The relative strength of the Premier League

[Iker Quesadillas]

So fans shouldn't get excited about emerging youth prospects for fear of coming across as gloating?

Nobody said fans shouldn't get excited about emerging youth prospects.

But I'm not sure what is supposed to be impressive about this. Am I supposed to think the PL has entered a new phase because of Phil Foden? Why? There were plenty of great English players in the previous generations.

 

[Bepi]

So fans shouldn't get excited about emerging youth prospects for fear of coming across as gloating? Get over yourself. La Liga had a period when it was the superior league, as did Serie A, now it is patently the PL. Why people get so touchy about this, I'll never know.

Mind, we non-UK based fans can clearly see the PL is the best right now because of wealth, coaches, structures and final product.

The main difference with La Liga and Serie A at their pomp is that such dominance does not translate (not yet…) into England dominating NT football with style or players like Spain and Italy (to a lesser extent… even Germany, when Dortmund was up there with Bayern a few years ago and Bundesliga less one-sided) did. Then, our amusement: you are actually selling tickets or cakes while feeling the masters of the lunapark, yet only being the butlers?

…devil’s advocate, if you like, this discussion over here always has a nationalistic trait and the be it, let’s call a spade a spade: when will England convert such dominance in a WC or Euro trophy? In six months time, if the pragmatic Southgate (Brendan Rodgers or Moyes level as a coach, or even less) makes his highly talented side play more like City and Liverpool than Leicester and West Ham…

 

[RobinLFC]

…devil’s advocate, if you like, this discussion over here always has a nationalistic trait and the be it, let’s call a spade a spade: when will England convert such dominance in a WC or Euro trophy? In six months time, if the pragmatic Southgate (Brendan Rodgers or Moyes level as a coach, or even less) makes his highly talented side play more like City and Liverpool than Leicester and West Ham…

La Liga or Serie A dominance translates into NT success because there's a lot more Italian and Spanish players in their domestic leagues. The Premier League being the dominant domestic league doesn't translate into England success because, as the most attractive league to play in generally speaking, it doesn't mean that English talent is on hand.

Liverpool's starting XI usually includes one Englishman and he's not even a certainty for England. City's starting XI includes one, two or three Englishman, none of them are certainties for England. If Real Madrid and Barcelona are on top of their game, they can usually combine for a full Spanish starting XI. If Bayern are, you almost have a full national Germany team (just looking at this weekend's fixture, you have Neuer, Kimmich, Goretzka, Müller, Gnabry, Süle, Sané and Musiala).

 

[Bepi]

La Liga or Serie A dominance translates into NT success because there's a lot more Italian and Spanish players in their domestic leagues. The Premier League being the dominant domestic league doesn't translate into England success because, as the most attractive league to play in generally speaking, it doesn't mean that English talent is on hand.

Liverpool's starting XI usually includes one Englishman and he's not even a certainty for England. City's starting XI includes one, two or three Englishman, none of them are certainties for England. If Real Madrid and Barcelona are on top of their game, they can usually combine for a full Spanish starting XI. If Bayern are, you almost have a full national Germany team (just looking at this weekend's fixture, you have Neuer, Kimmich, Goretzka, Müller, Gnabry, Süle, Sané and Musiala).

…which only reinforces my devils’ argument, doesn’t it? Feeling the masters and being the butlers…

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

La Liga had a period when it was the superior league, as did Serie A, now it is patently the PL. Why people get so touchy about this, I'll never know.

People aren't touchy, they just don't like bad arguments. This thread was made in 2016. The first post says this:

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....

This is Manchester United, currently (and comfortably) fifth.
---------------DDG-------------
Darmian- Smalling – Blind – Young
------------Carrick---Schniderlin-------
Martial-------Mata---------Memphis
---------------Rooney-------------
Subs: Romero, Jones, Lingard, Herrera, Shaw, Valencia, Fellaini

Now all of these players are recognized internationals and we have some proper world class talent. DDG, Martial and Smalling the real stand outs.

