Football Thread 12

[The Iceman of the North]

The quality of teams we are talking about.

Based on the quality of the leagues I'd use this ranking:

1a: England, Spain & Italy

1b: Germany & France

2: Russia, Ukraine, Netherlands, Portugal and perhaps Romania

3: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Scotland and Turkey

4: Most of the rest

5: Leagues like Wales, Northern Ireland, Andorra, San Marino, Luxembourg and Malta

The MLS would probably belong on the fourth level at the moment, or perhaps at the bottom of the third level.

[Celtigo]

I was talking about quality of football in the league, and not about the attendance percentage of a stadium.

Yes, but generally more money= better players and teams

[Horus Ex Machina]

Why do the latter two lag? Especially Germany?

German stadiums maybe the best in Europe, they have the highest attendance, and from what I remember many teams make a substantial profit.

I've heard something about refusal to go into debt financing and for some reason no foreign billionaires have seen fit to snap up teams. Although with Berlin now the capital of cool, I'm surprised Hertha hasn't been bought by the Sultan of Brunei or the next Roman Abramovitch

We spoke about this on another forum a week ago. Apparently the Bundesliga is number 2 on average team revenue. I asked about that and someone mentioned pretty much what you did, that German clubs don't like to go into debt and therefore choose not to compete with the Big 3 for the big transfers that would make them more competitive in CL.

Eredvisie is Holland, so that is the second group.

Didn't notice Holland there.

I agree in theory. CONCACAF has way too many tiny islands with little hope of ever being anything more than a first round WC qualifier exit. Economics and demography guarantee this unless the West Indian Federation makes a comeback.

The problem is that I believe both CONMEBOL and CONCACAF have to give their approval to any move. I just can't see all of the middle "powers" in the region giving up the two big boys/money makers. Unlike OFC, which doesn't have anyone equipped to even compete on the world stage (save the Kiwis, who have openly spoken about their desire to follow the Aussies to Asia at some point), CONCACAF has the Canadians (potential and the fact that 3 MLS franchises will be based here makes their inclusion a must for the US) and decent squads in Costa Rica, Honduras, and from time to time Trinidad and Jamiaca.

These other Confederations will see the writing on the wall and either move to block the exit of the US and Mexico or attempt to tag along and while South America might love the US and Mexico (decent national teams that will likely bring 2 WC bids with them and plenty of eyeballs and fans) are they going to want 4 or 5 additional squads?

It's difficult to say. I would have to say that they certainly like the money that Mexico currently brings to thier Copa Libertadores, and that would only multiply if you added the US and Canada to that mix. Of course they also don't want to water down their competition so we'd have to earn the right to play there first. I think that the US and Canada would come as a pair, especially since we are not only tied at the MLS but also USL 1 & 2 and on down to PDL. But the benefit would be that Canada's clubs will be equal to the US'. Should MLS loosen the salary cap structure, it is possible that Canada will have 3 of the best supported and likely strongest clubs in the league. So accepting them probably wouldn't be a problem.

Now Honduras and Costa Rica share cultural similarities with S. America as does Mexico, and clubs like Marathon or Saprissa would likely be welcome to those competitions. Obviously CONCACAF would be a money-losing proposition without the US, Mexico or Canada but conversly they would likely retain 2 World Cup bids (1 guaranteed and one play-in) which would give those two country's a chance at the WC. So it's a tradeoff. Eventually Canada will surpass both of them, I think, now that the sport is catching on up there. Especially with all of the Euro ex-pats living in TO.

[Iskaral Pust]

Assuming we get it in 22, it won't be played in LA again for two reasons. The first is the been there, done that factor. The second is the time zone difference from the other side of the Atlantic. It won't be played in Qwest because Seattle (and I love that city) lacks the international wow flavor other host cities have.

It will be played on the East Coast in NYC or DC.

Seattle at least has the best climate in the lower 48 for playing football in June/July. As we saw in 1994, the heat and humidity in most cities will detract from the quality. Ireland played matches in Florida, NY and LA in that World Cup. (not to mention the amount of air travel required, which is not kind to fatigued muscles)

But I agree that Seattle lacks the cosmopolitan cache to host the final.

I thought the financial problems in Germany stemmed both from the parsimonious TV revenue (forced by a state broadcasting monopoly?) and an unwillingness to use debt (both a cultural attitude and possibly a regulatory restriction). There was a good editorial on SoccerNet a year or two ago.

[Celtigo]

Seattle at least has the best climate in the lower 48 for playing football in June/July. As we saw in 1994, the heat and humidity in most cities will detract from the quality. Ireland played matches in Florida, NY and LA in that World Cup. (not to mention the amount of air travel required, which is not kind to fatigued muscles)

But I agree that Seattle lacks the cosmopolitan cache to host the final.

I thought the financial problems in Germany stemmed both from the parsimonious TV revenue (forced by a state broadcasting monopoly?) and an unwillingness to use debt (both a cultural attitude and possibly a regulatory restriction). There was a good editorial on SoccerNet a year or two ago.

