Please provide evidence that pro/rel increases the instability in minor leagues over closed minor leagues.
Like everything about this debate do we really know? I mean on one side it makes sense that pro/rel would encourage owners to spend in an attempt to move up to a more lucrative league. We have seen this specifically in the English Championship. BUT... couldn't you just as easily argue that other clubs are doing the reverse and not gambling because they aren't guaranteed the same revenue next season? I have had that exact argument made to me in regards to parity and how it is connected (or not) to pro/rel. The argument goes that clubs can't spend as much as they want because they have to account for possible relegation. Not saying I agree with it just pointing out that the argument is much more nuanced than it first appears. You could even argue that closed leagues encourage gambling because you are guaranteed a spot in the league, and a certain amount of TV money so why not over spend going for the trophy and an increase in profile? Knowing you can always slash payroll and have as bad a team as you want while still having access to minimum revenue. You see this cycle in a lot of American sports. Finally sports owners don't need the golden ring of promotion to drive them to stupid financial decisions. The NHL had to lock out their own players and essentially sacrifice a season to save the owners from themselves.
Here's an example: https://www.chad.co.uk/sport/football/cost-mansfield-town-promotion-push-so-far-revealed-agm-213750
And I'm sure this has been discussed in this thread. 'Football is bust, in crisis': Accrington Stanley owner Andy Holt horrified by skewed finances and he says clubs have been coerced into gambling.
Please provide evidence that pro/rel increases the instability in minor leagues over closed minor leagues.
Does having a CEO from the English Championship tell me almost literally word for word "I could bet it all on next season and go all in for promotion, but it would be a gamble that would likely put us in violation of FFP if we fail and that would probably cost us points and lead to relegation" count? He went on to explain that he wasn't going to make that bet, but he sees other teams in the Championship taking that gamble.
Who was the last team to play at the second level in England and subsequently be liquidated? How many second level teams in the closed league US folded in just the last, say, ten years?
Why are you still using England as your example? It has already been shown that, in all of Europe, only Germany has comparable lower league support. England is an outlier, not the norm. And then there's the comparison of an overwhelmingly dominant sport in England with a niche sport in the US.
Honestly, this post--or numerous posts making the same point--should almost be required reading before participating in this discussion. England is SUCH an outlier, it's really not a useful point of reference.
I think the problem is volume in the US. Promoting an entire 3rd division, folding an entire 2nd division a few years later - it's just too much to expect the clubs & franchises to be able to weather those kind of extreme events
I think the metric is "drawing less than 2K people per game" promotes instability at the lowest professional level in whatever country - be that the 6th division or 2nd division...
The evidence is Holt's accounting of the situation of football in England below the Prem. The evidence is Mexico having to do some very "American" type things to get the Ascenco in order so pro/rel can continue to be a thing there. The evidence is in China making American sports relocations look as one off as MK Dons. The evidence is in FIFA literally putting a mandate out to stop shenanigans like buying lower league clubs and swapping them with top tier clubs in existing pro/rel set ups. The evidence is in Italian clubs losing 20-0, fielding 7 players (including a staff member) and getting booted: https://sports.yahoo.com/world-ital...163844691.html?_fsig=Qe1rH2dSiZJH112vbKMjJw-- Literally the evidence is what is happening across the world in soccer ... Absolutely ... we've seen it plenty (highlighted by the PREM/CHAMP). We saw it with Monoco too ... with Malaga (hows' that club these days ...). The enticement and "lure" of that top tier and the riches it holds is absolutely an encouragement to do whatever it takes to get them. Bet the farm, as you will. BUT, just as with anything of the sort it absolutely can cause a prudent or much more realistic approach. That action though, doesn't erase the original encouragement. How much of a gamble is it, really though, in our structure? Gambling, by definition is taking risky action. Is it really risky for say the Royals to dump some money and make a push for a World Series over a three year period? What's the worst that happens in that scenario? Either they make a cinderella run and win (they did) or they what, exactly? Can't afford the upkeep, sell off the big money guys, and enjoyed a few seasons of winning ball (they did that too before and upgraded the stadium). Now, what kind of gamble is that compared to say ... Malaga or QPR? This is very, very true. The point, is that pro/rel dangles that golden ring on top of everything else. A fool and his money, and such. Though, it's even worse when there's something sitting there ever enticing that fool ... Odd though that you have to corner it so specifically when you were just harping on lower leagues in pro/rel VS closed set ups. We've done the "liquidated" VS "folded" dance several times in this thread. There is a construct specifically for failed football clubs (administration) that keeps the numbers skewed on technicality. But you know this ... And wasn't it Football League clubs as the mark before? You keep moving this goalpost ... I believe it is useful in that even in the biggest/best supported/most money example that exists for pro/rel ... it still happens, even at the top end.
