Saw it last night. Rafa Puente had one of his worst picantes I' ve seen. Terrible in almost every argument.
A league in which any team can literally beat any other team is the epitome of "competitive." It's a rather poor argument that is used to continue the myth of the "bajisimo nivel" of the league. It's the same argument that is thrown around here quite a lot. Really not that dissimilar to those who don't understand the difference between overrated and overvalued(overpriced) when it comes to individual player valuations.
Competitive or irregular? . That is the question. Both Hugo and Puente have good and bad points. Hugo trying to hype Mexican players that really have not done much, but I see the positive side of it. Encourage and applaud them for trying outside of their comfort zone. Puente's point is basically, what has Pulido done to warrant that price. Valid question.
Irregular? What does mean exactly? The setup and performances of teams within LigaMX is the exact definition of parity. You could argue the quality of said parity and usually, those who argue towards the irregular moniker will point towards performances in South American tournaments as indication of said lack of quality but there are factors that have contributed towards those kinds of performances in South America, like the increasing amounts of money involved in the league that force teams to prioritize league games over continental competition outside of CONCACAF. Insular ignorance is a bigger factor, IMO. People were slagging Pumas for losing to Independiente del Valle and once the tournament was over IdV turned out to be a rather decent team. I mean.....
Irregular son. like a team can play an awesome game against a good team one week and then play like shit next week. It happens quite often in the Mexican league. I don't watch any South American futbol. So I can't comment on that. At least Cruz Azul is consistently boring.
It's no surprise that the eurosnobbery of the 2 biggest euro snobs in Puente and Hugo leads them to believe that just going to the Long tournaments will make the league "the greatest" without taking into account that the league was actually worse when they were long tournaments instead of short ones. It also funny how they keep talking as if having top teams being on top constantly is the greatest yet it's typical puente bullshit. As soon as Real Sociedad or Villarreal beat a Real Madrid, he will use it as an example of how "competitive " the league is but if Morelia beats America, it's how irregular the Mexican league is. But to start claiminig Pulido didn't deserve to go to Brazil is beyond bullshit. Puente double down on his stupidity.
But why are they comparing the Mexican league with the Premier league, or America with Barcelona or Madrid to begin with?
Even in leagues with palpable financial disparities, teams like Barcelona, Real Madrid and PSG show symptoms of "irregularidad." Real Madrid can put 7 past Getafe one week and then struggle their way to a 2-2 tie vs Villarreal. Personally, I don't think there's anything remotely "irregular" about that. A game based on human error and strictly dependent on these same humans maintaining peak physical, mental and emotional condition for months on end means that at some point there will be collective, and individual, dips in form that will affect the performance of the group. Leagues with much more financial parity will have more parity, which leads to situations like the mentioned above but more frequently. If the starting point for your side of the argument is that Club America, Chivas, Cruz Azul and Pumas are the four "historic" teams in Mexico and should always be favored then you're simply ignoring the financial realities of modern day futbol. Again, the large amounts of money at play in LigaMX means that Veracruz can put together a pretty decent team and go to Estadio Azteca and get a result vs Club America. That isn't an indication of anything other than financial parity. Not to mention the increased involvement of science in the preparation of players and one can see how parity takes shape in various other aspects that don't even reference the financial bits. This conversation is really no different than the constant trope surrounding the National team and its performances in CONCACAF. There are people out there who really think Mexico should put five, six or seven goals past El Salvador simply because that's what we did 40 years ago. There is a false equivalency at play here. Rafa Puente constantly references Real and Barcelona when he makes his points which is why de Anda used them to make his point. Furthermore, in my opinion, he wasn't comparing a Chivas vs America game to a Real Madrid vs Barcelona game. If coaches don't get fired for losing those games (although some have been fired, like Pellegrini when he admitted that he went against the best team in the world and there wasn't much he could do about it) why do we expect Nacho Ambriz to lose his job for losing to Chivas?
And yet it go t super praised by the same people who can stop talking shit about the LigaMX when Queretaro beats America. Puente was freakin using the Aguirre Pachuca argument like minutes before De Anda brought it up and he continued. It's insane.
To @...In my defense's point of financial parity, this is happening in England more I think. With all the foreign money pouring in, historically mid/lower table teams have money to bring in really good players. Is City really a big team? Weren't they mostly shit until recent? They bought their way in, I don't see why others can't do the same. Not saying I'm expecting it but every few years it wouldn't shock me.
I don't think you can talk about financial parity in liga MX. No way Veracruz can put together as good a team as America. Cruz Azul or Tigres, at least not in paper. This is the point constantly brought up with team like Tigres.."con ese plantel, blah blah"..and that is part or the irregular nature of liga mx. Guadalajara can spend millions on players like De Nigris or Gullit and still be in relegation zone like they were last season.
Not really tho. City is miles ahead of any other team in terms of wealth. And the teams immediately behind them are Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal and Spuds... Those are the 5 teams who will duke it out for the top four spots almost every year... Leicester won because they had a great core team with an established coach in Ranieri who didn't have enough depth to mess up the chemistry... everyone knew their roles and played them perfectly. Also, they had no European Football to worry about and lost their third round match (first round in which Premier League teams participate) in the FA Cup and made it to the 4th round of the League Cup. So they effectively had 10 to 15 fewer matches to play than the other teams in the top 5... They went on a hot streak too. Essentially everything had to line up perfectly for it to happen and it did. We won't see it again soon.
City is a big team now, they have been in the top four spots in the last few years, they have signed very good players that deliver on a constant basis. All of this in a way more competitive league with a long season. I doubt America or Tigres would be that consistent under similar circumstances.
I don't think there's a whole lot of difference between most teams. Usually seems like there's one really shitty team and the newly promoted team that demonstrate a clear level lower than the rest. The whole of Tigres is not extraordinary, Gignac is the only player that clearly distinguishes himself. Most teams, while not as good as Gignac, have one or two above average players to match and will be able to compete with anyone.
They don't have to be though, different animal. You think the directiva cares about superlider, especially considering they never win the championship? It about going into liguilla healthy and on good form, consistency throughout doesn't matter and I'm certain the liga mx format on some level changes their approach. And city failed last season, every "grande" in England failed last season.
But you can not compared the amount of money they spend versus let's say Chiapas..I think there is a big difference in that respect, which does not translate to the field. City was top 4 last season, no? at least they will be in Champions.
LOL at putting Cruz Azul as an example of spending as if that has mattered. Tigres spending is unprecedented in Mexico and it has only produce a title they won on PKs against a team that is almost broke now. Even with the newly promoted, there is no whipping team in Mexico probably since that Indios final season. Even UDG kept their games close.
And the most important factor that just about every single one of the "big" teams decided to have a shit year helped Lester claim the championship. This year United, City, or possibly Chelsea will reclaim the title.