My bad, i forgot to add €27.5 m of TV money for every Serie A club. The more accurate numbers for Serie A clubs are: 1) €50.9 m 2) €46.9 m 3) €44.3 m 4) €41.7 m 5) €40 m 6) €38.4 m 7) €36.8 m
Best Athletes =/= Best Footballers Why the best athletes cant become the best footballers? If we judge footballers based on their raw athleticism (100m sprint record, vertical jump record, bench press record), Mbappe & Haaland would beat Messi in raw athleticism (physical performance) but Messi is superior to them in technical abilites (dribbling, making long passes, etc... ) & cognitive skills (sprinting and processing whats going on and visualising whats gonna happen next). Messi shows how a mastery in 2 aspects of football (tec-tac) can compensate the one aspect of football that he is not great at. Messi's no-look pass However this doesnt mean that the sport has no fitness requirement. You still need to be able to run for 90 min. International Football works best in Europe Football competitions work in Europe because there are so many teams in Europe with different levels of play. Some elite (Europe's big 5), some cannon fodders (San Marino, Faroe Islands) and many mid tier. People consider football competitions like UCL & Euro to be prestigious. Why? Because its actually hard to get qualified for the main tourneys of these competitions (due to many mid tier teams battling against each other for a small number of group stage spots) and even harder to win these competitions (due to the number of elite teams appearing in the knock out stage). On the other hand, these competitions do not lack the romanticism where a minnow can get qualified ahead of a mid tier team or a mid tier team can make a deep run. Football competitions dont work in North America because there are too few top teams & many low level teams but not many mid tier teams. The results from NA competitions are simply too predictable.
Modern athletes are better than past athletes not just due to better fitness & diet but mainly due to stronger work ethic / drive / commitment. Average distance per game from a player in each major sport: Handball is added into the table (https://handballfitnesstraining.com/some-brief-match-analysis-numbers/) Why women team sports are not as popular as women individual sports? Just look at the distance covered in a football game by a man and a woman. At an individual level, the gap between man and woman isnt too big but at a team level, it would mean the woman team covers 11km less than the men team. Simply put, one woman contending against one man would lead to a beatdown of the woman but a women team competing against a men team would result in a bloody massacre of the women team. Even though women can shine in individual sports that highlight skills & tactical acumen over physical performances, women can not hope to outperform men in a team sport that requires high level of work-rate. Now you can understand why it is so hard to market women team sports. Even in the most lucrative leagues (NBA basketball & NFL football), they will never have truly professional female athletes because the highlights of these sports are the physical performances of their athletes (dunking on someone & plowing through a group of people)
To be good at soccer, you must have not only technical abilites but also the cognitive skills (sprinting, processing whats going on and visualising whats gonna happen next. Not just running faster than your opponent but also thinking quicker than them). (https://i.imgur.com/2hFwqvj.jpeg) Global Revenue Rankings Football American Football Baseball Basketball Ice Hockey Auto Racing Tennis Cricket I do not have the numbers for Boxing & Golf but even if a popular individual sport like tennis generates less revenue than these 2 individual sports, i do not think the revenue gap between tennis and boxing/golf would be more than 1 billion euros. Global Popularity Rankings Football (worldwide) Basketball (North America, Europe, China) Tennis (North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific) Boxing & MMA (my guess is worldwide since people like watching WWE) Golf (worldwide but not a sport for the masses) Auto Racing (worldwide but only a spectator sport) Cricket (former Commonwealth nations) Ice Hockey (North America, Europe) Baseball (North America, Japan & Korea) American Football (North America) Volleyball & table tennis are listed to be among the top 10 most popular sports on many websites. And if you consider billiards as sports then they could also be considered to be in the top 10 since billiards are accessible in many parts of the world. However snooker players and athletes from volleyball & table tennis do not have star power. Its why i do not put these sports in my top 10 rankings of anything. In contrast to volleyball, table tennis & billiards, Motorcycle racing has a top star that can become a high earner despite the sport not being popular among the masses. Finally i would like to give honorable mentions to the 2 sports with regional popularity like Handball in Europe & Badminton in Asia. These 2 sports deserve to always be included in the discussions of popular sports.
