North American Pro Soccer 2015

[MJWalker45]

Wales is where they are because they've only played qualifiers. US has played twice as many games but only earned 557points vs 817 for Wales. That's with more wins too.

[crashcarson15]

Yes, the CONCACAF teams can move up, but how much exactly? The problem with everyone in the federation slipping spots is what does it mean if they beat each other?

The USMNT is now 34th. How much does it actually mean if they beat 40th Costa Rica and 41st Mexico in the final? Especially if it's just a 2-1 or 1-0 game. I think they'd have to have an extremely convincing tournament to make any major jump.

There’s likely not a single country ahead of the United States in this month’s rankings who is playing matches in the next month, so nobody ahead is gaining points; they can only lose.

The points accrued by the United States in this Gold Cup will have the “4x” multiplier applied to them.

The US accrued no (significant) points in July 2014, so there’s nothing dropping from “4x” to “3x.”

The points accrued by the United States in the 2013 Gold Cup will drop from the “3x” multiplier to “2x.”

The US likely accrued no points in July 2012, so there’s nothing dropping from “2x” to “1x.”

The 2011 Gold Cup should drop from “1x” to “0x.”

(Note, the multipliers may not be linear; I can’t find anything on this, but that’s how I remember seeing them at one point.)

So, realistically speaking, the United States should earn about twice as many points in the Gold Cup as will be coming off their ranking this month.

ALSO: You don’t lose points for losing matches, so it’s not like the zero-sum game that is, say, college football rankings. “Yeah, you beat #10, but now they’re obviously not #10 because you beat them, so you only go from #20 to #17,” isn’t really a thing here.

Everyone in CONCACAF should realistically be improving their ranking, save perhaps for Panamá.

In some way, the current rankings system sets itself up well for the United States or Mexico to try and nick a seed at a World Cup; CONCACAF has a regional championship (which earns a higher multiplier) and the entire, 10-game Hexagonal round within 12 months of the Finals draw.

[2001mark]

UEFA has it right, setting its friendlies up more like Davis Cup Tennis. It's not as if nations are invited or not, sides will be able to earn their way in to higher profile matches yes?

As for CONCACAF, it's simply a matter of having such a weak bulk of teams. Sure, Mexico & USA can roll through Gold Cups, and? It's like NCAAF, you have to start beating the best of other regions before you can see ranking results.

Thankfully, FIFA rankings still aren't decided by coaches & writers.

[Still MIGHTY]

In some way, the current rankings system sets itself up well for the United States or Mexico to try and nick a seed at a World Cup; CONCACAF has a regional championship (which earns a higher multiplier) and the entire, 10-game Hexagonal round within 12 months of the Finals draw.

And the Copa America Centario will add a nice point base if the US can win a few games, and the potential Confederations Cup as well.

Like I said before, the rankings don't really mean a whole lot right now. There's plenty of time between now and the 2018 draw to gain points.

[-kj]

I wonder how that one's going to be classified, given that it's a special version and not truly the CONMEBOL championship.

[Still MIGHTY]

I wonder how that one's going to be classified, given that it's a special version and not truly the CONMEBOL championship.

It's still going to be a competitive tournament for a trophy. I'd hope it's scored as such.

They're not just friendlies.

[crashcarson15]

It's like NCAAF, you have to start beating the best of other regions before you can see ranking results.

Yes, but that can’t happen when UEFA takes the ball and says, “ the rest of you, we’re the best and we aren’t playing anyone else!,” which is effectively what’s happened.

So, actually, yeah it’s just like NCAA football. We’re Boise State, and UEFA’s all the power-conference teams who refuse to play them. Perfect!

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

[crashcarson15]

Also, the new FIFA rankings are out, and despite those big wins over Netherlands and Germany, the USMNT actually fell 7 spots to 34th in the world. (They're still tops in CONCACAF, as Costa Rica fell 27 spots to 40th, and Mexico fell 17 spots to 41st)

The reason? Because they're "just" friendlies while those in UEFA were playing Euro qualifiers and South America was playing in Copa America, aka "meaningful" matches.

Whatever, I guess. We'll just keep doing our own thing over this way.

Why FIFA even have these rankings in the first place, especially if they're such garbage, I'll never understand. It doesn't take an expert, or rankings to realize the US is much better than the 34th best team in the world.

Thank god these rankings have no merit on who actually makes the WC.

EDIT: Crap, spoke too soon. Forgot the rankings for the top 8 teams actually determine seeding for the group draws. Once Blatter's gone, they need to fix this.

What do you propose as a better way to seed teams, though?

