The Ultimate Power Rankings

[Ed@PSG]

The Ultimate Power Rankings

Welcome to the most comprehensive and precise set of rankings for the top two leagues. In addition to the return of the newly improved CCCC© (Clarks Chance Creation Coefficient), we are now introducing two new metrics: C-TAC (Clarks Tackling Ability Coefficient) and the CUPRa (Clarks Ultimate Power Rankings).

Breaking down the game to its fundamental elements involves assessing a few key random decisions:

1. Is a chance created?
2. If there's a chance, is it successfully tackled, or does it culminate in a shot?
3. In the case of a shot, does it translate into a goal?

Consequently, we examine three critical metrics: a team's proficiency in creating opportunities, their effectiveness in tackling the opposition's chances, and ultimately, their success in winning games—factoring in the quality of the goalkeeper and forwards into the mix.

For each metric, we have identified what we consider the strongest team, ensuring that players aren't placed significantly out of position (e.g., deploying a defender as a forward solely to enhance total team tackling). Subsequent sections will provide more comprehensive details on each metric.

[Ed@PSG]

C-TAC (Clarks Tackling Ability Coefficient)

It's crucial to note that goalkeeper ratings are not factored into our rankings. Instead, we focus solely on each squad's capability to tackle opponents' chances and prevent shots. Normally, about 30-40% of chances are successfully tackled. There are two viable approaches to enhance your tackle count. First, you can boost your team's overall tackling stats, thereby increasing the tackle percentage. The second method involves adopting a play style that generates more chances for your opponent. However, it's important to recognise the risk in this strategy, since typically, for every three additional chances your opponent receives, you will likely face an extra two shots—a risky approach.

Initially, we assembled a starting eleven that we believe represents the strongest possible team without resorting to playing players out of their natural positions. For instance, we only placed defensive midfielders in the DM slot, since it is unlikely a team would put a sixth defender as a defensive midfielder due to lower secondary skills. I acknowledge that the selection of players is subjective, and that others may have different preferences, but the key focus lies in the relative rankings of the teams against eachother.

Next, we pitted this team against a randomly generated fictional average team to establish a maximum base C-TAC rating of 1000. We repeated this process for each of the top forty teams in the highest tiers, resulting in a C-TAC rating relative to the established base. For instance, a C-TAC rating of 800 implies that a team has achieved 80% of the maximum potential rating. Given that a C tactic and a 52201 formation yield the strongest values, we employed this setup for each team (it is likely that the formation would have been 52300C were it not for the stipulation that at least one forward must be played). Defenders/DMs with abs in excess of 800 were given the higher rating
Base Team
DF B_Chilwell 28 eng 22 17 14
DF Eder_Militao 26 bra 22 17 4
DF Marquinhos 29 bra 22 17 15
DF S_Dest 21 USA 22 17 13
DF V_van_Dijk 31 ned 22 17 11
DM D_Rice 24 eng 18 21 4
DM R_Sanches 25 por 18 20 14
MF S_Lobotka 27 slo 17 22 4
MF S_Tonali 23 ita 17 21 6
FW M_Locatelli 26 ita 17 21 14

EFL	TEAM	PTS
#1	ROM	888
#2	PSG	842
#3	ACM	839
#4	ATM	834
#5	RMA	834
#6	CEL	830
#7	BCA	828
#8	JUV	824
#9	LAZ	824
#10	INT	814
#11	BYM	811
#12	RAN	811
#13	MRS	807
#14	LIS	793
#15	NAP	782
#16	BYL	777
#17	RBL	776
#18	SOC	759
#19	DOR	753
#20	MON	742

PREM	TEAM	PTS
#1	MNC	859
#2	ARS	841
#3	CHE	839
#4	MNU	830
#5	AST	825
#6	LEE	824
#7	NEW	811
#8	BRI	802
#9	BAR	801
#10	LIV	791
#11	BUR	784
#12	TOT	782
#13	WHU	780
#14	SHW	764
#15	EVE	759
#16	CRY	753
#17	SOU	736
#18	BLA	733
#19	WOL	731
#20	SHU	725

COMBINED

[Ed@PSG]

CCCC (Clarks Chance Creation Coefficient)

This post focuses on a squad's capacity to create chances (and shots, considering that around 60-70% of chances typically lead to a shot). It doesn't serve as a indicator for goals or winning success. Similar to the C-TAC post that delved into tackling extremes, this post explores the contrasting aspect – the offensive prowess of a squad. Both extremes offer advantages; a team might be trying to close down a game after going in front, or holding on for a draw. Conversely, they could adopt an all-out attacking approach when attempting to stage a comeback in a match.

As before, we have assembled a starting eleven that we beleive represents the most formidable attacking lineup feasible, albeit with a slight modification. Due to the importance of the passing and shooting multipliers, the A tactic with attacking midfielders (AMs) and forwards (Fws) emerges as the most aggressive formation. However, for practicality, we opted for four defenders, as deploying three defenders with the A tactic is generally considered an extremely risky strategy. I acknowledge the subjectivity in player selection, and that different preferences may exist. Nevertheless, the primary emphasis remains on the comparative rankings of the teams against each other, rather than a direct comparison with the strongest team possible.

Next, we pitted this team against the same randomly generated average team as before. to establish a maximum base CCCC rating of 1000. For each of the top forty teams, we meticulously analysed various scenarios to identify their most effective formations for chance creation. The optimal formations varied; for some teams, it might have been 50122, while for others, 40024 was considered. All possible options were taken into account. Again, a CCCC rating of 800 indicates that a team has achieved 80% of the maximum potential rating. Players with abs in excess of 800 were given the higher rating

It is worth noting that the chance creation algorithm relies on the individual passing and shooting values of each player. Consequently, squads incorporating defenders or defensive midfielders with lower shooting attributes will exhibit lower overall values. This implies a potential drawback in terms of overall shot count across the team. However, managers adopting this strategy will no doubt anticipate a more concentrated distribution of shots to their more prolific players. This theory, among others, will undergo thorough analysis and consideration in the upcoming final post, the CUPRa ratings.

