UEFA Euro 2024

[Overgame]

Pot 1 seems strong. Germany has horrendous friendlies, but it doesn't matter, only the final tournament is important. Belgium is probably the weakest team of the pot.

Pot 2 seems meh. We have the group winners from the "weak" qualification groups + Austria. I'd give a small edge to Turkey and Austria, Turkey had the hardest group of the 5 winners here, and Austria just lost point against Belgium.

Pot 3 is really unbalanced. The Netherlands and Croatia are to be avoided, The Netherlands were in a group with France and only lost points there, Croatia is a title contender, even after their quite bad qualifiers. Czechia can be a pain. The other 3 would be considered a good draw (with the exception of Scotland for England)

Pot 4 will be really unbalanced. A good Italy is a title contender and Switzerland is always a pain to play against. Serbia would be a good draw. And then we have the 3 play-off winners. I wouldn't fear any of them, they're in line with the other pots.

[nogomet]

Major tournament (WC, EURO) participations since 1996:

15 - ESP , GER , FRA
14 - POR , ENG
13 - CRO , ITA
12 - NED
11 - DEN , SUI
9 - BEL , CZE , SWE , RUS
8 - POL*

*can still qualify for EURO 2024

[Dniprovec]

Can you do the same please if Turkey was in pot 3 and Croatia in pot 2? Just curious if Turkey was right to draw today...

Assuming the same Elo rating for Turkey, but swapping pots with Croatia, it is just marginally better: 53,28% to qualify into knockouts from Pot 2 vs 54,9% from Pot 3. It had a bigger impact on all the teams that were left in Pot 2 though, improving their chances by ~2% on average, since they can't get Croatia anymore. Croatia's chances has also improved but within a margin of error.

[BurningStorm]

@BurningStorm how is the current fan climate in Germany after these two friendlies?

Sarcastic, pessimistic. People who predict us as the winners of the EURO are a minority, at least I don't know such a fan. The only hope is the 2006 comparison where the friendlies before the tournament were also bad (1-4 loss in Italy). A home tournament can bring a lot of energy. Plus the hope that players who really perform in their clubs (also in the CL and EL) can finally show the same in the NT. With the exception of Alaba I don't think Nagelsmann would field any of the Austria players if there was still a Großdeutschland ( ), but we managed to lose to them in a horrible way. I see a lot good working national teams with worse players than us and this is annoying, especially when we saw a game like Germany - France (2-1) just two months ago, with the interim coach.

[air]

Do you see any possible separation in the group stage due to political affairs? I only see Serbia/Albania in different groups possibly.

[Firnen]

Major tournament (WC, EURO) participations since 1996:

15 - ESP , GER , FRA
14 - POR , ENG
13 - CRO , ITA
12 - NED
11 - DEN , SUI
9 - BEL , CZE , SWE , RUS
8 - POL*

*can still qualify for EURO 2024

Which are the 2 following?
I am curious about who would complete a European top 16 (I remove Russia, thus we have 14).

[amirbachar]

Can you do the same please if Turkey was in pot 3 and Croatia in pot 2? Just curious if Turkey was right to draw today...

Assuming the same Elo rating for Turkey, but swapping pots with Croatia, it is just marginally better: 53,28% to qualify into knockouts from Pot 2 vs 54,9% from Pot 3. It had a bigger impact on all the teams that were left in Pot 2 though, improving their chances by ~2% on average, since they can't get Croatia anymore. Croatia's chances has also improved but within a margin of error.

Thank you very much! Same Elo is a good assumption since this is their actual assessment of their abilty

[TommyChat]

Major tournament (WC, EURO) participations since 1996:

15 - ESP , GER , FRA
14 - POR , ENG
13 - CRO , ITA
12 - NED
11 - DEN , SUI
9 - BEL , CZE , SWE , RUS
8 - POL*

*can still qualify for EURO 2024

Which are the 2 following?
I am curious about who would complete a European top 16 (I remove Russia, thus we have 14).

Turkey and FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro/Serbia have 7, the latter is impressive since it includes only 2 Euros (2000,2024) and 5 World Cups.
Next is Romania with 6, Greece can also reach 6 if they win the playoffs.

[Sagy]

Would be good to be back to the world rankings when it comes to pots. This current one doesn't make any sense at all.

And tbh I don't think the Nations League works. UEFA could create groups with more teams and matches in WC/Euro qualification.

Why? Teams are seeded based on how they performed in the qualifying for the tournament. Why are results from x years ago more important?

