SunFlash
9 years ago
Constructive, huh? Well, I'll do my best.
I think that the biggest problem with English football can be boiled down to a few main points:
Spending too much money on players
Having the historical giants struggling
The perception of the best league in the world
First, and this is a huge problem, the amount of money spent on players. To highlight an example, Newcastle spent a whopping EIGHTY-THREE MILLION in the last two years and what do they have to show for it? Probably relegation. Why? There is no excuse for that, right? Wrong. In my opinion, a high turnover rate in players and managers is awful for the overall chemistry of a club. With the exception of global stars like Messi and Aguero, very few players shine brightly from day one and rarely turn in a bad performance, let alone season. Looking at my own club, United, several of our best players have had a very rough time in the team at some time or another, see: Ronaldo, De Gea, Rooney (currently). But since we had the same manager and same "filosophy" we were able to overcome it. The chemistry of a team matters. In Barca, managers come and go, but the majority of their players have been developed with their style of play, and the players that actually mattered, Xavi, Iniesta, Messi, Busquests, and Pique (in that order) ensured that new transfers could simply integrate into the system. In Madrid, having a superstar at every position is helpful, they're signing Toni Kroos for around the same amount Liverpool spends on Benteke. It's smart money. In Bayern, their main players, Robben, Ribery, Lahm, and every German worth anything ensure that their core is strong. In my opinion, if you take away all injuries, Bayern has been the best team in the world for the last 5-ish years. My main point here is that the biggest clubs don't throw money at a problem, they find the player they want, occasionally the best player in that position IN THE ENTIRE FREAKING WORLD and buy them. For all the money BPL teams have, they simply don't do this, and it's mind boggling to me. Example: Arsenal. Arsenal are a good striker away from winning the Champions league, and don't look at me like that. But they refuse to buy any striker at all, let alone one of the best, Lewa or Benzema.
Second, having the traditional English teams struggling. My main point here is not going to be United, but instead, Liverpool. I agree with Sir Alex that if Liverpool ever get going again, the world has to be scared. They have the history, fan dedication, and world-wide brand to be an absolute monster in international competition. Sadly for English football, but happily for me personally, they are currently wading through a period that makes even the most die-hard Liverpool fan cry. United is on the way back, and we're seeing that this year, which pleases me. If United and Liverpool are the top two teams in the Premier League, we wouldn't be having this conversation, that's the weight these two teams pull. Arsenal and Tottenham rounding out our top four wouldn't hurt either. Now I come to my controversial point where I made half this forum hate me, but here goes: Chelsea and City, in particular City, being the best teams of the BPL hurts the league. This applies less to Chelsea these days than City, and there's a good reason why. These teams simply don't have the longstanding world-wide support or CL experience that is required for you to DOMINATE the world. Understand now that Chelsea has been the Chelsea we know now for a decade, and have actually won the compeition and has had a generation go by, see: Drogba, Cech, Cole, Terry, Lampard, this applies less to them. I'll take you through a hypothetical: If City wins the Champions League this season (we're pretending, ok) will that answer the question of the BPL being the best league in the world? Of course not. What if Chelsea win it? Maybe. What if Arsenal/United/Liverpool (say next year for Liverpool) won it. That would certainly answer that question in the affirmative. It's no so much the league that wins the trophy, it's the club that wins it. If in addition to Arsenal/United/Liverpool -Dortmund/Athletico/Lyon/Ajax/Milan/Porto won the CL in the upcoming years, it would force a re-evaluation of leagues. If PSG/Barca/Madrid/Juventus/Bayern/Chelsea win it, nothing changes. It just confirms what we already know.
That brings me to my third and final point, the perception of the best league in the world. What makes a league - the best league? If we are talking about over strength of all teams combined, it's the BPL, no question. If we're talking about number of teams that are truly elite, which is the definition I subscribe to, and I think majority of people do as well, then it's Spain. Both Madrids and Barca are elite teams. (Before the season I'd have put Sevilla there to, but seriously Sevilla, wtf). In England, City is the ONLY elite team right now. Chelsea had that mantle last year, and gave it up. United should be there next year, and Arsenal, spend some targeted money you cheapstakes. Liverpool, I don't even know how to fix you. In Italy - yeah they don't have any elite teams anymore, which actually isn't a bad thing for the overall recovery of the league. In Germany, Bayern and maaaaybe Dortmund. In France, PSG. If you look that elite teams, no country has two clear candidates, except Spain, which has three.
In conclusion, you need teams to perform in Europe, because aside from a casual glance every now and again and some awareness for whatever team wins the domestic league, no one cares. It's how you perform in Europe that dictates how good your league is, and the BPL is epically failing that test right now.
