 | VS. |  |
As discussed yesterday, the US is growing as a soccer nation. The next question is how do we compare with the world? As the world perception goes, the US is not a current threat to any of the established soccer powers of the world. That perception is held by a number of fans here as well. Project 2010 was mocked when it was released and many today believe that the US is far from being a competitor. But is that perception reality?
The chart below shows a variety of teams in the world. Most were chosen because they are among the best in the world, a few were chosen for regional or World Cup reasons. For each team, the percentage of points taken against teams with ELO rankings in the top 10, ranked 11 through 25, 26 through 50, and over 50 was calculated along with the overall percentage of points won from matches after the 2002 World Cup through February 1, 2010. The final column is the points earned by the country's team, if the team was to play a hypothetical home and away series with every country (including themselves) in the ELO top 75 using the calculated percentages of points earned. This results in 10 games at the 1-10 percentage, 15 games at the 11-25 percentage, and 25 games at both the 26-50 and the 51+ percentage. The order of the table is ranked by these points. Think of it as if the world championship was decided by single table rather than playoff format.
| Country | Total | 1-10 | 11-25 | 26-50 | 51+ | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Spain | 80.8% | 79.2% | 79.6% | 78.2% | 83.8% | 362 |
| 2 | Netherlands | 71.2% | 48.3% | 57.1% | 80.8% | 89.3% | 336 |
| 3 | Brazil | 69.7% | 59.6% | 61.1% | 76.5% | 81.8% | 328 |
| 4 | England | 68.2% | 38.1% | 61.4% | 75.0% | 90.0% | 326 |
| 5 | France | 70.7% | 53.7% | 63.9% | 61.5% | 92.7% | 321 |
| 6 | Argentina | 65.0% | 34.9% | 66.6% | 73.5% | 84.4% | 318 |
| 7 | Germany | 67.0% | 33.3% | 75.4% | 71.4% | 78.9% | 313 |
| 8 | Czech Republic | 65.1% | 40.5% | 47.6% | 79.2% | 78.7% | 304 |
| 8 | Italy | 66.3% | 48.3% | 70.8% | 58.3% | 82.3% | 304 |
| 10 | Portugal | 66.7% | 38.3% | 42.4% | 62.7% | 90.0% | 290 |
| 11 | USA | 65.6% | 14.8% | 55.6% | 66.7% | 86.8% | 289 |
| 12 | Croatia | 64.7% | 41.7% | 51.1% | 56.7% | 85.7% | 285 |
| 13 | Mexico | 62.5% | 38.9% | 53.6% | 56.2% | 78.6% | 274 |
| 14 | Egypt | 68.4% | 14.3% | 63.0% | 63.6% | 75.1% | 273 |
| 15 | Denmark | 59.1% | 38.5% | 44.4% | 69.7% | 68.8% | 271 |
| 16 | Russia | 59.1% | 22.8% | 59.3% | 46.7% | 86.5% | 267 |
| 17 | Cote d'Ivoire | 65.9% | 11.1% | 71.4% | 48.1% | 81.6% | 265 |
| 18 | Switzerland | 56.3% | 17.6% | 59.0% | 50.0% | 83.3% | 264 |
| 19 | Ukraine | 54.7% | 18.5% | 55.6% | 60.0% | 70.4% | 257 |
| 20 | Greece | 59.1% | 39.2% | 48.3% | 38.1% | 88.2% | 256 |
| 21 | Chile | 52.4% | 22.2% | 42.6% | 51.0% | 83.3% | 253 |
| 22 | Japan | 62.6% | 15.2% | 43.1% | 52.1% | 79.3% | 245 |
| 23 | Uruguay | 50.6% | 17.6% | 72.9% | 54.5% | 54.0% | 239 |
| 24 | Australia | 61.7% | 20.8% | 44.4% | 41.7% | 76.7% | 230 |
| 24 | Turkey | 55.9% | 17.6% | 62.1% | 40.5% | 68.2% | 230 |
| 26 | Cameroon | 59.7% | 41.7% | 41.7% | 35.2% | 75.2% | 228 |
| 26 | Colombia | 48.0% | 33.3% | 34.9% | 54.1% | 63.6% | 228 |
| 28 | Sweden | 50.3% | 23.3% | 21.1% | 53.0% | 74.4% | 224 |
| 29 | Paraguay | 47.7% | 45.1% | 31.5% | 39.6% | 70.5% | 221 |
| 30 | Nigeria | 62.7% | 44.4% | 41.7% | 28.6% | 74.4% | 219 |
| 31 | Ghana | 52.3% | 25.0% | 33.3% | 51.5% | 59.4% | 211 |
| 32 | Honduras | 54.6% | 0.0% | 50.0% | 43.9% | 62.4% | 204 |
| 33 | South Korea | 55.0% | 27.8% | 40.7% | 27.5% | 70.0% | 200 |
| 34 | Costa Rica | 50.0% | 0.0% | 17.5% | 45.3% | 67.2% | 185 |
| 35 | Algeria | 49.8% | 0.0% | 46.7% | 33.3% | 54.6% | 174 |
| 36 | Slovenia | 40.6% | 20.0% | 12.8% | 31.1% | 63.4% | 165 |
As you can see in this analysis, the United States does fairly well, placing 11th behind ten countries recognized as traditional footballing powerhouses. A closer look at the table begins to reveal tiers of countries.
