Relegation: good thing or bad thing?

[GIMH]

Hmm, only partially agree Ausage. Ultimately different teams in the NBA win the titles over the long haul. That's the determinative factor.

It shows even more relaxed rules, which the NBA has, can work. Sure it won't work as well as other leagues with stricter rules, but that goes without saying.

Anyway this argument isn't necessarily against the relegation system. I don't think the relegation system means one can't have a salary cap, but that's another story.

I also think I will owe someone on CricketWeb a ****load of money if Wigan (a random team I selected a few years ago) ever win the Premiership.

I daresay my money is pretty safe.

Oh yeah, me

 

[morgieb]

If a player challenged the AFL draft system it would be tossed inside a minute in court. In fact, I don't even know if they'd bother to defend it, it's that obvious.

Someone will do it one day, then the AFL will need to deal with it. Until then, it seems to work pretty well tbh.

Yeah they did away with the NRL draft about a year after it was created iirc.

 

[GIMH]

At the end of the day, in football, success breeds success. Obviously there are teams with manufactured wealth, but teams like Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal have more money because over the history of football they have made themselves into winners.

Liverpool had money in the 70s and 80s, and United in the 90s and 00s but both clubs' success was built on much more than that. It's off-hand to put it all down to money. The main reason English football has seen few title winners in the global era is because of United, who built their success on a solid youth policy and earned their money from having a bigger fanbase than any other club, even after 26 years without a title. To equalise the wealth of clubs like these and Arsenal would be preposterous when it is money they have spent over a century acquiring in many ways - and the foundation of it is sporting. People all around the world don't support these clubs because they're rich but because they're successful. The foundation of their wealth is success. The success obviously breeds further wealth., so it is a cycle. But they've earned that right.

Your Chelsea/Man City is obviously different. I wouldn't actually be surprised if regulations were brought in sooner rather than later that made a billionaire owner less of an advantage. Dunno what, though.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Your Chelsea/Man City is obviously different. I wouldn't actually be surprised if regulations were brought in sooner rather than later that made a billionaire owner less of an advantage. Dunno what, though.

UEFA are doing something whereby teams that don't comply with their regulations are banned from Europe. It's coming in a season or so's time I think (could be wrong) and as such I haven't bothered to actually remember what the regulations are but had they been in force this season I think several clubs would have failed them.

 

[Burgey]

Yeah hockey is a really good example of a North American sport getting it right.

Yeah but hockey is like NRL and AFL - a sport limited to one elite competition in that part of the world.

As you've said earlier, a cap/ draft system won't work in football unless it's across all of Europe. Apples and oranges.

 

[marc71178]

UEFA are doing something whereby teams that don't comply with their regulations are banned from Europe. It's coming in a season or so's time I think (could be wrong) and as such I haven't bothered to actually remember what the regulations are but had they been in force this season I think several clubs would have failed them.

Something about only being able to lose a combined £35m over 4 years or something.

I think there's only about 2 or 3 clubs who'd meet it.

 

[Jarquis]

Your Chelsea/Man City is obviously different. I wouldn't actually be surprised if regulations were brought in sooner rather than later that made a billionaire owner less of an advantage. Dunno what, though.

New regulations being brought in say something along the lines of you can only spend as much as you make.

Financial Fair Play Regulations are approved ? UEFA.com

 

[Jono]

Yeah but hockey is like NRL and AFL - a sport limited to one elite competition in that part of the world.

As you've said earlier, a cap/ draft system won't work in football unless it's across all of Europe. Apples and oranges.

This debate is not about (or at least no longer about) whether a draft or salary cap should be used in England or any European leagues. We understand it is not possible.

Its actually about the merits of a draft and salary cap when they are possible. Some have suggested in this thread that its undesirable, or worse, unfair... which is crazy afaic. If English football was the only game in town, and hence the best players would play come what may, are some people here saying they wouldn't prefer a salary cap to ensure that the amount of guernseys sold in Asia, because all they see is 4 teams all the time, doesn't determine success?

In the AFL right now St Kilda is the perfect example. They are not a rich club by any means, but they have had around 6-7 years of being constantly one of the best 4 clubs (barring one year where they brought in a new coach) and have been in Grand Finals or prelim/semi finals throughout. They had their window, and now they will have to rebuild, as the draft system has ensured that other clubs, provided they recruit correctly and run properly, have their chance. Carlton, Essendon and other teams who are financial powerhouses were struggling in the last half-decade and constantly near the bottom, but are coming good now.

It is a testament to the fact that despite your team being the worst in the league for 2-3 seasons, you know you won't always be there.

 

[vcs]

Haven't followed this thread much, but does the draft system mean that players move too much between teams like in the IPL? If that's the case, it makes it a bit hard to maintain loyalties to a particular team.

 

[Jono]

No a draft system involves the young rookies coming into the AFL/NBA etc. The new players. Teams that perform poorly in a given season have first choice or a better probability of choice (depending on the draft system) of the best young talent starting out.

Loyalty in AFL has been one of its trademarks ftr. Though free agency may change that.

 

[vcs]

No a draft system involves the young rookies coming into the AFL/NBA etc. The new players. Teams that perform poorly in a given season have first choice or a better probability of choice (depending on the draft system) of the best young talent starting out.

