How would you rank Canada in regards to the other CONCACAF teams?

[michaeltfc91]

Group 1: Mexico, USA, Costa Rica

Group 2: Panama, Honduras, Trinidad, Jamaica

Group 3: El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Curacao, Cuba

On paper we are in group 2, on the field closer to group 3. (last 2 WCQ cycles we have come 7th / 8th, last 4 Gold Cups we have come 9th, 11th, 9th and QF)... so approximately 8-9th place average. I think 8th place right in between group 2 and group 3 is fair

[SpecialK]

4 minutes ago, michaeltfc91 said:

Group 1: Mexico, USA, Costa Rica

Group 2: Panama, Honduras, Trinidad, Jamaica

Group 3: El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Curacao, Cuba

On paper we are in group 2, on the field closer to group 3. (last 2 WCQ cycles we have come 7th / 8th, last 4 Gold Cups we have come 9th, 11th, 9th and QF)... so approximately 8-9th place average. I think 8th place right in between group 2 and group 3 is fair

Disagree totally

1- everything about the past gets thrown out the window because we have new players, new coach and system. 

2. Vs Honduras since last wcq we are 1-1-1. And we just lost to Jamaica by 1 goal and we dominated that game. If we win in Toronto we'll go ahead of them in my view. 

3. We have beaten  El Salvador 3-1 and tied in El Salvador, we have beaten Curacao. 

4. We should be right in middle of group 2 for sure ! Group 3 is too low for us, yes I'm bias but look at the stats and past games. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

Disagree totally

1- everything about the past gets thrown out the window because we have new players, new coach and system. 

2. Vs Honduras since last wcq we are 1-1-1. And we just lost to Jamaica by 1 goal and we dominated that game. If we win in Toronto we'll go ahead of them in my view. 

3. We have beaten  El Salvador 3-1 and tied in El Salvador, we have beaten Curacao. 

4. We should be right in middle of group 2 for sure ! Group 3 is too low for us, yes I'm bias but look at the stats and past games. 

Disagree totally

1. With our new coach and new players we made it to quarter finals (top 8)

2. We lost to Jamaica's B+ team 

3. We tied El Salvador at Gold Cup 0-0 and tied their B or C team away. Whatever thr fuck it was

[michaeltfc91]

19 minutes ago, SpecialK said:

Disagree totally

1- everything about the past gets thrown out the window because we have new players, new coach and system. 

2. Vs Honduras since last wcq we are 1-1-1. And we just lost to Jamaica by 1 goal and we dominated that game. If we win in Toronto we'll go ahead of them in my view. 

3. We have beaten  El Salvador 3-1 and tied in El Salvador, we have beaten Curacao. 

4. We should be right in middle of group 2 for sure ! Group 3 is too low for us, yes I'm bias but look at the stats and past games. 

On paper yes we should be in group 2 (making every other hex and making the Semis / QF in the Gold Cup consistently) but we haven't. Given our FIFA results, we have beaten El Salvador and Curacao recently so we seem ahead of Group 3. BUT we have not made it on to group 2 (we lost our last 2 games vs. Jamaica) 1-1-1 vs. Honduras in the past 2 years is actually okay, and haven't played Panama or Trinidad but they are in the hex and we aren't.

[mpg_29]

6 minutes ago, michaeltfc91 said:

On paper yes we should be in group 2 (making every other hex and making the Semis / QF in the Gold Cup consistently) but we haven't. Given our FIFA results, we have beaten El Salvador and Curacao recently so we seem ahead of Group 3. BUT we have not made it on to group 2 (we lost our last 2 games vs. Jamaica) 1-1-1 vs. Honduras in the past 2 years is actually okay, and haven't played Panama or Trinidad but they are in the hex and we aren't.

I think we are in "group 2"...just near the bottom of it..

[Club Linesman]

We are in group 2 and near the bottom right now.  But with a fairly significant upside to the team.  We are a relatively young squad and have some intriguing possibilities coming up like Edwards, Davies and hopefully Tabla.  How much we improve compared to the other group 2 countries will determine our success in the next GC and round of WCQ.  That and the CPL means we will have a much larger talent pool to choose from and hopefully there will be some late bloomers in CPL that will add something to the CMNT.