By this logic you should reseed all the teams before every knockout round in the tournament finals. It “doesn't make any sense at all” to have a R16 Belgium (#1 FIFA June 2021) vs Portugal (#5) when another R16 is Netherlands (#16) vs Czech Rep (#40). If you are into big names England vs Germany when another is Wales vs Denmark

[nogomet]

Teams certain to miss EURO 2024, ranked by the number of appearances on major tournaments since 1996:

9 - SWE
3 - IRL
3 - BUL
2 - NOR

(*excluding RUS for obvious reasons)

These teams could still qualify:

8 - POL
5 - GRE
4 - UKR
3 - WAL
2 - ISL

[Greyn]

... and I remember that thinking in Poland after the draw, that we could not draw an easier group and we can book tickets to Germany before playing the games. Not in mass media of course, but I remember that attitude reading comments on the internet.

Same story like after the draw of the WC 2010 qualifying groups. "Easy group" or "Only Czech Republic might cause some problems to Poland". At the end Poland finished only ahead of San Marino -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_FIFA ... FA_Group_3

[air]

Would be good to be back to the world rankings when it comes to pots. This current one doesn't make any sense at all.

And tbh I don't think the Nations League works. UEFA could create groups with more teams and matches in WC/Euro qualification.

Why? Teams are seeded based on how they performed in the qualifying for the tournament. Why are results from x years ago more important?

By this logic you should reseed all the teams before every knockout round in the tournament finals. It “doesn't make any sense at all” to have a R16 Belgium (#1 FIFA June 2021) vs Portugal (#5) when another R16 is Netherlands (#16) vs Czech Rep (#40). If you are into big names England vs Germany when another is Wales vs Denmark

My logic is that the strongest national teams take seriously one competition (the EC/WC qualifiers) but they won't take seriously two (Nations League). NL is +6 matches per a two-year cycle but if UEFA would simply use qualifucation groups with 7 teams, that would already mean +2 or +4 matches that strong teams need to take seriously.

If there are concerns about them qualifying too early, and don't mind about the last 1-2 matches, I am fine with an organized draw where big teams get 6th/7th pot minnows in the last rounds.

My issue is that this current system is simply unfair since teams are random about Nations League. Don't want another Portugal, Germany, France group (aka Germany, Netherlands, Italy) for my team just because the whole system depends on who is taking Nations League seriously and who isn't.

[Sagy]

Would be good to be back to the world rankings when it comes to pots. This current one doesn't make any sense at all.

And tbh I don't think the Nations League works. UEFA could create groups with more teams and matches in WC/Euro qualification.

Why? Teams are seeded based on how they performed in the qualifying for the tournament. Why are results from x years ago more important?

By this logic you should reseed all the teams before every knockout round in the tournament finals. It “doesn't make any sense at all” to have a R16 Belgium (#1 FIFA June 2021) vs Portugal (#5) when another R16 is Netherlands (#16) vs Czech Rep (#40). If you are into big names England vs Germany when another is Wales vs Denmark

My logic is that the strongest national teams take seriously one competition (the EC/WC qualifiers) but they won't take seriously two (Nations League). NL is +6 matches per a two-year cycle but if UEFA would simply use qualifucation groups with 7 teams, that would already mean +2 or +4 matches that strong teams need to take seriously.

If there are concerns about them qualifying too early, and don't mind about the last 1-2 matches, I am fine with an organized draw where big teams get 6th/7th pot minnows in the last rounds.

My issue is that this current system is simply unfair since teams are random about Nations League. Don't want another Portugal, Germany, France group (aka Germany, Netherlands, Italy) for my team just because the whole system depends on who is taking Nations League seriously and who isn't.

If you don’t take the NL seriously, don’t complain about your draw in qualifying. You made your own bed.

That aside, the nation league impact on the pots for the Euro finals draw is minimal. The big impact is how teams performed in the Euro qualifying. That will not change if the qualifying groups draw is done on different basis. As a reminder, we have had WC and Euro qualifying groups in the past with two “top teams” in the same qualifying group before the UCL.

With 24 teams in the Euro, and groups of 7 teams you would end up with 3 teams qualifying per group. That would be much worse and you are likely to have teams qualifying half way through and not playing top players the rest of the way (fear of injury for example). Even if you do it, the pots for the final draw will be random since some of the top teams will not do as well as you would like.

BTW, Portugal last time was in pot 3, because the Ukraine won their qualifying group. Why would it be fair to seed Ukraine below Portugal? France was in pot 2 because they could only get 1 point in two games against Turkey. Why would it be “fair” to put them ahead of someone like Ukraine which got 4 points against Portugal (which you consider better than Turkey)?

What’s wrong with Germany, Netherlands, Italy group? With more than 6 “top teams” two of them have to end up in the same group and nothing about Italy performance since the last Euro says it it should be protected from being the 3rd team in such a group.

What you are really objecting to is the fact that teams that you consider “top teams” do not always perform well in qualifying and have to deal with the consequences.

[air]

Why? Teams are seeded based on how they performed in the qualifying for the tournament. Why are results from x years ago more important?