Popularity contest between the best footballers vs the best tennis players from various nations Asia-Pacific (Move your mouse to reveal the content) Asia-Pacific (open) Asia-Pacific (close) Japan - Kamada / Tomiyasu vs Nishioka = Kamada / Tomiyasu win South Korea - Son vs Soonwoo Kwon = Son wins Australia - Aaron Mooy vs Kyrgios = Kyrgios wins North America (Move your mouse to reveal the content) North America (open) North America (close) US - Pulisic vs Taylor Fritz = Fritz wins Canada - Alphonso Davies vs Felix Auger-Aliassime = Alphonso Davies wins Costa Rica - Keylor Navas vs Jesse Flores = Navas stomps South America (Move your mouse to reveal the content) South America (open) South America (close) Argentina - Messi vs Cerundolo / Schwartzman = Messi stomps Brazil - Neymar vs Monteiro = Neymar stomps Colombia - Luiz Diaz vs Galan = Luiz Diaz wins Uruguay - Valverde / Suarez vs Pablo Cuevas = Valverde / Suarez win Chile - Alexis Sanchez / Vidal vs Nicolas Jarry = Alexis Sanchez / Vidal win Africa (Move your mouse to reveal the content) Africa (open) Africa (close) Egypt - Salah vs Amr Elsayed = Salah stomps Senegal - Sadio Mané vs Seydina Andre = Mané stomps Algeria - Mahrez vs Rayane Roumane = Mahrez stomps Gabon - Aubameyang vs no one in ATP rankings = Aubameyang stomps Cameroon - Matip vs no one in ATP rankings = Matip stomps Morroco - Hakimi / Ziyech vs Benchetrit = Hakimi / Ziyech win Ghana - Thomas Partey vs no one in ATP rankings = Partey stomps Nigeria - Osimhen vs Christopher Bulus = Osimhen stomps Ivory Coast - Sebastien Haller vs Coulibaly = Haller wins Europe (Move your mouse to reveal the content) Europe (open) Europe (close) England - Kane vs Daniel Evans = Kane wins Spain - Thiago vs Nadal = Nadal wins Germany - Thomas Müller vs Zverev = tie Italy - Chiesa vs Sinner = Chiesa wins France - Mbappe vs Gasquet = Mbappe wins Portugal - Ronaldo vs Nuno Borges = Ronaldo stomps Russia - Golovin / Akinfeev vs Medvedev = Medvedev wins Ukraine - Zinchenko vs Krutykh = Zinchenko wins Nẹtherlands - Van Dijk vs Botic van de Zandschulp = Van Dijk wins Belgium - De Bruyne vs Goffin = De Bruyne wins Turkey - Çalhanoğlu vs Altug Celikbilek = Çalhanoğlu wins Greece - Tsimikas vs Tsitsipas = Tsitsipas wins Switzerland - Xhaka / Shaqiri vs Wawrinka = Wawrinka wins Austria - Alaba vs Thiem = tie Scotland - Andy Robertson vs Murray = Murray wins Czechia - Schick vs Lehecka = Schick wins Denmark - Christian Eriksen vs Rune = Eriksen wins Croatia - Luka Modric vs Cilic = Modric wins Sweden - Kulusevski / Lindelöf vs Ymer = Kulusevski / Lindelöf win Serbia - Vlahovic vs Djokovic = Djokovic wins Poland - Lewandowski vs Hurkacz = Lewandowski wins Norway - Haaland vs Ruud = Haaland wins Romania - Răzvan Marin vs Ionel = tie Bulgaria - Ilia Gruev vs Dimitrov = Dimitrov wins Slovakia - Skriniar vs Molcan = Skriniar wins Slovenia - Oblak vs Bedene = Oblak wins Hungary - Willi Orban vs Fucsovics = tie Wales - Bale vs Evan Hoyt = Bale wins Bosnia & Herzegovina - Dzeko vs Dzumhur = Dzeko wins Armenia - Mkhitaryan vs no one in ATP rankings = Mkhitaryan wins Georgia - Kvaratskhelia vs Basilashvili = tie Kosovo - Rrahmani vs no one in ATP rankings = Rrahmani wins Footballers have it easier than tennis players / individual sport athletes. Playing for a big club with an already established global fanbase/followings & appearing on TV on a weekly basis are a pathway to fame. Additionally if you are good enough to be one of the 11 starters for your national team, you will earn many social media followings from your countrymen. On the other hand, tennis players / individual sport athletes have to build up their own fanbases. The only pathway to fame for tennis players is to win slam, if not then win Olympic gold medal or ATP finals. Only USA, Australia and probably Canada are where the home grown tennis players are more popular than the home grown soccer players.
