4 ms·

football without promotion and relegation is not football, i never understood the American style of "closed leagues". If you can't deal with relegation, don't p

by kome 6y ago

football without promotion and relegation is not football, i never understood the American style of "closed leagues". If you can't deal with relegation, don't play a game.

jonwinstanley 6y ago
It’s the difference between a sport and something designed to look like a sport but in reality is just entertainment
- kome 6y ago
  beautifully put
- username90 6y ago
  Super Bowl being closer to WWF than a competition explains so much, thanks!
technofiend 6y ago
Not that I'm a defender of either system but US teams don't promote or relegate as a whole. Rather, the players move up or down between minor and major league teams.
- cloudfifty 6y ago
  > Rather, the players move up or down between minor and major league teams. Uhm, so what? Players move between clubs all the time in football. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever to an avid, European, football fan like me at least
  - slantyyz 6y ago
    > .. Players move between clubs all the time in football. > That doesn't make any sense whatsoever to an avid, European, football fan like me at least Can you explain how ownership of a player's rights works in European football? As a non-football fan from North America, I have always found it confusing when I hear about the huge fees it costs move a player, before his salary is even discussed, as I'm more familiar with the simpler trade/free-agency model used by American sports leagues. What about player loans, how are those even a thing? I've tried googling/wikipedia-ing it more than once, but these concepts are often not dumbed down enough for me.
    - cloudfifty 6y ago
      The normal scenario is that a club signs a player up for X years. If another club fancy that player during the length of the contract period they negotiate with both the club and player to break that contract for a fee. If the contract expires, the player is free to sign for any club. Clubs usually make sure to not have important players on a soon-to-expire-contract, and if they do, they rather sell that player than let the contract expire. There are more complex cases where some players have multiple owners to their rights etc. Another more common case is that previous clubs usually have some sort of cut of future transfer fees as compensation for their "development" of the player. Loans are basically "We got this young player John Talent contracted, but we can't give him enough first team experience atm due to competition in the team, so we'll loan him out to a club in a less competitive league where he'll gain it". So that club will pay some amount for that loan during a year.
      - slantyyz 6y ago
        Thanks, that's much clearer than the explanations I've seen before. So it's basically the price to void the existing contract instead of moving the player with his contract.
        cloudfifty 6y ago
        Exactly.
        jonwinstanley 6y ago
        You aren’t only voiding the existing contract, you also have to pay the market rate for the player. The contract is between the club and the player, nothing to do with the league. A club “owns” a player under contract, so if someone wants to buy the player, they can ask for whatever price they want and turn down any offer if they choose. Often the costs have a lot of conditions included to protect the buyer and incentivise the player. Such as more money after a number of games played and more money if they win a trophy etc.
      - notdang 6y ago
  - technofiend 6y ago
    >Uhm, so what? Players move between clubs all the time in football. I'm sure they do, but do players often move between teams in different tiers as well? That's the key difference here: it is not a lateral move.
- slantyyz 6y ago
  Not saying that I want it, but I do think it would be interesting to see what would play out if the American sports leagues adopted relegation and removed salary caps/luxury taxes at the same time.
  - bena 6y ago
    It would get worse. There would be a set of 10 or so teams that would churn through promotion/relegation, a set of 5 or 6 teams that would win every year, then 16-ish teams that would basically serve as farm teams for the 5 or 6 big teams. The money available overall to each team is vastly different.
    - username90 6y ago
      What if you want to see the best players play against each other rather than be spread out among all the weak teams in order to optimally farm their budgets? The American style ensures that there will never ever be strong teams.
      - bena 6y ago
        Due to contracts and the draft, you'll never have that regardless. And then there are the areas where clubs are allowed to spend with abandon: the front office. Coaching staff, player personnel, analytics, etc. The "American" system does allow for strong teams, but it tries to make sure that there's more volatility from season to season.

by kome 6y ago

football without promotion and relegation is not football, i never understood the American style of "closed leagues". If you can't deal with relegation, don't play a game.

jonwinstanley 6y ago

It’s the difference between a sport and something designed to look like a sport but in reality is just entertainment

kome 6y ago
beautifully put
username90 6y ago
Super Bowl being closer to WWF than a competition explains so much, thanks!

technofiend 6y ago

Not that I'm a defender of either system but US teams don't promote or relegate as a whole. Rather, the players move up or down between minor and major league teams.

cloudfifty 6y ago
> Rather, the players move up or down between minor and major league teams. Uhm, so what? Players move between clubs all the time in football. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever to an avid, European, football fan like me at least
- slantyyz 6y ago
  > .. Players move between clubs all the time in football. > That doesn't make any sense whatsoever to an avid, European, football fan like me at least Can you explain how ownership of a player's rights works in European football? As a non-football fan from North America, I have always found it confusing when I hear about the huge fees it costs move a player, before his salary is even discussed, as I'm more familiar with the simpler trade/free-agency model used by American sports leagues. What about player loans, how are those even a thing? I've tried googling/wikipedia-ing it more than once, but these concepts are often not dumbed down enough for me.
  - cloudfifty 6y ago
    The normal scenario is that a club signs a player up for X years. If another club fancy that player during the length of the contract period they negotiate with both the club and player to break that contract for a fee. If the contract expires, the player is free to sign for any club. Clubs usually make sure to not have important players on a soon-to-expire-contract, and if they do, they rather sell that player than let the contract expire. There are more complex cases where some players have multiple owners to their rights etc. Another more common case is that previous clubs usually have some sort of cut of future transfer fees as compensation for their "development" of the player. Loans are basically "We got this young player John Talent contracted, but we can't give him enough first team experience atm due to competition in the team, so we'll loan him out to a club in a less competitive league where he'll gain it". So that club will pay some amount for that loan during a year.
    - slantyyz 6y ago
      Thanks, that's much clearer than the explanations I've seen before. So it's basically the price to void the existing contract instead of moving the player with his contract.
      - cloudfifty 6y ago
        Exactly.
      - jonwinstanley 6y ago
        You aren’t only voiding the existing contract, you also have to pay the market rate for the player. The contract is between the club and the player, nothing to do with the league. A club “owns” a player under contract, so if someone wants to buy the player, they can ask for whatever price they want and turn down any offer if they choose. Often the costs have a lot of conditions included to protect the buyer and incentivise the player. Such as more money after a number of games played and more money if they win a trophy etc.
    - notdang 6y ago
- technofiend 6y ago
  >Uhm, so what? Players move between clubs all the time in football. I'm sure they do, but do players often move between teams in different tiers as well? That's the key difference here: it is not a lateral move.
slantyyz 6y ago
Not saying that I want it, but I do think it would be interesting to see what would play out if the American sports leagues adopted relegation and removed salary caps/luxury taxes at the same time.
- bena 6y ago
  It would get worse. There would be a set of 10 or so teams that would churn through promotion/relegation, a set of 5 or 6 teams that would win every year, then 16-ish teams that would basically serve as farm teams for the 5 or 6 big teams. The money available overall to each team is vastly different.
  - username90 6y ago
    What if you want to see the best players play against each other rather than be spread out among all the weak teams in order to optimally farm their budgets? The American style ensures that there will never ever be strong teams.
    - bena 6y ago
      Due to contracts and the draft, you'll never have that regardless. And then there are the areas where clubs are allowed to spend with abandon: the front office. Coaching staff, player personnel, analytics, etc. The "American" system does allow for strong teams, but it tries to make sure that there's more volatility from season to season.