> My understanding is that promotion/relegation systems tend to lead to more lop-sided leagues where the winners keep winning because of the virtuous cycle of:

> My understanding is that promotion/relegation systems tend to lead to more lop-sided leagues where the winners keep winning because of the virtuous cycle of: more money from the TV rights from being in the "champions" league -> buy better players -> the better players keep you in the "champions" league. This is sort of true, but I'd argue it still results in a better product than the American model. Pro/rel in Europe tends to vary based on the way TV rights money is divided and how much is available. In Spain, your description is pretty accurate, since Real Madrid and Barcelona can negotiate their own rights with minimal revenue sharing. Those two teams will always be near the top, as demonstrated by Barcelona's performance this year - they've been complete trash and are still tied for 4th on points. In England the TV money gets divided up more evenly, and the result is that big clubs can fail if their management is poor - Newcastle, West Ham, Aston Villa, Fulham, and other large clubs have experience relegation. Everton is at risk of it for the first time ever (I believe) due to some really poor decisions by their front office. On the other hand, Leicester City - a team no one had heard of - won the EPL in 2016. I'd prefer the league with a handful of locked-in elite clubs where mobility is possible than a league where 1/3rd of the teams are incentivized to lose, and another 1/3 know they have nothing to play for while the season is still going.