The relative strength of the Premier League

[RobinLFC]

Yeah its unfair. They can pick up quality Spanish and German players for reasonable prices and form the basis of their team. In England thats a fast track to getting broke! I rate Isco and he went for like £28 million. How much would Barkley cost? Barca signed Pique for like 4 mill from us. John Stones £45 mill anyone? you get my point

Now I've heard it all...

What stops all our English clubs with more than sufficient resources from investing in their scouting system? There is more than enough value in the lower leagues, as well on the continent. Dele Alli went to Tottenham for £5m, Mahrez to Leicester for £350,000 and even Payet who has set the league on fire this season came to West Ham for only €14m which is probably peanuts for a Premier League side.

It's only the likes of Lukaku, Stones, Barkley who'll cost you a fortune because you need to buy them from another PL side (and in the cases of Barkley and Stones, young English talent). Stones has had an underwhelming season, he's worth nowhere near £45m in my opinion but Chelsea were desperate to sign him last summer and that's what you'll get with situations like that. The fee City paid for Sterling was also ridiculous, I'm not saying he's not worth it but I'm pretty sure they could find a decent replacement for him who costs at least €30m less than Sterling, look at Douglas Costa for example who has had a much better season, granted he's a couple of years older but still, I think you get my point. Juventus snapped up a new attacking duo (Dybala and Mandzukic) for only €51m combined while the former has looked like a world class talent/player since he's settled in, they got Khedira on a free who's having a good season as well. In the meantime, they sell an average defender in Ogbonna (who they don't even need) to a PL side for €14m. There's much less value in a transfer like that for West Ham than there is for Juventus but West Ham has the money so they'll splash it regardless.

There is a lot of value in the market, English teams just tend to go for the easiest and most well-known option, most likely a "Premier League proven" one which will cost them at least an additional €10m. You'll fall of your chair if you'll see the fee Everton will demand for Lukaku next summer, it'll be ridiculous but no doubt a PL team will be desperate enough to try and sign him, maybe even United.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Known how? How is it known?

I thought this thread was adding value according to you. Have you not been reading actual facts people have been posting? Bundesliga has consisently out performed its league un counterparts in European Competitions. Other than watching the two leagues which I know you're hesitant to do, that's a pretty good indicator, one which has been posted in on in this very thread.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

How do you know that?

He probably watches them. How would you compare the two leagues ? A glance at league tables from Google? How far the leaders are leading by? Clubs you've heard loads about in newspapers?

 

[Piratesoup]

I thought this thread was adding value according to you. Have you not been reading actual facts people have been posting? Bundesliga has consisently out performed its league un counterparts in European Competitions. Other than watching the two leagues which I know you're hesitant to do, that's a pretty good indicator, one which has been posted in on in this very thread.

Judging from this thread and his posts, everything fact-based turns into incomprehensible Grindcore lyrics inside his head as soon as he reads or hears it...

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Judging from this thread and his posts, everything fact-based turns into incomprehensible Grindcore lyrics inside his head as soon as he reads or hears it...

It's strange. Before this thread he was the overly positive guy on the caf, which was alright and negated overly negative views I suppose. This thread has some of the worst argumentative logic (mostly due to a lack of) I've seen on the caf and that's saying something.

 

[Wumminator]

I'm honestly floored by the argument "You can tell the quality of the league by watching it".

That makes so little sense to me. I can't even begin to get my head around it. I don't see how that works at all.

 

[Piratesoup]

I'm honestly floored by the argument "You can tell the quality of the league by watching it".

That makes so little sense to me. I can't even begin to get my head around it. I don't see how that works at all.

So you're saying the concept of consistently watching football to form an educated opinion is alien to you? Who would've guessed?

 

[Wumminator]

So you're saying the concept of consistently watching football to form an educated opinion is alien to you? Who would've guessed?

How can you base how good a team is when they're playing in a different team.

The whole point of a league system is to see how good a team is over a long period. That's why it's the best method of seeing the best team, and even then sometimes there are massive flukes.

You simply can't compare team A in one league vs Team B in another by looking at how they play.

Based on that you'd say PSV for example are better than Dortmund. They have a much higher goal difference and play better football in that league.

That is the logic in the thread that is really troubling. You simply can't tell how good a team in different leagues are by watching them just play. It quite clearly wouldn't work.

