|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 26 Jun 07:14
I asked, to this point in the FIFA 2026 World Cup, given the respective country population, strength of their domestic league and quality of players, eg teams they now play for - who do you think has been the biggest underachievers, and also the best over achievers?
Response is obviously based on searches of news and other statistical sources, packaged nicely - but here’s the output:
It`s an interesting way to judge a tournament, because you`ve suggested looking beyond just FIFA ranking and considering the "footballing resources" a country has:
Population (player pool)
Strength of domestic league
Quality of players (Champions League/Premier League/La Liga etc.)
Historical expectations
Using those criteria, here`s how I`d rank the tournament through the group stage as of 26 June.
Biggest underachievers
1. Belgium
For me, they`re the standout disappointment.
Belgium have:
12 million people (small but exceptionally productive)
one of Europe`s strongest talent pipelines
numerous players at elite clubs
a squad that should comfortably reach the Round of 32.
Instead they`ve drawn twice (vs Egypt and Iran) and now need a result against New Zealand just to be certain of progressing. Even allowing for an aging golden generation, they`ve underperformed expectations.
2. South Korea
Population: ~52 million.
Domestic league:
K League is one of Asia`s strongest.
Numerous internationals in Europe.
Losing to South Africa and failing to qualify automatically from a group containing Mexico, Czechia and South Africa is a poor return. They had enough quality to expect at least second place.
3. Uruguay (so far)
Given:
arguably the highest footballing talent per capita in history
world-class players across Europe
excellent recent qualifying form
Drawing Saudi Arabia and Cape Verde would represent a disappointing group campaign if they fail to top or comfortably advance. They still have time to change the narrative.
4. Scotland
Not because expectations were enormous—but after beating Haiti they couldn`t build on it.
With a squad full of players from the Premier League and Championship, finishing behind Morocco and Brazil is understandable, but the heavy defeat to Brazil and reliance on third-place qualification leaves them underwhelming rather than disastrous.
5. Qatar
Asian champions only a few years ago and with heavy investment in football infrastructure.
Conceding heavily to Canada and exiting without making a serious impression has been disappointing.
Biggest overachievers
1. South Africa ⭐
This is my number one.
Population helps (≈63 million), but:
domestic league isn`t among Africa`s strongest
relatively few players at Europe`s biggest clubs
weren`t expected to finish above South Korea.
Instead they:
beat South Korea
drew Czechia
qualified second behind Mexico.
That`s an outstanding campaign.
2. Cape Verde
Population:
Only around 600,000 people.
That`s extraordinary.
Drawing Spain and Uruguay would be remarkable for any African nation, let alone one with such a tiny population and limited domestic league.
This is arguably the best "per capita" performance of the tournament.
3. Morocco
Some may argue they aren`t overachieving anymore after their 2022 World Cup run.
Still:
unbeaten against Brazil
topped Scotland
comfortably reached the knockouts
shows they`ve established themselves as one of world football`s genuine elite teams rather than a one-tournament wonder.
4. Ecuador
Population: ~18 million.
Domestic league isn`t especially strong.
Yet:
qualified from CONMEBOL ahead of several traditional powers
beat Germany
reached the knockout stage.
A tremendous tournament so far.
5. Canada
The population (around 40 million) is large, but football remains behind hockey, basketball and other sports in participation and tradition.
Six goals against Qatar and a place in the knockout stage suggest they`re becoming a genuine football nation rather than just benefiting from hosting.
Teams performing about as expected
Argentina — excellent.
France — excellent.
England — solid if unspectacular.
Brazil — improving after an opening draw.
Netherlands — quietly very efficient.
Portugal — comfortably handling business.
The one team I`d highlight above all others is South Africa. Relative to their player pool, domestic league, and the number of footballers competing at Europe`s top clubs, reaching the knockout stage ahead of South Korea is arguably the tournament`s biggest positive surprise so far.
Conversely, Belgium stands out as the biggest disappointment. Despite a deep talent pool and players at elite European clubs, they`ve put themselves in a precarious position in a group they would have expected to navigate comfortably.
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jun 07:23)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Fri 26 Jun 07:23
I asked a follow up question that as Scotland has started to qualify for international soccer tournaments again, but unable to make headway once at those tournaments - how would you suggest we could improve that, for example by taking learning from other nations who are now starting to compete internationally, changing personnel, changing how the domestic game is operated, etc
Any thing that has worked elsewhere for National teams in a similar position as Scotland find themselves now?
Response:
I actually think Scotland are in a fascinating position because, in one sense, they`ve already solved the hardest problem.
