|
On September 25 2014 17:37 warding wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2014 15:09 Rebs wrote:
No system in any sport is made to foster competition, it is fundamentally incorrect to assume that dynasties and big teams make sports boring.
There really arent any major sports where big market teams havent dominated them historically. And its those same big market teams that garner interest towards the sport and make it bigger and that can only be better for all teams.
Rivalries make sports exciting. Two-three juggernauts on a league make a league exciting. One sole dominating dynasty is actually relatively rare and is non-existent in the major leagues like Serie A, La Liga and the Premier League, and I'd wager that people only tuned in to the Bundesliga recently because of the rise of Dortmund as a challenger to Bayern Munich's supremacy. As for your statement that no system is made to foster competition, then what are the salary caps in american sports for? EDIT: I also think that this dynasty is different from ones in decades past: while previously dynasties were built on perfect-storms of talent coming together at the same time in the same place, today's dynasties are built on having yearly revenues that are hundreds of millions of Euros above your competitors. That's actually much more difficult to overcome. Again, I see your point that people actually like dynasties and big teams, but even MJ's Bulls had to sweat to beat the Sonics, the Jazz, the Suns. I just don't see how Bayern Munich's total dominance Do you know of studies on this that conclude that single dynasties are good for a league's popularity? In my opinion: Celtics vs Lakers = good. Real Madrid vs Barcelona = good. M. City vs M. Utd vs Chelsea vs Liverpool vs Arsenal = awesome. Porto vs Benfica vs Sporting = great. Bayern Munich = zzz.
uhhh United ? Throughout the 90's they didnt win like what 3 odd times ?
Its not like Munichs winning record is far outside the norm for other leagues or am I missing something ? I think its very incorrect to simply say Bayern the way it is now will forever control the Bundesliga. Im sure people have said that everytime they went on a run and some factor has come along to liven things
Will they remain Germany's most successful team by far? Sure. But that has already been set for decades now. Why would that change ?
MJ's bulls may have had to sweat a few times but that also comes with the format. A playoff system, salary caps and the impact of individuals being markedly higher adds variables that dont mean the best team always wins versus a league system will always leave the door open for a slightly team to compete. The other times they absolutely crushed everyone
+ Show Spoiler +and frankly that Jazz team is probably the best team never to get a title in my eyes. But they also crushed plenty of teams . And lets be honest if Dortmund lay Munich in a best of 7 you dont think they can make them sweat ? Ofcourse they can.
And if basketball had a league then they pretty much decimated everyone, and would probably have rocked close to 70 win seasons if the league games mattered that much.
Even with salary caps, drafts and the league's having an inordinate control over the leagues you still have fewer unique winners in Basketball than you do in all of the football leagues over the last few decades.Additionally these sports are not global.
And even then you see that in Basketball you have dynasties. So its not like they were able to limit them are they ?
All it does is make sure smaller market weaker teams dont fade into obscurity, but they still remain small market.
Or you could do what they do in football, one of knockouts. Thats your guaranteed way to get unique winners but it doesnt mean its more competition.
Thats why the Ravens can win one year and be balls out garbage the next. I for one dont appreciate that.
Sure money based nurturing is a problem but that money will come everywhere eventually as it is. After all Bayern did plenty to pull Dortmund out of its grave financial circumstances.
|
Ahhh Barca played 0:0
I was starting to think Barca doesn't play under the week because I read no posts about it! ^^
Our la liga fans seem to be a bit fickle! :p
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On September 25 2014 21:20 sharkie wrote:
Ahhh Barca played 0:0
I was starting to think Barca doesn't play under the week because I read no posts about it! ^^
Our la liga fans seem to be a bit fickle! :p
 no comment
|
Even with salary caps, drafts and the league's having an inordinate control over the leagues you still have fewer unique winners in Basketball than you do in all of the football leagues over the last few decades.Additionally these sports are not global.
This is false. Every American sport has equal or more variation in champions than the individual European soccer leagues. Basketball has the least, but it's still better than European soccer. Ice hockey has the most, and hasn't had any kind of real dynasty for decades and is now more popular than ever. Same with American football. A huge amount of competition and variation, and there really aren't any dynasties in that sport at all, and popularity continues to explode.
