FIFA rankings - why they are important and how to beat the system

[maplebanana]

3 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

So in recent years, we reached our peak in February 2022, low 30s, then relaxed in the latter fixtures of WC qualifying. Losing in Panama actually hurt us. Which probably hurt our seeding for the tournament, landing us in the hardest group (we were on the threshold, it is not entirely clear where we had to be in ranking before the draw, and how we could have ensured that).

If my memory serves, since the draw was immediately following the march 2022 window, we had known that if we had beaten Panama, we would have moved into pot 3. A few things needed to happen in order for us to have that opportunity, including I think some results going our way in CAF. But we were very much in the 'win and in' regime. Too bad the team was mostly hungover. 

[Kadenge]

5 hours ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

.....

I think what it really says is that population need not be the key factor at all, that having a quality program, creating talent, moving it through pro systems, competing, is what is important. 

There's clear evidence of this when you see the number of high level players that were born/developed in France, England, Germany, Netherlands etc who play for North African countries, Jamaica, Suriname, Ireland, Wales, USA and others. Most of our current squad were developed in Canada. Staq and LDF being the exceptions. We need to ramp up the ID process and  get those young players into a strong developmental pathway.

[gigi riva]

9 hours ago, Kadenge said:

There's clear evidence of this when you see the number of high level players that were born/developed in France, England, Germany, Netherlands etc who play for North African countries, Jamaica, Suriname, Ireland, Wales, USA and others. Most of our current squad were developed in Canada. Staq and LDF being the exceptions. We need to ramp up the ID process and  get those young players into a strong developmental pathway.

Amen Brother

[CanadaFan123]

15 hours ago, Kadenge said:

There's clear evidence of this when you see the number of high level players that were born/developed in France, England, Germany, Netherlands etc who play for North African countries, Jamaica, Suriname, Ireland, Wales, USA and others. Most of our current squad were developed in Canada. Staq and LDF being the exceptions. We need to ramp up the ID process and  get those young players into a strong developmental pathway.

Even Staq was partially developed in Canada. We are doing incredibly well in comparison to our CONCACAF rivals. This is why CPL/L1 is so key as well to have more eyes all over the country. Now imagine what happens when the World Cup hits to inspire the youth and we have ~20 pro clubs around the country in another 10 years. 

[InglewoodJack]

18 hours ago, Kadenge said:

There's clear evidence of this when you see the number of high level players that were born/developed in France, England, Germany, Netherlands etc who play for North African countries, Jamaica, Suriname, Ireland, Wales, USA and others. Most of our current squad were developed in Canada. Staq and LDF being the exceptions. We need to ramp up the ID process and  get those young players into a strong developmental pathway.

It’s kinda crazy to think that Canada might have, pound for pound, one of the better domestic development pipelines in the world after most of the top tier nations. You take a city like Montreal, and at their absolute peak, I think the total value of say, Kone, Bombito, Crepeau, Saliba, Piette, Farsi, and a few of the other guys who grew up here, and their total transfer value might approach €100M. You look at the handful of guys that came out of the relatively (sorry) provincial city of Ottawa too, and it’s a lot of really good players that grew up in a two hour radius. 
 

Even in MLS, Montreal has frequently started 5-7 montrealers in their starting 11. I know TFC has had GTA-heavy lineups too. There aren’t many MLS teams in the US who can start a majority local lineup and still stay competitive. 
 

You project how things will progress and once some smaller cities start really producing players, especially now that dual nats like LDF, Sigur, maybe Jebbison are starting to get swayed by Canada, you almost start having crazy thoughts about where we’re going to be in 2030, 2034. Top 20 worldwide within the next decade is not completely unreachable, IMO. 

[Mihairokov]

These things seem impressive until you remember that Montreal has a larger population than Croatia, or that the Golden Horseshoe has a population nearly equivalent to Portugal. I agree that we've produced some very good players but we still have so much work to do at the grassroots level in ensuring that these players have somewhere to play at 15/16/17...

Players like David or Buchanan, for example, hopefully end up with a CPL or MLS side at 15 instead of staying local until transferring out of the country at 18. Develop more players at higher levels, receive transfer fees for them, and build upwards in a cycle from there.