If you can find an article on the impact of promotion and relegation on soccer in Italy or Spain I'd definitely read it. Maybe we're can just follow Fiorentina to their inevitable relegation under the stewardship of you know who.
Well, to the degree that some of the problems we talk about are related to global issues of money in sports, etc. and have little to do with league structure at all, sure. But I still maintain that England is the one place where we can most definitively say that pro/rel is the best (or at least most appropriate) system.
1 - of course, though that doesn't seem to be reciprocated too much towards our sporting leagues. 2 - that's not the point because for them, it is. Even with that, look at the myriad of issues. THAT is the point. Even in as Utopian of an example as there is ...
What does that have to do with the point I was responding to. Somebody asked if we really knew if P/R teams considered it a gamble, I responded with an almost exact quite of a CEO of a team saying "Yes, its a gamble". Don't try to change the subject just because you don't like the answer. I don't have an article, but if you dig back 5 months or so on this thread I point to a BBC World Football podcast where they interviewed a Italian blogger (for lack of a better term, he wasn't media, but he wasn't your average fan either) about the issues in lower league Italian soccer and why so many teams fail. Essentially it came down to their being no money below Serie A, mainly due to the lack of TV.
Ha, very true. Along those lines, I'm always amused when strong U.S. TV ratings for the big six clubs in England is used synonymously as "a huge demand for European soccer."
It's more like, England=Soccer with these people. If we're talking about the financial situation of second division teams around the world, it's generally pretty bleak. In many places, players getting paid on time by their second division club is not a given. From a financial perspective, USL Championship is probably in the top ten most financially secure second division leagues in the world.
In fairness, there are literally tens of thousands of clubs that have been around for the best part of a century (and often longer) where they don't draw 2k. In fact, that's pretty common beyond the average division 2. It probably matters more in the US because population centers are so spread out and at the lower levels, travel costs beyond modest regional distances become prohibitive. I also think we perceive a lot more attrition at supposedly higher US tiers, because the structure is relatively flat. Other soccer nations have their share of recreational teams that come and go at a rapid rate, because that's the nature of such teams. Certainly there are clubs at the UPSL level and even in PDL & NPSL, that aren't a million miles from that situation. Indeed, a lot of minor league soccer teams are largely in the business of being a stop-gap for college players outside their NCAA seasons. It's just that elsewhere, those teams would be playing well outside the established league pyramid and wouldn't be blended in with semi-pro outfits or organizations with expansion ambitions, so you wouldn't hear about them.
Oh, myself and a few others have pointed to the ratings for NON big 6 clubs when there are matches that feature those kinds of match ups (or matches without a big 6 club at all) .... ... they'd respond with "but look at when it was on" or "yeah but it was shoved onto MSNBC" or something. Which, EXACTLY. There's a reason it was on then or shoved to MSNBC and the demand you stated for it already got shown to be wrong, and the lack of audience following it to those times or those channels doubles down on that.
Wasn't one of the reasons for UEFA introducing FFP to prevent clubs from spending outside of their means and going bust? I realize the main reason for FFP was to keep the uber rich from buying a club, spending it into oblivion, and then moving on to their next toy leaving said club in financial ruin. AKA keeping the traditionally big clubs BIG, and the little clubs little. The big clubs feared what was happening at Chelsea in the early aughts after Roman bought the club, Man City and their injection of absurd cash, and PSG becoming a UCL contender virtually overnight. The situations at Malaga, Anzhi, and Monaco are examples of the other side and what FFP was supposed to prevent/discourage.