Globalism also doesn't have anything to do with the lack of competitiveness. A global game should have a larger pool of talent to pull from, meaning that there should be more competitiveness. Financial rules define the competitiveness of the European leagues.
Aside from that, it's not an all-or-nothing game. You don't have to strip teams of the ability to make and spend any money whatsoever or make everything like the NFL playoffs to insert randomness into the picture to get some more variability and competitiveness in the leagues. However, there aren't really any (serious) limitations on spending or any policies that promote competition whatsoever, and it gets pretty out-of-control. I don't count Bayern dominating the Bundesliga for years exciting, or Spain being owned by Real Madrid and Barcelona for years exciting.
Oh, and MLS isn't as popular because of the talent level in the games. People enjoy watching big names and a high level of talent. They don't watch La Liga because only the same two teams ever matter. They watch it because it's one of the most talented leagues in the world with the world's most recognizable players.
EDIT:
Number of Champions since 2000:
NBA:
Champions: 7
Repeats: 3
Threepeats: 1
MLB:
Champions: 9
Repeats: 0
NFL:
Champions: 9
Repeats: 1
Threepeats: 0
NHL (One less season):
Champions: 11
Repeats: 0
Premier League:
Champions: 4
Repeats: 5
Threepeats: 1
Double Winners: 2
Treble Winners: 0
La Liga:
Champions: 5
Repeats: 4
Threepeats: 1
Double Winners: 1
Treble Winners: 1
Serie A (One less season):
Champions: 5
Repeats: 7
Threepeats: 2
4-in-a-row: 1
5-in-a-row: 1
Doubles Winners: 2
Trebles Winners: 1
Bundesliga:
Champions: 5
Repeats: 4
Threepeats: 0
Double Winners: 10
Treble Winners: 1
Europa League:
Champions: 11
Repeats: 1
Champions League:
Champions: 9
Repeats: 0
Overall, we see that every major American sport is more competitive than major European soccer leagues, with the least competitive (NBA) still more competitive than Europe. Europe is surprisingly close in terms of competitiveness (although if you narrowed the sample to the last 10 years, Serie A and La Liga would drop in competitiveness), with the Bundesliga having the least amount of Repeats/Threepeats but by far the most amount of Doubles.
You could probably do a more in-depth analysis by looking at the average point differential at the end of each campaign or the different number of CL/EL participators (in which I would guess the Bundesliga would have the largest variance and La Liga the smallest amount), and on the American side the variation of teams making the playoffs, but I think this gets the point across.
This also shows my point about the Bundesliga as well: Bayern counts for 9 championships since 2000, 3 out of 4 Repeats, 8 out of 10 Doubles, and the only Treble. The Bundesliga's competitiveness is hindered almost completely by Bayern (not that just getting rid of them would magically solve the problem, that's ridiculous).
|
Competitiveness of league doesn't mean that you have many different champions but that level of teams in the league is simillar, I don't follow other leagues but NBA (where every season is 2-3 teams really fight for championship, maybe 4 more can take games from them fairly regularly and you have east playoffs which is one team crusing to finals cause whole conference sucks) is way less competitve than Premier League, La Liga or Serie A.
|
On September 25 2014 23:56 lprk wrote:
Competitiveness of league doesn't mean that you have many different champions but that level of teams in the league is simillar, I don't follow other leagues but NBA (where every season is 2-3 teams really fight for championship, maybe 4 more can take games from them fairly regularly and you have east playoffs which is one team crusing to finals cause whole conference sucks) is way less competitve than Premier League, La Liga or Serie A.
The number of teams winning championships is a result of the comparative skill level of teams in a league. Yes, it doesn't directly translate, but the NBA still sees more champions than any of those European leagues because that pool of 3-6 teams is constantly changing, whereas it doesn't in Europe. In England, it's Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City, and Man United. Thinking any other team will win the championship is naive at best. It's been this way since the turn of the century. La Liga and Serie A are very similar; there's a core group of teams that are ALWAYS favorites to win, and anyone who doesn't win out of that core group is a dark horse that is more like a bolt of lightning that just dies out quickly.
