What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official Soccer Discussion Thread*** (3 Viewers)

GoFishTN said:
It means it's not based on merit.
Click to expand...
Sure it's based on merit.  Real Madrid didn't become the most valuable team in the world because they suck.  It's just based on an evaluation of merit over a longer period of time. 

It's such a weird argument.  When MLS decides to expand, should they just hold a tournament and take the NASL/USL team that win it?

 
I'm in for Super League if they relegate the worst team and replace it with the non-Super League European champion. 

Suck it, elitists.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Sure it's based on merit.  Real Madrid didn't become the most valuable team in the world because they suck.  It's just based on an evaluation of merit over a longer period of time. 

It's such a weird argument.  When MLS decides to expand, should they just hold a tournament and take the NASL/USL team that win it?
Click to expand...
Great idea!

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Sure it's based on merit.  Real Madrid didn't become the most valuable team in the world because they suck.  It's just based on an evaluation of merit over a longer period of time. 

It's such a weird argument.  When MLS decides to expand, should they just hold a tournament and take the NASL/USL team that win it?
Click to expand...
if it's based on merit, a bad year should result in an ouster. but not if it's a closed league. or are you suggesting something closer to Argentina's league, where relegation is based over several seasons, to protect teams like River and Boca.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Sure it's based on merit.  Real Madrid didn't become the most valuable team in the world because they suck.  It's just based on an evaluation of merit over a longer period of time. 

It's such a weird argument.  When MLS decides to expand, should they just hold a tournament and take the NASL/USL team that win it?
Click to expand...
#### YES!

 
El Floppo said:
if it's based on merit, a bad year should result in an ouster. but not if it's a closed league. or are you suggesting something closer to Argentina's league, where relegation is based over several seasons, to protect teams like River and Boca.
Click to expand...
I see no way a Super League would have promotion/relegation.  I see no way any new league of any consequence formed in 2016 would have it.  Owners wouldn't allow it. 

I understand the concern that some owners would just try to spend as little as possible and let the money come in.  If the other owners cared, they could have a Bylaw to address that.  Maybe any team that finishes in the bottom 5 x years in a row could be replaced by a supermajority vote of the owners.  But it's not something I'd be all that concerned with. 

We're making a big deal about Leicester, but its kind of hard to attribute their success to the English system when that same system has produced five title winners in 23 years of the Premiere League (we're likely to get a sixth this year which is great).  Three teams have won 19 of 23.  And it's the same in most every major league in Europe.  There are a lot of enjoyable things about La Liga and the Bundesliga and Serie A but having Bayern, Real, Barca, Juve, or a Milan team win 9 out of 10 titles isn't one of them.

 
I hear you- and the trend of limited league winners has obviously worsened in recent years... but a russian/UAE owner can quickly change that- for any team in any league. plus there's the very occasional outlier like Leicester or Blackburn who deserve a shot at something more. or will there still be a CL along with the super league?

IMO, let house of pain dictate here... let the cream of the crop rise to the top, but don't eat pig because that's a police man. or arnold. playing sega. etc.

 
Being debated right now among my circle of friends: Who's better or who would you rather have right now: Gabi from Atlético or Coquelin from Arsenal?

 
El Floppo said:
I hear you- and the trend of limited league winners has obviously worsened in recent years... but a russian/UAE owner can quickly change that- for any team in any league. plus there's the very occasional outlier like Leicester or Blackburn who deserve a shot at something more. or will there still be a CL along with the super league?

IMO, let house of pain dictate here... let the cream of the crop rise to the top, but don't eat pig because that's a police man. or arnold. playing sega. etc.
Click to expand...
If a Super League started I don't think there'd be a CL.

The question, IMO, is whether its more profitable for the big clubs to have the CL and their respective domestic leagues rather than just scrapping both and doing business with each other.  I don't know the answer to that question. 

As fans, we may all value different things.  Tradition might be important to some.  Unpredictability to others.  For me, I'd like to be able to see the best players play as often as I can and with the absolute best production values.  So I'm kind of an ideal "Super League" consumer. 

But among owners of the top 20 to 25 teams in the world, I'm not sure there's as much diversity of opinion.  I'm sure they'd all prefer the system that maximizes their revenue.

 
I lost Bein when I moved, so I don't really have an informed opinion.  Coquelin is very important to Arsenal, but its not as if they've righted the ship since he's returned (of course, he's not responsible for Alexis playing like a sack of dog crap since returning from injury or Theo and Ox being Theo and Ox). 

Atletico are conceding so few goals, that its hard not to make an argument for all of their players who defend or protect the back four.  How long does Godin have to be awesome before he make a FIFPro Best XI?  Why am I not hearing about a huge bidding war for Gimenez (he's only six months older than Matt Miazga!)?

 
roadkill1292 said:
True, I was talking about Stillitano's bs CL reforms. But CL isn't any weirder than the NCAA basketball tournament, and in fact makes a lot more sense in that it requires teams to qualify by an objective criteria, not by a Selection Committe made up of Puny Humans. Also, in the home leagues of these Euro clubs (as it stands), those teams aren't picking their fellow league members either. They would in a Super League (which would be making a mistake to formulate a closed shop, IMO), sure, but that's mostly an American-style operation. I think American-style operations are really screwed up and unfair to lots of fans and cities.
Click to expand...
It actually is.  

Take a team like Liverpool 2013-2014.  They were super hot.  But that team didn't get to prove itself on the big stage.  That team got a lottery ticket to what is essentially a big tournament, the NEXT YEAR.  For someone like me, who was just learning the sport, that was rather odd to watch.  The NCAA tournament happens when the season is done and is nothing more than a playoff system.

I think that in the end, there will be some sort of super league.  There's too much money involved.  And that makes sense.  Many European fans will be outraged, but as an American that is used to American sports, it makes sense. 

It would be super easy to implement too.  

You could have a group of 20 teams that are guaranteed entry into the CL and then a group of "at-large" teams.  If you kept all the formats the same, there would be 12 at-large left and they could figure out some way for that to work.

For the most part, things wouldn't change all that much. Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern, Juventus...these teams are in conferences with little depth and they are going to qualify every year anyway.  

But in this format, you keep teams such as Chelsea, ManU, Arsenal, Man City and (hopefully) Liverpool involved. 

I get the point that these teams "made soccer" because they did.  They get ratings and people want to see them.  So if they want to create a league for ratings in which the big teams all play each other, why not?  

 
SuperLeague won't happen imo.

The world need doormats also.  And, none of the big squads want to become a doormat.  There is a certain comfort for teams knowing they may not be the best in the world but they are the best in their little corner of the world.

 
Yeah...why would the big clubs agree to take on a good chance they never win again? Some of them will be perpetual losers in the new system. You think Sheik America Abramovic is going to keep pouring money into PSChelsity after eight years of 15th place finishes and a 25% drop in revenue?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BLOCKED_PUNT
list index
Replies
16
Views
634
El Floppo
El Floppo
Andrew74
2025 FBG Stock Contest
2
Replies
77
Views
4K
Andrew74
Andrew74
SwampDawg
The College Soccer Experience
Replies
23
Views
931
BassNBrew
BassNBrew

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top