Sevilla (Spanish)
---------------------Rico--------------
Coke – Rami – Kolodziejczak – Tremoulinas
---------------N’zonzi-------------------
Vitolo--------Krohn-Delhi----Konoplayanka-
------------Gameiro----------Llorente-------------
Subs: Soria, Banega, Krychowiak, Reyes, Mariano, Immobile, Iborra.
Does this not suggest to anyone right away the quality of the respective leagues?

Again, the post was made in 2016. A few months later, Real Madrid would win their first of three consecutive CL titles (with Spanish teams having won the previous two CL finals). Sevilla would also win the Europa League final in 2016, which they won again in 2018-2019. Their manager Emery would also win it again with Villareal last season. The recognized internationals of United mostly floundered. Cabaye moved to Dubai two years later. Lukaku is a meme player here.

I'm sorry, but you have to laugh.

 

[goptun]

Mind, we non-UK based fans can clearly see the PL is the best right now because of wealth, coaches, structures and final product.

The main difference with La Liga and Serie A at their pomp is that such dominance does not translate (not yet…) into England dominating NT football with style or players like Spain and Italy (to a lesser extent… even Germany, when Dortmund was up there with Bayern a few years ago and Bundesliga less one-sided) did. Then, our amusement: you are actually selling tickets or cakes while feeling the masters of the lunapark, yet only being the butlers?

…devil’s advocate, if you like, this discussion over here always has a nationalistic trait and the be it, let’s call a spade a spade: when will England convert such dominance in a WC or Euro trophy? In six months time, if the pragmatic Southgate (Brendan Rodgers or Moyes level as a coach, or even less) makes his highly talented side play more like City and Liverpool than Leicester and West Ham…

I'm confused. Serie A's period of dominance in terms of being the top league in club football was the 90's. How many WC or Euro trophy's did the Italian NT win in this period?

 

[RobinLFC]

…which only reinforces my devils’ argument, doesn’t it? Feeling the masters and being the butlers…

Not really sure I fully understood that argument - do you mean they feel like they're the dop dogs while in fact they aren't? I think it's one thing to be proud or to argue that the PL is the best / most competitive / most interesting league, but another to recognize that that doesn't really reflect the level of the English NT. They are good though, and potentially could be as good as Italy and/or Spain (imo) if they had a similarly top level manager instead of Southgate.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

La Liga or Serie A dominance translates into NT success because there's a lot more Italian and Spanish players in their domestic leagues. The Premier League being the dominant domestic league doesn't translate into England success because, as the most attractive league to play in generally speaking, it doesn't mean that English talent is on hand.

Liverpool's starting XI usually includes one Englishman and he's not even a certainty for England. City's starting XI includes one, two or three Englishman, none of them are certainties for England. If Real Madrid and Barcelona are on top of their game, they can usually combine for a full Spanish starting XI. If Bayern are, you almost have a full national Germany team (just looking at this weekend's fixture, you have Neuer, Kimmich, Goretzka, Müller, Gnabry, Süle, Sané and Musiala).

In last seasons Champions League final 7 English players started the game and all play for England. 4 of them started the European Championship final for England later that year, 2 were on the bench and Foden was injured. It depends what you call international success. If you only class that as winning a major tournament (a very narrow definition of success) ((remember how your own countrymen celebrated finishing 3rd at the World Cup)) then your point is correct. I think if you're a bit more sensible then England having 7 starting players in a Champions League final and then reaching a major international final with all those players, except for Chilwell, contributing to that run is exactly what you'd expect to happen by your own measures.

Real Madrid play with a similar number of native players to the English sides (they have money and pull like English sides), this was true during their 'threepeat' era. They actually started their recent games against Chelsea with the same number of native players - 2. Unlike Chelsea though their native players are lesser lights in their side.

 

[Zehner]

La Liga or Serie A dominance translates into NT success because there's a lot more Italian and Spanish players in their domestic leagues. The Premier League being the dominant domestic league doesn't translate into England success because, as the most attractive league to play in generally speaking, it doesn't mean that English talent is on hand.

Liverpool's starting XI usually includes one Englishman and he's not even a certainty for England. City's starting XI includes one, two or three Englishman, none of them are certainties for England. If Real Madrid and Barcelona are on top of their game, they can usually combine for a full Spanish starting XI. If Bayern are, you almost have a full national Germany team (just looking at this weekend's fixture, you have Neuer, Kimmich, Goretzka, Müller, Gnabry, Süle, Sané and Musiala).