This isn't the case in the NBA, even if it is less competitive than other American leagues. Even in the NBA, you get new teams coming in and seeming like new contenders; the Mavericks aren't real contenders nowadays when they were 5-6 years ago. The Pacers, Nets, and Warriors are teams that no one took seriously not-too-long ago. NBA teams do stick around as competitors for a long time, but the scene is constantly revolving (at a fairly slow pace). European leagues don't revolve which teams are the "power teams"; you always have the same power teams, and once in a while a random team will have a good year, and then you'll go back to the status quo the next year.
|
On September 26 2014 00:03 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2014 23:56 lprk wrote:
Competitiveness of league doesn't mean that you have many different champions but that level of teams in the league is simillar, I don't follow other leagues but NBA (where every season is 2-3 teams really fight for championship, maybe 4 more can take games from them fairly regularly and you have east playoffs which is one team crusing to finals cause whole conference sucks) is way less competitve than Premier League, La Liga or Serie A. The number of teams winning championships is a result of the comparative skill level of teams in a league. Yes, it doesn't directly translate, but the NBA still sees more champions than any of those European leagues because that pool of 3-6 teams is constantly changing, whereas it doesn't in Europe. In England, it's Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City, and Man United. Thinking any other team will win the championship is naive at best. It's been this way since the turn of the century. La Liga and Serie A are very similar; there's a core group of teams that are ALWAYS favorites to win, and anyone who doesn't win out of that core group is a dark horse that is more like a bolt of lightning that just dies out quickly. This isn't the case in the NBA, even if it is less competitive than other American leagues. Even in the NBA, you get new teams coming in and seeming like new contenders; the Mavericks aren't real contenders nowadays when they were 5-6 years ago. The Pacers, Nets, and Warriors are teams that no one took seriously not-too-long ago. NBA teams do stick around as competitors for a long time, but the scene is constantly revolving (at a fairly slow pace). European leagues don't revolve which teams are the "power teams"; you always have the same power teams, and once in a while a random team will have a good year, and then you'll go back to the status quo the next year.
Thats the result not of closer skill level but bigger roster changes between seasons.
|
Reb,
Indeed, a playoff system makes it way more fun than a league, especially if you know with 90% certainty who the winner will be even before October. My point is that the Bundesliga is totally boring with Bayern Munich's dominance, as the Premier League was with Manchester United in the 90s - global viewership of the Premier League sky rocketed only after that, when Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool (to a degree ) stepped up.
I don't think we need yearly rotation of winners to make it fun, I think that's probably even a bad thing. Two-horse races can be very exciting, as is the case with Barcelona and Real Madrid. One horse races are boooooooooring.
|
On September 26 2014 00:33 warding wrote:Reb, Indeed, a playoff system makes it way more fun than a league, especially if you know with 90% certainty who the winner will be even before October. My point is that the Bundesliga is totally boring with Bayern Munich's dominance, as the Premier League was with Manchester United in the 90s - global viewership of the Premier League sky rocketed only after that, when Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool (to a degree ) stepped up. I don't think we need yearly rotation of winners to make it fun, I think that's probably even a bad thing. Two-horse races can be very exciting, as is the case with Barcelona and Real Madrid. One horse races are boooooooooring.
Chelsea didn't "step up" they got bankrolled, and then bankrolled again, and then bankrolled some more
|
On September 26 2014 00:07 lprk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 00:03 Stratos_speAr wrote:On September 25 2014 23:56 lprk wrote:
Competitiveness of league doesn't mean that you have many different champions but that level of teams in the league is simillar, I don't follow other leagues but NBA (where every season is 2-3 teams really fight for championship, maybe 4 more can take games from them fairly regularly and you have east playoffs which is one team crusing to finals cause whole conference sucks) is way less competitve than Premier League, La Liga or Serie A. The number of teams winning championships is a result of the comparative skill level of teams in a league. Yes, it doesn't directly translate, but the NBA still sees more champions than any of those European leagues because that pool of 3-6 teams is constantly changing, whereas it doesn't in Europe. In England, it's Arsenal, Chelsea, Man City, and Man United. Thinking any other team will win the championship is naive at best. It's been this way since the turn of the century. La Liga and Serie A are very similar; there's a core group of teams that are ALWAYS favorites to win, and anyone who doesn't win out of that core group is a dark horse that is more like a bolt of lightning that just dies out quickly. This isn't the case in the NBA, even if it is less competitive than other American leagues. Even in the NBA, you get new teams coming in and seeming like new contenders; the Mavericks aren't real contenders nowadays when they were 5-6 years ago. The Pacers, Nets, and Warriors are teams that no one took seriously not-too-long ago. NBA teams do stick around as competitors for a long time, but the scene is constantly revolving (at a fairly slow pace). European leagues don't revolve which teams are the "power teams"; you always have the same power teams, and once in a while a random team will have a good year, and then you'll go back to the status quo the next year. Thats the result not of closer skill level but bigger roster changes between seasons.
