SirBalon Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 7 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said: The tide is turning in my opinion and the Premier League is going to get less competitive, back towards normal service instead of the freak it is. Are you saying that domestic "competitiveness" has some correlation between that and results on the European scene? For me the competitiveness of the Premier League (leaving aside the fact Pep put forward of the Premier League being an out and out marketing phenomenon) is connected to the saturation in one division fuelled by the unbalanced (compared to other leagues) cash inflow it's had over the past 5 to 6 years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 32 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said: You don't judge the quality of Scottish football by Celtic's performances because they are a freak in their own land. Like Bayern Munich. Equating competitiveness with the quality of a team's performance makes the assumption there's no relationship between a league and that performance. Which in my opinion is gash. The top teams being unable to hold down a consistent league position between seasons and performance within it is in an indication of difficulty. They can't get rhythm, momentum, confidence and other key mentality and psychological factors. The tide is turning in my opinion and the Premier League is going to get less competitive, back towards normal service instead of the freak it is. But it would say something about Scottish football if Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen etc were all constantly winning the CL, EL and making Q/Fs and S/Fs year after year when no other country is. As is the case in Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honey Honey Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 1 hour ago, SirBalon said: Are you saying that domestic "competitiveness" has some correlation between that and results on the European scene? For me the competitiveness of the Premier League (leaving aside the fact Pep put forward of the Premier League being an out and out marketing phenomenon) is connected to the saturation in one division fuelled by the unbalanced (compared to other leagues) cash inflow it's had over the past 5 to 6 years or so. If a club is batting above or below their position on the food chain that suggests something unique to them is going right or wrong. Spurs for example are domestically batting above their food chain position. In European competitions if a group of clubs from the same domestic environment are all performing above or all performing below their food chain position then something domestically is causing it. English teams have been appointing the best managers in Europe, raiding other leagues for their better players and then getting beat off teams they've just raided for example didn't Anderlecht beat someone after having lost 3 of their best players to the lower mid table area of the Premier League that summer. This shouldn't happen if football followed a simple pattern of logic. That's just one game but we all know it is not a one off at the minute. Imo England has a too many cooks spoil the broth problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 3 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said: The top teams being unable to hold down a consistent league position between seasons and performance within it is in an indication of difficulty. They can't get rhythm, momentum, confidence and other key mentality and psychological factors. Don't even know how people can even try to dispute that as being a perfect example of competitiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 23 minutes ago, 6666 said: Don't even know how people can even try to dispute that as being a perfect example of competitiveness. Because it's not an indication of difficulty, it's an indication of a lack of quality. As proven by the messes Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal have been the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ Posted August 29, 2017 Subscriber Share Posted August 29, 2017 The toughness of a league isn't defined by how the best 2 or 3 clubs do in Europe, especially if you are the manager of one of those teams *cough*Bayern*cough*Barcelona*cough*. It is defined by the strength in depth. It is much harder for Man City to beat the West Broms and Stokes than it is for Barcelona to beat the Sociedads and Betis (anyone tries to deny this is flat out lying, sorry). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, Danny said: Because it's not an indication of difficulty, it's an indication of a lack of quality. As proven by the messes Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal have been the last few years. The quality isn't as high at the top but because of that the difficulty exists to finish in the limited Champions League spots as more teams are on a similar level making it more..... competitive. You need a dictionary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 10 minutes ago, 6666 said: The quality isn't as high at the top but because of that the difficulty exists to finish in the limited Champions League spots as more teams are on a similar level making it more..... competitive. You need a dictionary. No, you just need to stop suggesting people can't do it because it's "difficult". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honey Honey Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 High competitiveness stifles quality in any sport because of the effects it has on the mental attributes of the game. There is a sweet spot of differentials between teams in a league and the Premier League lost it when lesser teams imported too many players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 If we made a league consisting of the bottom half of our league with the bottom half of Spains... 