Since the football landscape has changed alot over the years, i find that my rankings of clubs, where only their UCL & European Cup records are taken into account, to be flawed. Therefore i include another section called "Notable Newcomers". The Competitiveness Rankings of Historic European Football Clubs Winners (these clubs have the highest number of cup wins) 1) Real Madrid (14 wins, 17 finals, 31 semi-finals) 2) AC Milan (7 wins, 11 finals, 13 semi-finals) 3) Bayern Munich (6 wins, 11 finals, 20 semi-finals) 4) Liverpool (6 wins, 10 finals, 12 semi-finals) 5) Barcelona (5 wins, 8 finals, 17 semi-finals) 6) Ajax (4 wins, 6 finals, 9 semi-finals) Runners-Up (these clubs have about the same number of finals with the winners but fewer cup wins) 7) Juventus (2 wins, 9 finals, 12 semi-finals) 8) Benfica (2 wins, 7 finals, 8 semi-finals) Semi-Finalists (these clubs have about the same number of semi-finals with the runners-up but fewer finals) 9) Man Utd (3 wins, 5 finals, 12 semi-finals) 10) Inter Milan (3 wins, 5 finals, 8 semi-finals) Financial Powerhouses (these clubs become CL contenders much later in their history (since the 2000s) 11) Chelsea (2 wins, 3 finals, 8 semi-finals) 12) PSG (0 win, 1 final, 3 semi-finals) 13) Man City (0 win, 1 final, 3 semi-finals) Knock Out Stage Competitors (these clubs are good enough to get out of group stage and ocasionally make deep runs) 14) Atletico Madrid (0 win, 3 finals, 6 semi-finals, 11 quarter-finals) Best of Group Stage Participants (these clubs might struggle to get out of group stage and advance not further than quarter-finals) 15) Porto (3 semi-finals, 10 quarter-finals) 16) Borussia Dortmund (4 semi-finals, 9 quarter-finals) Best of Non Participants (before finishing outside of top 4 in the last 6 years, Arsenal had been a consistent R16 team) 17) Arsenal (2 semi-finals, 7 quarter-finals) Notable Newcomers (these clubs have been competing for a UCL qualification spot or even challenging for a domestic league title since 2015 or 2016 but have not had great history in UCL) 18) Tottenham Hotspur (2 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 19) RB Leipzig (1 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 20) Napoli (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) ================================================================================= (this line is to seperate the clubs with both the ambition & the capacity to compete in UCL from all other clubs) Dropped to Europa League Level (these clubs have qualified for Europa League or finished bottom of their CL groups for a decade. However these clubs' quarter-finals records are similar to Arsenal's due to their long history of participation) 21) Crvena Zvezda (3 semi-finals, 8 quarter-finals) 22) Dynamo Kyiv (3 semi-finals, 8 quarter-finals) 23) Celtic (4 semi-finals, 7 quarter-finals) 24) PSV Eindhoven (3 semi-finals, 7 quarter-finals) 25) Anderlecht (2 semi-finals, 7 quarter-finals) Benchmark in All Time Rankings (5 quarter-finals are the minimum to reach top 26 of UEFA all time rankings, clubs with less than 5 quarter-finals dont surpass Dinamo Zagreb's total points in UEFA all time rankings) 26) AS Monaco (4 semi-finals, 6 quarter-finals) 27) CSKA Sofia (2 semi-finals, 6 quarter-finals) 28) Lyon (2 semi-finals, 5 quarter-finals) 29) Galatasaray (1 semi-final, 5 quarter-finals) 30) Rangers (1 semi-final, 5 quarter-finals) One Hit Wonders (these clubs won one or two cups in a specific era but can never retain a high level of competitiveness throughout their history) 31) Marseille (3 semi-finals, 4 quarter-finals) 32) Hamburger SV (3 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 33) Steaua București (3 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 34) Feyenoord (2 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 35) Nottingham Forest (2 semi-finals, 2 quarter-finals) 36) Aston Villa (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) Unable To Get Over The Line (these clubs have less than 5 CL quarter-finals and missed their only opportunities to win a final of CL) CL RU (2)37) Valencia (2 semi-finals, 4 quarter-finals) 38) Reims (2 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) CL RU (1)39) Panathinaikos (3 semi-finals, 4 quarter-finals) 40) Roma (2 semi-finals, 4 quarter-finals) 41) Leeds United (3 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 42) Borussia Mönchengladbach (2 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 43) Saint-Étienne (2 semi-final, 3 quarter-finals) 44) Partizan (1 semi-final, 3 quarter-finals) 45) Bayer Leverkusen (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 46) Club Brugge (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 47) Fiorentina (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 48) Malmö FF (1 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 49) Eintracht Frankfurt (1 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 50) Sampdoria (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) Only Sucessful in Lower Tiers (these clubs have less than 5 CL quarter-finals but won Europa League and/or Cup Winners Cup) 6 EL 51) Sevilla (0 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 2 EL + 1 CWC52) Parma (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 2 EL53) IFK Göteborg (2 semi-finals, 4 quarter-finals) 1 CWC + 1 RU at EL or CWC54) Sporting CP (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 55) Werder Bremen (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 56) Lazio (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 57) West Ham United (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 1 EL or 1 CWC58) Villareal (2 semi-finals, 3 quarter-finals) 59) Schalke 04 (1 semi-final, 3 quarter-finals) 60) Shakhtar Donetsk (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 61) CSKA Moscow (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 62) Everton (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 63) Mechelen (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 64) Zenit Saint Petersburg (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 65) Slovan Bratislava (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 66) Dinamo Tbilisi (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 67) Aberdeen (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 68) Ipswich Town (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 69)1. FC Magdeburg (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 70) Zaragoza (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) Came Close to Glory in Lower Tiers (these clubs have less than 5 CL quarter-finals and came close to winning a cup in European 2nd or 3rd tier competition) EL RU (2) or CWC RU (2)71) Rapid Wien (1 semi-final, 4 quarter-finals) 72) Athletic Bilbao (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 73) Espanyol (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) EL RU (1) or CWC RU (1)74) Standard Liège (1 semi-final, 4 quarter-finals) 75) Bordeaux (1 semi-final, 3 quarter-finals) 76) Austria Wien (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 77) 1. FC Köln (1 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 78) Dnipro Dnipropetrovsk (0 semi-final, 2 quarter-finals) 79) Dundee United (1 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 80) Ferencváros (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 81) Górnik Zabrze (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 82) MTK Budapest (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 83) Carl Zeiss Jena (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 84) Wolverhampton Wanderers (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final) 85) Red Bull Salzburg (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 86) VfB Stuttgart (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 87) Braga (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 88) Fehérvár (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 89) AZ (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 90) Twente (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 91) Mallorca (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 92) 1860 Munich (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 93) Torino (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 94) Dynamo Moscow (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 95) Antwerp (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 96) Fulham (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 97) Middlesbrough (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 98) Alavés (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 99) Bastia (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 100) Fortuna Düsseldorf (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) 101) Lokomotive Leipzig (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) Other Achievements in Europe (these clubs have good achievements only in Fairs Cup, which is recognised as the predecessor to the UEFA Cup / Europa League and selected the highest ranked clubs from European cities that hold trade fairs) FC (1) + FC RU (1)102) Dinamo Zagreb (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) FC (1) 103) Newcastle United (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) FC RU (2)104) Birmingham City (0 semi-final, 0 quarter-final) FC RU (1)105) Újpest (1 semi-final, 3 quarter-finals) Forever Minnows (these clubs made only one or zero CL quarter-final and never made to a final of an European competition in their history but are in the top 26 of UEFA all time rankings due to the clubs' long history of participation) 106) Olympiacos (0 semi-final, 1 quarter-final)