OK?
Skill level is a result of a combination of the players, the coaches, the system, etc. If you get new players, then the skill level changes because you are changing a variable in the equation.
Reb,
Indeed, a playoff system makes it way more fun than a league, especially if you know with 90% certainty who the winner will be even before October. My point is that the Bundesliga is totally boring with Bayern Munich's dominance, as the Premier League was with Manchester United in the 90s - global viewership of the Premier League sky rocketed only after that, when Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool (to a degree ) stepped up.
I don't think we need yearly rotation of winners to make it fun, I think that's probably even a bad thing. Two-horse races can be very exciting, as is the case with Barcelona and Real Madrid. One horse races are boooooooooring.
Perpetual two-horse races are really boring.
The Premier League stays interesting because there's always 3-5 teams in the mix to win it all (even though they're the same 3-5 teams). The Bundesliga has gotten it's reputation for being the most competitive because 1) the league has been competitive to the very end of the season, and 2) the teams competing with Bayern Munich tend to rotate between a set of 5 or 6 clubs.
|
Nottingham Forrest, currently leader of the english championship (second league) spend 10,69 million euro this transfer period. Thats more then the second german league and the 3 least spending first league teams. Combined. This includes Schalke 04, a consistant CL team.
If you want to blame someone that the German league lacks international quality or only has Dortmund as real contender i would go with the english fans who accept 4 to 10 times the ticket prices, want to see international players instead of english and have no problems with foreign investors buying the clubs. Its true for Spain too but for some reason i dislike PL now  . That destroyed the market in a way that the reginal focused Bundesliga cant keep up besides Bayern and Dortmund.
On the bright side this is the reason we have more then one and a half decend players in our national team
|
I believe the way the competitions are structured (pure round-robin vs regular season -> playoffs) has something to do with how many different teams are winning.
Also about NFL (I'm not following the other NA leagues), I believe more than half of the playoff teams usually change each season. Yes this can mean that the skills are even, but I believe at least some part of this is because there is a greater inherent randomness with more injuries, more player trades, the draft and so on.
A completely random game would be perfectly fine to produce a lot of different winners, but it's not exactly what most of us would want to see.
|
On September 26 2014 02:06 Mafe wrote:
I believe the way the competitions are structured (pure round-robin vs regular season -> playoffs) has something to do with how many different teams are winning.
Also about NFL (I'm not following the other NA leagues), I believe more than half of the playoff teams usually change each season. Yes this can mean that the skills are even, but I believe at least some part of this is because there is a greater inherent randomness with more injuries, more player trades, the draft and so on.
A completely random game would be perfectly fine to produce a lot of different winners, but it's not exactly what most of us would want to see.
This is absolutely true. There are two extreme sides.
On the one hand you have the NFL. There's a lot of randomness in it. The season is short (16 games) and each playoff round is a single-elimination game. There's no BoX, no 2-leg games, etc. This creates a lot of randomness and makes it easier to upset better teams. On the other side though, you have European soccer with no playoffs; it's purely a seasonal campaign.
The nature of playoffs vs. a season campaign contributes to competitiveness, but financial rules also obviously play a factor. I think that the campaign format would be perfectly fine and would have plenty of competition while still letting the better team win if there were some actual rules in play to promote financial competition instead of complete domination by certain clubs in each league.
Edit: Some more interesting numbers that I thought would be fun to see so I looked them up:
Average Point Differentials since 2000:
CL-EL is the last CL qualification spot (qualifier or directly in) to the first EL qualification spot.