Liverpool and City live off synergies. That's why complementary players like Henderson look very good and great system players like Trent or Foden look exceptional. The issue is that Southgate is an old school manager and doesn't know how to replicate these synergies and get more out of his team than the sum of it's parts. Similarly to how United signs great players only for them to become bad.

It's a real dilemma for England since the individual quality is high enough to get results too good to fire Southgate.

 

[Bepi]

I'm confused. Serie A's period of dominance in terms of being the top league in club football was the 90's. How many WC or Euro trophy's did the Italian NT win in this period?

We had deep runs in WC 1982 (champs), 1990 at home (semis), 1994 (final lost on pens), Euro 2000 (final lost on golden goal)… and won WC 2006 with half the Italian squad plus 1/3 France squad (both the finalists) coming from the almighty Moggi/Juventus model. That same year 2006 we had the farcical Calciopoli dethronising that kingdom and Italian football went into wilderness…

even as such, with two notable exceptions of Euro 2014 (final) and Euro 2020 (you know that final, right? The one against the masters of club football, against the more talented side, in their packed home, with them leading 1-0 after three minutes… what could go wrong from there when you are used to play like City and Liverpool instead of Leicester or West Ham? Again, we will see in six months time).

 

[MO_Football92]

People aren't touchy, they just don't like bad arguments. This thread was made in 2016. The first post says this:


Again, the post was made in 2016. A few months later, Real Madrid would win their first of three consecutive CL titles (with Spanish teams having won the previous two CL finals). Sevilla would also win the Europa League final in 2016, which they won again in 2018-2019. Their manager Emery would also win it again with Villareal last season. The recognized internationals of United mostly floundered. Cabaye moved to Dubai two years later. Lukaku is a meme player here.

I'm sorry, but you have to laugh.

Absolutely spot on.

 

[RobinLFC]

In last seasons Champions League final 7 English players started the game and all play for England. 4 of them started the European Championship final for England later that year, 2 were on the bench and Foden was injured. It depends what you call international success. If you only class that as winning a major tournament (a very narrow definition of success) ((remember how your own countrymen celebrated finishing 3rd at the World Cup)) then your point is correct. I think if you're a bit more sensible then England having 7 starting players in a Champions League final and then reaching a major international final with all those players, except for Chilwell, contributing to that run is exactly what you'd expect to happen by your own measures.

Real Madrid play with a similar number of native players to the English sides (they have money and pull like English sides), this was true during their 'threepeat' era. They actually started their recent games against Chelsea with the same number of native players - 2. Unlike Chelsea though their native players are lesser lights in their side.

I thought the initial discussion Bepi referred to was about international success at major tournaments, not at the CL stage, that's why I focused on that particular point.

Like I said, just my opinion of course. I think England's current crop of players is extremely talented and can do great things at a WC or EC, but despite of Southgate, not because of him. Your run-in was as easy as they come as well, compared to Italy for example (Belgium and Spain compared to Ukraine and Denmark). And if you're comparing City and Liverpool (clearly a few tiers ahead of Chelsea imo) to the likes of Barca, Juventus, Bayern, ... then you easily see what I meant about not having national players in their starting XI.

By the way I thought celebrating 3th place like Belgium did was strange, personally I thought there was nothing to cheer about - a missed opportunity once again rather than something which should've been celebrated, even though it was our best ever finish.

 

[Bepi]

I thought the initial discussion Bepi referred to was about international success at major tournaments, not at the CL stage, that's why I focused on that particular point.

Like I said, just my opinion of course. I think England's current crop of players is extremely talented and can do great things at a WC or EC, but despite of Southgate, not because of him. Your run-in was as easy as they come as well, compared to Italy for example (Belgium and Spain compared to Ukraine and Denmark). And if you're comparing City and Liverpool (clearly a few tiers ahead of Chelsea imo) to the likes of Barca, Juventus, Bayern, ... then you easily see what I meant about not having national players in their starting XI.