Above 300 points is the top tier, the soccer elite. These nine teams include the only 8 teams to have made a World Cup Championship match in the last 50 years. The only team from this tier not in that list is Spain, who finally broke through their string of underperformances with their Euro 2008 Championship and have been the most dominate team in the world over the last 8 years.
Around 250, there is another break, with only one team between 253 and 239. This second tier contains a number of the teams traditionally viewed as just below the powerhouses. Sides like Portugal, Mexico, Russia, Denmark, and Cote d’Ivoire; having the talent to make a run deep into the World Cup, but not considered threats to win the tournament.
Using 300 and 250 as guideposts, I’ll set a third break more arbitrary break at 200. A break here creates a third and fourth tier. The third tier primarily contains teams that are either growing as a soccer nation; Japan, Australia, Cameroon, Honduras, or have fallen back from being in the second tier; Uruguay, Colombia, Sweden. An analysis done four years previous to this one would likely have put the US in the third tier.
Finally, because of the teams chosen, tier 4 here consists only of a few teams. But these teams represent what tier 4 is, teams traditionally viewed as also rans; these teams have taken 50% or less of the possible points against all competitors during the last eight years.
Aggregating the teams in each tier allows for a further analysis of how the US compares. To do this, I’ve removed the US from tier 2 numbers and averaged the percentages of every team in each tier:
| 1-10 | 11-25 | 26-50 | 51+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | 48.4% | 64.8% | 72.7% | 84.7% |
| Tier 2 | 27.6% | 53.7% | 54.8% | 81.0% |
| Tier 3 | 26.0% | 43.1% | 43.5% | 69.0% |
| Tier 4 | 6.7% | 25.7% | 36.6% | 61.7% |
| USA | 14.8% | 55.6% | 66.7% | 86.8% |
Comparing the US to the aggregated tiers, a trend becomes obvious. Compared to even the top tier, the US is great at beating lesser teams. This is not just a case of being in CONCACAF, as Mexico’s percentage against the 51+ category is below both the tier 1 and tier 2 aggregates and Honduras is below the tier 3 average. The US is also very good against teams 26 through 50, falling between the aggregates for tier 1 and tier 2, but being much closer to the tier 1 percentage. Moving up to matches against teams 11 through 25, the US is again between tiers 1 and 2, but closer to the tier 2 number.
However, it is clear that the US is not in the range of tiers 1 or 2 when is comes to getting points off of the top ten teams. While the tier 3 number is high due to “giant killers” Paraguay, Nigeria, and Cameroon that all have 1-10 percentages of over 40, removing these outliers only brings the tier 3 average down to 20.1%. This still places the US somewhere between tiers 3 and 4.
This is why the US is not yet taken seriously by the rest of the world and why they are not seen as a threat to win international tournaments. As discussed yesterday, the US has become better against poor competition. Their bottom end numbers have evolved from their tier 3 days, but their top end numbers are well below their current tier 2 peers. The performance against Spain and in the finals of the Confederations Cup may be changing that perception, but more results are necessary for the US to turn the corner against top 10 teams. If they can, there would be little that distinguishes the US from second tier powers like Portugal, Mexico, and Croatia.
But the distribution of results leads to a question: what separates teams like the US, Egypt, and Switzerland who do relatively well against all teams except the top 10 from teams like Nigeria and Cameroon who have a better points percentage against the top 10 than they do against teams 26 through 50? Tomorrow, I’ll lay a groundwork for that analysis.