Bundesliga (34 games):
1st-2nd: 8.2
2nd-3rd: 4.0
CL-EL: 3.08
1st-2nd 10+ point seasons: 5
Premier League (38 games):
1st-2nd: 7.07
2nd-3rd: 5.47
CL-EL: 4.4
1st-2nd 10+ point seasons: 5
La Liga (38 games):
1st-2nd: 6.0
2nd-3rd: 7.5
CL-EL: 3.2
1st-2nd 10+ point seasons: 2
Serie A (34 games):
1st-2nd: 6.53
2nd-3rd: 6.73
CL-EL: 1.8
1st-2nd 10+ point seasons: 3
Trends:
Bundesliga: 1st-2nd differential is heavily skewed by Bayern's dominance the last two seasons (25 and 19 point differences). Discounting the last two seasons, the average drops to 6.07, and discounting the last two seasons, the Bundesliga is the most competitive league in each of the averages listed here.
Premier League: 1st-2nd differential steadily trends downward (4 of 5 10+ point differential seasons come from 2000-2005).
La Liga: First place is almost always a close fight. 2nd place is skewed by the gap between Barcelona and the next team in 2012 (30 points). Discounting that season, the average drops to 5.92.
Serie A: 2nd-3rd place differential has the most 10+ point seasons with 6. 1st-2nd differential is skewed a bit by one 22 point season.
I feel like the stereotypes that we have of the leagues are really from several years ago. The Bundesliga used to be an extremely close and extremely competitive league, but it's becoming significantly less competitive if you look at the last 3 years and the future outlook. The Premier League seems to be getting more competitive at the top.
|
On September 26 2014 02:06 Mafe wrote:
I believe the way the competitions are structured (pure round-robin vs regular season -> playoffs) has something to do with how many different teams are winning.
Also about NFL (I'm not following the other NA leagues), I believe more than half of the playoff teams usually change each season. Yes this can mean that the skills are even, but I believe at least some part of this is because there is a greater inherent randomness with more injuries, more player trades, the draft and so on.
A completely random game would be perfectly fine to produce a lot of different winners, but it's not exactly what most of us would want to see.
The NFL works that way because the only way to show "respect" to players is via money. You cant hold a roster together and almost all good teams are "win now" teams.
I dont think thats something good.
|
Micro_Jackson I'm also upset that Benfica transfer targets actually prefer playing for Hull City or Swansea, but you can't blame the English Premier League for actually being successful.
Stratos_speAr, what about Lakers vs Celtics? What about La Liga, the ultimate perpetual two-horse race? You can't argue with the fact it is the most watched league in the world.
Today, the leagues that market themselves the best to the global market will come out on top. Global fans are not necessarily interested in watching a league with a lot of competitive teams - they are interested in acquiring an emotional connection with one of the teams and then following these teams in their exciting quest for the title. For a football fan from Malaysia, for example, I don't think the added competitiveness of the PL vs La Liga is a factor in the excitement of following Chelsea vs Real Madrid. The story lines of either team are compelling throughout the year. The storyline of Bayern Munich is boring, and that of Dortmund is frankly frustrating.
|
On September 26 2014 02:32 warding wrote:
Micro_Jackson I'm also upset that Benfica transfer targets actually prefer playing for Hull City or Swansea, but you can't blame the English Premier League for actually being successful.
Stratos_speAr, what about Lakers vs Celtics? What about La Liga, the ultimate perpetual two-horse race? You can't argue with the fact it is the most watched league in the world.
Today, the leagues that market themselves the best to the global market will come out on top. Global fans are not necessarily interested in watching a league with a lot of competitive teams - they are interested in acquiring an emotional connection with one of the teams and then following these teams in their exciting quest for the title. For a football fan from Malaysia, for example, I don't think the added competitiveness of the PL vs La Liga is a factor in the excitement of following Chelsea vs Real Madrid. The story lines of either team are compelling throughout the year. The storyline of Bayern Munich is boring, and that of Dortmund is frankly frustrating.
Basketball became far more popular after the peak of the Celtic-Lakers era.
Let's also remember that the Bundesliga is the 2nd-best sport by average attendance in the world (2nd only to the NFL, which average stadium holds over 60,000 people). La Liga comes in 3rd in terms of football leagues behind the Premier League. I'd also like to see some TV ratings statistics if you can find them, because I can't.
