The relative strength of the Premier League
- Thread starter Wumminator
- Start date
It did not prevent Top 14 teams to dominate in Europe either and the Top 14 is the very close to the PL.
Yeah. I'd say they're of an equivalent quality to Kane and Wilshere.
At least I answered your question and ended the wonder.
On paper Newcastle and Sunderland don't have better teams, I have seen a lot of their players outside of England and they are shite. Sissoko is a disgrace, Kazri is a dross, Mitrovic an embarassment, Shaqiri was okay but he barely makes a difference and the list continue.
Chelsea capitulated under Mourinho. They were a shadow of their former self, their best players simply played like mid table players this season. You yourself have constantly on here stated how awful a job Mourinho did with them. Which simply goes alongside the argument myself and others have used about Spanish teams being coached better. As in, it's a huge aspect of the teams, not just money spent and their teams being better on paper.
Chelsea didn't even improve under Hiddink, their squad has simply massively underperformed this season.
Also, you can easily contradict your Chelsea argument with one word - Leicester.
Depends what outcome you want. Right now the Premier League is a money making machine that gives a shitload of money from English football fans to foreign club owners and average players. The overall quality is rather poor considering how much money goes into the league and the excitement comes not through quality but through unpredictability because of so many awful decisions made at clubs like United, Chelsea, City. If you're happy with all that, it's not a problem at all. I fully agree that it's exciting, I had fun watching Leicester win the league.
It'll change though. Some of the rich teams will get it right eventually and the financial gap between the top and the bottom in England is still way too big. The tv deal doesn't change that considering the ever growing importance of commercial deals compared to matchday and tv income.
To use an example, let's compare United to the smaller teams in England, let's take the 7th highest team in terms of revenue, the richest one outside of the top 6.
The numbers for last season were:
Manchester United 395.2m (200.8m from commercial revenue = 51%)
Newcastle 128.8m (24.9m from commercial revenue = 19%)
5 years before that, the richest English team outside of the top 6 was Aston Villa, the numbers:
Manchester United 286.m (81,4m from commercial revenue = 28%)
Aston Villa 89.6m (13.1m from commercial revenue = 15%)
Do you see the problem? The increasing tv deals over the last 5 years didn't actually change anything in the financial gap between United and English midtable clubs. And the same will be true with the new tv deal as well. The smaller clubs continue to struggle to create money through commercial deals while the share of the commercial revenue stream at the top clubs grew in importance in a crazy way. It's the same problem in Germany, where Bayern's financial dominance is pretty much solely based on commercial revenue (70% of the financial gap between Bayern and Dortmund is from the difference in their commercial income, the difference through matchday and broadcasting income is minor).
The unpredictablity you see right now is because the top teams collectively fecked up. It might appear like a crazy coincidence, but it's still what happened. The whole narrative that the increasing tv deals create a financial equality that will lead to consistent unpredictabilty is massively flawed.
Smaller English clubs will continue to struggle to attract actual quality players, because most quality and ambitious players still look for an interesting overall package. They rather play for Sevilla on good money than for Newcastle on great money. It's why English midtable clubs have to overpay so massively for average players. Of course you can continue to believe that Stoke's attack is full of great players that would be stars in other leagues rather than face the reality that they're all failed talents who went for the biggest paycheck because they weren't good enough to play for a good side in any of the top leagues anyway.
The English top clubs will fix their problems and the unpredictability you enjoy right now will be replaced by actual elite level football at the top in England again. It might take another year or two to get out of the slump, but it'll happen. It's just the way it is and it's not the first league where top teams struggled collectively for a few years even though it should be unlikely to happen.
Incredible.
Sissoko "is a disgrace" and you'd rather have a 40 year old running your midfield.
Shaqiri is "okay" and you'd rather have a 29 year old Nabil El Zhar (spent five years in the Prem doing nothing) playing for them.
Mitrovic is an embarassment but when Rayo have Bebe, Manucho and a 32 year old Pablo Hernandez playing for them, that's not that bad.
Didn't you recently say you never rated Wilshere as highly as others did on here to prove that you get predictions correct? Now you're saying Kane is at the same level as him?I definitely prefers the cheaper players, why would you spend money on dross.
Great post Balu. Thanks for responding so thoughtfully.
Some issues - "They would rather play for Sevilla on good money than for Newcastle on great money" . Don't think it's the case at all. I think players will mostly go where the money is. Hence the current exodus to the Chinese league and why teams from CL level clubs will leave to lower prem teams this year.
"top teams collectively fecked up" - Don't believe that either sorry. I can see that is how you can spin it, but I can't see that six major massive organisations just fecked up at once. Don't think that would be the case.
Another point I'd raise is that while the gap in the Premier League may grow, what'll happen is that clubs are now not competing just in their league but across Europe. So while United and City have a massive benefit over smaller Prem Clubs, they can only sign so many players and then the rest will flock to the Premier League. So the gap will decrease that way.
I wish I could go into more detail, but alas my morning on RedCafe is coming to an end. I appreciate the fact you put effort into your posts and respond appropriately.
Well when Liverpool beat Dortmund it somehow proved something to you but when they got battered by Sevilla it doesn't. Funny.
It doesn't matter that Liverpool spend a lot of money on Benteke when Sevilla can get a better player for less. The vast gap in quality between Spanish and English players means that English clubs will likely have to spend 5 times more to even have a chance of competing with Spaniards.