 

[Wumminator]

I thought this thread was adding value according to you. Have you not been reading actual facts people have been posting? Bundesliga has consisently out performed its league un counterparts in European Competitions. Other than watching the two leagues which I know you're hesitant to do, that's a pretty good indicator, one which has been posted in on in this very thread.

Also constantly out performed? Last year Monaco were top of their Champions League group. I've already explained why I disregard Europa League standings. Last year Everton scored 6 past Wolfsburg but Wolfsburg went further in the competition. Who is the strongest team based on that?

 

[kouroux]

How do you know that?

I've been watching the Ligue 1 more or less seriously for the past 15 years. I have watching a decent amount of German football to know that at this precise moment the German clubs are simply better overall.

 

[Wumminator]

I've been watching the Ligue 1 more or less seriously for the past 15 years. I have watching a decent amount of German football to know that at this precise moment the German clubs are simply better overall.

Based on the players in those teams?

 

[kouroux]

Based on the players in those teams?

On that but more importantly on their performances in Europe.

 

[Rado_N]

This is like asking a child what 2 + 2 is and then trying to explain to him why the answer is not yellow, all the while he just repeats 'but why?' to everything you say.

 

[Stacks]

Now I've heard it all...

What stops all our English clubs with more than sufficient resources from investing in their scouting system? There is more than enough value in the lower leagues, as well on the continent. Dele Alli went to Tottenham for £5m, Mahrez to Leicester for £350,000 and even Payet who has set the league on fire this season came to West Ham for only €14m which is probably peanuts for a Premier League side.

It's only the likes of Lukaku, Stones, Barkley who'll cost you a fortune because you need to buy them from another PL side (and in the cases of Barkley and Stones, young English talent). Stones has had an underwhelming season, he's worth nowhere near £45m in my opinion but Chelsea were desperate to sign him last summer and that's what you'll get with situations like that. The fee City paid for Sterling was also ridiculous, I'm not saying he's not worth it but I'm pretty sure they could find a decent replacement for him who costs at least €30m less than Sterling, look at Douglas Costa for example who has had a much better season, granted he's a couple of years older but still, I think you get my point. Juventus snapped up a new attacking duo (Dybala and Mandzukic) for only €51m combined while the former has looked like a world class talent/player since he's settled in, they got Khedira on a free who's having a good season as well. In the meantime, they sell an average defender in Ogbonna (who they don't even need) to a PL side for €14m. There's much less value in a transfer like that for West Ham than there is for Juventus but West Ham has the money so they'll splash it regardless.

There is a lot of value in the market, English teams just tend to go for the easiest and most well-known option, most likely a "Premier League proven" one which will cost them at least an additional €10m. You'll fall of your chair if you'll see the fee Everton will demand for Lukaku next summer, it'll be ridiculous but no doubt a PL team will be desperate enough to try and sign him, maybe even United.

lots of value in the lower leagues? Champions League quality players yeah? because remember we were initially debating about your Barca's and Bayerns. So value in the lower league will be the level of Barcelona B Team players.

also factor that we have an English quota, so for the benefit of maintaining squad standards, we have to buy decent English players. Unfortunately they cost and arm and a leg

Fergie says there is no value in the market and that's final.

 

[Wumminator]

This is like asking a child what 2 + 2 is and then trying to explain to him why the answer is not yellow, all the while he just repeats 'but why?' to everything you say.

Not at all. Im trying to draw out an answer. It's a high level skill to try and move the debate on. At the moment I've just seen kouroux mention that he can judge a league based on the quality of the players. That's what I was trying to get to Rado.

 

[Rado_N]

Not at all. Im trying to draw out an answer. It's a high level skill to try and move the debate on. At the moment I've just seen kouroux mention that he can judge a league based on the quality of the players. That's what I was trying to get to Rado.

For the umpteenth time, if you want to gauge which leagues have the highest quality on display, watch them.

 

[kouroux]

lots of value in the lower leagues? Champions League quality players yeah? because remember we were initially debating about your Barca's and Bayerns. So value in the lower league will be the level of Barcelona B Team players.

also factor that we have an English quota, so for the benefit of maintaining squad standards, we have to buy decent English players. Unfortunately they cost and arm and a leg

Fergie says there is no value in the market and that's final.

SAF can be and was wrong about this.