3 Spanish teams would be relegated and the other Spanish teams would be Fighting for their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 8 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said: High competitiveness stifles quality in any sport because of the effects it has on the mental attributes of the game. There is a sweet spot of differentials between teams in a league and the Premier League lost it when lesser teams imported too many players. The lesser teams have more money but are they really bringing in players previously considered above their level? Everyone was going on about that when Stoke brought in Shaqiri, Bojan and Arnautovic and look how they turned out. Premier League is worse than it was a decade ago and that was when there was a solidified top 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 11 minutes ago, Danny said: The lesser teams have more money but are they really bringing in players previously considered above their level? Everyone was going on about that when Stoke brought in Shaqiri, Bojan and Arnautovic and look how they turned out. Premier League is worse than it was a decade ago and that was when there was a solidified top 4. How do you know that a decade ago the top clubs across Europe weren't weaker? This is a shit debate because nobody has a clue what the answer is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 4 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said: How do you know that a decade ago the top clubs across Europe weren't weaker? This is a shit debate because nobody has a clue what the answer is. What does that have to do with anything? I'm comparing the Premier League back to then because the arguments for why it was the "best" in the world were completely different then, because back then we did have the strongest league and the league as whole was a lot stronger than it is now. And ironically Sky have used the same marketing tool of "competitiveness" as they have done with the Championship back then to try and sell the Premier League's lack of quality now which speaks volumes about how "tough" the league actually is now. What's happened with the increased money now isn't that the middle-lower table clubs have improved, it's that clubs who were there for a reason have wasted a load of money on players not worth what was paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 It's all just opinions and nothing can be proven either way. It's a boring, old debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honey Honey Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 Just now, Danny said: The lesser teams have more money but are they really bringing in players previously considered above their level? Everyone was going on about that when Stoke brought in Shaqiri, Bojan and Arnautovic and look how they turned out. Premier League is worse than it was a decade ago and that was when there was a solidified top 4. Those players individually are better players than the British and Irish alternatives Stoke would have had for sure. It has shifted the dynamics of the game, created a dependency on individual moments of talent and eroded part of the need to be a cohesive functioning unit. Too many cooks spoil the broth. The Premier League had a better balance than now between the teams 10 years ago but it was obviously on the turn then, the pool of talent open to the league as a result of money is detrimental to its own flourishing. In terms of what is best for European competitions I think it is no coincidence that la liga today has the foreign to national ratio that the Premier League had when it dominated the final 4 of the Champions League. A sweet spot of how many imports raise quality before too many start to lower the quality by making it too competitive. Weaken the bottom half of our league in terms of individual talent and the top teams will start playing flourishing football again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 13 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said: Those players individually are better players than the British and Irish alternatives Stoke would have had for sure. It has shifted the dynamics of the game, created a dependency on individual moments of talent and eroded part of the need to be a cohesive functioning unit. Too many cooks spoil the broth. The Premier League had a better balance than now between the teams 10 years ago but it was obviously on the turn then, the pool of talent open to the league as a result of money is detrimental to its own flourishing. In terms of what is best for European competitions I think it is no coincidence that la liga today has the foreign to national ratio that the Premier League had when it dominated the final 4 of the Champions League. A sweet spot of how many imports raise quality before too many start to lower the quality by making it too competitive. Weaken the bottom half of our league in terms of individual talent and the top teams will start playing flourishing football again. It's 2017, the Premier League has been dominated by foreign players for a long, long time. Stole just changed their manager and their old one is doing what he done there at West Brom whilst their new one is doing what he's done his entire career. La Liga has been dominant for years now, constantly out performing everyone in both European competitions. Not just 2-3 teams but 7-8 teams constantly doing it, no other national league can boast that. Weirdly I think last season was the first in a long time they've only had one team on the latter stages of the EL. Chelsea showed last season what the correct transfers and manager can do in this division and the big clubs haven't done it enough. You can't say it's down to the smaller sides when United were messing around with Moyes and Van Gaal, Mourinho got too big for his boots at Chelsea, Arsenal are just being Arsenal but for the first time in years punched below their financial weight, and Liverpool sold their only world class player and replaced him with a group of players not able to keep up, exposing the manager. Plus City's side slowly eroded from the title winning side with potential that they were. The big clubs have not just lacked leadership from a managerial point of view, but have lacked big players. You can't say with a straight face that we've had a world class side in England for a good 5-6 years at least now, let a lone a group of decent sides punching above their weights behind them. That has little to do with Watford or Swansea buying abroad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6666 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 1 hour ago, Danny said: No, you just need to stop suggesting people can't do it because it's "difficult". You don't seem to know the difference between competitiveness in a league and a high standard in a league. If people were arguing that there's more quality in the Premier League than any other league, you could argue that they're wrong and use