The only realistic alternative I can see is a committee, which would also be silly.

The rankings — at the time of the draw — rarely get it wrong.

If you want to talk about overhaul, stop being lazy, and actually split the teams into pots determined by their merit, not by their geography. UEFA doesn’t say, “English and Spanish teams in one pot for the Champions League, German, French and Italian in another, then Portugese, Dutch, Ukranian and Russian in a third, and everyone else in Pot 4.” They accomplish what they do by limiting where specific teams can go. That’s the way to do it.

In 2014, you’d have had…

1: Brazil, Spain, Germany, Argentina, Colombia, Belgium, Uruguay, Switzerland

2: Netherlands, Italy, England, Chile, United States, Portugal, Greece, Bosnia/Herzegovina

3: Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Russia, France, Ecuador, Ghana, Mexico, Costa Rica

4: Algeria, Nigeria, Honduras, Japan, Iran, South Korea, Australia, Cameroon

…which would’ve been a much better system.

(On another note, the World Cup really should be a 40-team competition, but that’s a discussion for another day.)

[IanC]

UEFA has it right, setting its friendlies up more like Davis Cup Tennis. It's not as if nations are invited or not, sides will be able to earn their way in to higher profile matches yes?

Exactly. This stops the lower ranked nations getting hammered when playing friendlies and will provide a better learning curve against teams at their level.

[IanC]

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

Far from it. You come across as very anti UEFA. They are just making a much more competitive standard of matches. Saying no-one is going to care about the Nations League that is implying thats just you. From the initial response from the nations involved it has been loked at very positively. Everyone is on board with it to provide a better standard of football across Uefa.

The lower ranked nations will still play against the better ranked ones when it comes the the qualifiers for the Euro's and the World Cup. Not sure where the problem is in wanting a better standard of friendlies which have been turned into a unique competition.

[crashcarson15]

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

Far from it. You come across as very anti UEFA. They are just making a much more competitive standard of matches. Saying no-one is going to care about the Nations League that is implying thats just you. From the initial response from the nations involved it has been loked at very positively. Everyone is on board with it to provide a better standard of football across Uefa.

The lower ranked nations will still play against the better ranked ones when it comes the the qualifiers for the Euro's and the World Cup. Not sure where the problem is in wanting a better standard of friendlies which have been turned into a unique competition.

I’m not anti-UEFA, I’m anti-8 of the 12 best teams in the world deciding they’re not going to play anyone else in friendlies other than themselves.

I’m an American soccer fan. The United States has benefitted greatly over the years by having the opportunity to play friendlies against nations like Germany, France, Holland, Spain, etc.

That opportunity is going away because UEFA is taking the ball and telling the rest of the world we’re not good enough, and to go themselves. It’s frustrating.

[IanC]

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

Far from it. You come across as very anti UEFA. They are just making a much more competitive standard of matches. Saying no-one is going to care about the Nations League that is implying thats just you. From the initial response from the nations involved it has been loked at very positively. Everyone is on board with it to provide a better standard of football across Uefa.

The lower ranked nations will still play against the better ranked ones when it comes the the qualifiers for the Euro's and the World Cup. Not sure where the problem is in wanting a better standard of friendlies which have been turned into a unique competition.

I’m not anti-UEFA, I’m anti-8 of the 12 best teams in the world deciding they’re not going to play anyone else in friendlies other than themselves.

I’m an American soccer fan. The United States has benefitted greatly over the years by having the opportunity to play friendlies against nations like Germany, France, Holland, Spain, etc.

That opportunity is going away because UEFA is taking the ball and telling the rest of the world we’re not good enough, and to go themselves. It’s frustrating.

Where has it been said that is going away? You will still find the friendlies against the U.S and top South American teams as they play different styles in build up to the World Cup finals. You are jumping to conclusions too quickly.

And you have contradicted yourself. Firstly stating you are not Anti Uefa but blame the national teams for this. Then you say it's Uefa's fault for taking the oppurtunity away to the rest of the world which they have not done.

[crashcarson15]

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

Far from it. You come across as very anti UEFA. They are just making a much more competitive standard of matches. Saying no-one is going to care about the Nations League that is implying thats just you. From the initial response from the nations involved it has been loked at very positively. Everyone is on board with it to provide a better standard of football across Uefa.

The lower ranked nations will still play against the better ranked ones when it comes the the qualifiers for the Euro's and the World Cup. Not sure where the problem is in wanting a better standard of friendlies which have been turned into a unique competition.

I’m not anti-UEFA, I’m anti-8 of the 12 best teams in the world deciding they’re not going to play anyone else in friendlies other than themselves.