The English FA has created their own rankings of leagues. Their rankings are quite similar to my rankings of leagues. https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/policies/player-registration/points-based-system Short version of the rankings from English FA Band 1 English Premier League, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A and Ligue 1 Band 2 Portuguese Primeira Liga, Dutch Eredivisie, Belgian First Division A, Turkish Super Lig Band 3 Russian Premier League, Scottish Premiership Band 4 Ukrainian Premier League, Greek Superleague, Swiss Super League, Austrian Football Bundesliga, Czech First League, Danish Superliga, Croatian First Football League, Band 5 Swedish Allsvenken, Serbian SuperLiga, Polish Ekstraklasa, Norwegian Elitserien, Slovenian PrvaLiga My rankings 1) England 2) Spain 3) Germany 4) Italy 5) France ==================== ↑ UCL contenders 6) Portugal 7) Russia 8) Ukraine 9) Netherlands 10) Belgium ==================== ↑ UCL regulars 11) Turkey 12) Greece 13) Switzerland 14) Austria 15) Scotland 16) Czech Republic ==================== ↑ UCL non-regular participants 17) Denmark 18) Croatia 19) Sweden 20) Serbia 21) Poland ==================== ↑ Top Representatives For A Region 22) Norway By comparing these rankings, we can recognize the biases from the English FA against the Russian & Ukrainian leagues and minor favouritism towards the Scottish league. However the bias against the Russian league is understandable since the relations between the UK & Russia have not been good since the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in March 2018 by Russia's agents and have been made worse by the Ukraine war. Even though the Russian league is still above many other small European leagues, the English FA does not want to give the players from Russian league the same status as the players from the Dutch, Belgian, Portuguese & Turkish league. The minor favouritism towards Scottish league is also understandable since the Scottish are close neighbours to the English. But this favoritism does not make English FA become brazen enough to put the Scottish league in the same bracket as leagues that have UCL regulars. In short, The English FA would favour Scottish league players over the players from the good small leagues (Austria, Switzerland, etc...) but not over the players from the strongest small leagues (Portugal, Holland, etc...). This is why i use the term "minor favouritism". The bias against Ukrainian league players is not understandable. I know Ukrainian clubs are not the most clean nor the most well run but the on-pitch perfomances from the top Ukrainian clubs show that they are the exceptions to the rule of money & long term financial growth. The off-pitch financial performances of footballl clubs are not the only things that determine their on-pitch performances. Look at how Ukraine beat Scotland in WC qualifiers. Also i would have placed the Danish league & the Croatian league in band 5 but if the English FA sees these two leagues as the best league within their own region (Scandanavia or Balkan) and thus deserve to be put in band 4, i have no objection to that reasoning. The inclusion of Norway in band 5 makes sense if its about including the whole of Scandavania in just one or two football groups instead of coming up with specific football criterias and judging every single Scandanavian league based on how they have fulfilled (or have not fulfilled) those criterias. What about the Western Balkan / former Yugoslavia region? To the English FA, Croatia & Serbia are not representative of the Western Balkan region enough and since Slovenia is ranked much higher than all other Western Balkan nations that are not named Croatia or Serbia, Slovenia deserves to be in the band 5. I find this way of ranking football leagues to be somewhat lazy and exists for the sake of including more nations in just one or two simple groups. Overall, the English's FA rankings of leagues are not strictly based on football and not as objective & specific as my rankings of leagues.
