## 5 Results and Discussion
### Comparison of Different National Championships  
In this section, the results of the above-presented evaluations for each team are aggregated for the ranking of the national championships. For this purpose, we used both the rankings and weights provided by the international evaluations. Table 9 contains the average of the estimated weights, presented in Tables 3 and 4. In Table 9, we can see that generally, England topped the list. In the case of the Thurstone method using W = 1 for the international matches, the German teams' average was slightly larger than the average weight of the English teams, but in the case of W = 4, the balance became positive for the English teams. This was in line with the fact that in the international cups, English teams performed better than German teams. The final of the UCL was played between two English teams, and there was an English team in the final of the UEL. On top of all this, the winner of the Super Cup was also an English team, Chelsea. According to the TH and AL methods, regarding the ranking of nations, second was GER, third was ESP, fourth was ITA, and last was FRA. The RN method ranked the French championship in second position. It was interesting to observe that in the international rankings, French teams were ranked ahead in the case of the RankNet method. See, for example, Lille, which was ranked second according to the RN method and eighteenth according to the TH and AL methods. Its international experience in cups did not support this position. Lille was 29 th on the list of the UEFA club coefficient rankings. Similarly, we can mention Lyon and Monaco, which were not even in the best twenty teams according to the TH and AL methods and were not contained in the UEFA club coefficient rankings. The explanation for this phenomenon could be the following: there were only two international matches between Lille and teams from other nations investigated. The results of these two matches were good: one win and one tie for Lille. Although Lille played several matches with other teams, these teams were not in the investigated groups; therefore, these results were not contained in the present evaluation. Lille achieved only good results internationally against teams from ENG, ESP, GER, and ITA, with no negative results to drag them down in the rankings. This seemed to be decisive in the case of RN. Some other French teams (such as Lyon and Monaco) did not play any international matches, but they were linked to Lille in the standings through the national championship; therefore, the average weight became high. We did not consider these rankings to be realistic. If we focus on the positions of the teams in the international rankings, the situation was somewhat similar and somewhat different. Ranking the best by a value of 1 and the worst by a value of 98, the average positions by nation are presented in Table 10. In the case of the Thurstone method using W = 1, the leader was Germany, followed by ENG, ESP, ITA, and FRA. In the case of the AL and RN methods, the best nation was England, but the rankings of the other teams differed. If we consider W = 4, according to TH and AL, the rankings were identical: ENG, GER, ESP, ITA, and FRA. The RankNet method identified England as the best, with France in second position. Moreover, the values of FRA, ITA, GER, and ESP were surprisingly close. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**International W = 1**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**International W = 4**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **TH** & **AL** & **RN** & **TH** & **AL** & **RN** \\ \hline ENG & 0.01182 & 0.01491 & 0.01281 & 0.01442 & 0.01490 & 0.01837 \\ FRA & 0.00756 & 0.00800 & 0.01063 & 0.00668 & 0.00799 & 0.01047 \\ GER & 0.01206 & 0.01007 & 0.00825 & 0.01143 & 0.01006 & 0.00824 \\ ITA & 0.00938 & 0.00813 & 0.01053 & 0.00837 & 0.00814 & 0.00692 \\ ESP & 0.01040 & 0.00989 & 0.00860 & 0.01024 & 0.00991 & 0.00682 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: Average weight values of the teams by nation.