What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Jimjamesak said:
Regarding rankings: I know each match gives a certain amount of points then each match has a multiplier depending on what type of match (ie a WCQ game is higher than a friendly, a World Cup game is higher than a Continental Championship game).

The rub is that there is (or was) a Confederation multiplier for each teams total. Europe was a 1.0, S. America was like 0.9 and CONCACAF was like a 0.5.
Click to expand...

CONCACAF, AFC, and OFC I believe are 0.85, which is the lower bound that was set when the formula was created (we might be lower otherwise). As I said, the really nasty thing about this is that the multiplier for a game is the average of the confederation multipliers of the teams playing in it, so the U.S. is guaranteed at least a 7% penalty to points vs. a UEFA team in any game we play. Taking it to an extreme, we get a 15% penalty for a match against Mexico at the Azteca, while Lichtenstein would get a 0% penalty for a match at home against Andorra.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

I somehow missed this: OFC's entrant into the Confederations Cup is Tahiti, who won last year's OFC Nations Cup by beating New Caledonia in the final after New Caledonia had knocked off New Zealand (who I assume must have been the prohibitive favorites, given that they have the only players in the tournament that anybody has ever heard of) in the semifinal. They're grouped with Spain, Uruguay, and Nigeria. I think it's, uh, gonna get ugly for them.
 
Shirtless Guy said:
Was looking at the breakdown for the 2014 world cup. It appears likely that CONCACAF will be paired with Asia again in whatever pot they end up.

To have a chance of not being paired that way, the seeded pot needs to end up 6/2 UEFA/CONMEBOL instead of 5/3. That would require Colombia to drop out of top 7.
Click to expand...
FIFA uses a different formula to determine seeds for the WC. I don't think has a possible shot at a seed.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

I found out something really interesting that surprised me a bit. I figured that the World Cup has been pretty much dominated by South American and European teams, and while I remembered that one team outside those two federations had placed inside the top four during my adult lifetime, I was wondering if any other team had.

The answer surprised me.

There have been 19 World Cups so far (none in 1942 or 1946).

I'm using the name of the continent for the federation since I'm not sure how far back some of the federations go.

Winners: 9 South America, 10 Europe.
2nd Place: 3 South America, 16 Europe.
3rd Place: 3 South America, 15 Europe, one other (this is the one that surprised me).
4th Place: 4 South America, 14 Europe, one other
(this is the one that I remembered. You might at first glance think two other, but one of those two is in UEFA. Ironically, those two played each other for third in the same tournament).

Overall: 19 South America, 55 Europe, one other A, one other B.



Brazil and (West) Germany each made the finals 7 times, Brazil 5-2 and (West) Germany 3-4. Italy is 4-2 in the finals. Argentina is 2-2, Netherlands 0-3, and no other country has made the finals more than twice.

(West) Germany has 12 top 4 finishes (out of 19! not bad). Brazil 10. Italy 8. Uruguay and France 5. Argentina, Netherlands, Sweden 4. No one else with more than 2.
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
I found out something really interesting that surprised me a bit. I figured that the World Cup has been pretty much dominated by South American and European teams, and while I remembered that one team outside those two federations had placed inside the top four during my adult lifetime, I was wondering if any other team had.

The answer surprised me.

There have been 19 World Cups so far (none in 1942 or 1946).

I'm using the name of the continent for the federation since I'm not sure how far back some of the federations go.

Winners: 9 South America, 10 Europe.
2nd Place: 3 South America, 16 Europe.
3rd Place: 3 South America, 15 Europe, one other (this is the one that surprised me).
4th Place: 4 South America, 14 Europe, one other (this is the one that I remembered).

Overall: 19 South America, 55 Europe, one other A, one other B.