By the way I thought celebrating 3th place like Belgium did was strange, personally I thought there was nothing to cheer about - a missed opportunity once again rather than something which should've been celebrated, even though it was our best ever finish.

Yeah, that’s the only missing piece in the current PL dominance jigsaw and, for the sake of my devil’s argument perspective, the most sensible one to a number of fans happily confusing PL football (a global, agnostic circus conveniently located where it can attract and move the most monies) with England football (with its local culture and heritage a la Southgate, better represented by mid-table level clubs).

Other topics were debating the rise of a new crop of English managers, yet United goes for just another random bloke from abroad instead of hiring a Potter, a Howe or a… Dyche.

 

[Righteous Steps]

Yeah, that’s the only missing piece in the current PL dominance jigsaw and, for the sake of my devil’s argument perspective, the most sensible one to a number of fans happily confusing PL football (a global, agnostic circus conveniently located where it can attract and move the most monies) with England football (with its local culture and heritage a la Southgate, better represented by mid-table level clubs).

Other topics were debating the rise of a new crop of English managers, yet United goes for just another random bloke from abroad instead of hiring a Potter, a Howe or a… Dyche.

England went to the Euro finals just last year so I think that part is catching up also, a manager like Potter or Howe instead of Southgate and they win the whole thing possibly.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

I thought the initial discussion Bepi referred to was about international success at major tournaments, not at the CL stage, that's why I focused on that particular point.

Like I said, just my opinion of course. I think England's current crop of players is extremely talented and can do great things at a WC or EC, but despite of Southgate, not because of him. Your run-in was as easy as they come as well, compared to Italy for example (Belgium and Spain compared to Ukraine and Denmark). And if you're comparing City and Liverpool (clearly a few tiers ahead of Chelsea imo) to the likes of Barca, Juventus, Bayern, ... then you easily see what I meant about not having national players in their starting XI.

By the way I thought celebrating 3th place like Belgium did was strange, personally I thought there was nothing to cheer about - a missed opportunity once again rather than something which should've been celebrated, even though it was our best ever finish.

I think what @Bepi was trying to say is that when other leagues have been strong i.e. Italy and Spain their dominance has been reflected by international football success.

This was a badly flawed point because whilst it works for the recent Spanish side it does not work for Italy. In 1982 Italy was the 14th ranked league in Europe by club performance! Roma were knocked out in the second round of the CWC by Porto. Napoli were knocked out in the first round of the UEFA Cup by Radnicki Nis and Juventus were knocked out in the second round of the European Cup by Anderlecht. Italian sides were completely rubbish in Europe that season but went on to win the World Cup. In 2006 Italy was the third ranked league in Europe. In 2020 Italy was the third ranked league. When Italy actually had the best league they didn't win any international titles. Bepi's workaround for this was a laughable one where he lauded 'deep runs' in competitions as a measure of success by Italy at that time, like the time they lost a major international final on penalties (sound familiar?). Essentially shifting the goalposts to unwittingly defeat his own point!

The basic logical flaw in this line of argument is that the narrative is completely reversed if England would've won a penalty shootout. It has no basis in common sense. If you want to make a 'you're first or last' argument then fine but I think it's stupid.

If what you're trying to say is that England are undermined by not having a high concentration of players in a small number of teams (meaning that they don't play together often enough) like Spain recently and Germany then that's a point I think that's more credible. That said, the last time the English league was very strong England did have most of it's best players concentrated in 3 sides but the international performances were poor.

I think Bepi's point was more that England don't have enough players playing at a high level in European club football though. Again a poor argument. Before Euro 2020 James, Mount, Chilwell, Walker, Foden, Stones, Sterling, Shaw, Rashford and Maguire (I include Maguire because he would've played if it weren't for an injury) played in one of the two major European club finals.

That takes us back to proving bepi's original point wrong. Given the prevalence of English players competing at the highest level of European club football a 'deep run' for the England national team at Euro 2020 wasn't a surprise.

 

[RobinLFC]

If what you're trying to say is that England are undermined by not having a high concentration of players in a small number of teams (meaning that they don't play together often enough) like Spain recently and Germany then that's a point I think that's more credible. That said, the last time the English league was very strong England did have most of it's best players concentrated in 3 sides but the international performances were poor.

