File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Franchises suck, discuss
>> Anonymous
And "The Draft" is the most retarded idea in sport
>> Anonymous
Well, I'm convinced!
>> Anonymous
It is true though, leagues>franchises
>> Anonymous
Relegation is a shit idea, discuss.
>> Anonymous
>>95379
Its better than letting 4 clubs sign all the great players
>> Anonymous
>>95404
Same teams OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER...FA Cup 3rd round, the greatest day in English football, Americunts will never have that feeling.
>> Anonymous
>>95404
Only if you are a Birmingham, Reading or Derby fan
>> Anonymous
>>95406
And for first pick, Sunderland get Ronaldinho.

Sounds fun right?
>> Anonymous
>>95406
Only if you aren't a Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea, or Arsenal fan.
>> Anonymous
>>95407
seeing the good teams use their reserves to play play shit second rate sides?
>> Anonymous
>>95407
It's more punishing to get your ass handed to you every year until you start to not suck than to get demoted to a shit league to beat the shit out of them for a year and repeat the cycle.
>> Anonymous
>>95406
not really, things change. five years ago Leeds were in a european semi-final and now they are in League 1
>> Anonymous
>>95412
there have been loads of "success" stories from promotion, Newcastle got promoted and their first few seasons at the top were consistently going for the top places
>> Anonymous
Still a shit idea.
>> Anonymous
>>95416
Did they ever win?
>> Anonymous
>>95439
unfortunatly no, 2 runners up 2 FA cup finals and many outings to Euro-land
>> Anonymous
It's simple Economics. If you leave it to the free market (the league tier system) then the firms (clubs) who are better at what they do will prosper. It leaves the shitter firms with the incentive to do better next time.

With franchises it's basically Communism(command economy). No matter how shit you do, you're safe in the knowledge that you'll be there next year. Also, the revenue reaped from advertisement and ticket sales should more than cover the BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW of not winning any Championships. It leads to great inefficiencies all around. E.G. one of the pivotal reasons only United Statians tend to watch American football.
>> Anonymous
>>95416
Yes, four times.
>> Anonymous
>>95447
I know that as a Detroit Lions fan the revenue I reap from ticket sales and advertisement more than makes up for the BAAWWWWWW of following a shitty team.
>> Anonymous
>>95447
>It leaves the shitter firms with little ability to do better next time.

Fixed. All capitalist systems quickly devolve into monopolies/trusts without effective and comprehensive regulation.
>> Anonymous
>>95447

That's not true, the more games you win the more fans you'll get to come to the games, more merch you'll sell, etc.
>> Anonymous
>>95463
Only if your country (the United States) is full of bandwagoning faggots.
>> Anonymous
>>95460
It didn't need to be fixed. God, you're worse than those immigrants who wash your car for you at a traffic stop when you didn't ask them to. Asshole.
>> Anonymous
>>95460
Uhh Portsmouth and Bayern Munich say no.

Also you ever heard of the NE Patriots? They're a monopoly in the NGL...
>> Anonymous
>>95463
No. It doesn't work like that. You see, most football teams actually have supporters that acutally live within a 10 mile radius of the fucking town that the club is situated in.
>> Anonymous
>>95468BAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWW

And you should love those immigrants washing your windows; they are all about incentive and free market, relegated to street corners cause they couldn't make the car wash. Maybe if one gets good enough he'll be promoted.
>> Anonymous
As an American, I find transfers odd. Teams pay millions to other teams for players, but the contracts for said players don't reach high numbers like they do here in America. Its a system that screws over the player while making individual clubs rich.
>> Anonymous
>>95479
Why would it? The Dollar doesn't mean jack shit in Europe anymore..
>> Anonymous
>>95478
DERP DERP DERP
>> Anonymous
>>95479
Michael Owen gets paid £120,000 a week, make that $230,000 a week
$11,960,000 a year is quite large IMO
>> Anonymous
>>95476Also you ever heard of the NE Patriots? They're a monopoly in the NGL
>>95477No. It doesn't work like that.

I love how the original Relegation argument - that static leagues are communism where successful teams gain no advantage and have no staying power - becomes the opposite when its pointed out that relegation's effects on league parity are bad. Suddenly the Pats are a monopoly too, and fans would NEVER think to follow a more successful team over a nearby one.