Brazil and (West) Germany each made the finals 7 times, Brazil 5-2 and (West) Germany 3-4. Italy is 4-2 in the finals.
Click to expand...
That "one other" that finished 3rd is the US! In 1930. Show some pride! The fourth place is S. Korea in 2002 correct?
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Jimjamesak said:
FIFA uses a different formula to determine seeds for the WC. I don't think has a possible shot at a seed.
Click to expand...
Not anymore it is just the last FIFA ranking before the tournament. I wasn't talking about the US having a shot at a seed, I was talking about the arrangement of confederation berths and how that effects who would be in the same pot as the US. I would assume it favors the US that we'd be in a pot with the S.American countries...although that drastically increases our chances of being in a group with Brazil and Argentina.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

FreshFish said:
I found out something really interesting that surprised me a bit. I figured that the World Cup has been pretty much dominated by South American and European teams, and while I remembered that one team outside those two federations had placed inside the top four during my adult lifetime, I was wondering if any other team had.

The answer surprised me.

There have been 19 World Cups so far (none in 1942 or 1946).

I'm using the name of the continent for the federation since I'm not sure how far back some of the federations go.

Winners: 9 South America, 10 Europe.
2nd Place: 3 South America, 16 Europe.
3rd Place: 3 South America, 15 Europe, one other (this is the one that surprised me).
4th Place: 4 South America, 14 Europe, one other
(this is the one that I remembered. You might at first glance think two other, but one of those two is in UEFA. Ironically, those two played each other for third in the same tournament).

Overall: 19 South America, 55 Europe, one other A, one other B.



Brazil and (West) Germany each made the finals 7 times, Brazil 5-2 and (West) Germany 3-4. Italy is 4-2 in the finals.
Click to expand...
To me the best part of trivia for those 19 winners is that Until 2010, Europe had never won a title that wasn't played in Europe. CONMEBOL was the only confederation to be able to say that, winning all the titles in Asia and North America plus one in Europe.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Jimjamesak said:
That "one other" that finished 3rd is the US! In 1930. Show some pride! The fourth place is S. Korea in 2002 correct?
Click to expand...

Yes for both.



5 of the 76 top four finishes were from countries that no longer exist: 2 Czechoslovakia, 2 Yugoslavia, 1 USSR.
 
Last edited:
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Well, in fairness they do have a tiny foothold in Europe.

Now, if Israel, Georgia or Kazakhstan ever make waves in the World Cup, that'd be a different story altogether.
Click to expand...
Or Guyana, French Guiana, or Suriname...Let's all remember that these are confederations that don't necessarily require being in the "continent." Australia is part of AFC...
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Jimjamesak said:
FIFA uses a different formula to determine seeds for the WC. I don't think has a possible shot at a seed.
Click to expand...

FIFA does whatever it takes to make the case for the seeds that they think are correct. Colombia doesn't have a chance.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Shirtless Guy said:
Or Guyana, French Guiana, or Suriname...Let's all remember that these are confederations that don't necessarily require being in the "continent." Australia is part of AFC...
Click to expand...
I suppose Australia could have its own qualifying by itself, as it's both a country and a continent.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Craig P. said:
FIFA does whatever it takes to make the case for the seeds that they think are correct. Colombia doesn't have a chance.
Click to expand...
Colombia didn't qualify in 2010. That'll take them out of the running alone.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

concacaf may get the shaft on rankings, but in exchange the USA has a super easy qualification hex for the world cup most times.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

Jimjamesak said:
The Hex is anything but "super easy".
Click to expand...
And yet at this point in our history, it's **** near a given that we'll get through it.

Compare that to the experience of countries that are on par with us in the FIFA rankings and have to trudge through the UEFA qualification route.
 
Re: World Soccer XXIII - "Pay" Up Pompey?

So, let's assume Lambert's youth plan 'worked' as Villa got stronger as the spring wore on and they finished on an upswing...something that had gone 100% the other way the previous 3-4 years.

He is getting/gotten rid of Bent, Given, Dunne, Ireland, Hutton, which accounts for a TON of money saved. They have also signed several guys (average age 13 years old) mostly 20-23 year olds with national team experience for their respective countries.

If Lambert is the Billy Beane of EPL and they lock up Benteke, along with Weimann already signed, then the Villans will be heading into a season with some justified optimism since the year before MON defected.

Edit: and the new kits aren't too shabby...sponsor could use some work:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top