This is what I was aiming at - if Madrid and Barca, or Bayern, are strong, chances are way higher than Spain and Germany are stronger as well because they usually make up more than half the NT. In England it's scattered over all the top clubs, so City and Liverpool dominating domestically (and/or in Europe) has a lesser correlation with England doing well at major tournaments (which they obviously did last year of course).

 

[Classical Mechanic]

This is what I was aiming at - if Madrid and Barca, or Bayern, are strong, chances are way higher than Spain and Germany are stronger as well because they usually make up more than half the NT. In England it's scattered over all the top clubs, so City and Liverpool dominating domestically (and/or in Europe) has a lesser correlation with England doing well at major tournaments (which they obviously did last year of course).

OK fair enough.

 

[Bepi]

I think what @Bepi was trying to say is that when other leagues have been strong i.e. Italy and Spain their dominance has been reflected by international football success.

This was a badly flawed point because whilst it works for the recent Spanish side it does not work for Italy. In 1982 Italy was the 14th ranked league in Europe by club performance! Roma were knocked out in the second round of the CWC by Porto. Napoli were knocked out in the first round of the UEFA Cup by Radnicki Nis and Juventus were knocked out in the second round of the European Cup by Anderlecht. Italian sides were completely rubbish in Europe that season but went on to win the World Cup. In 2006 Italy was the third ranked league in Europe. In 2020 Italy was the third ranked league. When Italy actually had the best league they didn't win any international titles. Bepi's workaround for this was a laughable one where he lauded 'deep runs' in competitions as a measure of success by Italy at that time, like the time they lost a major international final on penalties (sound familiar?). Essentially shifting the goalposts to unwittingly defeat his own point!

The basic logical flaw in this line of argument is that the narrative is completely reversed if England would've won a penalty shootout. It has no basis in common sense. If you want to make a 'you're first or last' argument then fine but I think it's stupid.

If what you're trying to say is that England are undermined by not having a high concentration of players in a small number of teams (meaning that they don't play together often enough) like Spain recently and Germany then that's a point I think that's more credible. That said, the last time the English league was very strong England did have most of it's best players concentrated in 3 sides but the international performances were poor.

I think Bepi's point was more that England don't have enough players playing at a high level in European club football though. Again a poor argument. Before Euro 2020 James, Mount, Chilwell, Walker, Foden, Stones, Sterling, Shaw, Rashford and Maguire (I include Maguire because he would've played if it weren't for an injury) played in one of the two major European club finals.

That takes us back to proving bepi's original point wrong. Given the prevalence of English players competing at the highest level of European club football a 'deep run' for the England national team at Euro 2020 wasn't a surprise.

Much simpler than that: I was just arguing that a number of fans think top PL football = top England football, which is not the case in a number of departments. Therefore, such bragging amuses non-UK based fans.

 

[giorno]

I'm sorry, but you have to laugh.

And we did

Until 2019

 

[Tavern in the town]

There’s an article in the Athletic today asking this very question. Every single analytical measure or stats based study shows the Premier League is the strongest it’s ever been and is miles ahead of other leagues. According to a Global Index Model developed by a Dutch based analytics company 54 of the top 100 players in the world play in the Premier League, and 94 of the top 200. It’s daft to suggest the league is anything but ridiculously strong at the moment.

 

[The Corinthian]

I'm confused. Serie A's period of dominance in terms of being the top league in club football was the 90's. How many WC or Euro trophy's did the Italian NT win in this period?

Well, since the 88/89 season, there was an Italian team in the final every year of the CL up until the 98/99 season other than the 90/91 season. And let’s be honest, there would have been an Italian team in the final that year were it not for a heroic performance from a certain Roy Keane.

No other league can match that level of dominance to my knowledge.

 

[GuybrushThreepwood]

In the golden days of Serie A, didn’t genuinely world class players spend some of their prime years at mid-table clubs?

In modern times, I still find the strength and performances of many of the La Liga clubs, relative to their financial resources and ‘Euro for Euro’, to be very impressive, whether it has been Levante about 10 year or so, Alaves a few years ago, Granada also fairly recently etc. That’s before we get to the likes of Villarreal.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

There’s an article in the Athletic today asking this very question.