[Kent]

I believe I brought it up a couple pages ago, but our 3-1 home win against El Salvador in World Cup qualifying was a game that didn't matter for them, plus we had the benefit of 2 offside goals scored, plus they played short a man for the last 34 minutes. Hardly a great indicator that we are obviously above them. I would say from MichaelTfc's groups that we are somewhere in group 3.

[theaub]

Fully agree with the Group 3 assessment.  To look at the group 2 teams over this decade.

Jamaica: 2 GC Finals, 1 hex

Honduras: 2 WC appearances, 1 hex, 2 GC SF

Panama: 2 hex, 1 GC final, 1 GC SF

Trinidad: 2 hex, 2 GC QF

Canada: 1 GC QF

Not even close. 

[SpecialK]

1 hour ago, Club Linesman said:

We are a relatively young squad and have some intriguing possibilities coming up like Edwards, Davies and hopefully Tabla.

I think you mean " hopefully Tabla , Cristante, Wotherspoon, Gutiérrez and Ferreira. 

[harrycoyster]

14 minutes ago, dsqpr said:

Well, we were missing Hutch so it was actually our B+ team that lost to Jamaica.

I think generally speaking a B+ team is a team missing 3-4 starters and a B team is more of less missing the entire starting 11 a la Mexico and the US at the start of this Gold Cup. We had our A/A- team, depending on if you still view Hutch as in the CMNT picture.

Pretty much agree with the ELO rankings with the exception that T&T should be 3-4 spots higher. They probably got killed in the ranking for the Caribbean Cup that they sucked in, but used mostly domestic players. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, dsqpr said:

Well, we were missing Hutch so it was actually our B+ team that lost to Jamaica. And in the group stage we were also missing Larin so that was only our B team. So our B team drew with Honduras and Costa Rica!

(Not directing this at you presonally canta15) As you can see, this whole B team, C team, B+ team argument is quite frankly ridiculous. Play whatever team you like. The result still counts.

I get your point but lets move along from the Hutch is still part of the team thinking. He is practically retired 

[harrycoyster]

Just now, dsqpr said:

Reference for this interpretation? Or are those just your personal rules? I'm not interested in blarney, show me a credible reference.

Not in a position to do research right now, but I know that the A/B/C teams monikers started in the late 90s when countries like Germany, England and Mexico started "Germany B" and "Mexico B" teams with their own head coaches to get players experience in international matches who weren't ready for the "A" team. So a B team was a whole other starting 11 from the A team and a A-/B+ team was a mixture of the two. Germany famously created Mannschaft 2006, a B team of promising young players in 2000/2001 with the idea of getting those players serious international minutes well in advance of them coming for age for the 2006 World Cup.

So unless I missed out on some change in soccer lingo, a B team is almost a full second 11, and a A-/B+ is a mixture of the two leaning more towards the full grades they are named for.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, dsqpr said:

Yes, you clearly understand that my point is that trying to discredit results because so and so had this player suspended and that player injured and some other player on vacation is ridiculous. In other words, we played the El Salvador first team in WCQ, on both occasions, and got a win and a draw. Both results count, without caveat.

Yes we got a point against El Salvador "first team" away. But due to their player strike a LARGE  number of their normal players did not play so they played a team of a lesser strength. Due to this team's decreased quality of talent, our team was more favoured against this team compared to their other team of normal players. I'm trying to tiptoe around the letters B and A for you

[harrycoyster]

46 minutes ago, dsqpr said:

The key here is that those matches were DESIGNATED as B internationals IN ADVANCE so the results did not count towards the rankings. The matches we are talking about were full internationals, not designated B internationals. So the results count.

I understand that I was just pointing out why the A/B thing exists in the first place. Results are the end all be all, but when the CMNT plays as few teams as it does, it's normal to read into what level of competition we were actually facing to get a better read of our standing in CONCACAF. 

[harrycoyster]

44 minutes ago, dsqpr said:

Just to switch topics for a moment and talk about the ELO rankings, I too would have expected T&T to be higher. But the ELO rankings page shows that their rating has dropped 128 points in the last year and you can click on their name to see every match they have played and how it affected their rating. Their results in the past year have been poor so perhaps their lower ranking is deserved.

http://www.eloratings.net/Trini_Tobago.htm

The other thing I have noticed by looking at the "one year change" column is that teams' rankings and ratings tend to be fairly stable, which is what you would expect from an accurate system. Big moves must be impelled by big results.

