Could a European style "soccer" league survive in the US

[Acsenray]

@Red_Wiggler

I’ve made numerous arguments about how an open system better serves the public by offering more towns/regions teams of their own with a chance of promotion (important point there) and it should be obvious how greater freedom of movement and more employment opportunities would benefit players.

It’s not evident that creating a system with scores more smaller teams in smaller cities is a benefit to the public over having 30 permanent top-flight teams.

Ticket prices would probably be lower, but sports fans might not consider that a benefit in exchange for giving up everything else.

None of us should give one rat’s ass about benefitting the owners, who are the historical primary impediment to us having a better system.

I don’t think anyone has said we should care about the owners’ welfare. The point is that they would have to spend their money to do it—why wouldn’t they just switch back to the current franchise system?

And it seems to me that the English Premier League has been inching closer to an American-style franchise system as a matter of practical effect.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

In what way?

[bump]

@Justin_Bailey

Sure, but you’re ignoring something that many Americans believe… they like having fixed leagues at different levels. Look at baseball, you’ve got…

First, US sports didn’t grow quite as organically as the European leagues did, where each city/neighborhood had a team, and they sort of naturally sifted themselves into a hierarchy of good to bad independent teams. This naturally lends itself to promotion and relegation, as each team’s independent of the others, and can move up or down in the hierarchy without regard to the others.

US minor league systems tend to either be centered around college teams (football/basketball), or are somehow tied to the top level teams. This is either by the entire team (minor league baseball and hockey) or individual players (NBA D-league). There are independent teams in minor league hockey, but they’re relatively rare.

What this means is that the whole promotion/relegation scheme wouldn’t work, as most minor league teams are arranged in a vertical player development chain upward to the major league team. The teams’ purposes are player development for the next step up, not necessarily to win in their own leagues.

For example, the Houston Astros (major league team) are affiliated with the following teams:

AAA - Fresno Grizzlies
AA - Corpus Christi Hooks
Advanced A - Lancaster (CA) Jethawks
A - Quad Cities River Bandits
Short Season A - Tri-City ValleyCats
Rookie: Greenville Astros, GCL Astros, DSL Astros

At each level, the major league team has personnel control, and can move a player from say… one of their rookie league teams to their AAA affiliate at their whim. Or for that matter, send a player from the major league team to AA or AAA ball to say… rehabilitate from injury without taking up a roster slot on the major league team.

Contrast this with say… Venezia in the Italian Lega Pro- they aren’t affiliated with any of the Serie A teams, and as such, could do well and get promoted to Serie B and then Serie A without affecting any kind of team affiliations.

It’s really the farm team systems that would likely be the biggest impediment to a promotion/relegation type system in baseball; since it’s all centered around the major league teams, it doesn’t really help anyone.

[Acsenray]

@bump

First, US sports didn’t grow quite as organically as the European leagues did, where each city/neighborhood had a team, and they sort of naturally sifted themselves into a hierarchy of good to bad independent teams. This naturally lends itself to promotion and relegation, as each team’s independent of the others, and can move up or down in the hierarchy without regard to the others.

I’m not sure that this reflects a correct understanding of how things developed either on America or in Europe.

There was nothing inorganic about the way the system developed in the United States. And, indeed, up to WWII, viable independent local teams existed across the country.

What this means is that the whole promotion/relegation scheme wouldn’t work, as most minor league teams are arranged in a vertical player development chain upward to the major league team.

Obviously, the farm system would have to be changed, shrunk, or eliminated entirely, but that’s a given.

[RickJay]

@amanset

Out of interest, have you been following the Premier League this year? Because one team that certainly won’t win it is Chelsea, who are hovering above the relegation zone after winning last year. And five points clear at the top is the mighty Leicester City.

I had the standings in front of me. We’ll see how things turn out, but Chelsea will move up (though they aren’t going to win) and Leicester City won’t finish first.

And seriously, that’s two teams. Guess who’s second and third and effectively tied for fourth? The usual suspects.

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
This has nothing to do with the system of promotion and relegation and everything to do with the fact that there is no salary cap outside North American sports
[/QUOTE]

Well, maybe. But MLB has no salary cap and the Royals still won the World Series while the Red Sox finished last.

Now, granted, MLB caan’t guarantee a championship to just 3-4 teams by virtue of having a 10-team playoff system whereby a solid club can be out golfing in the first week by virtue of running cold at the wrong time. So even though the big spending LA Dodgers made the playoffs, they didn’t win the big prize, so it (and all North American leagues) has that advantage. Of course, if it was just the #1 team, LA wouldn’t have won that either. They wouldn’t even have finished third.