For almost 25 years (1998–2020), Scotland couldn`t consistently qualify. Under Steve Clarke, that changed. Three consecutive major tournaments is genuine progress, and qualifying from a difficult UEFA confederation isn`t easy.
The next challenge is different: becoming a nation that expects to compete at tournaments rather than simply reach them.
If I were advising the Scottish Football Association over the next 10 years, I`d focus less on changing the senior manager and much more on changing the system underneath.
1. Learn from Croatia, not England
This is probably the biggest lesson.
Scotland (population ~5.5 million) should compare itself with countries like:
Croatia (3.8 million)
Uruguay (3.5 million)
Denmark (6 million)
Switzerland (9 million)
—not England, France or Germany.
Those countries all have one thing in common:
Their best players leave home young.
They don`t try to make their domestic league one of Europe`s elite.
Instead they make it one of Europe`s best development leagues.
That`s a huge distinction.
2. Scotland exports too few technically elite players
Think about Scotland`s current squad.
Most players come through:
Scottish Premiership
Championship
lower Premier League clubs
Very few become regular starters at:
Real Madrid CF
FC Barcelona
Bayern Munich
Paris Saint-Germain F.C.
Compare that with Croatia.
Every generation seems to produce players developed at Dinamo Zagreb before moving into Europe`s elite while still in their early 20s.
That has to become Scotland`s model.
3. The Premiership has become too comfortable
This might be controversial.
Outside the Old Firm, Scottish clubs often judge success by finishing 5th–8th.
Player development isn`t always the overriding objective.
Contrast that with:
Croatia
Belgium
Netherlands
Portugal
Those clubs know they`ll lose their best players.
That`s the business model.
Scotland could become much stronger if clubs saw themselves as producing £15–30 million players rather than trying to keep good players until age 28.
4. Produce more midfielders
This is where Scotland consistently lags behind.
Scotland produces:
centre-halves
hard-working midfielders
full-backs
strikers
What Scotland rarely produces is the player who controls a tournament game.
Think of:
Luka Modrić
Martin Ødegaard
Granit Xhaka
Kevin De Bruyne
Those players dictate tempo.
Scotland`s academy coaching should arguably spend far more time producing technical central midfielders than athletic players.
5. Change youth football philosophy
Spain changed after failing repeatedly.
Germany changed after Euro 2000.
Belgium completely rebuilt its academy structure after years of disappointment.
All three shifted emphasis toward:
technique
decision making
possession under pressure
small-sided games
creativity
Scotland has improved enormously, but culturally still values work rate and organisation slightly more than technical excellence.
Ideally, you`d want both.
6. Be more adaptable tactically
Steve Clarke deserves enormous credit.
His organisation got Scotland back to tournaments.
But tournament football often rewards flexibility.
Look at Morocco in 2022.
They could:
defend deep
counter
press high
keep possession when needed
Scotland sometimes look like they have only one way of playing.
Against elite opposition that becomes predictable.
7. Get more players abroad earlier
One thing Denmark and Croatia do exceptionally well:
A talented 19-year-old doesn`t necessarily stay home.
He moves.
Maybe:
Netherlands
Belgium
Germany
Austria
Those leagues improve players enormously.
Scotland arguably keeps some promising players in the Premiership longer than is ideal.
8. Stop measuring success by qualification
This is more psychological than tactical.
For decades, qualifying was success.
Now the benchmark should be:
qualify regularly
get through the group
occasionally reach a quarter-final
That`s exactly the progression Denmark made between the 1990s and today.
Would I change the manager?
Not immediately.
Steve Clarke transformed Scotland from a team that expected to miss tournaments into one that expects to qualify.
That`s a significant achievement.
The next manager, though, should probably be chosen with a different brief:
"Can you make Scotland play proactively against teams ranked 15–40 in the world?"
That`s a different challenge from rebuilding belief.
My "Croatia model" for Scotland
If Scotland copied one country, it would be Croatia.
Not because Scotland can become Croatia overnight—Croatia`s success is exceptional—but because the principles are transferable:
Accept being a small nation.
Make youth development the priority.
Export players early.
Prioritise technical quality over physicality.
Ensure every age group plays the same style.
Aim to produce one or two genuinely elite players each generation, rather than many solid professionals.
If Scotland consistently had even five or six regular starters at Champions League-level clubs, alongside the strong team spirit and organisation they`ve shown under Clarke, reaching the knockout stages of major tournaments would become a much more realistic expectation than it has been in recent decades.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 26 Jun 08:06
I`m sure it must be news to most Scotland fans that we consistently produce centre backs and strikers at the expense of midfielders who can control a game! It`s a fair point about midfielders although Billy Gilmour is probably the best we have in this area but unfortunately he missed out on the WC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
