falcolombardi wrote:Dutchball97 wrote:falcolombardi wrote:soccer is inherently a morr volatile sport than basketball, by a ton
the nature of low scoring games like soccer or hockey is that they have a stronger variance compared to high scoring games like volleyball or basketball (because one lucky or unlucku goal is a much bigger deal to overcome)
that soccer at the local level (national leagues) has less parity than basketball tells you how much worse team disparity of budgets and access to talent is
nba big vs small market disparity has NOTHINGH on the difference between real madrid and rayo vallecano
Rayo Vallecano is not even among the 100 most valuable clubs in Europe though. So of course they're going to be much worse than Real Madrid but one thing you're forgetting is at least they exist.
There are only 30 pro basketball teams in all of North America, meanwhile there are 38 pro soccer teams in just the Netherlands alone. If European soccer used the same structure as the NBA then all but 1-3 of these teams would cease to exist. Seeing as how more than half the US states don't even have a team in the NBA, a similar structure would see entire nations end up without a single European team.
The top 30 soccer teams in Europe in any given year have as much, if not more, parity than the NBA. It's just that there are many, many more teams of varying levels with tons of local support that can have cinderella runs of their own like for example Leicester in the Premier League or like half the CL winners in the 90s.
so what stops the spanish league from instituting some degree of revenue sharing or spending limits so the difference between madrid and vallecano is 2 or 3 times rather than 10?
it seema too comformist at times how they let a oil prince buy a team then proceed to outspend every team in its own league by like 10 times (paris saint germain)
and this is not just a concern of me, soccer fans in europe are the most annoyed at the growing disparities between the billoinare clubs and everyone else and fans of small teams have always disliked that their teams are esssentially perennial cannon fodder
the only soccer fans i see liking the status quo were fans of the richer teams (madrid, bayern, mamchester united) and they suddendly changed their tune when city and paris appeared with much more money to spend than them too
There are of course pros and cons to both the European football pyramid and the NBA system. The massive influx of billionaire owners isn't generally seen as a positive thing. The chance that smaller teams can compete is growing smaller every year but at least there is a chance.
The proposed super league is very similar to the NBA as it was a closed system with just a bunch of clubs who happen to have the richest owners and people would rather let UEFA run away with their first born than even consider the super league. So it isn't like the annoyed fans would want to replace the current system with something more like the NBA.
Revenue sharing to the degree you suggest in La Liga would eliminate Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico, Sevilla and all other Spanish clubs from competing with the English teams as even if they themselves had a similar revenue sharing system they'd still in average get much more due to the tv money being much higher for the Premier League than for any other league.
I wouldn't be opposed to a European super league but only with promotion/relegation. It'd be such a shame to have a bunch of teams with a ton of history be reduced to nothing, while Arsenal would just chill at the bottom of the standings for the rest of eternity.