Loyalty in AFL has been one of its trademarks ftr. Though free agency may change that.

Ah, OK. But then what's the motivation for clubs to spend money on academies etc.? Or do the clubs not have that responsibility in AFL? In European football, players who come through the club's academy and stay loyal to that club throughout their career are always valued highly by the fans (e.g. Unnamed Premiership Star, Scholes etc.).

 

[Redbacks]

IMO drafts reward mediocrity and shift responsibility for player development towards clubs/structures that ultimately don't see the benefit of that player's talent.

At least in the non victorian states that are 'football' mad, they system works whereby the licenses to the AFL teams are owned by the local football league. Thus, they take a cut of revenue from the AFL teams to fund the local comps, being the SANFL and WAFL. It's about $400k per club in SA a season. Because of this there is an incentive to keep the teams strong because it means a healthy state of affairs overall.

Given the gradual shift in who earns the $$, clubs cna no longer do what they used to, and say 'we will produce the players we want for our culture', with the AFL recruiters now having more influence on what skills they want 13-16 year olds to be focussing on. If they paid better dollars for drafted players, currently $10k i think, then you could see clubs like those in Argentina who meet their bottom line based on producing superstars.

Melbourne it's completely different becuase their local league became the AFL, the VFA has always been a B league with a smaller following.

 

[Jono]

Ah, OK. But then what's the motivation for clubs to spend money on academies etc.? Or do the clubs not have that responsibility in AFL? In European football, players who come through the club's academy and stay loyal to that club throughout their career are always valued highly by the fans (e.g. Unnamed Premiership Star, Scholes etc.).

The fact you named two Manchester United players goes to my point.

How are the mid-table or bottom of the table teams going to develop these stars? And if they do, will they stick around or go play for the teams that have more money?

Re the AFL, local clubs in the regions develop players as well as AFL academies. AFL teams can't pick out a 13 year old and make them theirs.

 

[Redbacks]

Haven't followed this thread much, but does the draft system mean that players move too much between teams like in the IPL? If that's the case, it makes it a bit hard to maintain loyalties to a particular team.

It's different in that you only really enter the draft once in the AFL.

It's then about free agency and trades if you want to move to another club. Teams are historically very reluctant to trade in the AFL making players often get stuck at the one club unless they really make a big motion that they want to move.

If no deal comes through in trade week, then the player has to be out of contract and can enter the pre-season draft. This is a lottery as you might get picked up by a club you also don't want to go to. Behind closed doors though you could let the other teams know you wont sign for less than a certain amount of $$, but if they pay up you will go to that team.

They are going towards free-agency after 7 years at a club IIRC because the older players feel at 28 they might be offered a 2 year deal, and want a longer one to secure their financial future or go home. Under the current rules it's quite difficult for this move to take place. As always, as the rule favours the clubs, they are cautious about its potential impact on their lists.

 

[Furball]

The fact you named two Manchester United players goes to my point.

How are the mid-table or bottom of the table teams going to develop these stars? And if they do, will they stick around or go play for the teams that have more money?

Re the AFL, local clubs in the regions develop players as well as AFL academies. AFL teams can't pick out a 13 year old and make them theirs.

By investing in the right structures to develop top young talent.

 

[benchmark00]

By investing in the right structures to develop top young talent.

So these mid/bottom table clubs develop the next Ronaldo... then what happens? He pisses off to another club. Superb way to harness talent.

Scholes and Giggs are great examples... except they are at one of the big four clubs, backing up our point.

 

[GIMH]

The fact you named two Manchester United players goes to my point.

How are the mid-table or bottom of the table teams going to develop these stars? And if they do, will they stick around or go play for the teams that have more money?

Re the AFL, local clubs in the regions develop players as well as AFL academies. AFL teams can't pick out a 13 year old and make them theirs.

So these mid/bottom table clubs develop the next Ronaldo... then what happens? He pisses off to another club. Superb way to harness talent.

Scholes and Giggs are great examples... except they are at one of the big four clubs, backing up our point.

United are one of the top four because they develop great talent. And that's a fact, Eric Bischoff!

 

[benchmark00]

United are one of the top four because they develop great talent. And that's a fact, Eric Bischoff!

So you're telling me noone apart from the top four clubs in the EPL are good at developing talent? Is every club that poorly run?

 

[Furball]

So you're telling me noone apart from the top four clubs in the EPL are good at developing talent? Is every club that poorly run?

In the Premier League, pretty much.

 

[Furball]

So these mid/bottom table clubs develop the next Ronaldo... then what happens? He pisses off to another club. Superb way to harness talent.

Scholes and Giggs are great examples... except they are at one of the big four clubs, backing up our point.

Except the club gets paid a transfer fee, which they can re-invest in more young talent.

Let's look at Porto, who are a mid/bottom table club in European terms. Since winning the Champions League they have sold €350m worth of players, yet have won 5 out of 6 league titles since, and last season won the Europa League.

If clubs are run sensibly then there's no real reason why they can't upset the applecart.

And again, I find it weird you guys are bashing the Premiership when it is pretty egalitarian in distributing TV revenue.