- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
How does seeding work for the World Cup?
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:46 am
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:46 am
I know there have been posts here and there about Grant Wahl's tweet about Switzerland locking in a top 8 seed. Maybe the answer to why was in some of those threads, but I didn't see it. How are the top 8 seeds determined? I'm confused how a Swiss team in the easiest group in Europe can have a top 8 seed locked up even being ranked out of the top 10 in the world rankings.
3
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:47 am to DestrehanTiger
quote:
How are the top 8 seeds determined?
FIFA rankings + host
quote:
I'm confused how a Swiss team in the easiest group in Europe can have a top 8 seed locked up even being ranked out of the top 10 in the world rankings.
Due to losses elsewhere they moved into top 7 + Brasil.
Also, FIFA rankings are shite and should be done away with.
This post was edited on 10/16/13 at 8:48 am
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:51 am to TN Bhoy
The Dutch haven't lost a qualifier and are ranked 9th. They weren't in that list that Wahl tweeted about.
ETA: Come to think of it, the USA hasn't lost since those rankings came out.
FIFA World Rankings
ETA: Come to think of it, the USA hasn't lost since those rankings came out.
FIFA World Rankings
This post was edited on 10/16/13 at 8:53 am
Posted on 10/16/13 at 9:00 am to DestrehanTiger
The top 7 + Brazil go into one pod, and the other three pods have teams bunch together based on geography and sports criteria from what I remember.
Just watch this LINK
Just watch this LINK
This post was edited on 10/16/13 at 9:01 am
Posted on 10/16/13 at 9:11 am to tzimme4
I get that, but Switzerland is just in the top 14, not the top 7. I just want clarification on how the Swiss can be considered a top 7 lock already when there are teams ahead of them that have already qualified.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 9:32 am to DestrehanTiger
Well the new rankings come out tomorrow. We'll see
Posted on 10/16/13 at 10:20 am to tzimme4
So does that mean we will be matched with a team from the first pod in group stages?
Posted on 10/16/13 at 10:21 am to beary25
quote:
So does that mean we will be matched with a team from the first pod in group stages?
Yes. Hopefully Switzerland.
But probably Spain or Brasil. And throw Ghana into our group for good measure.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 10:22 am to beary25
Yep.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 12:19 pm to TN Bhoy
quote:
FIFA rankings + host
Really I remember the USA reached an ridiculous #4 in the rankings in 2006 and was still boned out of the top seed pot and put in the group of Death.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 4:57 pm to Nimbus2000
They were either 9 or 10 at the time of the draw.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 5:07 pm to Keys Open Doors
It's time to box up those BCS computers and ship them to FIFA.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 5:12 pm to itawambadog
It'd be pretty "American" to put our ranking by our name whenever we played....
quote:
You're looking live at Columbus, Ohio for a thrilling top 25 match up the 13th ranked United States takes on #7 Uruguay.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 5:41 pm to Keys Open Doors
quote:
They were either 9 or 10 at the time of the draw.
Are you sure? I don't think that's right. I'm pretty sure seeding for that World Cup was based on rank, performance in 2002 (8th), and performance in 1998 (32nd). If we were even respectable in France we would have been seeded.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:08 pm to ohiovol
Posted on 10/16/13 at 8:17 pm to DestrehanTiger
https://www.footballseeding.com/international-tournaments/world-cup-2014/
This site is pretty clear with a table that shows how the 4 pots are chosen.
I think almost everyone is a bit confused by it even if they're not surprised. FIFA rankings, which also determine CL seeds and berths per country, tend to have even more odd outliers than the BCS computer polls.
This site is pretty clear with a table that shows how the 4 pots are chosen.
quote:
I'm confused how a Swiss team in the easiest group in Europe can have a top 8 seed locked up even being ranked out of the top 10 in the world rankings.
I think almost everyone is a bit confused by it even if they're not surprised. FIFA rankings, which also determine CL seeds and berths per country, tend to have even more odd outliers than the BCS computer polls.
Posted on 10/16/13 at 10:49 pm to ohiovol
Yeah, you were right. The US was 5 or 6 in the run-up to the seeding and would have been a 1 instead of Argentina, but they used a different formula then.
Maybe they were 9 or 10 at the start of the World Cup, and I was confusing the two rankings.
And yes, I am completely baffled how 14th Switzerland overtakes 9th Netherlands, 4th Italy, and 11th Greece in a matter of 2 games.
Maybe they were 9 or 10 at the start of the World Cup, and I was confusing the two rankings.
And yes, I am completely baffled how 14th Switzerland overtakes 9th Netherlands, 4th Italy, and 11th Greece in a matter of 2 games.
Posted on 10/18/13 at 2:39 pm to DestrehanTiger
Eurosport tried to explain it.
quote:
How it works
The formula is relatively simple, in theory: each team is awarded three points for a win. Those three points are then multiplied according to these formulas:
- Importance of the match (World Cup games 4.0, Continental/Confederations Cup such as the Euros 3.0, Qualifiers 2.5, Friendlies 1.0)
- Strength of the opposing team (200 minus the team's ranking at the time of the game, so Spain's multiplier is 199, while 100th ranked Georgia's is 100). There's a minimum 50 in this category, even if you're playing 207th-ranked San Marino.
- Strength of the Confederation (Europe or South America 1.00, North/Central America 0.88, Asia or Africa 0.86, Oceania 0.85)
In other words, if England beat top-ranked Spain in a World Cup match, they'll get three for the win, multiplied by four for the match importance, multiplied by 199 for the opposition, multiplied by one for the Confederation). That's 3x4x199x1=2,388. England's game against Poland, by contrast, landed them 1012.5 points (3x2.5x135x1).
All your points per match are averaged out for each calendar are year, and average results from the past four years are tallied up, with results longer ago counting less. Your score is then your average points this year plus 50% of your average points from the previous year, plus 30% of your average points from two years ago, plus 20% of your average points from three years ago.
Thus England have 1080: that's their average of 485 points a year in 2013, plus 310 from 2012 (when they averaged 620), plus 147 from 2011 (when they averaged 491) plus 137 from 2010 (when they averaged 686).
A little complicated, sure, but it seems fair enough. Until you start digging deeper, and you see that Switzerland, ranked seventh, have a ranking of 1,138, while Italy and Netherlands both have 1,136.
If you think that seems like a tiny margin dividing the teams, you'd be right. And that's brought up all sorts of anomalies.
Posted on 10/18/13 at 3:09 pm to TN Bhoy
i find it ridiculous Uraguay can be 5th in a table that doesnt even have Brazil in it, and can still be seeded
Posted on 10/18/13 at 3:59 pm to TN Bhoy
sounds better than the BCS
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News