 

[Skorenzy]

Not at all. Im trying to draw out an answer. It's a high level skill to try and move the debate on. At the moment I've just seen kouroux mention that he can judge a league based on the quality of the players. That's what I was trying to get to Rado.

Except that it's not based on the quality of the players - not really - it's based on the perception of their quality (as you'd need to consistently watch or at the very least follow up on what unbiased observers are saying to be able to get an accurate reading on that). Furthermore why does this seem to be the only acceptable method according to you? European football (and especially the coefficients derived from it), while far from representative of entire leagues, is still the most consistent indicator we've got to measure relative strength/quality - as it takes at least 25-35% of most leagues' teams' performances against each other into consideration.

 

[berbatrick]

I'm honestly floored by the argument "You can tell the quality of the league by watching it".

That makes so little sense to me. I can't even begin to get my head around it. I don't see how that works at all.

I think this is the funniest post I've ever read.

How can you tell whether a world cup final is at a higher standard than inter-collegiate football? Not by watching the games, that's for sure!

 

[Wumminator]

Except that it's not based on the quality of the players - not really - it's based on the perception of their quality (as you'd need to consistently watch or at the very least follow up on what unbiased observers are saying to be able to get an accurate reading on that). Furthermore why does this seem to be the only acceptable method according to you? European football (and especially the coefficients derived from it), while far from representative of entire leagues, is still the most consistent indicator we've got to measure relative strength/quality - as it takes at least 25-35% of most leagues' teams' performances against each other into consideration.

It's not the only acceptable method, it's an entirely unacceptable method but I find it somewhat better than using cup competitions.

It's a really hard topic. There's no way anyone is ever going to be proven right.

 

[Wumminator]

I think this is the funniest post I've ever read.

How can you tell whether a world cup final is at a higher standard than inter-collegiate football? Not by watching the games, that's for sure!

The top leagues of football are full of professional football players. If you were to show a random person a video of PSV and Dortmund playing the difference is somewhat negligible compared to an amateur vs World Cup competition.

To continue your anology if you showed them Greece in the Euros I'm not sure they'd rate the team at all.

 

[prarek]

The old team was better because it had two genuine world class players. Bale is the most expensive player in the world and was bought due to his near unstoppable force in the premier league. Modric is one of the best CM in the world. Spurs don't currently have anyone near that class. Did Gallas really play for Tottenham? Van der Vaart had goals in him. Ledley King, Robbie Keane, J .Defoe, Crouchy, Dawson etc. They were decent opposition in a SERIOUSLY competitive League. Back then Chelsea, United, Arsenal, City(creeping up) and Liverpool were still a genuine threat.

Gallas did play for Spurs at the time. And i think you're right, that team was better than this one. That Spurs team would probably have won the league this season.

 

[berbatrick]

The top leagues of football are full of professional football players. If you were to show a random person a video of PSV and Dortmund playing the difference is somewhat negligible compared to an amateur vs World Cup competition.

To continue your anology if you showed them Greece in the Euros I'm not sure they'd rate the team at all.

Actually all that shows is that you've never watched Dortmund. I eagerly wait for the weekend to watch the extended highlights of their games because every week they serve up the best football*, alongwith Villareal at times. The gulf in class between Dortmund and fecking PSV is vast. And we lost to PSV...


*excluding Barca, who've pretty much transcended superlatives.


And the Greece 2004 team is widely regarded as among the worst to win a tournament. So I don't get your point. Since you want to cherry-pick, you can compare the performances of Dortmund and Spurs vs Real Madrid, for example.


Have a look at how they play:
http://www.footytube.com/video/borussia-dortmund-1-fsv-mainz-05-mar13-410157

EDIT: Mainz are 3 points clear of the Wolfsburg team that beat us.

 

[berbatrick]

The main reason I'm convinced that the PL is (and has been for 5 years) inferior to La Liga is simply because I got to watch a few Liga games.

The same season they destroyed us, Athletic played Barca and got a 2-2 draw in one of the best football games I had ever seen. The level was so much higher than United had shown that season I couldn't believe it. A few minutes of random Spanish games had some nice passing and pressing and composure that I just never got to see in the PL. These games also did have flakier defences (though it's got a lot commoner in England lately), but the quality on the ball was miles ahead. And the way United and other English teams get exposed in the CL and even Erupoa League shows that gap.