Interesting on Germany. I guess it makes Bayern's success all the more impressive.

I agree on Seattle, and if it wasn't for the time difference I think FIFA might consider San Francisco with its similiar climate, but more prominent global reputation.

I think the massive amounts of travel was a huge complaint in 94 and almost every proposal or brain storming I've seen for 22 or later involves a regional pod system (except for the group that might involve the US) which would cut down on travel significantly, especially for teams that get slotted into the Northeast corridor.

[Black Wizard]

BTW, wouldn't the Eredivisie be in that second group?

Yeha you're probably right, but that league has been slipping back in quality over the last decade or so. PSV still make good progreess in the Champions Leaue occassionaly but Ajax - who were one of the top teams in Europe - haven't been in the Champions League for a few years now and are pretty much the Real Madrid feeder team. They're a bit like Hibs at the moment, producing all of Scotland's great young players only to loose them for a fraction of what they'd get if they were a bigger club.

I've always thought of the Portugese League and the SPL as roughly similar. Portugal has twice as many people with three big clubs that win basically every year (I know Boa Vista stunned the world 8 years ago) and Scotland has two. If Hearts or Hibs could get their shit together and become the Porto equivalent, the two would be the same in my mind. Neither the middle tier or the relegation yo-yos in either league are anything impressive.

In terms of finance Hearts are the third club in Scotland. In Romanov's first year as dictator at the club they split the Old Firm and won the Scottish Cup. They probably would have won the league if Romanov hadn't fallen out with George Burley who had them at the top of the league. As soon as he was out the door they lost to Hibs and never bridged the gap to Celtic again (in one game near the end of the season they were 2-0 against Celtic, but lost 3-2). In terms of the last twelve years of Scottish football, Hearts are massively successful with two Scottish Cups and a runners-up spot in the league; Hibs, Livingston and mabye Kilmarnock have won the League Cup (and so would Dundee United if it weren;t for Mark Kerr :mad: ).

Behind the Old Firm in terms of quality are Hearts, Dundee United, Aberdeen and Hibs. I mentioned above that Hibs have had to keep on selling their best players: Riordan (who has returned), Fletcher, Brown, Thompson, Miller, Caldwell, Whittaker, Killen, O'Connor, Sproule, Killen and probably more asides. If they had been able to keep this team together they may well have challenged for the league. Dundee United have lost Robson, Flood and Zaluska to Celtic in the last two seasons and it's wrecked United's challenge for the European spots both times.

I've not watched much Portugese football but I'd have expected it to be leaps and bounds better than the SPL, just look at some of the players Portugal produces. I know that Porto winning the Champions League was something of an anomaly because Mourinho was the manager then and the Portugese teams haven't been all that good since, with Sporting Lisbon getting dumped out of the UEFA Cup by Rangers. :lol: I'm pretty sure the quality of football in Portugal is higher than the SPL though.

[Master Aune]

Alonso is a Real madrid Player.

The prize is rumored to be €.30

I dont think Liverpool can win the EPL now.

[DJDonegal]

So Liverpool lose Alonso and Arbeloa while Man U lose Ronaldo and Tevez. I'd say Man U have lost the greater talent there overall which would theoretically bring the two closer together - but really it's Chelsea who are laughing in the background.

I still think Liverpool just have the edge with Torres and Gerard making such a formiddable partnership. And there's still time to make a substantial signing.

[Black Wizard]

I'm thinking Burnley and Birmingham City could be the dark horses this season. :P All those Scottish players will put them right in the mix, plus they both have Scottish managers.

[Celtigo]

So Liverpool lose Alonso and Arbeloa while Man U lose Ronaldo and Tevez. I'd say Man U have lost the greater talent there overall which would theoretically bring the two closer together - but really it's Chelsea who are laughing in the background.

I still think Liverpool just have the edge with Torres and Gerard making such a formidable partnership. And there's still time to make a substantial signing.

Mascherano may be out the door as well before the season really gets rolling.

Chelsea have to be the favorites in my mind simply because they haven't lost as much.

[koudoulis]

Based on the quality of the leagues I'd use this ranking:

1a: England, Spain & Italy

1b: Germany & France

2: Russia, Ukraine, Netherlands, Portugal and perhaps Romania

3: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, Norway, Scotland and Turkey

4: Most of the rest

5: Leagues like Wales, Northern Ireland, Andorra, San Marino, Luxembourg and Malta

The MLS would probably belong on the fourth level at the moment, or perhaps at the bottom of the third level.

romania ? ! ? seriously?

to point out that these listingns become very subjective from the 2nd-3rd group down would be an understatement. a big point for my objections stems from the fact that we re talking about quality of football in each country. while a ukranin team has made an impact the last years (shahtar) due mainly to a sudden influx of money that by no means that there is an elevated quality in the league. in no way can you put them in the same level with Netherlands and Portugal. also for me austrian and belgian (even czech ) teams are nowhere near the top and belong to the rest of countries.

and for the record i think the worth of MLS is wildy exaggerated in this thread.

