out.
Jeez, not this canard again. -- WRT Mexico, FIFA will almost certainly look for a reason to seed a team outside of Europe/South America. If it's Mexico, then so be it.
I really doubt that we'll draw an African team. The fact is, FIFA will likely place the 8 non-seeded African and CONCACAF teams in one "pot" just like they did last time. Being seeded, it would be Mexico that draws an African side. We're looking at a group that would likely contain two European sides and someone else, either Asian or South American.
They only need two teams from above to fail to qualify. Better, but still not promising. However, if we accepted Copa America, we would have needed to get to the finals to significantly improve our rankings.
I would agree with you in principle--with one caveat: 4 CONCACAF teams qualify. Then Mexico gets a seed and the remaining three teams are placed in the pot with Africa (just because it's always been done that way). However, say the 4th placed Concacaf team loses to the 5th placed Asian team, all bets are off (especially if Oceania wins their playoff). FIFA could then get creative with the allotment of pots.
Re: WC06 seeding formula update Question about the calculation for Turkey: they are technically listed as tied-for-eigth in the Fifa rankings, but are listed second after England, so I think that if you went down to the percentage points, they would be ninth. (The listing can't be sorted on the alphabet: Ireland/Cameroon are tied at 14th with IRL first; Costa Rica/Portugal are tied with CR first; Paraguay/Korea are tied with PAR first; so their is no pattern there.) So did you caclulate Turkey as eigth or ninth? How many fractional points would that cost TUR if you went ninth?
Re: Re: WC06 seeding formula update That's a good question. I had thought about it, but I did not account for it. Therefore, I awarded Turkey the same amount of points as England (in essence--8th). Redoing the projections with Turkey 9th (and Cameroon 15th, and Portugal 18th, and South Korea 23rd if you must know), Turkey goes from a flat 40 points to a flat 39. This puts them behind Denmark. (It's also probably a more realistic decision). Keep in mind that my calculations are projections. I'm assuming the current rankings would be the same over the next two years. Of course this isn't likely to happen, but it gives an accurate picture. Looking ahead, barring the completely unforeseen, all of the seeded teams should probably stay approximately the same over the next two years (ie. within 3-4 rankings). Holland and Denmark have a good chance of improving if they can have remarkable Euro2004s. Turkey is assured of dropping next year due to not qualifying for Euro2004.
Re: Re: WC06 seeding formula update First, England and Turkey are, in fact tied for eighth. Second, I think what FIFA did for the last world cup was to basically treat England and Turkey as both being ranked #8.5, so they would both get 24.5 points for the 12/03 Coke rank snapshot.
Re: Re: Re: WC06 seeding formula update Aaaarrgh! Okay, if that's the case, here's the final results (which still doesn't really change a thing). Brazil 63.67 Spain 51.17 Germany 49.83 Italy 46.5 Mexico 46.5 England 46 France 45.67 Argentina 45.33 ---------------- Netherlands 43 USA 40.33 Denmark 39.83 Turkey 39.5
Re: Re: Re: WC06 seeding formula update Then let's get those Japanese computers that can calculate PI to a trillion decimal places, and get the true numeric answer. What I really don't like is the possibility that the tied ranking can be because of roundoff error. How do we know that England's rating is something like 738.23, and Turkey's isn't like 737.87, and they get rounded to the same integer? Individual games are calculated to a number of decimal places. But the final result is converted to an integer for readability. Again, for such an important calculation, they should use the exact decimal result.
question about france for Worldsoccerjeff and others. I remember in the previous LONG thread about 06 seedings that France was on the outside looking in, and since their WC record is already set, they would have a very hard time moving up the ladder because their world ranking has little if any room for improvement. Am I remembering incorrectly?
You remember correctly, read Jeff's post in this thread: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63727&highlight=seeding+formula It appears that Denmark, US, and Turkey have done poorly enough to let France jump past them.
France is currently riding their WC98 win and their FIFA rank for a seed. If for some reason their FIFA rank goes in the crapper over the next 2 years, they won't get a seed. Assuming FIFA uses the same seeding method in 06 as in 02, the seeding standings are as follows: Brazil 42.3 Germany 35.8 Spain 31.2 Italy 31.2 England 29.7 Mexico 29.7 Argentina 26.7 Denmark 26.5 ------------ USA 25.7 France 25.0 Netherlands 23.7 Turkey 23.2 South Korea 22.5 Belgium 21.8 This is different from Eldiablito's list, as I'm not projecting any points for 12/04 and 11/05 ranks. But if France remains one of the top few teams, France should get a seed, so I wouldn't say they'll have a "hard time climbing the ladder."
Yes and No. Actually, I now see that StymieG has posted the current standings which has Denmark getting the final seed over France (with USA achingly close). This is correct as a snapshot is concerned--meaning if FIFA were seeding teams today and plugging in the known data in their formula, these would be the seeds. However, I don't believe it is a good indicator of what will actually happen in December 2005. That is why my numbers are *projections*--I carry the current FIFA rankings over the 3 years. Realistically, that's not going to happen 100%, but it does appear there should be little variance. Doing it that way, the math allows one to see relevant trends. For example: France will be seeded as long as it stays in the top five. This is now more than likely. France, actually keeps improving its ranking. It's solidly in 2nd place and has an outside chance of becoming #1 if France wins Euro2004 and Brazil crashes out of Copa America and its next qualifiers. France went unbeaten in qualifying for Euro2004, won the "coveted" Confederations Cup and thrashed Germany at Germany during a friendly. When was the last time France lost a game? As long as France maintains their current level of play, they will be seeded. Also, Italy, England, and Mexico just need to remain in the top 10 to stay seeded. Argentina needs to stay in the top 7. Spain is a lock as long as they qualify. Netherlands needs to win Euro2004 and continue to increase its ranking. It has to become around #2 to ensure a seed--quite difficult. Denmark, too, needs to do tremendously well in Euro2004 and in qualifying (and still might need some help). If they can finish 2004 and 2005 in the top 7, it will make the seeding race interesting. Turkey is all but out of it for not qualifying for Euro2004. Their ranking will suffer next year and they will probably be around 14 or 15 by year's end. If the Peruvian president can convince Bush to force the USSF to accept the invitation to CopaAmerica, then USA has a slim chance of improving its status. (That's a big if, and highly unlikely--in other words, I like Turkey's chances better).