 

[Skorenzy]

It's not the only acceptable method, it's an entirely unacceptable method but I find it somewhat better than using cup competitions.

It's a really hard topic. There's no way anyone is ever going to be proven right.

It is indeed a complex subject, not made any easier by your obfuscation of different concepts - ie. competitiveness, quality, strength - which you've also failed to properly define thereafter.

Let me ask you this. How do you judge a player's quality? On what criteria do you base it?

If I may remind you of your opening post?

Your premise: "We actually have the strongest league I think I’ve ever seen right now, the quality is immense. From players like Lukaku, Butland and Cabaye being regulars in bottom ten sides to teams like Arsenal, Chelsea and United struggling while being filled with star studded players"

You then simply listed 4 different squads (current PL, past PL, current Bundesliga, current La Liga) and concluded with: "Does this not suggest to anyone right away the quality of the respective leagues?"

Clearly it suggests to you that the PL is the "strongest" (whatever that means) it's been so far - you didn't outright say it was "stronger" or of superior "quality" than the other two, but reading between the lines (and subsequent posts) would suggest this pattern of thought.

If so, I'd like to know on what grounds you believe that to be the case? (the overriding feeling, as with the whole Rayo Vallecano debacle, would be because you know them and have seen them in action a lot whereas that's not the case with the others?).

 

[amolbhatia50k]

This is like asking a child what 2 + 2 is and then trying to explain to him why the answer is not yellow, all the while he just repeats 'but why?' to everything you say.

Pretty apt.

Not at all. Im trying to draw out an answer. It's a high level skill to try and move the debate on. At the moment I've just seen kouroux mention that he can judge a league based on the quality of the players. That's what I was trying to get to Rado.

Yet you somehow managed to miss the rest of his argument. You can guage the strength of a league by watching it, and how well it's teams do in continental competitions, as @kouroux has said. You on the other hand ignore the football that's played and the performances in Europe (when it suits you). I'm no expert on the Bundesliga but to anyone with functioning pair of eyes and half a brain, it is a stronger league than the French league. It's precisely why La Liga is considered the best. It's got the best players on the planet, it's top teams are better than the other leagues, the rest of its league is pretty much as strong as any other league, all of which is evidenced by the football on show, and the performances of the teams in Europe.

 

[slig]

thought it is cool to be in the mains, and then i have to read stupid things from guys like twigginater

 

[amolbhatia50k]

It's not the only acceptable method, it's an entirely unacceptable method but I find it somewhat better than using cup competitions.

It's a really hard topic. There's no way anyone is ever going to be proven right.

Why only one method or the other?

My take is that the strength of the league comes from the strength of the teams that play in it, which might no necessarily correleate with the names of the players therein. For example Valencia has always been one of the better teams in Spain and they have a good squad, however managed by Gary Neville they've been utter rubbish. Same with Chelsea. Big team in England with big players, current champions in fact. But like Valencia their contribution to the "strength of the league" is low this season given they've had the strength of Rafa Benitez's willpower to diet. So, no, simply pulling up names , for me, doesn't work. It isninheranly flawed, because football is a team sport. And a team is not necessarily the actual sum of the individual parts on papers.

So firsly I'd stress on "strength of the TEAMS in the league". That is guaged by watching them, for example Leicester are an very good team this year despite on paper the squad suggesting otherwise. And then of course also by how well these teams do in direct competition with teams from across Europe.

 

[Wumminator]

How good are Wolsfburg compared to Premier League teams? Do we base it on the team that lost 4-0 to Everton or the team that beat Man United?

 

[slig]

wolfsburg is shit this year.
but it was enough to beat united....
enough for explanation? ^^

 

[Wumminator]

Why only one method or the other?

My take is that the strength of the league comes from the strength of the teams that play in it, which might no necessarily correleate with the names of the players therein. For example Valencia has always been one of the better teams in Spain and they have a good squad, however managed by Gary Neville they've been utter rubbish. Same with Chelsea. Big team in England with big players, current champions in fact. But like Valencia their contribution to the "strength of the league" is low this season given they've had the strength of Rafa Benitez's willpower to diet. So, no, simply pulling up names , for me, doesn't work. It isninheranly flawed, because football is a team sport. And a team is not necessarily the actual sum of the individual parts on papers.