The article says:

The Premier League shared its income more equitably than the other big leagues, which either let the biggest clubs on their patches do their own media-rights deals or just let them take huge slices of the centralised cake. This meant the English league had greater depth than those in Germany, France, Italy and Spain, but the top sides in those leagues could easily go toe-to-toe with the Premier League’s elite for top talent. This meant Barcelona could afford a front line of Lionel Messi, Luis Suarez and Neymar, while Real Madrid could put Gareth Bale, Karim Benzema and Cristiano Ronaldo, all in their peak, on the park.

This puts too much emphasis on money IMO. The PL could afford CR7. He was there. He just didn't want to be there anymore. Suarez wanted to move to Arsenal; Liverpool didn't let him. Modric wanted to move to Chelsea; Spurs didn't let him. Bale could have moved to another PL club; I imagine Spurs didn't want that either.

 

[goptun]

I think what @Bepi was trying to say is that when other leagues have been strong i.e. Italy and Spain their dominance has been reflected by international football success.

This was a badly flawed point because whilst it works for the recent Spanish side it does not work for Italy. In 1982 Italy was the 14th ranked league in Europe by club performance! Roma were knocked out in the second round of the CWC by Porto. Napoli were knocked out in the first round of the UEFA Cup by Radnicki Nis and Juventus were knocked out in the second round of the European Cup by Anderlecht. Italian sides were completely rubbish in Europe that season but went on to win the World Cup. In 2006 Italy was the third ranked league in Europe. In 2020 Italy was the third ranked league. When Italy actually had the best league they didn't win any international titles. Bepi's workaround for this was a laughable one where he lauded 'deep runs' in competitions as a measure of success by Italy at that time, like the time they lost a major international final on penalties (sound familiar?). Essentially shifting the goalposts to unwittingly defeat his own point!

The basic logical flaw in this line of argument is that the narrative is completely reversed if England would've won a penalty shootout. It has no basis in common sense. If you want to make a 'you're first or last' argument then fine but I think it's stupid.

If what you're trying to say is that England are undermined by not having a high concentration of players in a small number of teams (meaning that they don't play together often enough) like Spain recently and Germany then that's a point I think that's more credible. That said, the last time the English league was very strong England did have most of it's best players concentrated in 3 sides but the international performances were poor.

I think Bepi's point was more that England don't have enough players playing at a high level in European club football though. Again a poor argument. Before Euro 2020 James, Mount, Chilwell, Walker, Foden, Stones, Sterling, Shaw, Rashford and Maguire (I include Maguire because he would've played if it weren't for an injury) played in one of the two major European club finals.

That takes us back to proving bepi's original point wrong. Given the prevalence of English players competing at the highest level of European club football a 'deep run' for the England national team at Euro 2020 wasn't a surprise.

Fantastic post.

 

[RedRonaldo]

From my time of watching football:

90’s - Serie A
99-03 - very close among top 3
04-08 - PL
08-18 - LL
18 onwards - PL

 

[PedroMendez]

The article says:



This puts too much emphasis on money IMO. The PL could afford CR7. He was there. He just didn't want to be there anymore. Suarez wanted to move to Arsenal; Liverpool didn't let him. Modric wanted to move to Chelsea; Spurs didn't let him. Bale could have moved to another PL club; I imagine Spurs didn't want that either.

Focusing on money as one relevant category is perfectly fine, but these arguments seem to always focus on the aspect that tells a convenient narrative and not the one that really matters. The whole “fair money distribution” and “strength in depth” schtick is at the very least overstated. The EPL is currently the best league in the world because three English clubs are in the top5-6 teams in the world with both City and Liverpool having a decent claim to be top2. Depending on the CL results this evaluation might shift, but overall, City, Liverpool and Chelsea are elite clubs and part of a group of top favorites in the CL, while other leagues have one or no such team.

Two of the English teams are “investor teams”, that are not all that bothered by the TV money distribution one way or another. The EPL has currently three top teams, because two have/had owners, that injected consistently massive amounts of funds into them - in both cases well above a billion £ only on players - while having overall good management. That’s the difference. On top of that came COVID, that didn’t hurt these teams as much as many of their competitors. Yes, the EPL would have more money without these teams, but the difference would be far less relevant. On the flip side, if any league would attract similar investors, it would be in a similar position.

