Man Utd and Liverpool slip in World Rankings.

How do you United fans feel about being ranked 30th in the world? Liverpool 39th? True Story Bro'

http://www.iffhs.de/?10f42e00fa2d17f73702fa3016e23c17f7370eff3702bb1c2bbb6f28f53512

 

I'm suicidal.

 

Me too. I'm not sure how I'll cope. At least we're still above City. What is amazing is how the 4th best team in the world could lose at home to QPR.

 

Thread not going quite how you hoped?

 

that happens when you get a made up list of some random German website.

 

Who gives a flying ****?

 

Interesting post. You would expect the champions of Europe to be high up though. Spuds 55th!

 

oh dear...................

 

[video=youtube;VImAGUVd8_4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VImAGUVd8_4[/video]

 

Can't argue with the source buddy. Especially when it says Chelsea have been worse than Arsenal and Liverpool for the past twelve years...

http://www.iffhs.de/?3d4d443d0f04390d857ddad5205fdcdc3bfcdc0aec70aeedbc0b

 

I would say that was about right over the last 12 years. Of course they have you 2nd to Barca so i guess you think you should be lower because you certainly shouldn't be higher

 

http://www.clubworldrankings.com/100.htm

shows chavs at 34

 

Hmm this might just be the most reputable source ever!

 

As long as they use the same criteria to rank every club does it matter?

I bet you agree with this one View attachment 20432 does it have any more validity because you're top? No,equally as valid.

 

And what do you believe the supposed criteria was used to make this awful excuse of a list?

It's certainly not league or European form, excuse me for not taking it at face value.

I never really value any of these lists especially FIFAs idea of international ranking.

 

All depends on the methodology. If the number of fans was determined by a scientifically valid and representative survey then it is a valid survey. Ultimately, that is measuring a fixed number - everyone knows what a person is, so there can be no debate.

The problem with the IFFHS one, as with other similar measures of performance over a season, is that they are all dependent on the assumptions and decisions you make around the relative value of different achievements, such as winning La Liga vs winning the FA Cup vs winning the Copa Libertadores. They also include other factors such as points won and relative performance in the league.

Do you, for example, think it is credible that the IFFHS list shows Man City as having been worse than Liverpool over the past year? Or perhaps a better example - in the 2010/11 season UEFA gave Utd a higher coefficient than Barca because, despite us getting spanked in the final, we won more games and scored more goals en route to the final. IIRC the IFFHS did the same. Do you really think that is a credible basis for claiming Utd should be ranked higher than Barca that season?!?

Similarly, last season Chelsea were ranked behind Real, Barca and Atletico in the UEFA coefficients as, despite winning the CL, you were beaten a few times along the way and scraped through some games by the skin of your teeth. So were Real, Barca and Atletico the top European teams last season?

 

United's poor record in knock out stages v European heavyweights counts against them in these rankings

 

but finishing 2nd in the domestic league help them stay on the top few especially over the temporary champs of Europe.

 

http://eurorivals.net/club-rankings.html

do keep trying

 

I admire your perseverance!

Talk us through the goals in the two Chelsea v QPR games this season. Surely QPR will be top ten next year?