[InglewoodJack]

1 hour ago, Mihairokov said:

These things seem impressive until you remember that Montreal has a larger population than Croatia, or that the Golden Horseshoe has a population nearly equivalent to Portugal. I agree that we've produced some very good players but we still have so much work to do at the grassroots level in ensuring that these players have somewhere to play at 15/16/17...

Players like David or Buchanan, for example, hopefully end up with a CPL or MLS side at 15 instead of staying local until transferring out of the country at 18. Develop more players at higher levels, receive transfer fees for them, and build upwards in a cycle from there.

I think number of clubs is more relevant than population considering the two countries you mentioned- like the other titans of the sport- have a century head start over us in developing players and the culture that surrounds it. Canada for all intents and purposes have 3 big clubs, 8 domestic clubs and a small handful of semi pro teams who have produced some very good players (Sigma, Azzuri, CS STL). That about 5 or so clubs have produced the majority of a top 40 national team, a Copa semi finalist, World Cup qualifying roster is remarkable. The CPL being a 5 year old league that has yet to produce a star player- it’s coming- and our big clubs playing in a league that disadvantages Canadian players makes it even more remarkable.  
 

Ultimately, I think we all agree that more clubs and more opportunities will unlock this. We’re already seeing the CPL start to produce U20 guys with some future potential, we just need more of it. But the vision is there, if a few Canadian clubs start producing anywhere near the talent coming out of the 3 MLS clubs, we’re going to see our team take an even bigger leap.

[Neil R.]

It's nice to see us gain another 7.65 points, putting us back over 1500 in the FIFA rankings.

I know people will say "it doesn't matter, they won't be relevant again for us until year whatever", but I think that's very short-term thinking. At some point in the future, they will matter again, and we'll be glad we were adding to our total during the non-relevant times.

[CanadaFan123]

4 hours ago, Mihairokov said:

These things seem impressive until you remember that Montreal has a larger population than Croatia, or that the Golden Horseshoe has a population nearly equivalent to Portugal. I agree that we've produced some very good players but we still have so much work to do at the grassroots level in ensuring that these players have somewhere to play at 15/16/17...

Players like David or Buchanan, for example, hopefully end up with a CPL or MLS side at 15 instead of staying local until transferring out of the country at 18. Develop more players at higher levels, receive transfer fees for them, and build upwards in a cycle from there.

I mean, that would be like comparing NHL players coming from those areas. We’ll get there. 

[Kent]

I'm not sure if I've posted this table before or not. If I have it's been over a year. It's not a great picture for CONCACAF.

This table is tracking the change in the total FIFA point pool for each confederation. The "Championship" column separates out confederation cups (Gold Cup, Copa America, Euro, etc) and Nations League playoffs. The reason for that being that teams don't lose points for losing games in the knockout rounds. So it's always going to be a net benefit to the confederation (but a bigger net benefit if the underdog wins). The "Other" column is due to things like the World Cup, friendlies against teams outside the confederation, or being a guest team in another confederation's tournament. "Overall" is the sum of the "Championship" and "Other" columns.

CAF might jump off the page as doing very poorly, but that is because Eritrea has been removed from the rankings due to not playing a game in more than 4 years. When they play a game next that will be about 833 points back in CAF's pocket.

So if we give those 833 points back to CAF that means CONCACAF has had the second lowest gain overall, and the worst drop from inter confederation matches. We also had the worst World Cup by this measure. The last time CONCACAF gained points without a Gold Cup or Nations League playoffs was in August 2022. That's 11 straight FIFA ranking releases with negative points (not counting the Gold Cup or Nations League windows, but it does count Copa America and World Cup).

[Neil R.]

Since it's the last day of September, I hope we get a CONCACAF ranking update today. Our September window was fantastic (win against the US, draw against Mexico) and I'd really like to know before League A plays their last 2 Nations League matches in about a week or so, who is currently 2nd, 3rd, and how close they are in ranking points.

If we get an updated set of rankings today and we have a really good shot at 2nd, it will be fun to follow the last 2 League A matchdays knowing we would get the 2nd place finisher from Group A or B with the highest point total as our Nations League quarter-final opponent.

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

17 hours ago, Neil R. said:

Since it's the last day of September, I hope we get a CONCACAF ranking update today.

We have!