But with a promotion and relegation system what happens is you devastate the ability of a team that gets relegated to make it back. Suppose Kansas City had been relegated in 2009, the last time they were one of the two worst AL teams (tied with Cleveland, actually, but let’s say the Indians win a relegation playoff game.) Attendance would have collapsed. Royals fans would not have supported a AAA Kansas City Royals the way they did a MLB Kansas City Royals. They would have made far less money and been unable to maintain the scouting and personnel budget of a major league ballclub. There’s just no way that history would have subsequently unfolded in a way that they became the best team in the major leagues around 2014-2015. What built up to that achievement was in part already being a Major League Baseball franchise.

[ISiddiqui]

Promotion and relegation may sound nice in theory (and even then I have my misgivings), but it won’t work in the US. US fans are accustomed to having a static major league, so that even if their franchise has a poor year, it will still be in the top league and have a chance to reach the heights again through the draft (which no European soccer leagues have) and/or free agency. Fans would in no way accept, say, the Cubs to get relegated - and not just Cub fans, but the fans of the Cardinals and other rivals would be aghast.

As stated earlier, American fans are regional fans - one of the reasons being the vast distances in the US. The proof of this is look at college football fanbases: living in Georgia, I can tell you for a fact that people who went to Georgia State or other smaller schools (though Georgia State now has a college football team in 1A) are strong supporters of the University of Georgia. Why? Because that is the big team in the region. So regardless of if they went to a smaller school, they back the regional ‘major league’ team.

[Justin_Bailey]

@Red_Wiggler

I’ve made numerous arguments about how an open system better serves the public by offering more towns/regions teams of their own with a chance of promotion (important point there) and it should be obvious how greater freedom of movement and more employment opportunities would benefit players.

Again, these small (often, very small) regions already have minor league teams. And that’s because they don’t have the population to support anything close to an MLB team.

@bump

First, US sports didn’t grow quite as organically as the European leagues did, where each city/neighborhood had a team, and they sort of naturally sifted themselves into a hierarchy of good to bad independent teams.

This is exactly how the US leagues formed. But again, it happened a century-and-a-half ago. The US system isn’t just entrenched, but entrenched over generations.

[RickJay]

@Justin_Bailey

Again, these small (often, very small) regions already have minor league teams. And that’s because they don’t have the population to support anything close to an MLB team.

This has been explained to Red Wiggler many, many times.

The way things are is an inherent part of sports culture. North American professional sports are the way they are because of things that happened well over 120 years ago (MLB is the grandfather of all pro sports in North America and the model they’re all copied on.) As a result, that’s the way people in North America prefer their pro sports. European leagues have used relegation and promotion for decades, and so that’s how Europeans prefer the sport. One system is not “better” than the other, and calling one system “cowardly” suggests an unfamilarity with what that word means.

[Red_Wiggler]

@RickJay

This has been explained to Red Wiggler many, many times.

The way things are is an inherent part of sports culture. North American professional sports are the way they are because of things that happened well over 120 years ago (MLB is the grandfather of all pro sports in North America and the model they’re all copied on.) As a result, that’s the way people in North America prefer their pro sports. European leagues have used relegation and promotion for decades, and so that’s how Europeans prefer the sport. One system is not “better” than the other, and calling one system “cowardly” suggests an unfamilarity with what that word means.

I don’t need conventional thinking explained to me, thank you. I’m a born and bred Murican who thinks we do things in a second rate way. Unless you’re a team owner. Then your monopoly status is pretty dang wonderful.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@RickJay

But with a promotion and relegation system what happens is you devastate the ability of a team that gets relegated to make it back.

But I gave you recent examples of teams who did just that in each of the major European leagues.

[ISiddiqui]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

But I gave you recent examples of teams who did just that in each of the major European leagues.

And he explained why in the US that wouldn’t be the case (American fans wouldn’t support a AAA team to the same extent as a major league team - heck, I’m a Newcastle fan and when they were relegated a few years back, I completely stopped following them until they got back in the Prem, now you could accuse me of being a crap fan, but I’m just acting as someone trained in the American context - in addition to not caring what you think of my fandom ). In any case, for a lot of those examples, wasn’t it the case that the formerly relegated team was bought by some rich billionaire type who spent ridiculous gobs of money to bring a team to the title (Man City applies here)?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Only Man City, as far as I recall (though Atletico was bailed out by some billionaire or other). But that’s not the point: American fans may be trained to support only “major league” teams now, but there is nothing inherent to American fans that prevents them from following local ones instead. In many ways, American fans are probably more likely to support their local than Europeans, if not for force of habit.

[ISiddiqui]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Only Man City, as far as I recall (though Atletico was bailed out by some billionaire or other). But that’s not the point: American fans may be trained to support only “major league” teams now, but there is nothing inherent to American fans that prevents them from following local ones instead. In many ways, American fans are probably more likely to support their local than Europeans, if not for force of habit.