I agree with you that ELO is better than FIFA rankings, but the eye test is better than both. T&T's last year has been terrible because they are facing the giants of the Hex and sent a domestic team to the Caribbean Cup. I'd take T&T over Haiti in a home and away every day of the week.

[mrstepp817]

Mexico

USA
Costa Rica

Jamaica

Panama

Honduras

T&T

Canada

 

Is how I'd rank it today....The top 3 can all beat each other on any given night....the bottom 5 all can beat each other...but for a bottom 5 to beat a top 3 right now they need to play really well and have the other squad have a subpar outing

[harrycoyster]

3 hours ago, mrstepp817 said:

Mexico

USA
Costa Rica

Jamaica

Panama

Honduras

T&T

Canada

 

Is how I'd rank it today....The top 3 can all beat each other on any given night....the bottom 5 all can beat each other...but for a bottom 5 to beat a top 3 right now they need to play really well and have the other squad have a subpar outing

I strongly disagree with Jamaica over Panama. Jamaica has had a great Gold Cup run, but remember Panama got knocked out outplaying what was probably the second best team in the tournament and tied the US in the group stage. Outside of the Gold Cups, Panama has been a far more impressive team. Especially if you are talking home and aways...Jamaica is 0-2-2 against Panama since 2012 and hasn't won in Panama since 1969.

[mrstepp817]

10 hours ago, harrycoyster said:

I strongly disagree with Jamaica over Panama. Jamaica has had a great Gold Cup run, but remember Panama got knocked out outplaying what was probably the second best team in the tournament and tied the US in the group stage. Outside of the Gold Cups, Panama has been a far more impressive team. Especially if you are talking home and aways...Jamaica is 0-2-2 against Panama since 2012 and hasn't won in Panama since 1969.

I can see that...I am probably jaded off their strong GC performance...

[xcalibre]

Losing to Jamaica on a neutral ground and then beating them at home would not make us better. How does that even compute??

[Keegan]

I still think we're better than Jamaica but obviously that can't be proven by our results.. we have outplayed them just about anytime I can remember besides in 2015. 

Honduras and panama without a doubt are better. Jamaica is even worse than us in wcq shockingly, going down 3 0 at home to Nicaragua... we would lose our minds 

[harrycoyster]

19 hours ago, Keegan said:

I still think we're better than Jamaica but obviously that can't be proven by our results.. we have outplayed them just about anytime I can remember besides in 2015. 

Honduras and panama without a doubt are better. Jamaica is even worse than us in wcq shockingly, going down 3 0 at home to Nicaragua... we would lose our minds 

Historically, Jamaica is absolutely terrible at playing in Central America, but they play good at home and haven't had trouble playing in the US and probably wouldn't in Canada. I'd favor their full roster over ours in a home/away, but their inability to win in Central America basically mandates you put them below Panama and Honduras.

[ReedOnTheGrand]

#1 in my heart, and that's where it really matters^right?

[DannyFromToronto23]

USA 

MEXICO 

CANADA 

COSTA RICA 

JAMAICA 

HONDURAS 

T & T 

 

[Keegan]

On 2017-07-26 at 2:43 PM, dsqpr said:

Current ELO Rankings:

15 Mexico (1832)

23 United States (1782)

29 Costa Rica (1741)

49 Panama (1651)

66 Jamaica (1572)

69 Honduras (1545)

79 Canada (1509)

82 Guatemala (1495)

88 Haiti (1458)

95 Trinidad & Tobago (1428)

95 El Salvador (1428)

http://www.eloratings.net/america.html

Seems fair aside from Guatemala being so high. They've been pretty poor aside from a win against the states. 

[MtlMario]

On 7/28/2017 at 4:43 PM, harrycoyster said:

Historically, Jamaica is absolutely terrible at playing in Central America, but they play good at home and haven't had trouble playing in the US and probably wouldn't in Canada. I'd favor their full roster over ours in a home/away, but their inability to win in Central America basically mandates you put them below Panama and Honduras.

They're terrible in Central America because(like us) they're not used to the heat.