3 ms·
The problem of football is not low quality matches. The problem is that top clubs are paying 120+ mil for average players, or players who do not fit in. Then th
by ssijak 6y ago
The problem of football is not low quality matches. The problem is that top clubs are paying 120+ mil for average players, or players who do not fit in. Then they pay them 500-1000k per week on salaries. And on top of that, they pay ~50 mil to managers for those transfers. After years of that, they complain about debt problems.
And also, how would a league with guarantueed 10-12 teams solve the problem of "weak" matches? That would get boring after a while for me. One of the excitement of current setup is that the underdogs do have a chance of winning, remember Porto and CL? And that because of the mix of different teams, strengths and tactics it never gets boring.
Also, how would this 10-12 "best" teams evolve if you have a guaranteed place in a league. You can optimise for profit and not for best football, skill, tactics and play. So I would wager that after a few years they would play some weird football optimized for number of goals or excitement.
- msg3 6y agoI have to disagree about the low quality matches (completely agree about the debt issues). I watch both NFL and Football and think the average NFL game is more competitive / exciting than the average EPL game. Look at this season - it's been clear Man City will win the league for a while now, and most games Man City play the question isn't "will they win" but "how many will they win by". I don't think the ESL was really about addressing the problem of low quality matches, but I really hope this doesn't stop all innovation in football. I think compared to other sports (Rugby, Cricket and NFL come to mind), football is too conservative about making changes that actually improve fans enjoyment of the game. I've certainly found myself watching switching over to other sports over the last 10 or so years.