DON’T make World Cup predictions until you read this

(Editors note: Former FC Dallas general manager Andy Swift is a walking World Cup encylopedia. He correctly called "Italy" four years ago. So, before you fill out your bracket, do yourself a favor and read this.)

By Andy Swift

With the start of South Africa 2010 less than a week away, it’s time to get those World Cup brackets filled out. But unlike the fixed NCAA National Basketball Tournament bracket, a Word Cup bracket is a moving target. The order of finish in the group stage determines how teams are split up in the elimination phase. Whom you choose to finish first or second in a group will have major implications in maximizing the points obtained from your bracket, and will also have a noticeable effect on how many of the semi-finalists and quarter-finalists you get right.

It seems that before every World Cup, one nation becomes the public’s darling and gets included as one of the favorites to win the cup along with the traditional powers (Brazil, Italy, Germany and Argentina). Heading into South Africa ’10, Spain, the Euro ’08winner, is the tournament favorite. In picking your bracket’s winner, it’s hard to not pencil in Spain as your champion with all the hoopla you hear about that team.

But if you take a look back at history, you can see how falling into that trap can cost you valuable bracket points.

In the early and mid-seventies, Johan Cruyff and his Clockwork Orange teammates were favored before both the ’74 and ’78 World Cups. They reached the final both times, but neither time could seal the deal. In ’82, many thought Spain, as hosts, would finally win their first World Cup. They barely made it out of the group stage, and completely fizzled out in the second round.

Three-time “Golden Ball” winner Michel Platini and his Les Blues teammates (’84 Euro Champions) were highly favored prior to the ’86 World Cup. A nice, shiny third place medal was all they would get. Holland won Euro in ’88 and had Marco van Basten, Ruud Gullit, Frank Rijkaard and company heading to Italy ’90 as “can’t miss” favorites. How did they do? Three ties in group play and an early exit in the second round.

Remember Colombia’s thrashing of Argentina in Buenos Aires during qualifying forUSA ’94? It prompted Pele to declare them the favorites to win the World Cup. They finished last in their group. Figo’s Portugalwas the “darkhorse favorite” to win the tournament in ’02. They didn’t even get out of their group. In ’06, both the CzechRepublic and Frank Lampard’s England were highly touted. The Czechs failed to make the Round of 16, while England bowed out in the quarterfinals. Still feel good about Spain taking first place in South Africa?

The “Super Power” Factor

Arguably, there are four traditional World Cup Super Powers – Brazil, Germany, Italy, and Argentina. These are the four teams that have been the most dominant in World Cup history, the four teams that sit at the top of the all time World Cup point rankings. Between them, they have won 14 of the 18 World Cups. Every single World Cup Final has featured at least one of these four nations. Additionally, either Brazil or Germany has finished in the top three in every World Cup except 1930 (the very first one).

Super Powers reach the finals so often because they are nearly invincible in semifinal games. When facing non-Super Powers, they have advanced 17 out of 19 times to the final (15 out of 16 times since 1950). In fact, in the last 12 World Cups, Super Powers are 13 for 13 in advancing to the final when facing a non-Super Power in the semifinals.

Few things trump the Super Power Factor. Choose one (or two) of the four Super Powers and have them reach the final.

The “Trendy Team” Factor

It is natural to want to look at a team’s success over the previous few years when predicting tournament performance. But you have to be careful about how much stock you put into this. Take the FIFA rankings, for example (which are based on a team’s results obtained in recent years). Ever since the start of the ranking system in 1993, no World Cup winner was ranked #1 in the FIFA rankings at the end of the previous year.

FIFA Rankings in December, prior to World Cup:

December 1993: Italy was #1, Brazil won the 1994 World Cup

December 1997: Brazil was #1, France won the 1998 World Cup

December 2001: France was #1, Brazil won the 2002 World Cup

December 2005: Brazil was #1, Italy won the 2006 World Cup

And what about using recent success in the Euro Cup as a barometer? Well, only once has a Euro Cup finalist won the following World Cup (Germany won the 1972 Euro, then won the World Cup as hosts in 1974). In all other eleven Euro Cups played, both finalists have failed to win the following World Cup.

