USMNT move up to No. 13 in latest FIFA Rankings

USMNTLineupVsSoutKorea (

Photo by


The U.S. Men’s National Team’s victory on Feb. 1 against South Korea benefited the team in more ways than one.

FIFA announced on Thursday that the USMNT has jumped up one place to No. 13 in the latest FIFA rankings, placing them ahead of Chile and England, who dropped two places to No. 15. The rankings also removed the defeat in Honduras last February from their points calculation, helping the U.S. improve its overall position.

Elsewhere in CONCACAF, Mexico remained at No. 21, Panama moved up four places to No. 32, Costa Rica dropped three places to No. 35, and Honduras improved three spots to No. 40. Rounding out the top five was Spain, Germany, and Argentine in the top three places followed by Portugal in fourth, which swapped with Colombia, now in fifth.

Switzerland jumped up to sixth place followed by Uruguay, Italy, Brazil, and the Netherlands. The next rankings will be released on March 13.


What do you think of this news? Like the current placement in the rankings? Think the USMNT could jump up again with a win in Ukraine?

Share your thoughts below.

This entry was posted in Featured, FIFA, U.S. Men's National Team. Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to USMNT move up to No. 13 in latest FIFA Rankings

  1. A.S.A. says:

    Wow three spots away from top 10. We must be that good…….
    Totally joking by the way. FIFA rankings mean nothing. The Swiss are ranked sixth for Gods sake. Tells you everything you need to know about these rankings.

    • Dirk McQuigley says:

      And Brazil and the Netherlands are ranked 9 and 10.

      “There’s Holland and the Netherlands, so who are the Dutch,” George Lewis Costanza.

      • user222 says:

        If people from Poland are called “Poles”…

        Are people from Holland called “Holes”?

      • TomM says:

        “There are only two things I can’t stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people’s cultures… and the Dutch.”

        – Goldmember

      • Birgit Calhoun says:

        The Dutch are the people of Holland or the Netherlands.

        • AristotleTimVickery says:

          People from the Netherlands are called Smurfs

        • John Cocktosen says:

          The Dutch live in Holland
          Deutsch is the German langauge word for German.
          Deutche is the word for Germans. They live in Deutschland

          The capital of Deutschland is Berlin.
          JFK said “Ich bin ein Berliner”
          This was mis-translated to mean “I am a doughnut”
          The danish is also a type of doughnut.
          Someone who is Danish is from Denmark.
          That person is a Dane.

          JFK is also an airport in NYC.
          RFK was the brother of JFK.
          DC United play at RFK stadium.

          Manchester United play at Old Trafford.
          Manchester United’s best player is RVP
          RVP is Dutch.

      • marden08 says:

        Brasil os ranked 9th and will win the world cup. Tell me again the meaning of these rankings.

    • KingGoogleyEye says:

      FIFA rankings are accurate to within +/- 10 spots.

      Even then, they don’t reflect the HUGE disparity between the top 5 teams and the next 5 teams.

      • away goals says:

        They actually do demonstrate disparities between rankings. Or attempt to at least.

        Spain’s rating is 1506, germany are #2 at 1314. Switzerland (#6) and uruguay (#7) meanwhile are rated 1159 and1157 respectively. So there’s a much greater disparity between 1 and 2 then between 6 and 7.

        The real problem with the rankings is that they can be easily manipulated by clever associations. The swiss are a prime example. They played almost no friendlies over the last few years. Friendlies, even against good teams, tend to lower your rating.

        If only one team is exploiting the algorithm, they can give themselves a huge advantage.

  2. AdamTheRed says:

    To say the FIFA ranking mean nothing is wrong. They decide who gets seeded. A few more results go our way, ie winning in CRC and Honduras etc, and we are not in Group G.

    • atleticodemadridfan says:

      …yes but the chance to be unlucky for Ghana, Portugal (and that ego-maniac pretty boy Cristiano Ronaldo), and the Krauts – you just gotta love it. If we come out of that group with our heads held high, qualified for the knockouts, we will have accomplished something!

    • Lost in Space says:

      If the US were to have been in the top 7 FIFA would have changed the rules for seeding (ala 2006) to give the seed to someone else.

      • wood chip zip says:

        so true

      • Rodger says:

        We finished on top in our region and have a higher rating than Mexico. So why do we have a much worse WC draw than they do?

