FIFA World Cup Seeding

[ss4_goku]

I'm sorry if this was covered some where, but what do you guys think about the 2014 World Cup Draw Seeding??

For those that don't know, it will be the top teams in the new FIFA ranking system that will be seeded in the first pot and so forth. And we have the following teams seeded: Brazil (Host as A1), Spain, Germany, Argentina, Colombia, Belgium, Uruguay (as long as they qualify) and Switzerland. Italy, Netherlands, France (if they make it) are put onto the 2nd pot or lower.

I'm all up for having the strongest teams avoid each other in the early stages of the World Cup, but does Belgium and Switzerland really get to be in the TOP group ahead of World Cup Winners Italy, France and the runner up from last year Netherlands? I think apart from FIFA rankings, recent performances at the WC should also factor in when teams are seeded (much like how CL draws have been done). This year it seems like it can lead to many group of deaths and some great teams will not make it out of the group.

What do you guys think?

 

[Damjan]

In my opinion, it's very odd that a Euro 2012 finalist (Italy) is below a team that wasn't at Euro 2012 (Switzerland).

 

[lo zio]

yeah it is quite weird indeed. but then again, theese sort of rankings always seem kinda random to me and i've never given them much thought.
the truth is, if u're a great team, such as italy, or a potentially great team such as france (not being disrespectuful to france here... i just think we still have to see them performing at their full potential), then the pot shouldn't be much of a concern. if u have any realistic winning ambition, then u should be able to beat the best teams out there.
i'm not saying italy has any serious winning ambition (of course an italian victory might happen, but it would definitely come as a huge surprise, as spain and germany are the clear favourites), but i do believe that a fit italy is more than capable of beating the crap out of any team on the planet...... except spain, of course

infact my only real concern for the world cup is the weather. put us against germany, argentina, colombia, uruguay or any team u want..... just have us playing somewhere u can play football without risking a heart attack. last summer, during the confederations cup, we played with 35 celsius degrees and 70% humidity. and that's my real concern. nevermind seedings or rankings or pots... with those weather conditions we might aswell lose to san marino.

 

[gerd]

It is indeed very debatable wether countries like Switzerland and Belgium (yes) deservo to be in the top pot...
It doesn't sound right that Italy isn't (and god forbid, that might motivate them if they should play against Belgium)...but in the end (apart from the extra motivation), does it really matter ? If you are strong (at that moment) you will progress.

And now purely for argument sake. The question is if you look at current strength or istorical strength.
The only good way to measure current strenght is the FIFA ranking (and i realize this is far from ideal, but what is the alternative, playing a tournament to decide the ranking for the World Cup pots...a litle bitabsurd no ?).

If you look at historical strength then countries like Brazil, Italy, Germany, Argentina, France, Spain, Uruguay and perhaps England will be in the top pot. But then again France and Uruguay might not qualify...

Historically seen a club like Nottingham Forest is a bigger club than Swansea or even Spurs. A couple of years ago i read a Rough guide about football and there was an alltime club ranking in that book. At that moment Burnley were historically among the top ten. Most people will agree that Spurs and Swansea are at the moment significantly better than Nottingham Forest and Burnley...

It will always remain a dilemma, and imo it's not that important. But yes somehow it doesn't feel right that belgium would be considered better than Italy...

 

[ss4_goku]

My point isn't to consider history since day one. Much like how CL does it (I think they keep the record for 6 years or so), only recent history is considered. The past 4 world cups will give 16 years, or maybe include their own continental cup results to score how high they should be??

I mean if Nottingham or Burnley made it to the CL this year, they wouldn't be in the top part because they were good in the early days of football.

And while I do understand that for a strong team like Netherlands, they have nothing to fear, whoever their opposition is (unless its Germany or Spain), but if they are placed in the pot with Brasil for example, and then the second European team is Portugal, and fourth is an Asian team like Japan/Australia...that would be a horrible group as any three of those 4 has consistently made it out of the group stage in recent years...

 

[LFC Albania]

I'll support Switzerland , Bosnia , Belgium and Croatia (if they are in they are my #1 as always)