You relegation fags don't even know what the fuck your system is for.
>> Anonymous
People arguing for relegation are clearly doing it on ideological grounds instead of examining the effects it has on competition.
>> Gentleman
>>95479
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/specials/fortunate50/2007/index.20.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/specials/fortunate50/2007/

Also, each time a player is transferred, signs a new contract or renews his contract, he will touch a substantial (often sevral million pounds) bonus. Add to that non-salary benefits (performance-related bonuses) that can be pretty impressive (IIRC, some Ukrainian billionnaire promised each player of Shaktar something like a million dollars if they got past the first round of the CL, and then 2, 4 and 10 millions if they won in the next rounds).

Soccer players are far from being poor.
>> Anonymous
>>95489
But you see, unlike you Amerifags, Britain and Europe have an enshrined, unwritten law to support a team which actually has some geographical relevance to us. And 95% follow that law.

Amerifags will learn the truth once FIFA force the MLS and USL to follow in sync with the rest of the world's football league pyramid system.
>> Anonymous
>>95496
You are a fucking tard.

No one gives a shit about the richest motherfuckers. That proves nothing. The dictator of Boomaboomatitipoo might have as much money as Warren Buffet; does that mean the salary of Boomabooma government workers is equal in size to the US?

The average EPL salary in 2006, as reported by The Independent, was approx. $1.2 million. In an US non-relegated sport of comparable roster size, the MLB, the average player took home $2.9 million. Even the fucking NHL pays the average player more.
>> Anonymous
>>95505
Dear Eurofags,

Unlike you Eurofags, us Amerifags are accross an ocean. So while we support local teams that are of geographical reference or personal background in the US, we can choose to support whoever the hell we want in Europe. The difference of course being national teams. Only one you can choose there, and thats the one you tie yourself most closely too. IN any other league competition in europe, we are free to choose, generally having favorite(s) in each league.

The only reason you guys don't do the same is american sports generally suck in your humble-nose-turned-way-up opinions. So i'll tell you what, troll harder, and stop being such a Eurofag.

Love, Amerifags.
>> Anonymous
>>95505
You're on a fucking island the size of a midwestern US state. EVERY team in the fucking EPL has geographical relevance to a motherfucking limey.
>> Anonymous
>>95512
Yeah but I never ever turn down a good football match for thinking "Oh, these guys only earn about £500,000... i only watch football matches where the average player earns over £1,000,000"

that comparison is just retarded..
>> Anonymous
>>95517
Actually, they are on HALF an island the size of US state.
>> Britannian Anonymous !4bbKDTSEQc
>>95505
Yeah, but they can't do that until there are enough teams in America to make the system work. Really, the states are big enough that a place like Texas should have it's own league and they should have a Champions league style system to decide the best team in all of the USA and Canada. Mexico and the Caribbean would then have to have their own FIFA area called Central America, instead of the North and Central America we have currently.

However, because there aren't enough teams and the US is desperate to make football fit into the system it's other sports currently use this can't happen, yet.

Promotion and relegation allow teams to start from nothing and grow bigger, it gets harder the nearer the top you get and so these teams must improve or face oblivion (AFC Wimbledon are a great example of success with this). With the American system a team needs 'approval' from the league and big money to go straight into the big time. This is ok whilst the amount of teams is small, but once the game grows is stupid. Japan's J-League is setting a great example, clubs require approval to turn professional, mostly proof they can survive as clubs and are run well as well as being good at the game. As more clubs are joining up they've created a lower division, and sooner rather than later will create another one at the rate it's going.
>> Gentleman
>>95489
>>95491
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CONCACAF_Champions%27_Cup

Look at the Mexican league. It is open and works on a promotion-relegation system. Look at the USA's "MLS", that's a closed, non-relegation league.

Mexican wins : 24.
American wins : 2.

Yea... Relegation is totally worse. Especially when you consider that Costa Rica, El Salvador, Suriname, Guatemala, Honduras and Trinidad and Tobago and Haiti have won it more/as often than/as the USA. And they all have promotion-relegation system leagues.

I mean, can you think of any other competition where a closed league competes with a promotion-relegation league?

Also, no "but Mexxico is bettar naturally" : Since 1978, the USA's national side has had similar results to the Mexican national side, both in regional competitions and the World Cup. So the talent pools are similar.
>> Anonymous
>>95521
We aren't talking about what the fuck you will watch, dumbass, we are talking about which system benefits the players or high-end clubs more.

HINT: Relegation benefits the high-end clubs over the players.