        It means nothing and the deck is always stacked against us

        • Jake says:

          That’s a dumb comment. That has nothing to do with how the pots and the draw for the world Cup works. Its frustrating that we have such a tough draw, but the draw has nothing to do with FIFA rankings other than the top 8 teams. Its not that the deck is particularly stacked against us in this sense. It was chance (unless you believe the conspiracy theories).

        • whoop-whoop says:

          EVERTIME the deck is ALWAYS stacked against us… well, I mean, except the times it is not…. like last World Cup.

      • AcidBurn says:

        Correct. I even know how they would have done it…use current ranking and results in the last 2 WCs…US went 3 and out in 2006, so that would drop them out of the seedings.

        This is how they put France in as a seed I believe.

        FIFA decides who they want to seed and then come up with the formula, which is why they don’t set out the criteria at the beginning of qualifying.

        • away goals says:

          That certainly doesn’t seem to apply this year. Traditional fifa powers italy, england, france, holland, portugal all unseeded.

          Would have been easy for fifa to adjust the criteria to seed several of those teams at the expense of belgium, switzerland, or colombia.

          Unless you’re arguing fifa would tweak the seeding requirements ONLY to screw over the usmnt. That would be a bit arrogant though, no?

      • AcidBurn says:

        How can the US be ranked so high if most of its players don’t challenge themselves at the highest level?

        It is strange to see how the US can get ranked so high when its roster in terms of club pedigree pales in comparison to teams 10 slots below them.

        • Lil' Zeke says:

          Provocateur! Apparently they don’t consider that as reliable a predictor of success as the team’s actual performane

  3. user222 says:

    Off the topic…. sorry guys…

    it took FIFA what, 50 yrs to increase the number of WC players from 22 to 23?

    Times have changed, the game is a lot more faster, more physical, knocks take longer to heal,
    serious injuries are now more common. It is time to upgrade FIFA rules.

    Expand team rosters to 26 players and all players must be active for every WC game.

    If a game goes into extra time, each team should have 4 new subs if desired. From a safety perspective, this avoids putting players through inhumane physical assignments of enduring another 30 minutes of running in a potential brutal climate of heat and humidity.

    From an entertainment perspective, the game can experience a rebirth as fresh legs are brought in to play the extra 30 minutes. Teams might be more willing to risk and attack instead of sitting back waiting for a penalty shoot out.

    This change will help mostly “bottom” of the table teams. ie. USA needs to be sometimes 3 guys deep to cover for a field position due the backup player not being well verse in ALL aspects of the game.

    Please cut and paste this suggestion in every website, forum, thread, etc… Now that Ives is in the doghouse with JK, forward this to FoxSoccer, ESPN, Grant Wohl, he start off the email chain to Gulati–>Klinnsman–>Beckenbauer–>Platini–>Blatter….

    There is no logistics arguments that this could be and issue at any level of soccer.

    Really, this can take a couple days for FIFA to vote and approve… but nothing takes less than a month with the dinosaurs at FIFA.

    • Reid says:

      User I agree and thought about this last year and am on board it you mean by 4 new subs, actually is 4 total subs (one additional). Please clarify.

      • user222 says:

        either 3 or 4 brand new subs in extra time…

        it is the team’s prerogative if they want to keep the same 11 players on the field for extra time.

        • Reid says:

          3 or 4 brand new subs…. I think you are on an island by yourself with that thought. I very much doubt you would get any real support for this.
          This is not Nam there are rules

        • DanO says:

          Why not just change it to on the fly subs like hockey then? Fresh legs all around, oranges on the sidelines, and participation trophies for everyone!

          • user222 says:

            The purpose of increasing the roster from 23 to 26 players is to use most/all of your players precisely in acute situations.

            WC 94 had 10 mins water ‘breaks’ in each half at several games…. and there were no orange slices nor Sunny D. bottles.

            All of you, provide reasons why this won’t be good for the game….

            • DanO says:

              I couldn’t care less if the roster was 26 vs. 23 for a tournament.

              I also don’t really think the number of active players in a given game is that big of a deal, but there is some strategy to limiting the number active players to less than the whole squad for a given game.

