Premium Content - preview


First example shows Country Ranking points gained by all Albanian clubs - sorted by a total gained points. As you can see, most successful Albanian team since season 99/00 is KF Tirana, which gained 12,0 pts, what represents 22 % of all Albanian points.


Example 2 shows results of all clubs from Belarus, including » all, which indicates results of whole association (i.e. results of all Belarusian clubs together). Data are sorted by average gained points (per 1 participation in European Cups). This picture very clearly shows that FC BATE Borisov and FC Dinamo Minsk gain points above the Belarusian average, so their participations in European Cups are profitable for coefficient of Belarus (in contrast with clubs from the bottom).


Naturally, it depends on you, if you wish to see results of individual clubs, associations (» all), or both. This example shows only clubs from Belarus and Lithuania - sorted by the percentage share on gain of whole association. At the top is FC BATE Borisov, which gained 55,9 % of all Belarusian points. Of course, it's on you, if you want to compare clubs only from few countries, or all (approx. 800) European clubs.


Fourth example shows comparison of whole associations of Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Finland, Latvia and Malta (sorted by gained points in season 2002/03). It was most successful season for Bosnia and Herzegovina (Max values in green color) and worst season for Finland (Min values in red color).


You can also find some curiosities. As you can see, for example Hamburger SV gained more points, than whole association of Bosnia and Herzegovina (i.e. all Bosnian-Herzegovinian clubs together). What do you think - how many associations gained more points than for example Manchester United itself? Or how many clubs gained more points in their best season ever (Max) than for example Real Madrid in its worst season (Min)? 


Premium content also includes all-time coefficient standngs. It's based on gained coefficients (= gained points / participating clubs) by all associations in all seasons. This preview shows only bottom of the ranking - sorted by total coefficient. San Marino is weakest European association with all-time coefficient 1,249. If we sort data by the average gain, position of Gibraltar would be much better because clubs from Gibraltar played European Cups only 3x. By the way, in full version you can see incredible coefficients of Spain - for example coefficient in Spanish worst season (Min) is so big, that vast majority of associations only can dream about so high coefficient.


On the same principle is based also table, from which is an example number 7. This table is also based on gained coefficients in individual seasons, but it shows standings instead of coefficients themselves. Associations in this example are sorted by the standings determined by gained coefficients in season 2015/16. In other words - association of Faroe Islands had 52nd highest coefficient in season 15/16, Andora was 53rd and worst coefficient had San Marino.


Next premium table shows five-years coefficients (sum of coefficients from five consecutive seasons), as we know them from UEFA Country Ranking. Because they determine the number of places allocated to an association in European Cups, this time the colors don't indicate best and worst results, but Champions League spots. You can know them from our country overviews (blue = 2 clubs in GS + 1 club in Q; purple 1+1; red 0+2; colorless 0+1).


This is second table, which is based on five-years coefficients. It shows standings on UEFA Country Ranking (it works on same principle like tables in examples 6 and 7). Colors indicate Champions League spots again. Our example shows Denmark, Israel and Norway - sorted by their average position on UEFA Country Ranking. Except trends of these three associations, you can also see that despite average positions of Denmark and Israel are very similar (19,28 and 19,67), Israel finished on crucial 15th place only once, whereas Denmark was able to finish even on 12th position (what means direct spot in CL GS).


Premium content does offer you also huge database of knockout ties, which were won by unseeded clubs. That means more than 700 ties. Picture above shows all upsets in UEFA Champions League season 2000/01 - sorted by a coefficient of eliminated seeded club. Of course, you can display all data by club, association, competition, round or season. Or would you rather see everything, including the record ties? :)


Example 11 shows all ties in UEFA Cup and Europa League, which were won by unseeded Bulgarian clubs. Data are sorted by difference between coefficients of unseeded winner and seeded loser. The biggest coefficient difference between Bulgarian club, which advanced for next round of Uefa Cup / Europa League as un unseeded team, and seeded eliminated club was 50,048 (CSKA Sofia vs Bayer 04 Leverkusen).


Example 12 is focused on all ties, which Hertha BSC Berlin lost as a seeded club. Ties are sorted by a quotient. It means how many times was coefficient of unseeded winner smaller. As you can see, most shameful tie for Hertha Berlin was first round of UEFA Cup 2003/04 against Groclin Grodzisk. Coefficient of Groclin Grodzisk was nearly 6 times smaller (5,88), but German club wasn't able to eliminate this Polish team.


Another part of premium content is summary of all ties in knockout rounds, in which the seeding was based on club coefficients. So these data are based on more than 3 000 matches. This example shows summary of all Estonian clubs including association average (» all) sorted by winning ratio in ties, which Estonian clubs played as an unseeded team. Most successful are FC Levadia Tallinn and Nõmme Kalju FC. They advanced for the next round as an unseeded clubs in more than 27 % of ties. Last club above country average is JK Sillamäe Kalev, which has winning ratio 25 %. As you can see, 7 Estonian clubs never advanced for the next round when they were unseeded. Especially results of JK Narva Trans are very bad, because they were eliminated in all seven played ties. But full version of premium content discovers teams with even worse stats :)


Of course, like in all tables in premium content, you can display all clubs and sort them by any criteria. This one shows Estonian and Georgian clubs sorted by total number of won ties, which these clubs played as a seeded teams. By the way, you also can display only clubs (or associations) which played requested number of ties. It might be useful in case of sorting the data by winning ratio (excluding clubs which played only few ties).


Naturally, you can see statistics of whole associations. Example 15 shows Andorra, Macedonia and Northern Ireland - sorted by number of won unseeded ties. If you look at total summary on the right side (i.e. regardless of a seedings), you can see that Andorran clubs advanced for the next round twice. What do you think: how many ties did San Marino win?


You can compare results in KO rounds also season by season. Example 16 shows all associations whose clubs were eliminated as a seeded teams in season 2005/06. Least successful were Serbian clubs, which were eliminated 4x. And since they didn't achieve at least one unseeded win, their + - summary was -4 (4 seeded loses; 0 unseeded wins).


This example is very similar. But it shows all unseeded clubs, which advanced for the next round in season 2002/03. Most successful was a Turkish duo Beşiktaş JK and Denizlispor. Both Turkish teams won 3 ties despite they were unseeded.


Now let's talk about results in group stages. Example 18 shows all Russian clubs, which started in group stage of UEFA Europa League or UEFA Cup, and their results. 'When seeded' indicates GS participations when they were seeded in pot 1 or 2 (in case of UEFA Cup also in pot 3). 'When unseeded' indicates seedings in pots 3 or 4 (EL) or pots 4 or 5 (UC). All in all, it absolutely works on same principle like summary of KO ties (examples 13 - 17).


Second group stage example shows Czech clubs in UEFA Champions League GS. From 9 participations they were 3x able to advance for the next round of UEFA Champions League - always in case of AC Sparta Praha. A 50 % winning (i.e. progress) ratio of Sparta Praha from pots 3 or 4 is a fantastic result, but as you may see in a full version of the premium content, there are some clubs with even better unseeded ratio.


Of course, you can display statistics of whole associations, in this example results of Russia and Turkey in all group stages (CL, EL, UC), sorted by total number of progresses from top 2 (in case of UC top 3) drawing pots. Despite Russian clubs progressed more times (15x), Turkish clubs have better ratio (13 progresses from 19 participations).

Please note - data in all examples were actual only at the time of making this preview.