EPL clubs still need to deliver and win a couple of international titles to back up these claims, but imo the EPL is undoubtedly the strongest league in the world at the moment. Yet, the reason for that is not the more equitable TV money distribution, but Roman, Mansour and in the future MbS. Everyone has to decide on their own if that’s really something to celebrate.

 

[kaiser1]

The only thing that needs to change is the BL should apply an equal share of TV broadcast revenue between all clubs, rather than the larger share going to the bigger clubs, similar to what it is in the EPL. That would go a long way to reduce disparity.

Another thing which the writer for some reason doesn't mention is that Covid hit the BL a lot more than other leagues because 1) They had lockdowns for longer than other leagues, it's only now that BL clubs have been allowed to have full capacity while the EPL had full capacity from the start of this season and 2) Due to 50+1, they can't get bailouts from their rich owners.

How is the TV money being shared in Bundesliga currently vs the EPL? Is there a chart that shows the different amount each Bundesliga team gets and the amount each EPL team gets at end of every season from TV rights

 

[kaiser1]

Focusing on money as one relevant category is perfectly fine, but these arguments seem to always focus on the aspect that tells a convenient narrative and not the one that really matters. The whole “fair money distribution” and “strength in depth” schtick is at the very least overstated. The EPL is currently the best league in the world because three English clubs are in the top5-6 teams in the world with both City and Liverpool having a decent claim to be top2. Depending on the CL results this evaluation might shift, but overall, City, Liverpool and Chelsea are elite clubs and part of a group of top favorites in the CL, while other leagues have one or no such team.

Two of the English teams are “investor teams”, that are not all that bothered by the TV money distribution one way or another. The EPL has currently three top teams, because two have/had owners, that injected consistently massive amounts of funds into them - in both cases well above a billion £ only on players - while having overall good management. That’s the difference. On top of that came COVID, that didn’t hurt these teams as much as many of their competitors. Yes, the EPL would have more money without these teams, but the difference would be far less relevant. On the flip side, if any league would attract similar investors, it would be in a similar position.

EPL clubs still need to deliver and win a couple of international titles to back up these claims, but imo the EPL is undoubtedly the strongest league in the world at the moment. Yet, the reason for that is not the more equitable TV money distribution, but Roman, Mansour and in the future MbS. Everyone has to decide on their own if that’s really something to celebrate.

I totally agree. The TV distribution argument is not a sound one because the Chelsea, City could care less about how much they are getting in TV money and Newcastle will join that league soon
Where they make it is from commercial (Man Utd, Liverpool) or sugar daddy(City and Chelsea)
When Roman is rumored to be selling, Most Chelsea fans were hoping it would be another generous moneybag. They are not hoping on the TV money to keep them competitive

 

[giorno]

The article says:



This puts too much emphasis on money IMO. The PL could afford CR7. He was there. He just didn't want to be there anymore. Suarez wanted to move to Arsenal; Liverpool didn't let him. Modric wanted to move to Chelsea; Spurs didn't let him. Bale could have moved to another PL club; I imagine Spurs didn't want that either.

Whole article was actually pretty good, well researched and made use of multiple data studies. And it pretty much said what has been obvious all along: the PL took over in 18/19 and has pulled away ever since. These days both the top 3 and the bottom half of the PL are significantly better than the top 3 and bottom half in the other leagues. Midtable is closer though the PL still has an edge

 

[FootballHQ]

In the golden days of Serie A, didn’t genuinely world class players spend some of their prime years at mid-table clubs?

In modern times, I still find the strength and performances of many of the La Liga clubs, relative to their financial resources and ‘Euro for Euro’, to be very impressive, whether it has been Levante about 10 year or so, Alaves a few years ago, Granada also fairly recently etc. That’s before we get to the likes of Villarreal.

Getafe knocked out Ajax a few years back aswell didn't they and ran Inter Milan very close over two legs in the europa.