By this logic you should reseed all the teams before every knockout round in the tournament finals. It “doesn't make any sense at all” to have a R16 Belgium (#1 FIFA June 2021) vs Portugal (#5) when another R16 is Netherlands (#16) vs Czech Rep (#40). If you are into big names England vs Germany when another is Wales vs Denmark

My logic is that the strongest national teams take seriously one competition (the EC/WC qualifiers) but they won't take seriously two (Nations League). NL is +6 matches per a two-year cycle but if UEFA would simply use qualifucation groups with 7 teams, that would already mean +2 or +4 matches that strong teams need to take seriously.

If there are concerns about them qualifying too early, and don't mind about the last 1-2 matches, I am fine with an organized draw where big teams get 6th/7th pot minnows in the last rounds.

My issue is that this current system is simply unfair since teams are random about Nations League. Don't want another Portugal, Germany, France group (aka Germany, Netherlands, Italy) for my team just because the whole system depends on who is taking Nations League seriously and who isn't.

If you don’t take the NL seriously, don’t complain about your draw in qualifying. You made your own bed.

That aside, the nation league impact on the pots for the Euro finals draw is minimal. The big impact is how teams performed in the Euro qualifying. That will not change if the qualifying groups draw is done on different basis. As a reminder, we have had WC and Euro qualifying groups in the past with two “top teams” in the same qualifying group before the UCL.

With 24 teams in the Euro, and groups of 7 teams you would end up with 3 teams qualifying per group. That would be much worse and you are likely to have teams qualifying half way through and not playing top players the rest of the way (fear of injury for example). Even if you do it, the pots for the final draw will be random since some of the top teams will not do as well as you would like.

BTW, Portugal last time was in pot 3, because the Ukraine won their qualifying group. Why would it be fair to seed Ukraine below Portugal? France was in pot 2 because they could only get 1 point in two games against Turkey. Why would it be “fair” to put them ahead of someone like Ukraine which got 4 points against Portugal (which you consider better than Turkey)?

What’s wrong with Germany, Netherlands, Italy group? With more than 6 “top teams” two of them have to end up in the same group and nothing about Italy performance since the last Euro says it it should be protected from being the 3rd team in such a group.

What you are really objecting to is the fact that teams that you consider “top teams” do not always perform well in qualifying and have to deal with the consequences.

No, it's not minimal. Nations League is the only reason why teams like Netherlands and Italy drew France and England in their EQ groups therefore there was no outcome where 2 teams from England, France, Italy, Netherlands don't end up in pot3/4, making the whole pot system a joke.

[TommyChat]

Why? Teams are seeded based on how they performed in the qualifying for the tournament. Why are results from x years ago more important?

By this logic you should reseed all the teams before every knockout round in the tournament finals. It “doesn't make any sense at all” to have a R16 Belgium (#1 FIFA June 2021) vs Portugal (#5) when another R16 is Netherlands (#16) vs Czech Rep (#40). If you are into big names England vs Germany when another is Wales vs Denmark

My logic is that the strongest national teams take seriously one competition (the EC/WC qualifiers) but they won't take seriously two (Nations League). NL is +6 matches per a two-year cycle but if UEFA would simply use qualifucation groups with 7 teams, that would already mean +2 or +4 matches that strong teams need to take seriously.

If there are concerns about them qualifying too early, and don't mind about the last 1-2 matches, I am fine with an organized draw where big teams get 6th/7th pot minnows in the last rounds.

My issue is that this current system is simply unfair since teams are random about Nations League. Don't want another Portugal, Germany, France group (aka Germany, Netherlands, Italy) for my team just because the whole system depends on who is taking Nations League seriously and who isn't.

If you don’t take the NL seriously, don’t complain about your draw in qualifying. You made your own bed.

That aside, the nation league impact on the pots for the Euro finals draw is minimal. The big impact is how teams performed in the Euro qualifying. That will not change if the qualifying groups draw is done on different basis. As a reminder, we have had WC and Euro qualifying groups in the past with two “top teams” in the same qualifying group before the UCL.

With 24 teams in the Euro, and groups of 7 teams you would end up with 3 teams qualifying per group. That would be much worse and you are likely to have teams qualifying half way through and not playing top players the rest of the way (fear of injury for example). Even if you do it, the pots for the final draw will be random since some of the top teams will not do as well as you would like.

BTW, Portugal last time was in pot 3, because the Ukraine won their qualifying group. Why would it be fair to seed Ukraine below Portugal? France was in pot 2 because they could only get 1 point in two games against Turkey. Why would it be “fair” to put them ahead of someone like Ukraine which got 4 points against Portugal (which you consider better than Turkey)?

What’s wrong with Germany, Netherlands, Italy group? With more than 6 “top teams” two of them have to end up in the same group and nothing about Italy performance since the last Euro says it it should be protected from being the 3rd team in such a group.

What you are really objecting to is the fact that teams that you consider “top teams” do not always perform well in qualifying and have to deal with the consequences.

The bad performance of France and England in Nations League didn't hurt them in qualifiers. It ended up hurting every other in their group.