I’m an American soccer fan. The United States has benefitted greatly over the years by having the opportunity to play friendlies against nations like Germany, France, Holland, Spain, etc.

That opportunity is going away because UEFA is taking the ball and telling the rest of the world we’re not good enough, and to go themselves. It’s frustrating.

Where has it been said that is going away? You will still find the friendlies against the U.S and top South American teams as they play different styles in build up to the World Cup finals. You are jumping to conclusions too quickly.

And you have contradicted yourself. Firstly stating you are not Anti Uefa but blame the national teams for this. Then you say it's Uefa's fault for taking the oppurtunity away to the rest of the world which they have not done.

(See other thread for response to first point.)

Have I? The member nations constitute UEFA. They can tell Platini to go away, yet they don’t.

I’ve criticized a decision UEFA has made. That doesn’t mean I’m “anti-UEFA.” There’s an important difference here.

If I was “anti” everything that ever made a bad decision, I wouldn’t be for anything.

[IanC]

The whole “we’re eliminating meaningless friendlies” thing is a giant piece of . Nobody’s going to care about the Nations League. They’re going to be a series of meaningless friendlies, except for, like, Estonia or someone, who’ll take them seriously and then we can all proclaim in 10 years, “Look at that Estonia side! Top of the Nations League First Division! How inspirational.”

Far from it. You come across as very anti UEFA. They are just making a much more competitive standard of matches. Saying no-one is going to care about the Nations League that is implying thats just you. From the initial response from the nations involved it has been loked at very positively. Everyone is on board with it to provide a better standard of football across Uefa.

The lower ranked nations will still play against the better ranked ones when it comes the the qualifiers for the Euro's and the World Cup. Not sure where the problem is in wanting a better standard of friendlies which have been turned into a unique competition.

I’m not anti-UEFA, I’m anti-8 of the 12 best teams in the world deciding they’re not going to play anyone else in friendlies other than themselves.

I’m an American soccer fan. The United States has benefitted greatly over the years by having the opportunity to play friendlies against nations like Germany, France, Holland, Spain, etc.

That opportunity is going away because UEFA is taking the ball and telling the rest of the world we’re not good enough, and to go themselves. It’s frustrating.

Where has it been said that is going away? You will still find the friendlies against the U.S and top South American teams as they play different styles in build up to the World Cup finals. You are jumping to conclusions too quickly.

And you have contradicted yourself. Firstly stating you are not Anti Uefa but blame the national teams for this. Then you say it's Uefa's fault for taking the oppurtunity away to the rest of the world which they have not done.

(See other thread for response to first point.)

Have I? The member nations constitute UEFA. They can tell Platini to go away, yet they don’t.

I’ve criticized a decision UEFA has made. That doesn’t mean I’m “anti-UEFA.” There’s an important difference here.

If I was “anti” everything that ever made a bad decision, I wouldn’t be for anything.

Also see my response on the other thread. You are just not grasping it but just making it the U.S.A are hard done by which they are not.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

This NYCFC/TFC game is a pip.

When does Pirlo start?

[sportstar1212]

:censored:ing Giovinco...

Pirlo joins the 21st, I believe, and will most likely play his first game the 26th against Orlando.

[Nyk33]

Don Garber picked Lampard & Gerrard to be in MLS All Star Game as "Commissioner's Picks" even though they haven't played in MLS yet which is bull (especially Lampard after the "loan" debacle).

http://www.mlssoccer.com/all-star/2015/news/article/2015/07/13/steven-gerrard-frank-lampard-selected-as-commissioner-picks

Here are some reactions from other MLS players.

http://total-mls.com/2015-articles/mls-players-react-to-commissioners-all-star-picks.html

[bosrs1]

Don Garber picked Lampard & Gerrard to be in MLS All Star Game as "Commissioner's Picks" even though they haven't played in MLS yet which is bull (especially Lampard after the "loan" debacle).

http://www.mlssoccer.com/all-star/2015/news/article/2015/07/13/steven-gerrard-frank-lampard-selected-as-commissioner-picks

Here are some reactions from other MLS players.

http://total-mls.com/2015-articles/mls-players-react-to-commissioners-all-star-picks.html

What MLS doing something bush league... color me shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!

Surprised half the Galaxy lineup wasn't added to the team as well.

[Gothamite]

Yeah. That's a bad move.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

It's lame, but MLS is also paying a lot for those two players. Might as well squeeze out as much value as possible as soon as possible. Especially in Lampard's case. That guy needs to suit up ASAP.