As for La Liga, people watch Barcelona and Real Madrid; coverage of other teams is pretty abysmal in a lot of places in the world. I think you're making the situation too complex. I don't think it's about an "exciting quest for the title" or about exciting story lines or any of that. I think it's two big things. 1) Marketing 2) skill level. Real Madrid and Barcelona have a huge boost in marketing because they carry most of the most famous players in the world (Ronaldo, Messi, Neymar, Bale, etc.) and because they have HUGE sums of money. Furthermore, as Spanish-speaking teams, there are a lot of cultures in the world that they can directly appeal to. Second, people want to see the highest skill because that is generally the most entertaining, and this, again, comes with money. Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man United, Chelsea, these teams all have gigantic sums of money and so they are able to market well and buy the best players.
German as a language is spoken significantly less than both Spanish and English (it's only the primary language in a small handful of countries). German teams also don't have players that are the face of their teams like a lot of those other big-money clubs do. Who's the face of Bayern? of Dortmund? Of Schalke? Leverkusen? Furthermore, Germany wasn't a power league until very recently and, for most of history, wasn't in a position to make itself a big-money league like La Liga or the EPL. Coverage of the Bundesliga? AWFUL. We still don't have the Bundesliga on TV in the U.S. Not only this, but there are no mechanisms in place to stop football monopolies by teams in Europe like there are in America (salary caps, drafts, etc.).
Again, it's not about blaming particular teams/leagues for their success, but realizing that the system itself is the problem. Yes, Bayern are the cause of the lack of competitiveness in recent years in the Bundesliga, but they only do it by playing by the rules of the system in Europe.
|
I am pretty sure a salary cap system like in the US is impossible because it is against EU law.
|
Stratos_speAr, very valid points. I think the Bundesliga has very high attendance rates due to the fact that 1. Germans have moneys, 2. not concentrated in major metropolises(plural?) but instead in many medium-sized cities.
About RM and Barcelona, it's a chicken and egg thing. They have great players because they earn a bajillion moneys from worldwide TV rights, shirt sales, etc. They earn a bajillion moneys because they have great players. I think the true cause is that they offer a great story line.
Agree with you on Germany, and again we're piling up factors that make the Bundesliga boring. I agree language makes a difference, and you make a great point about the lack of a face, although I think Pep Guardiola and Jürgen Klopp kind of assume that role. No player reaches the skill level of a Ronaldo or Messi but I think they're much farther away as stories. Ronaldo was a very engaging story-line way before reaching the peak, as a supposed brat who dived but had amazing skills and flair. Messi seems to have no public personality but the hypothesis he might be the greatest ever is a story-line in itself.
I do insist on the story-line thing. I think they're what sports is all about.
EDIT:
On September 26 2014 04:26 Micro_Jackson wrote:
I am pretty sure a salary cap system like in the US is impossible because it is against EU law.
Which is ironic, given that in theory the USers are the capitalists and the Europeans the socialists.
|
On September 26 2014 05:08 warding wrote:Stratos_speAr, very valid points. I think the Bundesliga has very high attendance rates due to the fact that 1. Germans have moneys, 2. not concentrated in major metropolises(plural?) but instead in many medium-sized cities. About RM and Barcelona, it's a chicken and egg thing. They have great players because they earn a bajillion moneys from worldwide TV rights, shirt sales, etc. They earn a bajillion moneys because they have great players. I think the true cause is that they offer a great story line. Agree with you on Germany, and again we're piling up factors that make the Bundesliga boring. I agree language makes a difference, and you make a great point about the lack of a face, although I think Pep Guardiola and Jürgen Klopp kind of assume that role. No player reaches the skill level of a Ronaldo or Messi but I think they're much farther away as stories. Ronaldo was a very engaging story-line way before reaching the peak, as a supposed brat who dived but had amazing skills and flair. Messi seems to have no public personality but the hypothesis he might be the greatest ever is a story-line in itself. I do insist on the story-line thing. I think they're what sports is all about. EDIT: Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 04:26 Micro_Jackson wrote:
I am pretty sure a salary cap system like in the US is impossible because it is against EU law. Which is ironic, given that in theory the USers are the capitalists and the Europeans the socialists.
