The mancityfans.net football forum

Dimples wrote:.........Specific options include more guaranteed entries for the strongest leagues, protected places for the biggest clubs, and playing matches on Saturdays rather than midweek to appeal to Asian and American audiences......

No need to say anymore - they want to get Liverpool and MU back in - by Hook or by Crook

This is why the only thing that matters to me is the Premier League. UEFA can go f... itself.

Dameerto wrote:

Dimples wrote:.........Specific options include more guaranteed entries for the strongest leagues, protected places for the biggest clubs, and playing matches on Saturdays rather than midweek to appeal to Asian and American audiences......

No need to say anymore - they want to get Liverpool and MU back in - by Hook or by Crook

This is why the only thing that matters to me is the Premier League. UEFA can go f... itself.

Me too. I am very much in the camp of domestic football. PL is the big prize for me and the holy grail each year. 38 games sorts the men from the boys. I hope Pep shares my thoughts on this as well

Nigels Tackle wrote:the fact that they've referenced the nfl as a model means that 'smaller' clubs might as well just give up now. rip football.

I am no NFL fan, but that league does allow for practically any team to win if managed properly, which I suspect some fans would welcome, but that's not what is being talked about here it seems. They were referring to the revenues, but I don't see how UEFA can replicate it unless other leagues that participate in CL/Europa agree to either stop playing games on one weekend day/time a week, or no important fixtures scheduled on those days/times, which would always be reserved for CL games.

The NFL is so popular (for now) because it is adored for its violence, there is only one game a week, and because they do not compete with other American football leagues for the most part when they play their games (Sunday and Monday nights). Sometimes they play on Thursday nights, and a few Saturday's late in the season, but that's when "college football" does not play, which owns Saturdays during the same time frame, generally. The NBA goes past it so they get the winter into spring, and baseball the summer into fall. This is partially why trying to replicate their model would be difficult.

PrezIke wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:the fact that they've referenced the nfl as a model means that 'smaller' clubs might as well just give up now. rip football.

I am no NFL fan, but that league does allow for practically any team to win if managed properly, which I suspect some fans would welcome, but that's not what is being talked about here it seems. They were referring to the revenues, but I don't see how UEFA can replicate it unless other leagues that participate in CL/Europa agree to either stop playing games on one weekend day/time a week, or no important fixtures scheduled on those days/times, which would always be reserved for CL games.

The NFL is so popular (for now) because it is adored for its violence, there is only one game a week, and because they do not compete with other American football leagues for the most part when they play their games (Sunday and Monday nights). Sometimes they play on Thursday nights, and a few Saturday's late in the season, but that's when "college football" does not play, which owns Saturdays during the same time frame, generally. The NBA goes past it so they get the winter into spring, and baseball the summer into fall. This is partially why trying to replicate their model would be difficult.

I am totally against modelling any football competition on any American professional sport. Not unless you want to go further down the road of scheduling the game to suit the television advertisers. Maybe break the game into 4 quarters.etc.
Football is professional and a business, but let's try and maintain its sport origins as much as possible.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

PrezIke wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:the fact that they've referenced the nfl as a model means that 'smaller' clubs might as well just give up now. rip football.

I am no NFL fan, but that league does allow for practically any team to win if managed properly, which I suspect some fans would welcome, but that's not what is being talked about here it seems. They were referring to the revenues, but I don't see how UEFA can replicate it unless other leagues that participate in CL/Europa agree to either stop playing games on one weekend day/time a week, or no important fixtures scheduled on those days/times, which would always be reserved for CL games.

The NFL is so popular (for now) because it is adored for its violence, there is only one game a week, and because they do not compete with other American football leagues for the most part when they play their games (Sunday and Monday nights). Sometimes they play on Thursday nights, and a few Saturday's late in the season, but that's when "college football" does not play, which owns Saturdays during the same time frame, generally. The NBA goes past it so they get the winter into spring, and baseball the summer into fall. This is partially why trying to replicate their model would be difficult.

I am totally against modelling any football competition on any American professional sport. Not unless you want to go further down the road of scheduling the game to suit the television advertisers. Maybe break the game into 4 quarters.etc.
Football is professional and a business, but let's try and maintain its sport origins as much as possible.

sport is sport...i don't think "modeling" footy on the NFL is anything more than some emotional trigger for folks to say "it shouldn't be like America."