We have surpassed the USA and are now second in the rankings 🥳

https://www.concacaf.com/rankings/men-s-national-team/

@archer21 , @Kent , @maplebanana and others who believe they may have a grasp on the formula, does the swing in points confirm your models/theories?

Mexico: a win against New Zealand & a draw against Canada = +7 points

USA: a loss against Canada & a draw against New Zealand = -31 points

Canada: a win against the USA & a draw against Mexico = +25 points

Panama: No games played = no change in points

And interestingly,

Costa Rica: a win against Guadeloupe & a draw against Guatemala = no change in points

Edited Monday at 11:03 PM by Olympique_de_Marseille

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

The question becomes, are we solely in charge of our own destiny? If we beat Panama, can we get surpassed by the USA if they also beat Panama and Mexico?

Also, could Panama move into second if they best both the USA and ourselves?

This October friendly may have stakes that make it feel competitive.

Edited Monday at 11:45 AM by Olympique_de_Marseille

[Kadenge]

5 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

The question becomes, are we solely in charge of our own destiny? If we beat Panama, can we get surpassed by the USA if they also beat Panama and Mexico?

Also, could Panama move into second if they best both the USA and ourselves?

This October friendly may have stakes that make it feel competitive.

2-4 spots are tight for sure. It seems securing 3rd  is key if that means we don't face Jamaica, assumimg they  top  their group? Time for a thread for the Panama game.

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

Just now, Kadenge said:

Time for a thread for the Panama game.

I can make one late tonight with a detailed opening post.

[Kent]

Dream scenario now would be that we beat Panama, Panama beats USA and Mexico beats USA. That should give Panama positive points (because we are ranked higher than USA), and USA would get negative points for the two losses, surely Panama would pass USA and we would stay ahead of Panama. So that would keep us at 2nd and push USA to 4th, making them the lowest seed for Nations League playoffs.

That's the dream, but the Panama game will be tough. If we lose that there is a real possibility we drop down to 3rd or 4th as well.

[MtlMario]

40 minutes ago, Kent said:

 

That's the dream, but the Panama game will be tough. If we lose that there is a real possibility we drop down to 3rd or 4th as well.

Do I have to take out my crystal ball to make you feel better?😁

[archer21]

2 hours ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

We have!

We have surpassed the USA and are now second in the rankings 🥳

https://www.concacaf.com/rankings/men-s-national-team/

@archer21 , @Kent , @maplebanana and others who believe they may have a grasp on the formula, does the swing in points confirm your conclusions?

Mexico: a win against New Zealand & a draw against Canada = +7 points

USA: a loss against Canada & a draw against New Zealand = -31 points

Canada: a win against the USA & a draw against Mexico = +25 points

Panama: No games played = no change in points

And interestingly,

Costa Rica: a win against Guadeloupe & a draw against Guatemala = no change in points

I guessed we’d gain about 18.5 from the USA match but that was before factoring in home field advantage. I still think I probably underestimated anyways though. Maybe we got around 21 or 22 from USA then 3 or 4 from the Mexico draw. 
 

-31 is a lot for USA to lose though so unless they’re giving NZ a ridiculously low chance of beating USA, maybe our game was worth even more (23?).

My best guess is beating Panama give us about 15 points. USA winning both would get around 35.

Which would put us tied in total points. Basically what I’m saying is, it’s too close to really know who would be 2nd and who would be 3rd in this scenario without knowing the formula for “expected result”. 

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

On 9/19/2024 at 1:39 AM, maplebanana said:

The slope of these curves at any point...

1 hour ago, archer21 said:

...without knowing the formula for “expected result”. 

Here is one that may help us crack the formula.

The friendly in July between El Salvador and Guatemala on neutral ground in the USA.

El Salvador was on 1215.

Guatemala was on 1392.

After El Salvador won 1-0: El Salvador gained 22 points and Guatemala lost 22 points.

[maplebanana]

4 hours ago, archer21 said:

I guessed we’d gain about 18.5 from the USA match but that was before factoring in home field advantage. I still think I probably underestimated anyways though. Maybe we got around 21 or 22 from USA then 3 or 4 from the Mexico draw. 
 

-31 is a lot for USA to lose though so unless they’re giving NZ a ridiculously low chance of beating USA, maybe our game was worth even more (23?).