Spain was the #1 ranked team in December 2009. Additionally, Spain and Germany were the Euro Cup finalists in 2008. So while one of them may very well reach the World Cup final, if this trend holds true in South Africa, neither will actually win end up as the Champion.

The “MVP” Factor

It seems that any nation blessed with having the current best player in the world on its roster automatically becomes one of the World Cup favorites. But smart bracket predictors do not fall for this illusion. Neither a reigning FIFA “Player of the Year” award winner, nor a reigning South American “Player of the Year” award winner, nor a reigning “Golden Ball” award winner (European player of the Year) has ever won the World Cup. Ever. This trend doesn’t bode well for Argentina: Lionel Messi is both the reigning FIFA “Player of the Year” and “Golden Ball” winner, while another Argentine, Juan Sebastian Veron, is the reigning South American player of the year.

Picking Argentina to win the 2010 World Cup is risky business.

The “Qualifying Stage Performance” Factor

Many also tend to look at how teams performed during the qualifying stage to help determine their tournament predictions. But this habit can also potentially damage the success of your bracket.

For instance, every World Cup from 1990 to the present has had at least one European team that finished the qualifying stage undefeated, but then failed to get out of group play in the World Cup.

The following teams were undefeated in European qualifying for 2010: Germany, Spain, Italy, and Holland. If this trend were to continue, at least one of these teams would fail to get out of group play. If I had to pick one, I would pick Italy. Germany is too efficient (they have never failed to get out of group play), Holland has a relatively easy group, and Spain is simply too good to not advance to the second round.

In South America, ever since the new single table format was put in place, the team’s final position in the standings has not always correlated with their performance in the World Cup. In fact, South American teams finishing in third place (the top four qualify) have had a collective winning percentage of .800 in that World Cup. Compare that to the first place teams (.643) and second place teams (.583). Fourth place teams, though, have lagged behind with a World Cup winning percentage of only .364.

The order of finish in this World Cup’s South American qualifying was 1. Brazil 2. Chile 3. Paraguay 4. Argentina. Perhaps this trend is an indicator that Paraguay will do well in the group stage (and that Argentina will not).

The Case Against Spain

Not only will Spain be fighting both the FIFA #1 ranking jinx and the Euro Cup Champion jinx, a few other historical trends will also be working against this tournament’s favorite. For starters, no European team has ever won a World Cup held outside of Europe. Spain would have to be the first nation to do that. Furthermore, the last three countries to win a World Cup for the first time all did it on home soil – England ’66, Argentina ’78, and France ’98. And if all that weren’t enough, Spain’s track record in the knock-out stages of the World Cup is abysmal. While they have a healthy 19-8-6 (.667) record in first round games, their second round record is 2-7-5 (.321).

There are simply too many factors working against Spain to comfortably pick them as the tournament winners.

What about the United States and Mexico?

There are factors working both in favor and against these two CONCACAF rivals:

· While the United States has a paltry 0-9-1 World Cup record on European soil, they have a very respectable 6-7-2 record in World Cup games played in every other continent.

· Mexico, on the other hand, has lost 11 of the 12 World Cup games it has played in the Southern Hemisphere (South Africa is in the Southern Hemisphere). Also, Mexico is also only 4-7-9 in the Eastern Hemisphere (South Africa is in the Eastern Hemisphere).

· CONCACAF teams are a whopping 0-16-4 against traditional Super Powers in World Cup action. This matters because if the US and Mexico finish second in their respective groups, there is a strong likelihood that they will face Super Powers Germany and Argentina respectively in the Round of 16.

· If the United States does indeed end up having to play Germany in the Round of 16, they’ll be facing a side that has never failed to reach at least the quarterfinals in the modern era (post WWII) of the World Cup.

· Mexico is grouped with South Africa in Group A. In the entire history of the World Cup, the host nation has advanced out of group play every single time.

The United States has a good chance of advancing to the 2^nd round. But they are unlucky to have drawn into a group that will have them likely face Germany right away.

My Predictions

England, Brazil, Germany, and Spain all win their groups, and all advance to the Semifinals.

In one Semifinal, Brazil beats England. In the other, Germany gets past Spain, but not before the game goes to penalty kicks. Brazil then beats Germany in the final in a repeat of the 2002 World Cup.

Don’t agree? Then I’m willing to bet you a delicious enchilada platter from www.zuzufresh.com.