[polishgenius]

Romania had two clubs in the group stages of the CL last year - that's more than Holland, Russia or Scotland. Whether that will last is debatable but they're worth noting.

[Celtigo]

romania ? ! ? seriously?

According to the current UEFA league coefficient they're 8th I believe.

And who here is "wildly exaggerating" the value of MLS?

Once again they're are 340 million people in the US and Canada. Thats more than Germany, England, Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, and the Netherlands combined. It won't take a huge percentage of North Americans caring about MLS to move it past Greece, Scotland, or Belgium (at least) in 20 or 30 years.

And there is interest: 93,000 to watch Barcelona in LA, 71,000 to Watch AC Milan-Chelsea in Baltimore, 81,000 in LA for Milan-Chelsea, Projected 80,000 + to watch Real Madrid-DC united, Seattle sold 65,000 to watch their MLS team take on Chelsea, 67,000 tickets have been sold for Seattle-Barca, and so on.

These games have all taken place in the last 4 weeks.

[koudoulis]

Romania had two clubs in the group stages of the CL last year - that's more than Holland, Russia or Scotland. Whether that will last is debatable but they're worth noting.

worth noting doesnt make them a 2nd group country. above turkey? galatasaray has won the UEFA cup and have you seen fenerbahce or besiktas? the stadiums?turkish players playing in campionato and bundesliga? anyway even greece usually has two teams in group stage the last years and the quality of football is much lower than you d think.

According to the current UEFA league coefficient they're 8th I believe.

And who here is "wildly exaggerating" the value of MLS?

Once again they're are 340 million people in the US and Canada. Thats more than Germany, England, Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, and the Netherlands combined. It won't take a huge percentage of North Americans caring about MLS to move it past Greece, Scotland, or Belgium (at least) in 20 or 30 years.

And there is interest: 93,000 to watch Barcelona in LA, 71,000 to Watch AC Milan-Chelsea in Baltimore, 81,000 in LA for Milan-Chelsea, Projected 80,000 + to watch Real Madrid-DC united, Seattle sold 65,000 to watch their MLS team take on Chelsea, 67,000 tickets have been sold for Seattle-Barca, and so on.

These games have all taken place in the last 4 weeks.

thats 4 games.. and they involve Milan , Chelsea and Real Madrid. its not about a long league involving DC united , LA galaxy and the rest.if these games were hosted in manilla they would attract roughly tha same number of spectators, that doesnt mean the filippines will be great in 30 years. so these numbers shouldnt be taken for granted. they are but a sign , and yes its a good sign. if we are talking in 20-30 years then yes they may become a power. right now they lack critical things and they are years away from producing top class players. Money is important but not the deciding factor. look at those south american countries with no money whatsoever but raw talent flowing around. colombia , uruguay , mexico .. not mentioning argentina and brazil. and even brazil's league cannot be compared to the strong european leagues due to other reasons. like attitude towards the physical aspect of the game and discipline. anyway ..

edit to add that the uefa coefficient is just a tool to ensure that all countries under the big 4 will get a chance to be represented in the european competitions and just tries to protect the aforementioned competitions prestige. its a nice tool but it doensnt represent anything but a trend of the last couple of years.

[Mme Erzulie]

Here's hoping we can sign Aquilani and Silva (or Villa (pipe dream)).

I'm glad we're at least rumored to have got the £30 million Rafa insisted on.

Still a severe blow, though. I can only hope we'll be able to hold on to Mascherano.

[polishgenius]

I don't really know why Aquilani appears to be the main target- he's older, injury prone and not as good as Alonso. If you're going to get someone in not as good, it should at least be someone with potential to improve, like say Tom Huddlestone.

[Black Wizard]

I can finally watch some live football again tonight. Dinamo Moscow-Celtic on BBC 2, then on saturday West Brom will pump Newcastle and next week the Norway-Scotland match is on the telly. :) My life is complete.

[Renasko]

Yeah, looking forward to settling down tonight to watch the Celts. Aside from two pre-season games (Ah Alhy and Tottenham, respectively), I've had to watch their games on-fucking-line. Oh well, that is behind us now, and their league games are gonna be on Sky, too. Aberdeen, first, on the 15th I believe. But tonight's game is more important. In light of the recent Setanta dilemma, it is imperative that we qualify for the CL - for more reasons than the financial one, but you cannot ignore how essential that money now is for the club. Let's not let Dinamo stand in our way! C'mon the Bhoys. :)

[DJDonegal]

Did someone post a code for Fantasy League in here earlier in the thread?

[Hereward]

Not that I recall. I've just set up my two teams (the A Team and an all English XI), so I could set up a league and post details if you like. I must admit I lost interest last year as I plummeted from a respectable top 3 at Xmas to lower mid table, but this year will be different!