2 lol vids Even though Messi & Ronaldo are most popular sportmen in the world, they are not the most legendary figures of their former clubs in the same way that Maradonna was for Napoli & Sir Alex Ferguson was for Man Utd. These figures are fondly remembered (and in Maradonna's case worshipped) for having brought mid table clubs to new height of achievements.
How hard is it to qualify for UCL Knock Out Stage? Out of 55 federations, only 15-17 federations (meaning 30% of UEFA) would make it to UCL Group Stage. Out of those 15-17 federations, only 7-9 federations (meaning 16% of UEFA) would get qualified for UCL KO Stage. References Number of UCL KO Stage Participations from 2003-04 season to 2022-23 season England 20 Spain 20 Germany 20 Italy 20 France 20 ============ Portugal 17 ============ Netherlands 6 Russia 5 Ukraine 5 Turkey 4 Greece 4 Scotland 4 Switzerland 3 Belgium 2 Czechia 1 Austria 1 Denmark 1 Cyprus 1 Numbers show that the Portugese league is the best league outside of big 5 leagues. Therefore i've made some updates on my rankings. 1) England 2) Spain 3) Germany 4) Italy 5) France ==================== ↑ UCL contenders 6) Portugal ==================== ↑ UCL KO competitors 7) Russia 8) Ukraine 9) Netherlands 10) Belgium ==================== ↑ UCL regulars 11) Turkey 12) Greece 13) Switzerland 14) Austria 15) Scotland 16) Czech Republic ==================== ↑ UCL non-regular participants 17) Denmark 18) Croatia 19) Sweden 20) Serbia 21) Poland ==================== ↑ Top Representatives For A Region 22) Norway 23) Romania 24) Bulgaria 25) Slovakia 26) Slovenia 27) Hungary ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Tourneys of International Football & Club Football (Eastern Mediterranean) 28) Israel 29) Cyprus ------------------------- (Former USSR) 30) Belarus 31) Kazakhstan 32) Azerbaijan 33) Moldova ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Only Club Football Tourneys (British Isles) 34) Wales 35) Republic of Ireland ------------------------------------- (Western Balkan) 36) Albania 37) North Macedonia ------------------------------------- (Ice Hockey nations) 38) Finland 39) Latvia ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants in Tourneys of International Football & Low-tier Club Football (Western Balkan) 40) Bosnia & Herzegovina ------------------------------------- (North Atlantic Island) 41) Iceland ------------------------------------- (British Isles) 42) Northern Ireland ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Only International Football Tourneys Why Spain is ranked higher than Germany & Portugal is ranked higher than Netherlands? Colonial legacy of Latin Europe helps them attract the best talents from Latin America - the only continent that really competes with Europe for World Cup glories.
For those who want to become a pro & international footballer 4 zeros for a professional career. What are the odds for a professional footballer to get selected for their national team & get to play in the World Cup? Lets look at Denmark - with a population of 6 mil people and reported by FIFA to have 390 pros, selecting the best 11 out of those 390 is equal to selecting the top 2.8% of all the pros in that nation. This means that even if you become a pro, you still have less than 3% chance to become a starter for your national team. https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/a59132e138824c1c/original/jlr5corccbsef4n4brde.pdf However the number looks a bit more opstimistic for those who want to be included in the squad of a national team with 5.6% chance for a Danish pro to get called up for international duty. The negative interpretation from this 5.6% number is that being top 6% of all the pros in your nation does not guarantee you a spot in the national team. Overall, a soccer player would have about 0.000026% chance of getting selected for World Cup duty. In short, 5 zeros for an international career.