Wow i really disagree on the last sentence. Salary cap gives almost all the power to the club and league owners were players are traded like cattle. Very rich cattle but still. The idea that a club (or franchise if you will) can be moved like a office or a company to another city or have another name because it is nothing more then a thing that makes money is as capitalistic as it gets.
|
On September 26 2014 05:08 warding wrote:Stratos_speAr, very valid points. I think the Bundesliga has very high attendance rates due to the fact that 1. Germans have moneys, 2. not concentrated in major metropolises(plural?) but instead in many medium-sized cities. About RM and Barcelona, it's a chicken and egg thing. They have great players because they earn a bajillion moneys from worldwide TV rights, shirt sales, etc. They earn a bajillion moneys because they have great players. I think the true cause is that they offer a great story line. Agree with you on Germany, and again we're piling up factors that make the Bundesliga boring. I agree language makes a difference, and you make a great point about the lack of a face, although I think Pep Guardiola and Jürgen Klopp kind of assume that role. No player reaches the skill level of a Ronaldo or Messi but I think they're much farther away as stories. Ronaldo was a very engaging story-line way before reaching the peak, as a supposed brat who dived but had amazing skills and flair. Messi seems to have no public personality but the hypothesis he might be the greatest ever is a story-line in itself. I do insist on the story-line thing. I think they're what sports is all about. EDIT: Show nested quote +On September 26 2014 04:26 Micro_Jackson wrote:
I am pretty sure a salary cap system like in the US is impossible because it is against EU law. Which is ironic, given that in theory the USers are the capitalists and the Europeans the socialists.
I don't think that Germany's attendance figures have anything to do with having money, especially since game tickets and all that jazz are significantly cheaper in Germany than they are in most other countries (looking at you England and the U.S.). German football is 1) very affordable and 2) an essential part of German culture.
That's a good point about Real Madrid and Barcelona, but it's better to compare it to any other industry monopoly when trying to think about it. The playing field is level when it all begins in any given market. However, once one or a few companies start building up and growing, it becomes harder and harder for new companies to build up and compete unless the government has something set in place to limit monopolies. This is exactly what happened in each individual European league and in Europe as a whole. Everyone started out kind of small, but certain clubs got big many years ago and are now so big that they choke out any competition that tries to rise up (BVB being a perfect example; all indications point to BVB not becoming a perpetual European power and going back to "just another German team" since they aren't bankrolled by someone).
I don't think that most (or any) of the things that I listed make the Bundesliga boring. The Bundesliga has marketed itself for years as the most exciting major football league out there, with the most goals scored, the fastest pace, the most competition, the best fans/atmosphere, etc. In fact, they still do, and I largely agree. However, the talk of the Bundesliga being boring has only really turned up in the past 2-3 years when Dortmund soared to their peak in 2011-2013 and Bayern really started to step it up to the next level and are coming off of back-to-back seasons where they finished a good 20 points above everyone else.
Wow i really disagree on the last sentence. Salary cap gives almost all the power to the club and league owners were players are traded like cattle. Very rich cattle but still. The idea that a club (or franchise if you will) can be moved like a office or a company to another city or have another name because it is nothing more then a thing that makes money is as capitalistic as it gets.
Regulations on players or franchises moving has absolutely nothing to do with a salary cap.
Trading players is allowed by regulations that allow teams to move or trade contracts without a players' consent, whereas transfers cant't do this. Franchise moving is also completely separate and is much more complicated.
I don't think a salary cap is the magic answer (although it might help). Let's use the NFL as an example. The NFL salary cap works in part because every team is able to afford to max out their salary cap in the first place. This is because all 32 teams of the NFL are the NFL, and so the financial situation is such that income is split much more evenly (although it's still not perfectly even) and teams aren't in danger of going under and dissolving because of financial troubles due to the league as a whole securing everyone else in the league.
This isn't the case in, say, Germany, where the 18 teams in the Bundesliga are separate local organizations participating in a different organization's competitions (the DFB). If you just suddenly plopped down a salary cap in Germany right now, I 100% guarantee you that S.C. Paderborn wouldn't be able to afford half of whatever salary cap would be set, since teams like Bayern would want it set high enough so that they can spend the money that they earn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