You act as if force of habit and culture and tradition are easy things to break out of. If anything, a league like the NFL may be able to reverse these massive, massive forces, but a league that is still trying to grow, like MLS hasn’t got a prayer of doing so.

[silenus]

@Red_Wiggler

I don’t need conventional thinking explained to me, thank you. I’m a born and bred Murican **who thinks we do things in a second rate way. **Unless you’re a team owner. Then your monopoly status is pretty dang wonderful.

And you’re wrong. Totally and completely, and you absolutely zero concept of baseball, major league anything in the US, or how entrenched the system is, Besides that, you’ve given zero evidence that you way would be better in any way.

[Quercus]

@Red_Wiggler

I’ve made numerous arguments about how an open system better serves the public by offering more towns/regions teams of their own with a chance of promotion (important point there) and it should be obvious how greater freedom of movement and more employment opportunities would benefit players.

How does promotion/relegation offer greater freedom of movement to players?
I mean, sure, theoretically Messi could decide to go play for Lower Hodgepiddle in the English 4th tier, but (even leaving aside any transfer fees), Lower Hodgepiddle would only be able to pay him 100 pounds a week or something. That’s not really a possible option for him. And really, going to Newcastle or anywhere except the top 3 in England, 2 in Spain and 1-2 in Germany would be a massive pay cut for him. Whereas, every NBA team has the same resources to give a superstar player.

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

This has nothing to do with the system of promotion and relegation and everything to do with the fact that there is no salary cap outside North American sports.

Sort of a fair point, except that how would a salary cap be implemented in a promotion/relegation scheme? Would a relegated team have to cut salary? Would a promoted team be able to suddenly give players raises? Or would there be a theoretical cap, where in it’s majestic equality, the cap forbids anyone in tier 4 from spending more than ManU?
I’m not saying I think it’s seriously impossible, but I think there’s a lot more to work out. (Also, I suspect the politics of implementing a cap are a lot easier without relegation, but so far this thread is about ideals, not how to get there).

[Quercus]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

VFL Wolsburg were a third division side until the early 1990s, and won the Bundesliga in 2009.

Anecdote

[QUOTE=Wikipedia]
The following 12 clubs have won the Bundesliga: FC Bayern Munich (24 titles), Borussia Mönchengladbach and Borussia Dortmund (5), Werder Bremen (4), Hamburger SV and VfB Stuttgart (3), 1. FC Köln and FC Kaiserslautern (2), TSV 1860 Munich, Eintracht Braunschweig, 1. FC Nürnberg and VfL Wolfsburg (1).
[/QUOTE]
Data.

And note that if you start in 1970 (dropping the first six years), that reduces the number of winning clubs to 9, with Bayern Munich winning half of all championships and the top three teams winning two-thirds of them.

In this century alone, Bayern Munich won 2/3 of the time. No, that’s not a slam-dunk – unlike say, La Liga, where the top 2 teams have won 13 out of 15 this century-- but it’s not exactly comparable to the NFL, NBA, MLB or NHL.

[griffin1977]

@chappachula

it’s an interesting question, but basically irrelevant.
The reason Americans don’t like soccer is not due to the how the system of leagues works.

Based on my experience that’s not true. Americans DO like soccer, just not domestic soccer.

[RickJay]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

But I gave you recent examples of teams who did just that in each of the major European leagues.

One example in each league in twenty years. All bigger market teams who fluked into a few years of failure. Whoop dee do.

[Acsenray]

Nm

[bump]

@Justin_Bailey

This is exactly how the US leagues formed. But again, it happened a century-and-a-half ago. The US system isn’t just entrenched, but entrenched over generations.

That’s kind of my point- US baseball teams and Euro soccer teams aren’t really any different in terms of how old they are, but there was a difference in how they grew- the US got the idea of minors and majors pretty early on, while the Europeans never really have solidified that idea, with teams moving several levels in the hierarchy over the span of decades.

I personally think that in light of the population differences between the US and Europe, that the systems we have work about as well as we could hope. By that, I mean that in the European system, most large cities have several clubs, so the fan base for any one club isn’t that huge, and doesn’t require a mega-stadium. And smaller towns/cities have their own fan bases, and they move up along with their teams. But even at that, the top tier teams tend to reflect the biggest/most important cities in that country- it just isn’t a fixed thing.

In the US, it’s pretty much one city = one team, and the level of the competition and the size of the venue pretty much reflect the size of the city (and corresponding fan base). Promotion and relegation would mean absurdities like Philadelphia’s and Cincinnati’s teams in AAA, and Fresno, CA and Columbus, OH in the major leagues. That can’t be as lucrative, or even as interesting for the fans