There are three factors necessary for football success, according to 'Soccernomics: Why England Loses, Why Spain, Germany, and Brazil Win, and Why the US, Japan, Australia - and Even Iraq - Are Destined to Become the Kings of the World's Most Popular Sport'.
Those factors are a big population, a strong economy, and a fervent fan base.
Football success has nothing to do with the combination of those 3 factors! Smaller economies can or may win. "Fervent fan base" - What does this mean? Fan base of clubs? The national team?
Football is only about cycles of generations, and they don't depend on economies, population and fan bases. For a generation you only need about 30 players, and it's a golden generation if 10 are world class.
Now this is the point: even the best generations don't win a thing but they achieve other kind of success: in earlier posts it was written that we only remember those who win. That's wrong. Everybody remembers Brazil's mega team in 1982 (probably one of the best ever), Hungary's mega team in early 1950's, Netherlands in the 1970's and so on. We remember them because in one way or the other, their teams changed football.
And besides all this, sometimes not-so-great teams win, best defenses wins, best offensives wins, one-player team wins. And there are other kind of influences, the weather, the team's spirit, the quality of the manager.