World Cup 2018

Who is going to win?

Show me the numbers!

The stat heads over at 538 say Brazil, Spain, and Germany are the favorites.

The FIFA world rankings have Germany, Brazil, and Belgium as the top three.

If the Bovada odd's makers know anything, they have Brazil, Germany, and Spain listed 1-2-3.

If history is any guide:
2014 winner Germany (no one has defended a title since Brazil won 1958 and 1962)
2010 winner Spain (won 1 time so far)
2006 winner Italy (they didn't qualify this year)
2002 winner Brazil (won 5 times so far)
1998 winner France (won 1 time so far)

Looking further back into history, the only other nations to ever win a World Cup:
Argentina (1986, 1978)
England (1966)
Uruguay (1950, 1930)

From listening to sports people, Brazil, Spain, and Germany are the clear favorites. But in breaking news today, the manager of Spain has just been sacked.

Getting some mention are Belgium and France for having a collection of solid top level players.

Also mentioned are Portugal and Argentina since they respectively have a GOAT (greatest of all time) level player on their squads.

Am picking France, Brazil, Spain, and Germany in the final-four with Brazil winning the whole thing.

UPDATE: France won the whole thing! Germany didn't even get out of the group stage. Spain got booted on PK by Russia in the round of 16. Brazil lost to Belgium in the quarter finals.

Other quick observations:

1. Could Uruguay have dealt with France in the quarterfinal if they didn't lose Cavani to injury Probably not but it would have been more interesting.
2. Portugal and Argentina with one GOAT player each lost to teams with solid players across the starting XI. Yes, soccer is a team sport and a transcendent star needs some supporting cast members.
3. Brazil's Neymar has become a bit of a joke with his flopping.
4. Mexico's win over Germany was the highpoint but in the end they still couldn't get past the round of 16 and so the page will turn on their "golden generation" that carried their hopes of glory.
5. Russia had a magic carpet ride as is often the case of the host country. They took down Spain in PK and took Croatia to PK but came up short in a match of high drama! Not the greatest soccer but certainly the most dramatic!
6. Sweden showed what a group of modest talents can do when they play with a plan and play their game. If you had said they would get to the quarter finals before the competition started you would take it.
7. Columbia with James Rodriguez might have beaten England.
8. England to the semi-finals was a surprise. Unlike past England teams that wilted under the expectations and off-field/on-field controversy, this group went out there and had fun and played to their abilities. In the end, their youth and inexperience came up short against Croatia. Croatia had a few of those wily veterans who simply know how to win on their club that edged out the young lions of England.
9. How far would team USA have gotten? Well, CONCACAF didn't do much in the tournament. Panama and Costa Rica went without a win. In qualifications the USA lost TWICE to Costa Rica and beat Panama once and drew once. So maybe NOT making the World Cup spared them an embarrassing showing?

How does MLS compare with other leagues?

With the increasing popularity of soccer, the team at 538 have now included their stats analysis on various leagues in world soccer.

Since teams within a continent can play across club lines in things like the Champions League or Europa League, some head-to-head comparison is possible. However, how strong is a league in one continent compared to another?

The 538 people make an attempt. Not surprisingly, traditional soccer powers and their leagues are at the top of their charts.

Looking further down, you eventually can find the MLS.

One should note that the "market value" of a league is based on salaries. By that metric, the English Premier league is highest due to "wage inflation" that is possible with the rich TV contracts they have throughout the world. The same notion of "wage inflation" is true for MLS in the USA since Designated Player salaries are probably inflated for the level of talent that is obtained.

Yet, despite the monetary strength of MLS, note the weakness of MLS in direct competition! MLS is below many lesser priced leagues including Sweden! Of course, these are based on math models. In practice MLS teams never play head-to-head with anyone outside of MLS. The only exception is MLS teams that make it to CONCACAF champions league where they usually beat everyone except Mexico Liga MX clubs.

What to make of the analysis?

In Sweden, there is only so much money available from TV contracts and funds from local fan support. Good Swedish talent eventually transfer to more lucrative salaries available in other parts of Europe. If one looks at the Swedish national team roster that are striving for a spot in the World Cup, almost all play outside of Sweden. Nonetheless, some solid talent remains in country in the club system. On average, they earn less than MLS on average.

The MLS wage structure is not a strictly free market system. There are high priced players who are Designated Players earning 7-digit salaries. Teams are limited to a maximum of three such players. The rest of the team is comprised of mid-priced players picking up 6-digit salaries and players at or just barely above the league minimum with 5-digit salaries. 

Thus, how strong would an MLS club be against second and third tier European clubs? 

The 538 data would suggest that MLS would not fare well. 

I suppose the average Swedish player is paid more than an MLS player at the league minimum?

As for talent, would those Swedish club players be comparable to the typical mid-priced MLS player? If so, it is possible that overall, a Swedish team might have more players at this level than an MLS club and thus would win in a head-to-head match? Or would those 3 Designated Players push an MLS club over a Swedish club in an on-the-field match-up?

Who knows!?