New FIFA Ranking:
Moderators: Moderator Team, phpBB2 - Administrators
-
Bigpokey24
- Super Eagle
- Posts: 111004
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 4:58 pm
- Location: Earth
New FIFA Ranking:
New FIFA Ranking top 20
1. Germany
2. Brazil
3. Belgium
4. Portugal
5. Argentina
6. Switzerland
7. France
8. Spain
9. Chile
10. Poland
11. Peru
12. Denmark
13. England
14. Tunisia
15. Mexico
16. Colombia
17. Uruguay
18. Croatia
19. Netherlands
20. Italy
we should play Tunisia
http://www.espn.com/soccer/blog/fifa/24 ... ar?src=com
1. Germany
2. Brazil
3. Belgium
4. Portugal
5. Argentina
6. Switzerland
7. France
8. Spain
9. Chile
10. Poland
11. Peru
12. Denmark
13. England
14. Tunisia
15. Mexico
16. Colombia
17. Uruguay
18. Croatia
19. Netherlands
20. Italy
we should play Tunisia
http://www.espn.com/soccer/blog/fifa/24 ... ar?src=com
SuperEagles
© Bigpokey24, most loved on CE
My post are with no warranties and confers zero rights. Get out your feelings
It is not authorized by CyberEagles. You assume all risk for your use.
All rights aren't reserved
© Bigpokey24, most loved on CE
My post are with no warranties and confers zero rights. Get out your feelings
It is not authorized by CyberEagles. You assume all risk for your use.
All rights aren't reserved
Re: New FIFA Ranking:
Friendlies games doesn’t really hold weight. Wcq, confederation cups, world cups holds the biggest weight. Unfortunately, it doesn’t favor African teams sha
-
Cellular
- Site Admin
- Posts: 53804
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 5:59 pm
- Location: Nembe Creek...Oil Exploration. If you call am bunkering na you sabi.
Re: New FIFA Ranking:
Why?Bigpokey24 wrote:New FIFA Ranking top 20
1. Germany
2. Brazil
3. Belgium
4. Portugal
5. Argentina
6. Switzerland
7. France
8. Spain
9. Chile
10. Poland
11. Peru
12. Denmark
13. England
14. Tunisia
15. Mexico
16. Colombia
17. Uruguay
18. Croatia
19. Netherlands
20. Italy
we should play Tunisia
Regardless of who we play the FIFA rankings remain a shammockery.
I will keep advocating that FIFA streamline World Cup and World Cup qualification to give Confederation champions automatic qualification to the WC. And then have all the other Confederation Qualifiers all be put in one pool and divided to play each other.
To get the other qualifiers.
THERE WAS A COUNTRY...
...can't cry more than the bereaved!
Well done is better than well said!!!
...can't cry more than the bereaved!
Well done is better than well said!!!
Re: New FIFA Ranking:
I think we need two things to be resolved
There is a HUGE difference between consistency and power ranking, the two are NOT the same
FIFA tries to do both and fails spectacularly at both. I think the ELO ranking does a much better job at gauging consistency.
As for power ranking, there is currently NO medium that I am aware of that does it properly. You need a ranking that accounts for managerial tenure, i.e. a team with a 20 winning streak with a retired manager that all of a sudden has a new manager with a 0-0-5 losing streak is probably something that should weigh negatively for a power ranking. A power ranking tries to accommodate for all the factors that determine CURRENT strength.
When you finally seed, you seed using a coefficient that accounts for both an adequate consistency based ranking such as the ELO ranking and a power ranking. You do not amalgamate the two, but only allow for a ratio during seeding.
Perhaps in Europe there is probably a greater convergence between power and consistency, but in Africa especially, the two could not be farther from the same. That is the reason why Nigeria does not qualify for the 2012 AFCON and wins the 2013 AFCON. but even in the Europe example...the premise is still true.
FIFA staggers the weight of matches based on time periods but that does not really rectify the issue.
There is a HUGE difference between consistency and power ranking, the two are NOT the same
FIFA tries to do both and fails spectacularly at both. I think the ELO ranking does a much better job at gauging consistency.
As for power ranking, there is currently NO medium that I am aware of that does it properly. You need a ranking that accounts for managerial tenure, i.e. a team with a 20 winning streak with a retired manager that all of a sudden has a new manager with a 0-0-5 losing streak is probably something that should weigh negatively for a power ranking. A power ranking tries to accommodate for all the factors that determine CURRENT strength.
When you finally seed, you seed using a coefficient that accounts for both an adequate consistency based ranking such as the ELO ranking and a power ranking. You do not amalgamate the two, but only allow for a ratio during seeding.
Perhaps in Europe there is probably a greater convergence between power and consistency, but in Africa especially, the two could not be farther from the same. That is the reason why Nigeria does not qualify for the 2012 AFCON and wins the 2013 AFCON. but even in the Europe example...the premise is still true.
FIFA staggers the weight of matches based on time periods but that does not really rectify the issue.
Buhari, whose two terms thankfully ground to a constitutional halt in May. (One thing both democracies have going for them is that their leaders, however bad, have only two terms to swing the wrecking ball.) Under Buhari, growth per head also plunged to 0. An economic agenda drawn from the dusty pages of a 1970s protectionist handbook failed to do the trick. Despite Buhari’s promise to tame terrorism and criminality, violence flourished. Despite his reputation for probity, corruption swirled. FT
Re: New FIFA Ranking:
You might be onto something here.Tbite wrote:I think we need two things to be resolved
There is a HUGE difference between consistency and power ranking, the two are NOT the same
FIFA tries to do both and fails spectacularly at both. I think the ELO ranking does a much better job at gauging consistency.
As for power ranking, there is currently NO medium that I am aware of that does it properly. You need a ranking that accounts for managerial tenure, i.e. a team with a 20 winning streak with a retired manager that all of a sudden has a new manager with a 0-0-5 losing streak is probably something that should weigh negatively for a power ranking. A power ranking tries to accommodate for all the factors that determine CURRENT strength.
When you finally seed, you seed using a coefficient that accounts for both an adequate consistency based ranking such as the ELO ranking and a power ranking. You do not amalgamate the two, but only allow for a ratio during seeding.
Perhaps in Europe there is probably a greater convergence between power and consistency, but in Africa especially, the two could not be farther from the same. That is the reason why Nigeria does not qualify for the 2012 AFCON and wins the 2013 AFCON. but even in the Europe example...the premise is still true.
FIFA staggers the weight of matches based on time periods but that does not really rectify the issue.
How about we set up Tbite Rankings.
Seriously, this is a great idea!
“If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.”- Sun Tzu