2014 World Cup seedings, draws, and "groups of death"

(Un)fortunately, FIFA's new seeding rules closely resemble those of the NFL, where undue prominence is given to division leaders that may not even have a winning record, while teams with the third-best record in the nation may have to scrape through in the wild card round. Likewise, here many good teams are relegated to the second tier, while teams who won relatively easy qualification groups get top-tier seeds.

On the one hand, this is purely meritocratic, which makes sense, and it could spice things up at the group stage, which is fun. On the other, it can severely diminish the quality of the spectacle at the knockout stage, which is definitely not fun. It's a trade-off. As one of FIFA's main goals lately is to increase the visibility and opportunity of historically lesser teams (a "sports affirmative action" of sorts), that seems sensible after all... I often prefer unpredictability to tradition, after all.

Here are the likely seeding pots going into the final stage draw on December 6:

One thing that jumps out is the possibility of a group with three previous Cup winners, as England and Italy are in the second tier and France is in the third. A group with Brazil, Italy, and France and a group with Argentina, England, and France are "groups of death" by any standards -- so much historical rivalry! And it is only because of the rule that no more than two European teams can be drawn into the same group that we will avoid groups like Germany, Italy, and France (can you imagine that?).

More possible groups of death, for the fun of it:
Brazil, Netherlands, Ivory Coast, Japan
Germany, Netherlands, Ghana, Japan
Argentina, Portugal, Ivory Coast, USA
Spain, England, Nigeria, Mexico

Not all of these are horrible. Perhaps the worst of all is the group with Brazil, Italy, France, and Japan, which is arguably best team from the fourth tier. That group would be three-fourths of group B at the latest Confederations Cup that gave rise to highly spectacular matches.

Now for some easy groups, that is, the groups that second-tier European teams are really hoping for:

Switzerland, Italy, Algeria, Honduras -- the Italians' wet dream
Colombia, Netherlands, Ecuador, Iran -- nice 'n easy for the oranje
Belgium, England, Cameroon, Australia -- not exactly easy, but I'd love to see this for the precedents

In general, everyone wants to get Colombia, Switzerland, Ecuador, and Algeria. Not that these are easy, because remember, there are no easy teams: this has been a cutthroat qualifying season full of talent. But surely there are more affordable groups. Belgium, as is clear by now, will be a major outsider, and if they live up to expectations they could go a very long way.

There is also the following observation. Having an easy group is not necessarily great. Some teams, such as Italy and Uruguay, typically exalt themselves when they play big teams, and especially their historical rivals, and tend to struggle against the underdogs. In this sense, perhaps most great teams prefer a balanced group over an easy one. And given FIFA's new seeding, that is almost guaranteed to happen.