So firsly I'd stress on "strength of the TEAMS in the league". That is guaged by watching them, for example Leicester are an very good team this year despite on paper the squad suggesting otherwise. And then of course also by how well these teams do in direct competition with teams from across Europe.

You're right about seeing teams play. They can be greater than the sum of their parts. However would we not say that it is often easy to look at the strength of the squad and know who is better? It's been alluded to on this thread plenty of times. You just have a feel for the talent of the player based on how he is seen in the football world.

 

[Wumminator]

wolfsburg is shit this year.
but it was enough to beat united....
enough for explanation? ^^

That is quite literally not an explanation of anything.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

How good are Wolsfburg compared to Premier League teams? Do we base it on the team that lost 4-0 to Everton or the team that beat Man United?

How do we judge Manchester United? 5th place in their league or lost to Wolfsburg and PSV?

On a more serious note, you judge the teams over a period. The German league has comfortably out performed the French league both in terms of performances by their teams in Europe and the standard of football within their league, hence its a better league.

 

[Wumminator]

How do we judge Manchester United? 5th place in their league or lost to Wolfsburg and PSV?

On a more serious note, you judge the teams over a period. The German league has comfortably out performed the French league both in terms of performances by their teams in Europe and the standard of football within their league, hence its a better league.

I know the Bundesliga is a better league. To me it is obvious. But it's interesting that when I ask you lot why you answer with

A) the performances in Europe

Fair enough, your side has constantly argued this

B) the quality of the players

This is what I've been trying to argue. There is a gulf in the players

 

[amolbhatia50k]

You're right about seeing teams play. They can be greater than the sum of their parts. However would we not say that it is often easy to look at the strength of the squad and know who is better? It's been alluded to on this thread plenty of times. You just have a feel for the talent of the player based on how he is seen in the football world.

Often, yes and often, no. We are fine example of that. I don't know why you want to dumb down the method of judging to something illogical. Yes, Barca have the best attack and are the best team. But United with some star names are also playing dire football and getting dumped out of Europe by the likes of Wolfsburg and PSV. To ignore things like the quality of the TEAM makes no sense to me. It would be easy to just look at players but I'd rather not do the easy thing when I know I'd be wrong.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

I know the Bundesliga is a better league. To me it is obvious. But it's interesting that when I ask you lot why you answer with

A) the performances in Europe

Fair enough, your side has constantly argued this

B) the quality of the players

This is what I've been trying to argue. There is a gulf in the players

Actually on the second I answered with quality of the football/football teams rather than players, since you can have two star names and be crap, and have no star names and be good. Everton have hyped names in attack but in essence are a very mediocre football team.

Wait, so you agree that there is a gulf between bundesliga and the French league? What was the post about there being no difference all about then?

 

[Wumminator]

Often, yes and often, no. We are fine example of that. I don't know why you want to dumb down the method of judging to something illogical. Yes, Barca have the best attack and are the best team. But United with some star names are also playing dire football and getting dumped out of Europe by the likes of Wolfsburg and PSV. To ignore things like the quality of the TEAM makes no sense to me. It would be easy to just look at players but I'd rather not do the easy thing when I know I'd be wrong.

There's not a right way. We're all arguing varying degrees of wrongness really. We'll never be right because football is so unpredictable at its best.

 

[Wumminator]

Actually on the second I answered with quality of the football/football teams rather than players, since you can have two star names and be crap, and have no star names and be good. Everton have hyped names in attack but in essence are a very mediocre football team.

Wait, so you agree that there is a gulf between bundesliga and the French league? What was the post about there being no difference all about then?

Yeah of course I agree with that. I was playing devils advocate. My point being that the French league is a target of ridicule but the German league is as equally uncompetitive.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

There's not a right way. We're all arguing varying degrees of wrongness really. We'll never be right because football is so unpredictable at its best.

Its not about unpredictability. If you take into account all the relevant factors youll at least have a solid base for your judgment. That's what I'm stressing on.

 

[JPRouve]

I know the Bundesliga is a better league. To me it is obvious. But it's interesting that when I ask you lot why you answer with

A) the performances in Europe

Fair enough, your side has constantly argued this

B) the quality of the players

This is what I've been trying to argue. There is a gulf in the players

Actually the point B is pretty bad, because the french league has a lot of good players, the problem is with the turnover of players, it's a selling league, as soon as a player does well he is sold which means that the teams are continuously rebuilding.