Base Team
DF F_Nacho 31 esp 20 19 13
DF J_Stones 29 eng 21 18 14
DF R_Varane 28 fra 20 19 13
DF T_Lamptey 23 gha 19 19 14
AM K_De_Bruyne 32 bel 13 22 20
AM Vitinha 23 por 4 21 20
FW E_Haaland 23 nor 3 18 24
FW G_Ramos 22 por 3 20 23
FW K_Mbappe 25 fra 4 18 23
FW Rodrygo 22 bra 7 18 23

EFL	TEAM	PTS
#1	PSG	966
#2	ROM	963
#3	RMA	956
#4	INT	916
#5	ATM	879
#6	JUV	861
#7	LAZ	859
#8	CEL	858
#9	BYL	848
#10	BYM	847
#11	LIS	842
#12	BCA	837
#13	SOC	802
#14	DOR	797
#15	NAP	797
#16	ACM	796
#17	RAN	793
#18	MON	775
#19	RBL	762
#20	MRS	753

PREM	TEAM	PTS
#1	MNC	930
#2	MNU	906
#3	LEE	884
#4	ARS	881
#5	CHE	858
#6	NEW	855
#7	BLA	850
#8	WHU	845
#9	BUR	843
#10	TOT	840
#11	AST	815
#12	BRI	801
#13	SOU	797
#14	EVE	791
#15	SHU	784
#16	LIV	780
#17	BAR	765
#18	CRY	761
#19	WOL	760
#20	SHW	752

COMBINED

[Ed@PSG]

CUPRa (Clark's Ultimate Power Rankings)

Welcome to the final episode of our trilogy. In our initial article, we delved into the defensive extreme, meticulously examining each team's ability to thwart opponents' chances, via a tackle. Subsequently, our second article unraveled the other end of the spectrum, shedding light on each team's ability in creating scoring opportunities. What is hopefully evident to everyone is that focusing exclusively on either extreme would be unlikely to result in victories; the key lies in achieving a harmonious balance.

Now, in this concluding episode, we bridge the remaining gaps by assessing dominance – a team's ability to secure victories by outscoring their opponents.
To complete the picture, we add the following to the data previously obtained. We introduce the goalkeeper's quality, the probable distribution of shots across the team, and each player's likelihood of converting a given opportunity. Additionally, we factor in the impact of fatigue, providing a comprehensive metric of a team's ability to win a game.
It's important to note what is not taken into consideration:

• Player age: Our focus is solely on their contribution to the match, irrespective of their value or potential future rerates (both positive and negative).
• Substitutions or the quality of players beyond the starting XI: We concentrate on the core eleven contributors.
• Tactical advantage: To ensure reliable comparisons, we have deliberately excluded tactical advantage. Since there is no assurance of having or yielding tactical advantage in any given game.

As before, we built an eleven which we consider to be the best possible from the current available players in FFO. While the selection may be a little subjective, We are confident that it is the most effective possible combination. We actually selected the strongest eleven for each of all the available tactics, also considering the numerous formations with each tactic. This elite lineup actually boasts three outfield players each from the powerhouses of Man City, Roma, and Paris Saint-Germain, complemented by a standout from Real Madrid. The final player is then any of the adept 25 rated goalkeepers in the game.
Once more, we pitted this ultimate eleven against the same randomly assembled fictional average team as before, to benchmark the maximum achievable base CUPRa rating, to be pegged at 1000. Our challenge then led us to replicate this process for each of the forty top-tier teams, culminating in the determination of their CUPRa rating relative to the established benchmark. Again, for every single squad we meticulously considered each possible tactic and formation using the players in each squad. A CUPRa rating of 900, for instance, signifies that a team has achieved 90% of the maximum potential rating, providing a comprehensive metric for gauging their relative standings against other teams.

Final comment: to give some perspective to the values, an increase in the rating of a goalkeeper typically increases the rating by approximately 15, compared to 5-7 for a forward main, and finally 2-4 for a defender and midfield main. These numbers vary dependent on the formation, tactic, and number of such players being played

EFL	TEAM	PTS
#1	ROM	951
#2	PSG	936
#3	RMA	913
#4	ATM	859
#5	JUV	855
#6	BCA	852
#7	INT	834
#8	CEL	827
#9	LIS	816
#10	LAZ	804
#11	ACM	797
#12	BYM	791
#13	SOC	755
#14	DOR	753
#15	RAN	743
#16	MON	738
#17	NAP	738
#18	BYL	733
#19	MRS	711
#20	RBL	700

PREM	TEAM	PTS
#1	MNC	917
#2	MNU	854
#3	ARS	854
#4	LEE	840
#5	AST	826
#6	CHE	817
#7	NEW	797
#8	BUR	781
#9	TOT	776
#10	BLA	757
#11	WHU	754
#12	BRI	748
#13	LIV	748
#14	EVE	737
#15	SOU	736
#16	BAR	726
#17	SHW	714
#18	CRY	713
#19	WOL	707
#20	SHU	705

COMBINED


TOTAL WORD COUNT THIS ARTICLE 1933
TOTAL WORD COUNT FRENCH ARTICLES 624
TOTAL 2557

[Si@Burnley]

Cool stuff! I assume #8 BRI is in fact BUR

[Ed@PSG]

Cool stuff! I assume #8 BRI is in fact BUR

Good spot. You are correct