European performances as an example. You can't do that when talking about competitiveness within a league, even if all the teams are shit, the fact that they're all on the same level means it's competitive. How they do in Europe is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 1 hour ago, HoneyNUFC said: High competitiveness stifles quality in any sport because of the effects it has on the mental attributes of the game. There is a sweet spot of differentials between teams in a league and the Premier League lost it when lesser teams imported too many players. There's also the issue that it leaves top players who are looking for guaranteed success unsure off which English club to go to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honey Honey Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 2 hours ago, Danny said: It's 2017, the Premier League has been dominated by foreign players for a long, long time. Stole just changed their manager and their old one is doing what he done there at West Brom whilst their new one is doing what he's done his entire career. La Liga has been dominant for years now, constantly out performing everyone in both European competitions. Not just 2-3 teams but 7-8 teams constantly doing it, no other national league can boast that. Weirdly I think last season was the first in a long time they've only had one team on the latter stages of the EL. Chelsea showed last season what the correct transfers and manager can do in this division and the big clubs haven't done it enough. You can't say it's down to the smaller sides when United were messing around with Moyes and Van Gaal, Mourinho got too big for his boots at Chelsea, Arsenal are just being Arsenal but for the first time in years punched below their financial weight, and Liverpool sold their only world class player and replaced him with a group of players not able to keep up, exposing the manager. Plus City's side slowly eroded from the title winning side with potential that they were. The big clubs have not just lacked leadership from a managerial point of view, but have lacked big players. You can't say with a straight face that we've had a world class side in England for a good 5-6 years at least now, let a lone a group of decent sides punching above their weights behind them. That has little to do with Watford or Swansea buying abroad. Chelsea were not even remotely close to being a quality free flowing champion that we have been used to in top flight football's history (under a different league environment). Even some of their fans on here have expressed a boredom and low energy for football. Both of their titles in the last 3 years have been dour and barely champion like at all. Someone has to win it, it's not just Chelsea, it sums up about 6 or 7 of the last 7 or 8 years of champions. That 4 or 5 teams can spend between a quarter and a half of a billion pounds on players each over the course of a half a dozen years and still not have a single one of them look like proper champions seems too off to just be a big coincidence that you imply it is imo. Obviously every team is going to have an internal crisis about it and blame factors within their control. Those factors like the manager and the idea that the players just aren't good enough, so change the manager, spend another £100m on players. You might win the title like Chelsea but there's no history being made. No real side to be in awe of for years. That's odd. That's unusual for any league system. But the whole point of the debate and argument is reasoning for English clubs losing to or struggling against sides BELOW them in the food chain in European competitions. So no one having a Messi superstar player is not really relevant because they're not always being knocked out by or playing naff against teams above them in the food chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carefreeluke Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 3 hours ago, RandoEFC said: The toughness of a league isn't defined by how the best 2 or 3 clubs do in Europe, especially if you are the manager of one of those teams *cough*Bayern*cough*Barcelona*cough*. It is defined by the strength in depth. It is much harder for Man City to beat the West Broms and Stokes than it is for Barcelona to beat the Sociedads and Betis (anyone tries to deny this is flat out lying, sorry). I'm not saying La Liga is more competitive but in England (it's slowly changing) but the top teams being shite is a fair argument, Real Madrid recently made Man United look like a mid table team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFCMadLad Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 12 minutes ago, carefreeluke said: I'm not saying La Liga is more competitive but in England (it's slowly changing) but the top teams being shite is a fair argument, Real Madrid recently made Man United look like a mid table team. Because that's what they are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pep Talk Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 Don't think anything he says is wrong here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azeem Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 Premier League have more clubs that have fan following around the world(including glory hunters), money, marketing,big names in their squad, no matter how much shit they are at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asura Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 6 minutes ago, Azeem98 said: Premier League have more clubs that have fan following around the world(including glory hunters), money, marketing,big names in their squad, no matter how much shit they are at the moment totally offtopic bhai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azeem Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 On 8/28/2017 at 10:33 PM, SirBalon said: I can agree it's more competitive... That's a whole different story! But the bit I've quoted... Tell me the 5 to 6 clubs that have a realistic chance of winning the title? On 8/28/2017 at 10:42 PM, Asura said: Two manchesters, chelsea, spurs and liverpool... thats 5 clubs. There will be always five six title contenders for the PL because they are 'Big clubs on paper' because of their money,fan base,marketing. Just like Argentina,Germany,France etc will always be big teams and there will always be a 'maybe they can win the WC'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.