SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums College, Pro & International Soccer Latest FIFA rankings...

Dont think we will be ranked that high after the loss to Germany. I was surprised Germany was not in the top 19...

The higher ranking of certain teams (i.e. USA, Mexico, Japan, Turkey, Iran.) is due to number of games they play.

For example: USA plays 10 games in the last four months, and Germany plays 4, USA will be ranked higher than the Germans bc USA played more games and they got more points (points are given by FIFA to teams that play in a higher level of competition) for either a Win or a Draw. Where as Germany only played 4 games and got 2 wins and a loss and a draw, they wouldn't get as many points.

Man go read about your blue sharks or something.

U.S. Moves Up to Fourth in FIFA rankings

ZURICH, Switzerland (April 19, 2006) AP -- The United States moved into fourth place in the FIFA world rankings for April -- its highest showing ever.

Argentina, which had been fourth and is considered to be one of the main contenders along with Brazil to win the World Cup later this year, dropped into a tie for eighth place with Portugal.

Brazil is the No. 1 team in the world with 830 points, five less than last month. The Czech Republic is second with 779 points, followed by the Netherlands with 774.

The Americans dropped four points to 760, but still moved ahead of Argentina, which dropped 12 points.

The United States, which was drawn into one of the toughest groups at this year's World Cup with Italy, the Czech Republic and Ghana, reached the quarterfinals at the 2002 World Cup and won the 2005 Gold Cup.

Spain moved up one spot to round out the top five with 759 points, one more than sixth-place Mexico.

The rest of the top 10 includes France in seventh and England in 10th, nine points behind Portugal and Argentina.

World Cup host Germany and European champion Greece moved back into the top 20 after dropping out last month. They are tied for 19th with 699 points.

Croatia, which will face defending champion Brazil, Australia and Japan at the World Cup, dropped five spots to 24th.

Palestine, which moved up 17 places last month, picked up another six places this time to go into 115th place with 387 points. Tajikistan moved up 16 spots to 125th, and Kyrgyzstan moved up 13 places to 146th.

Moral of the Story: Play bad and get ranked higher

Man I can not wait to see what happens in our group.

WA... isn't that how it works at the office? do nothing, get promoted?

it sure seems that way

FIFA adapting new world rankings
Posted 5/24/2006 4:47 PM ET
By Stephen Wade, The Associated Press

LONDON — FIFA is adopting a new world soccer ranking system. It's easy to see why.

Under the old scheme, the United States rose to No. 4 in April's rankings — its highest position ever. The eye-popping rise occurred a few weeks after the Americans were routed 4-1 by World Cup host Germany.

"Maybe some guys were looking at that ranking a little bit too seriously," American goalkeeper Kasey Keller said after the loss.

The Americans have slipped slightly in the most recent poll, the last before the World Cup opens June 9, and are tied for fifth with Spain.

FIFA's new computer rankings, with new criteria to rate the world's top teams, will be released July 12, three days after the World Cup ends.

"We don't think it's that bad at all, but there is always room for improvement," FIFA spokesman Andreas Herren said.

How far out of kilter are the present rankings? Few serious soccer fans would place the Americans in the world's top 10, possibly not even the top 15.

Under FIFA's present system, five world soccer powers are ranked behind the United States: France (No. 8), Argentina (9), England (10), Italy (13) and Germany (19).

The only teams ranked ahead of the United States in the May rankings were five-time World Cup champion Brazil, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and Mexico.

Mexico's ranking also raises eyebrows. It probably should be ranked behind the Americans.

In the past 10 games between the two countries, the United States has won seven, including a 2-0 win in the second round of the 2002 World Cup. Mexico has two victories in that period.

Over a 20-game span dating back to 1994, the United States has beaten Mexico nine times, with the Mexicans winning seven. Four were draws.

Under the new ranking system, FIFA will take into account games played over the past four years. Under the old system, it counted results over the past eight.

Under FIFA's old computer ranking system, explained in 2,750 words on its website, it awarded team ranking points based on the importance of the games — World Cup finals vs. friendly matches, for example — the relative strength of the teams, goals scored and conceded home or away, etc.

The new system takes into account most of the same factors but weighs them differently.

So why are the Americans and Mexicans so high in the present FIFA rankings? Under the old system, FIFA gave the most weight to games in the World Cup, the continental championships and World Cup qualifiers.

The region in which the United States is grouped, CONCACAF, plays a continental championship every two years. In Europe, it's every four. In addition, CONCACAF plays almost 50% more World Cup qualifiers than the average European country.

Under the new system, FIFA will adjust for these factors — and adjust more for the relatively weak CONCACAF group.

World Cup host Germany, which slipped to No. 19, also suffered under the old system. Because it qualified automatically for this World Cup, Germany played no qualifying games.

Egypt, the African Cup of Nations champion, is ranked two spots above Germany. Greece, the defending European champion, Tunisia, Uruguay and Iran are ranked right behind Germany.

In announcing its changes, FIFA assures the new system will be better.

"Transparency and simplicity, the key principles guiding the revision, have been combined with sporting criteria," FIFA said in a statement.

Soccer fans can only hope so.

I agree completely that the ranking system needs to be adjusted. But, I'm pretty sure that the number of teams for each confederation that are allowed in the World Cup finals are allocated in proportion to the number of teams in the top 32. UEFA, which currently has 16 teams in the top 32, is allocated 14 spots in the WC. The other confederations have less, based on how many are in the top 32. Making an adjustment as described above may very well drop several CONCACAF, African and Asian teams out of the top 32, which may affect the balance of the next WC. I would hate to see the "World" Cup become a tournament of 25 UEFA and 7 SA teams.