My best guess is beating Panama give us about 15 points. USA winning both would get around 35.

Which would put us tied in total points. Basically what I’m saying is, it’s too close to really know who would be 2nd and who would be 3rd in this scenario without knowing the formula for “expected result”. 

My concacaf calculator is definitely not 100% accurate, but my calculation for Canada in the last window was +23.7 for USA match and +2.8 for MEX, so total of +26.5 in the window (actual: +25). But my calculation for USA was -37 (actual: -31). 

Based on my coefficients, a W/D/L for Canada vs Panama is: +12/-5.5/-23. Meaning a win or draw and we stay above Panama; a loss they pass us by 9 pts.

But, since USA is playing Panama and Mexico too, it adds many scenarios.

Worst-ish case: PAN beats CAN, USA beats PAN, MEX beats USA. That would be:

CAN: -23 -> 1771
PAN: -12.5, +23 -> 1766.5
USA: +12.5, -10 -> 1776.5
---> 2. USA, 3. CAN, 4. PAN

Best case: CAN win, PAN beats USA, USA loses to MEX:

CAN: +12 -> 1806
PAN: +23, -12 -> 1767
USA: -23, -10 -> 1741
---> 2. CAN, 3. PAN, 4. USA

Semi realistic: CAN beats PAN, USA beats PAN, MEX draw USA:

CAN: +12 -> 1806
PAN: -12.5, -12 -> 1732
USA: +12.5, -10 -> 1777
---> 2. CAN, 3. USA, 4. PAN

Edited Monday at 06:52 PM by maplebanana
updated for accuracy re: home field adv

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

1 hour ago, archer21 said:

without knowing the formula for “expected result”. 

That's why I posted Costa Rica's points. I was wondering if it could give us the necessary info to calculate points gained or lost, especially when two teams draw.

Costa Rica was on 1688. Guadeloupe was on 1119. Costa Rica won 3-0 at home and gained x points.

Guatemala were at 1370 at the end of August. Guatemala drew Uruguay in a friendly at the beginning of the month, then Guatemala beat Martinique 3-1.

So Guatemala were likely a bit higher than 1370 after those two matches. Maybe ~1390 or 1400ish when they faced drew Costa Rica at home?

So Costa Rica also lost x points by drawing a team ranked roughly 300 points below them.

[maplebanana]

13 minutes ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

Here is one that may help us crack the formula.

The friendly in July between El Salvador and Guatemala on neutral ground in the USA.

El Salvador was on 1215.

Guatemala was on 1392.

After El Salvador won 1-0: El Salvador gained 22 points and Guatemala lost 22 points.

My calculator says: ESV should have gained 22.14 pts (and GUA loses the same). So sometimes my calculator is wildly accurate and other times it's not so much.

'60% of the time, it works every time'

[Olympique_de_Marseille]

5 minutes ago, maplebanana said:

My calculator says: ESV should have gained 22.14 pts (and GUA loses the same). So sometimes my calculator is wildly accurate and other times it's not so much.

'60% of the time, it works every time'

So is the fault in your calculator perhaps calculating points gained or lost when CONCACAF teams play non-CONCACAF teams? Like, is the hiccup in your formula, the part for converting New Zealand's 🇳🇿  FIFA ranking to a "CONCACAF" equivalent?

Edited Monday at 05:00 PM by Olympique_de_Marseille

[maplebanana]

@Kent I said earlier this +22/-22 pt swing didn't make sense according to my model, but I think it had been so long since I dusted it off that I used it wrong. Upon review, my model does predict this.

Disclaimer: Distinct possibility that I'm wrong in both instances.

[maplebanana]

1 minute ago, Olympique_de_Marseille said:

So is the fault in your calculator perhaps calculating points gained or lost when CONCACAF teams play non-CONCACAF teams? Like, is the hiccup in your formula, the part for converting New Zealand's 🇳🇿  FIFA ranking to a "CONCACAF" equivalent?

That is certainly part of it. I tried to estimate NZ based on their FIFA ranking (95) being between Curacao (88) and T&T (101). But T&T's CONCACAF ranking is quite a bit higher than Curacao. But playing with the numbers in that range won't get me from -37 to -31 (more like -35).