You're ridiculous.
I'm saying Wilshere is an equivalent player to someone like Koke.
I have ALWAYS claimed that Europa League and CL is not a fair reflection as too much can happen in those competitions. However, other people didn't view it like this. These people however have yet to tell me what Liverpool beating Dortmund and Villareal mean for this debate.
Serious question - do you genuinely believe United and Chelsea have been good in the league?
Which means you must not really rate Koke, then?
I'm not sure how anyone can't rate Koke, he's a brilliant young player.
I'm sure if he ever moves to the PL you'll rate him.
Sevilla's problem is they play in a very strong league so it's hard to make CL there.
Answer my question about Las Palmas first!
If by equivalent you mean they're both professional footballers, sure....
They're both very technically good players. They're both rated similarly. I'd rather have Koke, but in the grand scheme of the footballing world, they're viewed equally.
I'm amazed that this is stil going. Twigginater is like Teflon.
Literally on the same page
I'm using someone's arguments against them Cina.
Ah yes, the poster who claimed that Stoke were putting themselves into a financial black hole by signing Imbula. How are you do.ob?
Of course. The only fair reflection is not watching the teams play between themselves, it's looking at the amount of money they spend. No football is actually played on the pitch.
They are absolutely not viewed equally and you know it. Wilshere probably gets overrated by the English press, like all English players, but in Europe, there's no comparison.
So you think that the Europa League is a fair barometer?
Are Liverpool better than Villareal and Dortmund then?
They impressed me this season. In fact, they outplayed Barcelona when the two met, and were unlucky to lose, which was pretty amazing.
That's pretty much what I feel you don't know about La Liga, and there's no way you could, because you don't watch it. If these teams were as shit as you think they have no business outplaying the greatest team on the planet with possibly the greatest player the game has seen. But football is so much more than big names and big transfer fees. It's about the collective. It's about the system. It's about a tactic that defeats the other team's tactic. It's about everything encompassed all together which is defined in performances.
Villarreal was out of form and were down to 10 men, they had a great start to the season but I don't think they're 4th best team in Spain at the moment on current form.
Sevilla were also in a very bad form, still managed to beat Liverpool comfortably.
Yep, La Liga is the best league in the world by a fine margin. Sevilla are competing with Real Madrid, Barcelona and Atletico, three teams that are a level or more above anything Premier League has. There's only really 1 CL spot they could possibly get and a lot of very good teams fighting for it.
Wilshere doesn't exist outside of England, he had too much injuries and underperformances.
This is how this thread goes:
Twigg: I don't think the Europa League or Champions league is a valid way of comparing teams. Here is why (With quotes from Mourinho and Bale to back me up)
Others: Ok, but what about THIS match? And these matches?
Twigg: Fair enough, but I don't think that those should count. BTW, using your logic Liverpool are better than Dortmund and Villareal. Man City are on the same level as Barcelona.
Others: Ugh, you just said we COULDN'T use the Europa league, HYPOCRITE!
Twigg: I don't think the Europa League or Champions league is a valid way of comparing teams. Here is why (With quotes from Mourinho and Bale to back me up)
Others: Ok, but what about THIS match? And these matches?
Twigg: Fair enough, but I don't think that those should count. BTW, using your logic Liverpool are better than Dortmund and Villareal. Man City are on the same level as Barcelona.
Others: Ugh, you just said we COULDN'T use the Europa league, HYPOCRITE!
No ambitious player left for China. You get mercenaries who aren't that interested in winning meaningful trophies anymore. It's a huge problem for many English clubs actually. They pay for good talents with an awful attitude and then are surprised why the players don't give a feck and are happy to take huge wages home without putting an effort in. The obvious example were Queens Park Rangers in 2013 when they paid higher wages to their team than Dortmund. Queens Park got relegated, Dortmund finished 2nd in the league and played in the CL final.
It's actually really difficult to find the balance between individual quality and the right attitude. The same player might give it all for Sevilla fighting for EL qualification and for winning trophies while he won't be arsed to put the same effort in fighting for 12th place in England, because his main motivation changed from achieving something great and interesting to just doing his job for money. Does that tell us anything about the quality of the team or the league overall? Often smaller teams benefit from giving playing time to ambitious young talents who want to prove their worth so that they get the move to a bigger club while the same player then struggles with his motivation once he got his move. The new challenge has to be more interesting than the next one for most players.
He hardly exists inside England anymore.
Fair enough for giving me a reason. I don't agree with it, but fair enough.
Not outside of England.
No-one has ever rated Wilshere outside of England or people who watch only EPL.
An average player who had a good game a lifetime ago.
Koke on the other side, has been one of the best midfielders in the world for the last three years. It is ridiculous to compare them. Like comparing Robben to Nani.
It's the only barometer for mid-table quality control and much better than saying team A is better because they spent 30 million more than team B.
I think Liverpool are about par with Villarreal in terms of quality which was evidenced by their encounter, Dortmund are a better than Liverpool but were truly terrible for 30 minutes on the day and are a bit tactically naive (like I also think Barcelona are a better team than Atletico but were worse on the day and not suited to Atletico's game).
It's not really about one off games but the fact that the competition has gone for a very long time and English sides have not been competitive in it while Spanish teams have been winning it and getting very far consistently.