It's not surprising that big teams with lots of resources and money might win more trophies -- just look at Man City's dominance in recent seasons -- but what might surprise you is the sheer scale of this inequality.
US Sport really seems to get this right. Aren’t there like new champions every year? Whereas the PL is a Man City procession each season, same in France and Germany and only about 4 teams can win the CL.
Yeah the MLB (major league baseball) hasn’t had a repeat winner since the year 2000. The NFL has had a huge variety in its winning teams in the last 12 years. This is what I love about American sports as an American, and I think the playoff system great.
It does get it right but it’s missing one or two big ingredients, relegation and promotion.
The aim is for parity but in reality there’s still a difference between the rich and the poor because of local TV deals and free agency. The big market teams can afford to go after and pay big contracts for the best players. They employ the best scouts. Is it perfect correlation? No, but it is easier for a big team to rebuild quicker than a small market team. The New York Yankees had a bad season this year. But they can go and sign a couple of big band free agents this winter to supplement their squad. Cleveland on the other hand isn’t an attractive destination for a star player, they’re mostly always selling and drafting and picking up the lower end of the talent in free agency.
You can’t take US sports as a base for European football. First in the US every sport rely on Drafts as a feeder system of talent into the league coming mainly from the NCAA. The MLS is a bit different that it has both but the limit is the payment but the whole Messi situation is good fronthe marketability for the league but not good for the competition. He is way better than any player in that league and he’ll get help and no other team is going to match that level of player. It creates an unfair environment that will take Miami as a bottom feeder to a top team in no time.
The other issue is European competitions, if the PL does it and the others don’t then it means they’ll be in a disadvantage. So the European competition will become one sided with teams not being able to compete. The PL for what it is is really fair in comparison to other leagues, in Spain there are basically only 3 teams that are able to spend to compete at the top flight the rest just survive. Meanwhile in England you can have teams that Nottingham forest spending when they got promoted to try and compete with the top dogs.
The PL isn’t fair in the slightest. Man City win it literally every year, and will carry on doing so until Newcastle outspend them, and then Newcastle will win it every year until someone with more money and similarly dubious ethics comes along. It’s a joke competition.
They won the league last season by 5 points, meaning that if arsenal hadn’t lost both games to city they may have won the league.
They won the 21/22 season by 1 point.
They walked the league in 20/21.
They were left in the dust in 19/20.
They won in 18/19 by 1 point.
They walked the league in 17/18.
They finished 3rd in 16/17.
In the last 7 seasons they’ve only comfortably won the league twice, all while having apparently the best manager in the history of the game and while having unlimited financial resources and breaching FFP.
If they’re punished appropriately for breaching FFP they should have 2 league titles take away from them, meaning they’ll have won the league once comfortably and twice by small margins.
And if you’re complaints about city having a monopoly on league titles you must not have been watching football for long. Man utd won 13 league titles in 20 years in the 90s and 2000s. Liverpool won 11 of the previous 20.
US Sport really seems to get this right. Aren’t there like new champions every year? Whereas the PL is a Man City procession each season, same in France and Germany and only about 4 teams can win the CL.
Yeah the MLB (major league baseball) hasn’t had a repeat winner since the year 2000. The NFL has had a huge variety in its winning teams in the last 12 years. This is what I love about American sports as an American, and I think the playoff system great.
It does get it right but it’s missing one or two big ingredients, relegation and promotion.
The aim is for parity but in reality there’s still a difference between the rich and the poor because of local TV deals and free agency. The big market teams can afford to go after and pay big contracts for the best players. They employ the best scouts. Is it perfect correlation? No, but it is easier for a big team to rebuild quicker than a small market team. The New York Yankees had a bad season this year. But they can go and sign a couple of big band free agents this winter to supplement their squad. Cleveland on the other hand isn’t an attractive destination for a star player, they’re mostly always selling and drafting and picking up the lower end of the talent in free agency.
But that big thing is no relegation.
Who gives a shit about 3 new Washington Generals every year. They still have absolutely no shot of being the Globetrotters.
Apparently they once did though
US leagues goes in cycles, that’s why there’s always new winners.
You can’t take US sports as a base for European football. First in the US every sport rely on Drafts as a feeder system of talent into the league coming mainly from the NCAA. The MLS is a bit different that it has both but the limit is the payment but the whole Messi situation is good fronthe marketability for the league but not good for the competition. He is way better than any player in that league and he’ll get help and no other team is going to match that level of player. It creates an unfair environment that will take Miami as a bottom feeder to a top team in no time.
The other issue is European competitions, if the PL does it and the others don’t then it means they’ll be in a disadvantage. So the European competition will become one sided with teams not being able to compete. The PL for what it is is really fair in comparison to other leagues, in Spain there are basically only 3 teams that are able to spend to compete at the top flight the rest just survive. Meanwhile in England you can have teams that Nottingham forest spending when they got promoted to try and compete with the top dogs.
The PL isn’t fair in the slightest. Man City win it literally every year, and will carry on doing so until Newcastle outspend them, and then Newcastle will win it every year until someone with more money and similarly dubious ethics comes along. It’s a joke competition.
Man City are currently top by 1 point.
They won the league last season by 5 points, meaning that if arsenal hadn’t lost both games to city they may have won the league.
They won the 21/22 season by 1 point.
They walked the league in 20/21.
They were left in the dust in 19/20.
They won in 18/19 by 1 point.
They walked the league in 17/18.
They finished 3rd in 16/17.
In the last 7 seasons they’ve only comfortably won the league twice, all while having apparently the best manager in the history of the game and while having unlimited financial resources and breaching FFP.
If they’re punished appropriately for breaching FFP they should have 2 league titles take away from them, meaning they’ll have won the league once comfortably and twice by small margins.
And if you’re complaints about city having a monopoly on league titles you must not have been watching football for long. Man utd won 13 league titles in 20 years in the 90s and 2000s. Liverpool won 11 of the previous 20.
TLDR: Man City to win Premiership in 23/24
when you don’t have to worry about losing you spot in the league its easy to agree to salary caps and revenue splits
Yes and no.
The closed league isn’t great there isn’t a lot of jeopardy in the relegation battle that isn’t there.
Regular season where you don’t win if you win it also isn’t for me.
The entire draft system and lack of youth commitment from teams…. Well your development can be rather disturbing in both systems.