update 1/19/04 FWIW, the top 46 places in the FIFA rankings did not change--therefore, the projected seeds remained the same as last month: Brazil 63.67 Spain 51.17 Germany 49.83 Italy 46.5 Mexico 46.5 England 46 France 45.67 Argentina 45.33 ---------------- Netherlands 43 USA 40.33 Denmark 39.83 Turkey 39.5 HOWEVER, because 2004 is a new year--the current standings have changed from Stymie's above post. If FIFA was to seed teams today, this is the current standings: Brazil 53 Germany 42.83 Spain 41.16 Italy 38.83 England 37.83 Mexico 37.83 Argentina 36 France 35.33 --------------- Netherlands 33.33 Denmark 33.17 USA 33 Turkey 31.33
updated 2/18/04 For those following along at home, here are the updated results of the world cup seeding formula. With the exception of the African Nations Cup, there was little movement in the FIFA rankings. Next month may be more interesting, as today marks the beginning of qualifying in Asia and Concacaf--plus a lot of high profile friendlies in Europe. 1. Brazil 63.67 2. Spain 51.17 3. Germany 49.83 4. Mexico 47.83 5. England 47 6. Italy 46.5 7. France 45.67 8. Argentina 44.67 --------------------- 9. Netherlands 43 10. USA 40.33 11. Denmark 39.17 11. Turkey 39.17 Mods please change the title of this thread to reflectu update, thank you
updated as of 3/17/04 Really not too much difference, but here they are: 1. Brazil 63.67 2. Spain 51.17 2. Germany 51.17 (tie) 4. Mexico 47.83 5. England 47 6. Italy 45.83 7. France 45.67 8. Argentina 44 ---------------------------- 9. Netherlands 43 10. USA 39.67 11. Turkey 39.17 11. Denmark 39.17 (tie) A few points regarding the data: 1. As you can see, the Netherlands can catch Argentina if it can continue to climb while Argentina continues to fall. However, I don't foresee that happening considering Argentina's upcoming schedule with wc qualifiers and copa America. 2. Mexico continues to look more like a lock. Right now it has to drop 5 spaces! That's unlikely to happen considering their schedule. Regardless of their performance in upcoming friendlies with Costa Rica and USA and in copa America, they should receive enough points to remain in the top 8. For Mexican fans, this is great news. It makes it harder for FIFA to come up with an alternative mathematical formula to shut out Mexico for a seed. (Of course FIFA could come up with an entirely subjective alternative). 3. This point in time really marks the beginning of the spiral downward for USA (and Turkey). At this point, they appear close, but the rest of the pack will begin to distance them in a couple of months. Denmark should surpass both of them soon (by June or July for sure). My point is that soon it will seem silly to include them on this list. (Much like how it's pointless to mention Belgium in 13th place with 33.17 points currently--there's no hope of Belgium getting a seed). 4. The following note is a futile attempt to pre-empt future discussions as to why Czech Republic deserves a seed. I realize the Czechs are tearing it up right now. They have some crazy unbeaten streak dating back to before the World Cup. They are poised to do well this summer in Euro2004. They may even whip up on their group of death in wc qualification. However, they have not been to the world cup finals since 1990 when they were known as Czechoslovakia. This means they have missed the last three world cups. In other words, for the history half of the seeding formula they have the same score as Honduras, Hungary, Iraq, Mali and United Arab Emirates. That's a big fat 0. I remember some clamoring for Portugal to get a seed before the last world cup for similar reasons. It's not going to happen. The next update will be around the 14th of April.
Re: updated as of 3/17/04 Isn't it worth including the US and Turkey due to the (likely?..at least based on recent history) chance that 1 or 2 of the top 8 teams won't qualify for the 2006 World Cup?
MassRef, You do have a point. I was assuming that all of those teams would qualify for the world cup--especially considering their groups. However, we all know what happens when you assume. I'll continue to show USA and Turkey--even if for sh!ts and giggles.
MassRef always has a point... Thanks, I could use some sh!ts and giggles. I have a feeling they're going to be few and far between for US fans in the next little while. G.
Re: updated as of 3/17/04 I wonder if their schedule could hurt them in the points race. Their Concacaf qualifying bracket is so easy (until they get to the hexagonal), that they won't be getting the mega-super points from winning matches. They better get points from the Copa-Am and the Hex: dropping six points (in the raw standings) will drop them three places, eight points would drop them four.
Also, I'm just curious on how the "pots" would look if they seeded all places: a pot of seeds 1-8, a pot of seeds 9-16, one of 17-24, one of 25-32. (To get the right number of teams from each confederation, you would have to guess at outcomes of play-off matches.) I hope they go to a fully-seeded draw like this, instead of having the top seeds, then the other teams by continent.