I'm sure your next argument will be "Well I wouldn't want the average soccer player making too much money. All my disposable income for the management!"
>> Britannian Anonymous !4bbKDTSEQc
>>95512
That's because the gap between the top and bottom of the Premier League in money terms is astronomical. Steven Gerrard at Liverpool earns $13,198,227 per year BASIC WAGE. This is because he's a great player playing for a great and long established team, add in the advertising and bonuses and it's probably close to $15-18 Million per year. Whereas players at Derby County who were only promoted last season make much less because their club is much smaller and not established in the Premier League.

Averages are distorted massively because of this.
>> Anonymous
>>95527
All you demonstrate is that relegation leagues have top-heavy structure; top-end teams that suck up all the talent and wins.

And jesus christ, the US didn't even have a real professional league half those goddamn years., of course they don't have as many championships as the Mexican league. Are you really this stupid or are you just casting around wildly for support?
>> Anonymous
>>95404
Forget I said that. You can never troll effectively because Eurofags take everything so seriously when it comes to their precious soccer.
>> Anonymous
>>95533That's because the gap between the top and bottom of the Premier League in money terms is astronomical.

THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT!

Jesus christ, it can't be this fucking hard to understand. THIS IS WHY RELEGATION IS BAD. Salary structure from team to team and league to league is completely out of whack, and thus the top-end is static and most teams compete at insane competitive disadvantages.
>> Britannian Anonymous !4bbKDTSEQc
>>95543
And this is what you're not understanding. the relegation structure rewards consistency, good management, support and quality. the system says that shit teams don't deserve rewards, and it's correct.
>> Gentleman
>>95512
Swing and miss, pal.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=435215&cc=5739

"The average Premier League footballer will earn around £1.1million a year next season, according to a new report."

£1 = $1.95

So that's $2.15M on average. Salary.

Oh, and I see you missed completely the point I made about nominal salary being pretty much only half what a player will earn from his club each year.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/163676000-the-average-salary-of-a-premi
ership-footballer-in-2006-473659.html

"The average basic salary of a footballer in the English Premiership [...] typically rises by between 60 and 100 per cent when performance-related bonuses, including for actually playing, are added."

So, let's table on 60%... Conservative estimate.

$2.15M * 1.6 = $3.44M

$3.44 Million. Average salary, bonuses included.

And you should add transfer/contract renewal fees, because they're not counted as part of "bonuses"... They're "signing-on fees".
>> Anonymous
>>95550And this is what you're not understanding. the relegation structure rewards consistency, good management, support and quality. the system says that shit teams don't deserve rewards, and it's correct.

You are ridiculous. You willingly emasculate all the teams in a league except 4-8 at the top to chase after some golden ideal of rewarding perfection.

Every season is a new season, and every team deserves the same basic advantage at attaining a championship, that their players' and coaches' talent doesn't already give them. Your shortsighted and uptight views regarding rewarding/punishing franchises replaces the thrill of continuing change with a punitive shell-game, and denudes your precious sport of real on-field competition.
>> Anonymous
>>95551
All I see are accounting gymnastics. I'll give you at most a 100% doubling of salary for the average player in 2006: that puts them at $2.4 million, still behind MLB pay scale.

Finally, the article you posted noted this:

>The review also shows a huge gap in wages paid by Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool compared to the rest of the Premiership.

The average salary of EPL players isn't really going up, its the average salary of players at the above clubs.
>> Anonymous
>>95577

The American system works in America because there's no real competition, it wouldn't work in Europe because there's too much history there, too many leagues competing for the players, and too many teams in the system already (it wouldn't be fair to the lower league teams to lock down the EPL).

Your system isn't superior, it just works for you guys because American millionaires enjoy being able to safely make money off sports.
>> Anonymous
>>95577
Compeition doesn't just take place on the field, cockfag, it takes place at the ticket window and in business meetings.
>> Anonymous
>>95590Your system isn't superior, it just works for you guys because American millionaires enjoy being able to safely make money off sports.

Wrong. It works for US leagues because long ago, before many of the sports we watch became entertainment juggernauts, the people with influence in the sport recognized the value in fostering a sport environment where the majority of the competition is on the field between the players, and everything else is equalized in-league.

The leagues that did this went on to become successful, and their owners became millionaires. There have been plenty of relegation (and almost completely unregulated) leagues in the US; usually they die out because they lack competitive balance.

Read up on the Rooneys and Maras in the NFL.
>> Anonymous
>>95597
I hope you have a Man U business suit. Or at least a tie.
>> Gentleman
>>95589
Because Tampa Bay, the Athletics, the Pirates, the Nationals and the Marlins pay the same salaries as the Yankees, right?

