Broadly speaking, Belgian clubs still had lots of room to improve compared to e.g. Holland but our clubs still need to work hard to unlock as much potential as possible ... Belgium has also become a more attractive destination for scouts which started with the current golden generation. Reform, reorganization at club level & further professionalization made gains possible ... strict rules to obtain a Jupiler Pro League license helped to make clubs healthier and keep salaries in check (59% of the budget goes to salaries which is 5% less than the European average although some clubs perform worse & others better), the league only has 16 teams and lucrative play-offs (interesting for the top, less so for the rest), transfers, commercial revenue, expensive ticket prices, etc. ... still the Belgian market is smaller and I don't think they can ever close the gap ... even in a BeNe-league. In the previous season Anderlecht's revenue increased with 13% to 77M (outperforming the likes of PSV @ 62M but not Ajax unless we're talking growth) ... the new tv deal moved a lot closer to the Eredivisie's Murdoch deal (so starting from next season Anderlecht can expect a big boost) ... transferwise I'm hoping they can hold onto the current talented crop yet I'm expecting little from their European adventures ... the budget used to be much smaller but is now being increased from 40M to 44M (thanks to a new kit sponsor) ... they project to break the 50M barrier via added stadion capacity (either by expanding the current venue or moving to a new one) ... I prefer that they move to the national stadion (80K seats in the Holland/Belgium bid but that has dropped to 60K seats). Also Gent, the poorest of the G5 clubs, moved to a brand new venue: 'Stadium of the Year 2013: Ghelamco Arena' (Gent was looking to build a 40K seater in the Holland/Belgium bid ... 20K seats suffices though unless they attract more fans). In the context of the BeNe-league ... I'm a proponent of our leagues growing towards each other ... still I expect that Belgian clubs will remain underdogs ... although there could be a bit of bias on my part, the assertion that Belgian clubs are profitable and closing the gap with their Dutch counterparts is based on a lot of ink on the subject ... to illustrate, an article from 'De Standaard' (often you'll find different data but seeing that they are a quality newspaper, I trust them more): "De Belgische clubs doen het uitstekend in het financiële jaarverslag van UEFA. België is één van de twaalf Europese landen waar de clubs gezamenlijk geen verlies lijden. Eén van onze teams staat zelfs in de top-20 van clubs die de grootste winst boekten in het voorbije seizoen. Ons land behoort, samen met Engeland, Spanje, Duitsland en Kazachstan voor het derde jaar op rij tot het kransje dat een operationele winst (zonder transferinkomsten dus) maakt." On the whole I try to focus on the question: can our clubs compete in a BeNe league? Take the best 20 clubs (12 Dutchies & 8 Belgies) ... all should be healthy, have a competitive budget and attract a decent amount of fans ... I feel that you can start as soon as the format is finalized, e.g. 2015/2016 or soon after.
Who knows? I'm guessing that the scouting apparatus in Holland is much better ... maybe even to the extent that Dutch clubs have fallen victim to their own success? So far I haven't heard of a Belgian P.D.Visser ... well Emenalo lived in Brussels for a while but afaik he's Nigerian (ex RWDM ... currently at Chelsea: chief scout, assistant first team coach, technical director heading the scouting and academy programs). When scouts bring in a few talents from abroad that add value, you won't hear me complain ... don't want to see a repeat of the now-defunct Beveren case though: they worked closely together with a CIV youth academy ... bringing in talents like Yaya Toure, Gervinho, etc. ... introduced plenty of CIV NT players while ignoring youth development at home.
It will probably become the first time since 2003-04 that no Dutch player is active in the UCL final.
More income for the top clubs will improve pretty much every other aspect of dutch football. Either you emulate the way portuguese top clubs negotiate scouting networks or find magnates to invest. Portugal is not exactly achieving anything great. The only reason we've been able to stay afloat is because of the way the top clubs generate income and because of that are able to compete internationally (not that we're kicking ass in the CL though). That is the role model business for the top clubs for a long time now. We're not going up in quality, it's the other leagues who are taking (or took) the wrong approach. Of course it's easier said than done, but after looking at a few posts here, I think you guys are looking too much for a meaningful explanation. The only problem in Eredivisie is money among the top clubs. Nothing else. And I don't think merging with the belgian league is going to help that much.
http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/3790280/knvb-bezorgd-dalend-niveau-nederlands-voetbal.html Looks like the KNVB at least acknowledges the problems.. Let's see if they can (and wan't) to do something about it.
The gap with international football he talks about will only increase with the 'Nations League' (where the most marketable names play many games against each other; and gain experience).
The 'Volkskrant' had yesterday a brief but very good summarizing sentence. "The Netherlands was a 'avant garde country' ("gidsland"). That image is hard to cultivate, with players who move to abroad sooner and sooner, to clubs with different norms."
Well, that's what I posted a few years ago, when I argued against players like Bruma in the Orange team that donot have at least two years full time Eredivisie experience before moving abroad, just because of that "Dutch soccer culture"!!
The money now a days is so attractive for young footballers. It's hard to blame them for wanting to move abroad. They feel as though playing for the Chelsea youth academy or the Bayern Munich youth academy has more prestige than playing for the Ajax youth academy(regardless of which one is better at development.) The name and the money and the fame that comes with that is too great to pass up, plus it is an inside track to getting on the first team of those clubs, which means even more money and more exposure. Something that the Eredivisie and it's clubs currently cannot offer in comparison.
I couldn't tell you to be honest. That's a point that you should bring up to the players who are leaving the Netherlands at a young age.
It's just the money in my opinion. Young players face a lot of uncertainty in regard to their future. That first big contract in England is very tempting, as many players are not exactly from a privileged background. They are more likely to discount the long term in comparison to individuals with a planned career track and strong support.
Sure it's not the end of their career, but it seems a lot of them end up having to turn around and go back to get their careers restarted. And when they finally go back, how did playing for Chelsea's youth team help them get develop? It's hard to say for sure since it's hard to really predict which players will make it when they're young, but I wonder whether Bruma wouldn't be in the WC squad right now instead of De Vrij if he had stayed at Feyenoord. Nathan Ake could have 60+ professional games to his credit already if he stayed, and wouldn't be playing at LB. Are any former Chelsea youth products are currently playing on a top team elsewhere?
Jeffrey Bruma is on PSV at the moment(came back home to the Netherlands) and Fabio Borini is on Liverpool(was loaned to Sunderland this past season.) Other then that, I can't think of any. I would think a majority of the top players around the world gritted their teeth in their home land and then moved abroad after they became established in the local league. I know players like Messi, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Ibrahimovic did just that and it worked out pretty well for them.
^ Messi moved to Barcelona when he was 13 years old because the club offered to pay for his growth hormone treatments. The other three you noted did get established in their local leagues.
Some medical experts believe getting hormone treatment at such a young age gave Messi an unfair advantage. Makes sense because his speed, quick feet and dribbling ability seem out of this world, almost non-human like
Extremely unlikely. I was an invited "expert" in a meeting convened by Major League Baseball here in the US that explored a variety of issues associated with this (see: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dta.v1:9/10/issuetoc ). Performance enhancing effects are minimal and even if there are some, continued administration of human growth hormone would need to be given. there are a variety of other performance enhancing drugs that are much better than HGH.