I think this is probably the strongest depth to prem in europe we've ever seen. Before we've had annual 3 of 4 in CL SF in late 2000s (Man. United, Liverpool, Chelsea and sometimes Arsenal) but beyond that wasn't a huge amount happening in europe bar Fulham's brillliant run to the 2010 Uefa cup final.

Now aswell as likelihood of another all English final in CL, there's a fair chance West Ham and Leicester could make the finals of their respective european competitions so feels like quality and squad size is filtering down at long last which is consequence of the vast money.

I do wonder if Rodgers or Moyes actually winning a european trophy would get either back on the radar of major european clubs or will the stigma of British coaches abroad still persist?

 

[Classical Mechanic]

I think the recent Spanish dominance was the strongest in the history of football. They won three major international tournaments on the bounce whilst La Liga totally dominated European club football. There was one season where no Spanish side lost a game in the CL or EL against a non-Spanish side.

 

[SirAnderson]

There shall be an All-Spanish CL final this season to put this thread on pause.

 

[Lecland07]

I think the recent Spanish dominance was the strongest in the history of football. They won three major international tournaments on the bounce whilst La Liga totally dominated European club football. There was one season where no Spanish side lost a game in the CL or EL against a non-Spanish side.

In Europe, yes, but you could argue Brazil from 1958 to 1963 for most dominant ever - won both world cups in this period. Also, the intercontinental cup was won twice by Santos, in 62 and 63.

They also won the world cup in 1970. Could count as the same period, so three world cups out of four. But they didn't do as well in the intercontinental cup after the Santos period.

 

[Charrockero]

I think the recent Spanish dominance was the strongest in the history of football. They won three major international tournaments on the bounce whilst La Liga totally dominated European club football. There was one season where no Spanish side lost a game in the CL or EL against a non-Spanish side.

I find it funny that people say Spanish dominance when it actually means Real Madrid dominance. Europa League wins do count but I see that history normally puts all teams under their place... Valencia in 2000 and 2001 and Atletico in 2014 and 2016 are like a reminder of that IMO.

 

[bosnian_red]

I find it funny that people say Spanish dominance when it actually means Real Madrid dominance. Europa League wins do count but I see that history normally puts all teams under their place... Valencia in 2000 and 2001 and Atletico in 2014 and 2016 are like a reminder of that IMO.

Wasn't exactly just real Madrid dominance? Between 2008/09-2017/2018 (10 seasons), Barcelona won the CL 3 times and made the semi's another 3 times, Real Madrid won it 4 times and made the semi's another 4 times. Atletico Madrid were runners up twice and made the semi final 1 other time. They won the Europa League 3 times. Sevilla won the Europa League 3 times. Bilbao a runner up once.

In 10 years, 7 CL wins, 9 times finalists, 17 times semi finalists. 6 Europa League wins, 7 finalists. They pretty much dominated until Pep and Klopp got going in the prem and Ronaldo and Messi started declining.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

I find it funny that people say Spanish dominance when it actually means Real Madrid dominance. Europa League wins do count but I see that history normally puts all teams under their place... Valencia in 2000 and 2001 and Atletico in 2014 and 2016 are like a reminder of that IMO.

Not entirely sure what you mean but Barcelona won the CL three times in the period that Spain won their 3 international trophies.

It is interesting that Real and Barca are the only two Spanish sides to have ever won the European Cup or Champions League.

In Europe, yes, but you could argue Brazil from 1958 to 1963 for most dominant ever - won both world cups in this period. Also, the intercontinental cup was won twice by Santos, in 62 and 63.

They also won the world cup in 1970. Could count as the same period, so three world cups out of four. But they didn't do as well in the intercontinental cup after the Santos period.

Fair argument.

 

[giorno]

Spanish teams record across the 13-14 to 15/16 record is insane. Won like 70% of all games, and something silly like 42-3 in KO rounds against non-spanish sides

 

[adexkola]

If United beat Madrid, Barcelona and Atletico to win the CL this would have been bumped.

What's the verdict?

Go!

 

[kouroux]

The PL is good entertainment for sure but it's also very overrated by the media and ex players.
Villareal weren't ridiculous vs Liverpool, Atletico had some chances vs Man City.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Real Madrid are officially PL champions 21-22, give the medals back City.