• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

I calculated and ranked the top 16 european teams from 1994 to now(WCs and Euros)

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Was bored and did a thing.

Using a probably flawed system, i've calculated and ranked european teams based on their results at the 2 biggest tournaments from 1994 to this current Euros. I wanted to basically make a 'best european nations of modern football' list.

If 1994 seems like an arbitrary cutoff point, I was originally going to start it at the year 2000 and just have it as a 21st century thing. But the 1998 WC and the 1996 Euros seem too iconic to exclude, and still very feel much like modern football. Then I decided to dial it back to 1994 so I have an even number of World Cups and Euros represented, 7 each. I could have gone all the way to 1990 as a cutoff but '90 and '92 are a bit weird. The Soviet Union, West Germany and Czechoslovakia still existing in some form even as late as '92(in the football world anyway, CIS were a team in '92) would make it a bit of a pain to calculate things and possibly make my system unworkable. Plus the '92 tournament was only 8 teams which would also possibly be an issue with the way I'm doing things.

Annnyway it's a pretty simple points system.

Teams get 1 point for qualifying for a tournament but not advancing past the group stage, 2 points for getting to the round of 16, 4 for the quarters, 8 for the semis, 16 for making the final and 32 for winning one.

I know it's not perfect, and there were other ways of doing the points that I considered, but I went with this way.

Anyway, there is a clear gap between the top 16 teams and the rest. Only 16 teams got 15+ points and it's a huge cluster**** afterwards, I think 5 teams tied on 10 points for example. So anyway here we are:

1- France (151 points)
2- Germany (141 points)
3- Spain (129 points)
4- Italy (114 points)*
5- Portugal (88 points)
6- Netherlands (67 points)
7- England (48 points)*
8- Croatia and Greece (41 points)
10- Czech Republic (36 points)
11- Belgium and Sweden (26 points)
13- Denmark (24 points)*
14- Turkey (23 points)
15- Russia (22 points)
16- Switzerland (18 points)

*If Italy win the final, they slip past Spain by 1 point and hit 3rd.
*If England go on and win the Euros, they pass Netherlands and hit 6th.
*If Denmark beat England and go on and win this tournament they jump all the way to 7th and tie England. If they beat England but fall to Italy they just pass Sweden and Belgium and hit 11th. If we did include the '92 Euros, they'd already be ahead of England and would pass Netherlands with a win this time around.
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Nice. I thought Portugal would have a few more points than that, must have had some disastrous tournaments I’ve forgotten about.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Makes you realise how poor Spain have been for long periods either side of that amazing team that swept all before them given they are so far behind France.
 

Teja.

Global Moderator
I would've thought France would be a bit more clear off second place than that but tbf there's no 3x premium or something like that for winning a WC.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I would've thought France would be a bit more clear off second place than that but tbf there's no 3x premium or something like that for winning a WC.
outside of their big wins and finals they went out early a fair bit. Germany are super consistent at making the semi final stage
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
England 7th seems disproportionately high, given their performance at Euros has historically been dire more often than not.

(not a crack at mister and the mister methodology btw - just a comment on how this is an example of stats not painting the most accurate of pictures).
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
England 7th seems disproportionately high, given their performance at Euros has historically been dire more often than not.

(not a crack at mister and the mister methodology btw - just a comment on how this is an example of stats not painting the most accurate of pictures).
still the lowest of the 7 'big' teams. And they're at least usually always in the mix. In my mind there's 7 European teams that have been consistently strong my whole life. Belgium would have benefited a lot if I'd made the cutoff 2000 onwards. They basically got no points from the '90s
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
I'm not really should I would describe England as being consistently strong at any point in my lifetime tbh. My experience of England could probably best be described as fleeting moments of expedience and promise in a sea of stodge/inadequacy/embarassing failures.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
England 7th seems disproportionately high, given their performance at Euros has historically been dire more often than not.

(not a crack at mister and the mister methodology btw - just a comment on how this is an example of stats not painting the most accurate of pictures).
Must admit I was surprised Croatia are below us. Presumed they would be quite a way above.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I'm not really should I would describe England as being consistently strong at any point in my lifetime tbh. My experience of England could probably best be described as fleeting moments of expedience and promise in a sea of stodge/inadequacy/embarassing failures.
well, they've made a lot of knockout phases right? they've underdelivered against the best teams but they seem like the best of the rest. Croatia arguably get more cred for making a final though
 

Howe_zat

Audio File
Yeah in my mind England are a tier below the traditional top teams of Italy, Germany, France and Spain and are bedfellows with the likes of Netherlands whose history is also filled with nearlies and maybes. Spain used to be in our camp before 2008, they were the only team that were even bigger underachievers than England.

I would expect to see Germany top by miles if you included earlier history.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Italy are perennially under-rated, this is their 5th final in the 1994-present day time frame, which off the top of my head is more than any other European side in that time frame.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Nice. I thought Portugal would have a few more points than that, must have had some disastrous tournaments I’ve forgotten about.
Have they not been largely crap for the last 10 years save Euro 2016? (which they were also crap in but spawned their way to a tournament win)
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Very interesting idea.

Mildly surprised Bulgaria don't make the top 16 given their WC semi in 94, but guess they've been a bit pooey-pants of late.
 

Top