The "average" Yankees player earns $6,744,567, against $661,712 for the "average" Marlins player. So just like in the EPL, it's a few clubs that pull the average up. Or, perhaps unlike the EPL, it's not really teams, but rather "players".

The EPL system means that clubs need to finish 1st over 38 games between 20 clubs to be champion. Whilst a playoff system like the MLB only requires to be 1st in the division, or wild-card. And then win the face-off games in the playoffs. There are massive differences in salaries within clubs like the Yankees that don't exist within their counterparts in the EPL. Chelsea have differences in salary between their "best" players and their bench players, but nothing as ridiculous as the difference between Alex Rodriguez' $28 millions and Jose Molina's under-$2 million salary when they've played the same number of games so far...
>> Mr. Trap or Die
>>95600

although the argument can be made about the pitfalls of leagues based on promotion and relegation in the US, there are some major exceptions to this rule in latin american soccer. this most obvious example is that of the mexican clasura and apertura. in mexico you have two seasons in the fall and spring, where the 18 team league is split into three groups of six, and they compete in a playoff format to determine the winner. and promotion and relegation is not based on where a team lies in the standings at the end of the season, but rather an average of points earned over three years. and it is only the worst team relegated, and they are replaced by the winner of the segunda division playoffs.

another example is in brazil, where there are in essence two competitions that teams play in, in addition to national cups. you have the brazilian serie a, which was only created in the 1970s at the behest of the military regime. this is a round robin tournament where every participant plays home and away, and the winner is tabulated according to points. this is about as traditional as it gets in brazil according to league structures though.

whereas the serie a is thought to be a national championship for brazilian soccer, you have also a simultaneous state championship that occur doing various parts of the year. states like rio de janerio or sao paolo where you have several teams competing in the serie a, they will hold their tournaments during the serie a close season. smaller states will hold their championships usually during the brazilian winter, whch is begining right now. the serie a is orgainzed by the national federation of brazil, the CBF. the state championships are orgainzed by the respective state associations.

part 1
>> Mr. Trap or Die
part 2

the state championships are very old, with the oldest competitions having been played without interruption for over a century. the history and prestige that goes along with the championships like the campeonato paulista or the campeonato sergipano (rio de janerio) are considered to be unparralelled.

and while the serie a consists of just 20 teams from all over the vast nation, the state championships boast scores of teams. the campeaonato paulista boasts over 100 teams competing in the championship. the state competitions are massively popular, and have enormously massive support. and the regional derbies that are so intense developed from the state championships

but yeah....sometimes it pays off to think outside of the box
>> Anonymous
>>95769
>>95765
>>95689
>>95600
tl;dr

niggertits
>> Anonymous
>>95689
You are right that there are massive differences in MLB between the top and the bottom teams, that speaks to a competitive disadvantage. But the MLB middle-class is much healthier - they routinely win the World Series, and sign some very high-priced free agents.

The difference you note between high-low salary on the Yanks speaks to this. The Yanks and Sawks can't sign EVERY awesome player to ride the pine like the the best teams in the EPL do, they have to make do with modest vets for the bench and bullpen.

And really, the MLB is well-known for being the least "even" major league in the US; I only brought it up because roster size/starting lineup size was comparable to EPL football/soccer. A better anti-relegation league to look at would be the NFL. Obviously the average player there will make less because of roster size; but the players OVERALL make 60% of league revenues.
>> Anonymous
How drafts suck... Funny for the best player in the world 17 having to join a shit team when he could be out winning
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
RONALDO!
>> Anonymous
>>95765
>>95769

I'm not familiar with Brazilian soccer, as 4chan is not a Portuguese board. Are there teams there that routinely win or solely compete for the championship due to unmitigated advantages in revenue? Due some of the state leagues clearly outstrip others in prestige and media exposure?

Don't get me wrong, relegation systems are great for low-level amateur competitions like what I think you describe, where competitive wherewithal is well within the grasp of many, many team, and relegation serves to collect competitive groups of teams together.

But once you get to be a media and entertainment juggernaut like the EPL and the Big 4 within it, relegation and no salary cap etc. destroy competition. It stops being sport and becomes war, as the big clubs grind out victories on payroll spreadsheets.
>> Anonymous
>>95783
Heard somewhere that the NFL was suppose to be all 8-8 teams... Wheres the fun in that? And how'd that work out (16-0 reg. season)
>> Anonymous
>>95805
So what's your point? The NFL has managed to balance having many competitive teams with also having great ones, and that's bad?

That the power structure changes from year to year, depending on what teams sign and draft the best players? I mean, who'd want that in a league?