You mean other than the one they actually won?If England are ever going to win a major tournament, it seems like this is it.
I like this as a Ukraine fan.England are the only side in the R16 to play at home.
Neither England nor Germany has played particularly well. I think the Dutch have as good a chance of reaching the final as either of them, and after today, I wouldn’t sleep on Sweden either (probably not to reach the final, but maybe to upset the ENG-FRG winner in the quarters).That Wales/Denmark/Ned/Czech quarter of the draw is very weak. One of those teams is going to be in a semi. The England/Germany winner will be a strong favorite to make the final.
England are the only side in the R16 to play at home. Three other countries still in it are hosting games (Netherlands, Spain, Denmark), but they aren't hosting the game their team is playing in. Italy and Germany will host quarterfinal matches, but the way the bracket is set up, the local side won't play in those matches. England would have to play their quarterfinal in Rome, but the semis and final are back in London.
If England are ever going to win a major tournament, it seems like this is it.
If the Germans will play without Kroos and any other DDR players, (probably very few, haven't researched) I like the English chances.That’s a brutal draw for Belgium — they probably have to beat Portugal, Italy, and France to reach the final.
Neither England nor Germany has played particularly well. I think the Dutch have as good a chance of reaching the final as either of them, and after today, I wouldn’t sleep on Sweden either (probably not to reach the final, but maybe to upset the ENG-FRG winner in the quarters).
DDR was the former East Germany, no?Sorry, minor nit. (Was arguably the largest pet peeve of my late dad. )
If Sweden and Germany don't score in the final minutes, we get a far more balanced bracket.The top half is loaded. I don't like how this shook out.
FIFA rankings (which don't necessarily reflect how these teams are playing right now):
Italy - 7
Austria - 23
Belgium - 1
Portugal - 5
France - 2
Switzerland - 13
Croatia - 14
Spain - 6
Wales - 17
Denmark - 10
Netherlands - 16
Czech - 40
Sweden - 18
Ukraine - 24
England - 4
Germany - 12
So five of the top 7 teams in the world in the top bracket, and only one out of the top 14. But in the bottom bracket, only one of the top 7, and five outside the top 14.
Very unbalanced. C'est la vie. Go Azzurri!
I've been more impressed by Ukraine than you have, and less impressed by Sweden. I think Ukraine could be the "good bad team" in the tournament, and maybe make the sort of deep run that Wales madeDamn, Sweden look like they are going to the second-straight quarterfinals of a major tournament if they can get past Ukraine (who I don't think are very good). Andersson deserves a ton of credit, he's a great international manager.
Mancini has a bit of a selection headache in his midfield with Verratti backBelgium-Italy has a ton of great matchups.
Lukaku, Chiellini, and Bonucci are all well acquainted with each other these days.
Locatelli’s athleticism and work rate will be focused 100% on De Bruyne. And that leaves Jorginho with a much more manageable job tracking Witsel.
Belgium’s wide players will give the Italian fullbacks a lot to think about before bombing forward.
Verratti vs Tielsman is class on class.
But the Azzurri’s mobile and active front 3 will put a ton of pressure on the Belgian back line. And they can bring on Chiesa and Passina if they need to chase a goal
Barella was great in the first two matches, but if Verratti is healthy, he has to be the choice.Mancini has a bit of a selection headache in his midfield with Verratti back
I think you're reading too much into this data since it doesn't consider opponent strength (acknowledged in the post) and the strategy of the teams. I mean, do you believe that Scotland (xGD of +1.7) essentially played better than France in the group phase (xGD of +0.7)? France, Portugal, and England all play a very conservative style and are mostly happy to win low scoring games but Portugal have a significantly higher xGD (+2.6), likely due in large part to 3 late goals against Hungary. They should certainly get credit for those goals, but the fact that (1) they came against Hungary and (2) in the last 5 minutes of a match should bring down their predictive value a bit.xGoals after the group stage:
View: https://twitter.com/BetweenThePosts/status/1408055188242436096
I also found xgoals for the qualifying phase.
https://footystats.org/international/uefa-euro-qualifiers/xg
Random takeaways:
People are underrating Spain which based on xGoals had the best offense and the second best defense. Belgium and Portugal gets a boost when you realize the teams above them in next expcted xG all had home field advantage. During the qualifying phase, Portugal was second only to Spain in net xG. England looks mediocre. France has a great defense, but not as potent of an offense. Scotland deserved better as it beat both Czechia and Croatia in xG. Sweden, Croatia are overrated.
Agreed on all of this and I think for domestic table competitions xG is really helpful. I also love xG generally and I frequently check it for matches I watch to compare viewing impressions versus data-driven ones. Without common opponents and a small data set, it's really hard to compare teams across groups in a competition like Eurocup.Look. Of all the methods for predicting future performance, xGoals has been proven to have the most predictive power. It doesn't explain everything, there are things we don't know and the model can incorporate things like the way individual talent affects goal expectation. But it's better than every single other method. That's why the method is slowly becoming more widely known and accepted.
All caveats apply with the numbers I 've posted. Strength of schedule, small sample size, home field advantage, different strategy for knockout matches (though this is something I am more dubious about - knockout matches are like the mlb playoffs, a crapshoot).
And no. I don't believe that Scotland played better than France. But the xgoals tell me that Scotland -as well as Poland- got worse results than they deserved; and also that to the extent this tiny small sample size is accurate, they were going to do better if they had more matches. In other words, xgoals are more useful in putting a team's results into context than and predicting future performance.
xGoals are great for correcting our intuitive but often wrong impressions. Most people saw Spain's first two matches and thought they were too wasteful and not effective in scoring. xGoals saw a team that was creating goal opportunities that will eventually start scoring goals. This is what in fact happened in the third game; it often takes longer, far longer to see it.
Last, but not least, that's why I also looked at the xGoals from qualifying. It provides a larger sample size.
Well at least my final projected pairing is still alive!Top of my head predictions:
First round
Italy over Austria
Portugal over Belgium
France over Switzerland
Spain over Croatia
Denmark over Wales
Netherlands over Czech
Sweden over Ukraine
England over Germany
Second round
Italy over Portugal
France over Spain
Denmark over Netherlands
Sweden over England (upset)
Semis
Italy over France
Denmark over Sweden
Final
Italy over Denmark
Yes I'm an Italy homer. But I think they were the best team in the group stage as well. Doesn't mean they'll win, but they are a red hot team right now brimming with confidence like I haven't seen in years. And I think Denmark is riding some magic from the horrifying Christian Eriksen situation. They've got serious mojo and I think they can get through that bracket. They won't be the favorites, but they've got some juice right now.