Although I do believe having United in the CL again is EXCELLENT for English football. Aside from Chelsea (who've had some shockers as well) no other team in England right now even has a chance at bringing any semblance of dignity back to English football in CL. City could win the damn thing and everyone would just say something along the lines of "oil money, lol finally won something important, does this mean Pelligrini isn't fired" etc etc etc
The days of European dominance seem over for the Premier League. Where did it all go wrong?
“They said ‘Thierry, is this the best league in the world?’”
A rare bout of existentialism there from Sky as Thierry Henry pondered this question in their ad to kick of the League in August. Was there finally some doubt creeping in to challenge the hitherto unshakeable stance that the English game was the pinnacle of global football
Ninety seconds of classic footage later, Thierry apparently has his answer:
“…and that is why, my friends, this is the greatest league in the world.”
Based on the English performances in the Champions League again this week, the real answer to that opening question might be a bit different.?
Now not to say that Sky and BT are paying these clubs too much money for the television rights, but when Queens Park Rangers and Sunderland are receiving more in TV revenue than PSG, Dortmund and Atlético then the market is obviously askew.
England has become a sort of rich stepping stone for so many foreign footballers – a place where they can go and earn vast amounts in wages while hopefully doing enough to impress Real Madrid or Barcelona. And even if they don’t get that “dream move” to a Spanish giant, at least they still have their massive contracts to fall back on.
It’s arguably a more competitive league on average that most of the other big European leagues, but that doesn’t make it better. Better would mean it contains some of the best players in the world, but realistically how many in England could be included in that list? Hazard? Agüero? David Silva?
Either way it pales in comparison to Real, Barça and Bayern – all of whom each have at least five realistic Ballon d’Or candidates in their ranks.
Regardless, the smaller teams wouldn’t even be able to narrow the gap if the top six weren’t so bad at recruiting. The bigger sides are spending hundreds of millions of pounds with comparatively little to show for it.
England can complain about the lack of value in the market but they really have no right to – because it’s a market of their own creation. Every time a generic yet well-polished Sky Sports News face runs the Totalizer to see another forty or fifty million pounds added to the pile spent by Premier League clubs, another European chairman or president rubs his hands with glee.
Gary Neville recently used the metaphor of England being an ATM for the rest of Europe, and it’s hard to argue with that. Clubs from just about every other league would balk at the idea of paying £55 million for Kevin De Bruyne or £36 million (at least) for Anthony Martial, and yet both Manchester sides were only too happy to part with their money.
Given the very real danger of England losing a Champions League place to Serie A in the near future, it is a problem that the Premier League is going to wake up to. They also have to realise that throwing vulgar amounts of money at the issue won’t solve it – especially when the money they spend is bankrolling the very teams that turn around and beat them.
The financial bubble in England is unlikely to burst any time soon, but while it continues to be the most important factor in how so many of these clubs operate then it’s difficult to see anything changing in the near future.
So Thierry, is this really the best league in the world?
From PunditArena.com
I may not agree 100% about this post, because i also think that the problem is much deeper than just money ruining it, but i cant deny that ATM thing by Garry.
Sure EPL is the most watched, any player specially the average one dreams to go there because he will get paid like a world class player with the only obligation to make the headlines from time to time, even not consistently, the urgency of result doesnt seem like in other top 6 clubs of leagues because we will always say that the rival earned his point rather than the top team flopping really hard, but then when its Psv, Zagreb, Basel, Besiktas, Olympiakos.... This competitivity argument falls miserably because those teams are outside England, giving credit to them means that the leagues they play in are on part with the PL, and then everyone goes silent because at the end there is nothing to say, eyes starts to be opened about the real problem or only extreme egos make them still blind, but until when ? Until Italy who arent in their best form get the 4 th CL spot at the expense of PL ? ( not sure it will happen but its not really impossible though )
The problem we have here when we talk about the best is the criteria, PL is the most watched league, the players there get an incredible visibility even the mediocre or the average are known and get big wages ( i still cant believe some average ligue 1 players notorioty there while they could never make it into France 23, or only there visibility help them to make it imo at the national team level expense )
The best athmosphere for me is Germany, the best level for me is Spain, the roughest ( not really a compliment ) is France, PL for me is the most bankable but does it mean the best ?
What should they do to be on par at least with the Europeen Giants ? Before dominating them...
Can money resolve everything specially on the pitch ? Why some teams terrific on paper lacks the urgency of results that only can be shown in CL ?
This is the real talk, the most bankable league wont reach any result if they do not try to resolve the problem without thinking that injecting money will be enough. The German in the early 2000's admitted that their cycle was over, worked on formation and adapted their Football and philosophy, brought a new modern Football and till now they are both present massively in all competitions reaching Euro finals and earning a World cup...
Not a rant or critic thread, but constructive one.