Realistically, as someone mentioned...the NFL has parity, but it also has a salary cap, and a strict process by which owners and clubs own players and not vice versa, which is the current model in intl footy. The NFL might get more money than the CL, but there aren't 3 other cups/leagues for each NFL team to potentially play in and for media companies to bid upon which means of course the revenue for the one league will be higher. Add up all the revenue from 4-8 top European footy leagues/comps and then you have a valid-ish comparison.

At any rate, the only thing that European footy can deliver from the NFL is basically for the owners to make more money, with the carrot dangled for fans that "any given sunday" means anyone can win....this expresses itself in control over the players and the wages, which flies 100% in the face of what players and agents want. Unlikely, tho at some level i am a firm believer in funding for lower leagues and academies for local FAs that should come from the league/players, etc...

Anyway, a much more complex argument than "don't be like the NFL" imho.

cheers

I think there is one thing we could learn from the Americans, it's called the "salary cap". Those two words are better financial FAIR play than anything UEFA have proposed so far.

Slim wrote:I think there is one thing we could learn from the Americans, it's called the "salary cap". Those two words are better financial FAIR play than anything UEFA have proposed so far.

Yeah and all draft players each summer. Great.

john@staustell wrote:

Slim wrote:I think there is one thing we could learn from the Americans, it's called the "salary cap". Those two words are better financial FAIR play than anything UEFA have proposed so far.

Yeah and all draft players each summer. Great.

Does this mean you are one that prefers the best teams dominating then or are at least in favour of players' right to earn as much as the market dictates, rather than some arbitrary figure that limits this (I actually am in the latter camp)?

You do realise that system, like the "salary cap," is actually designed to keep the leagues competitive (as well as, or more cynically, just make sure all owners can earn as much as any other as they can, while appeasing fans of less rich clubs), by helping lower performing clubs to add talent even if they play on a smaller club or in a smaller market.

I am more of a supporter of players getting as much as they can in their careers, and care less what fans want if it hurts them. This is since the owners make so much, off of the performance of uniquely talented individuals with limited years to earn due to age, and if anything goes wrong as a player you are quickly discarded. As a result I am generally against such limitations, but in America it is more accepted perhaps because of our attitudes towards unions and workers rights. Since the 1980s we tend to blame workers for everything and have targeted workers unions/rights when it interferes with the masses consumption or corporate profits to the point of unions barely existing and generally unpopular.

The draft system also incentivises bad play by teams, particularly in sport where adding one player can transform a team instantly (basketball, American football - if you draft a quarterback, especially). Baseball does not have these limitations, as it has the strongest players union -- because they were actually the sport where a players union first took a historic stand against owners and won -- so you see a model more similar to international football where it's a players' market and rich teams have an advantage, generally. They have a draft, but it would be like drafting players for the under 18s or Reserves/EDS. They are less likely to live up to potential, almost always playing in lower leagues for years first, compared to American football or basketball players, who often go right into the first teams after being drafted.

Even as you jest, a draft wouldn't work anyway because with football there are too many top leagues. So the best young player out of, say Brazil, would probably be drafted to play in multiple nations' leagues. It would make no sense. In American sport with draft systems those sports are the top leagues by a good margin, so all of the best players want to play in the NFL, NBA, NHL or MLB. MLS has a draft, but that tends to focus on American youth who are leftover from the best, because the real best discovered young enough who are smart go abroad to develop, like 17 year old Christian Pulisic, who plays for Dortmund. Basketball has a little lure for playing internationally, and some young players have went to Europe, but that's rare (we are just as bad, and arguably worse, than English youth with being willing to live abroad where English is not the native language).

Anyway, I know it's easy to mock us Yanks at times, and I can surely criticise aspects raised, no problem, but let's have a fair conversation about some aspects, as "someone else" (Doomie - don't want to write my name?) alluded to in an earlier post. The NFL is the worst league for players, btw, who can get cut without earning their wages unlike other professional sports, and the risk for life threatening injury is extremely high (now with evidence about 1 out of 3 players risking development of CTE/serious brain trauma over their lives). I actually predict the sport to decline over time as a result. I'd never want my children to play it seriously.

Why don't they just guarantee places for teams who play in red and stop pretending it's about anything else