              I do have issue with the 3-4 extra subs. One extra sub for the extra 30 minutes makes sense, 3-4 more changes the whole dynamic of the game. There is more than just fresh legs to having a good game. There are tactics, formation changes, players shifting positions, etc. Then there’s the whole argument about tradition…

              Also, where’s your evidence that playing 120min places players in significant danger? Please do not cite anecdote. At the end of the day, we’re talking about incredibly fit PROFESSIONAL athletes.

        • Maykol says:

          3 or 4 brand new subs? That made me laugh out loud

    • SilverRey says:

      I always thought they should allow at least one more sub when it comes to overtime.

    • whoop-whoop says:

      Nah. Mass substitution in OT completely changes what is an important characteristic that distinguishes soccer, makes it special if you ask me. Limited substitutions plays a huge role in the nature of the game in strategy and how a player prepares. It adds an element of stamina, character/mind over matter, perseverance. It’s a war of attrition. How many games do see where a team plays even or even over runs another for a half, only to crumble when fatigue sets in?

      “Fatigue makes cowards of us all…” General George S. Patton

    • Joamiq says:

      Make it 25 players and one additional sub in ET and I’m with you.

  4. Patrick says:

    I don’t normally do this, but youre idea is dumb.

  5. Sandtrout says:

    This is starting to feel like 2006 all over again.

  6. Birgit Calhoun says:

    Note who is the sine qua non of that upward move. He is in the picture above.

  7. Jake says:

    Are you sure the Honduras game is “removed” from the rankings? I thought it was a weighted average over the past 4 years. Which would mean the Honduras loss is weighted in the data from 13-24 months ago, but not “removed” at all.

    • Joamiq says:

      That is correct. Don’t know where Dan got the idea from that only the past year counts. That would be silly.

  8. bizzy says:

    I thought FIFA rankings is geared towards how you are ranked on the world stage in terms of team strength?!!!! Ranked ahead of England and France…..4 spots from brazil??? yeah right. Ghana is 37 and always seem to have our number. we have issues with lack of belief…lack of confidence….we lack players in top leagues in Europe yet we are ranked higher than the strongest English and French NATIONAL teams? I don’t know anymore but might as well enjoy it….lol

    • Iggypibe says:

      I agree with you that the FIFA rankings are inaccurate… If you want a better picture of the soccer world stage, check the ” World Football ELO Ratings”… I think they have a better (and more transparent) way to rank the teams as they show you the points gained/lost by every team in every match they play… Coincidentally, the USA is ALSO ranked #13 there!! But don’t fear… Your revered England (#7) and France (#12) are ahead of the USA… Brazil, Spain, Germany, Argentina and The Nederlands (in that order) round the top five spots… Ghana (deservedly) is #32… Mexico is #20… The Swiss (#6 in FIFA) and the Greeks (#12 in FIFA) don’t appear in the top 12… Except for the fact that Belgium is a little low (#18) in my opinion… Those are real rankings!! Whether you like it or not… We’re #13… Lucky 13!!

  9. Limey says:

    I’ve never really cared much about the ranking but there are some oddities in there, assuming a higher ranked team would be favorite to win, would the first team in these matches be favorite t win?
    Colombia Vz Brazil
    Switzerland Vs. Brazil
    Switzerland Vs. Italy
    Greece Vs. USA
    USA Vs. England
    USA Vs. France
    Cape Verde Islands (wherever that is) Vs. Romania, Costa Rica or ten other countries

    I could go on but you get the idea, sounds like the ranking are a little silly.

    • Joamiq says:

      Cape Verde is actually better than you’d think. Still not sure how they’d do against those teams, but they have a bunch of guys playing in Portugal and Holland

  10. Gill King says:

    USMNT are Fifa’s pawns. The world according to Fifa would implode were the US to win their freaking WC.
    It is my dream to actually win it “against all odds”.. then encircle it at mid pitch, and urinate all over it, and leaving it with steam wafting off of it.. and never to participate in their rigged tourney again!
    To take American players and American dollars out of Fifa forever.. They hate us anyway.. EFF them.

  11. Leo says:

    Equally as interesting as the FIFA rankings is a recent interview FIFA did with Klinsmann I saw linked:

    link to

    In it he discusses expectations and benchmarks for the USMNT in WC14.

  12. Ygritte says:

    Rankings mean nothing, Jon Snow…

  13. chuck says:

    Ha! I bet after a dissappointing first round exit at the World Cup, those Swiss will plummet all the way down to number 9!