Naples, for all its flaws (crime, littered streets, the segregation of neighbourhoods between the rich & the poor, etc..) has found football as a way to redeem itself, to earn some respect. Whenever Naples was at its worst, football always existed as the positive among many negatives, as the nolmacy among the chaos, as the light among the darkness. To Neapolitans, Maradonna has brought them good memories & elevated a neglected place & group of people to a new height of recognition. Heavy topic Elephant football to lighten up the mood
I dont trust these numbers (especially from non Western countries) but its still interesting to see how much a pro make on average. https://www.progressivesoccertraining.com/average-salary-of-a-soccer-player-in-europe-usa-more/
What makes a football powerhouse? There are at least 7 factors that are essential to the developement of football of a nation. And first 3 that i list here are the most important ones. 1) Population (huge & dense) Having a huge population equals to having alot teams to play against each other. And if the population is concentrated in a few regions instead of being scattered all over a nation, it would take much less travel time & travel expense for all teams to play against each other. Simply put, living in a huge & dense population allow footballers (even at a recreational level) to play against as many teams as the footballers can afford to visit and thus accumulate as much gametime as they possibly can. It is simple math really: more teams + less travel time & travel expense = more gametime for everyone. Furthermore when you take into account the number of stuffs that can help an athlete gain more popularity (like numbers of TV viewership, youtube views & social media followings from a population, influential media & news sites, global reach of clubs, etc...), you can see that only the biggest sport names in America or in populous parts of Europe can become the biggest sport names of the world. Now what are the good examples of a nation's population density affecting its club football? Just take a look at France. French club football being the worst of big 5 is partly due to the uniform distribution of the French population. Since France has the least amount of urban centers among the big 5, French club football has never been able to utilize the huge size of French population to its maximum potential. Only Paris & its surrounding areas plus Southern France are the French regions with a really competitive club football. Also the factor of population size somewhat explains why Russia & Ukraine - the populous part of eastern europe - have better records in ucl qualifications than Scandanavian nations who have too small of talent pool to compete in football. However somebody will argue with me that "China, India & America are populous but they are not good at football". Well i will say that population alone is not enough. You need to take into account the level of interest on the sport & the kind of money spenders that these 3 biggest nations itw have. A populous nation can not simply become a football powerhouse by solely relying on the manpower that the nation possesses. It still needs to have many people of all ages view the sport as part of their culture or even their religion. 2) Level of interest So where does football rank in your country? How good are those who play soccer at just recreational level? If your nation has a low population + soccer not being no1 there, you wont be able to compete against small euro & small latin american countries where soccer is the no1 sport. Nevertheless if your nation has a huge & dense population, you still have the human resources to be the best in the world at multiple sports despite those sports not being the no1 sport in the country. 3) Economy (market of sport consumers & good investors) What is the amount of money that people are willing to spend to support their local club or their fav player? Lets take a look at Chinese Super League. The league does not generate much revenue because Chinese consumers are not spending much on sport entertainment but on buying real estates. What the CSL has shown is that when the club does not earn enough money to pay its players a living wage then the players' level of professionalism would be low. Only when the club earns more than enough money to pay its players the wage of a professional player, it can then invest more into its academies & sport infrastructures and even borrows some money without hurting the long term financial stability of the club. Then there is the problem with tax regulations. If the tax rates are too high on rich folks, it would be harder for the club to attract superstar players who demand high wages. This also explains why French club football is the worst of big 5. In order to recruit & retain the same star players, French clubs have to pay them top wages, which are higher than the high wages that other elite clubs can offer. And not many French clubs are willing to that. 4) Research (data analysts contribute to the evolution of tactics, advancements in sport science lead to the improvement of fitness in modern day athletes and allow them to have longer career) 5) Colonial Legacy (having better chance of attracting talents from other football powerhouses) 6) Geography (being located next to other footballing powerhouses means more competition, more competion leads to constant self-improvement due to every competitor learning from each other or coming up with things to counter each other. Not having to face a neighbouring competition is why isolated, far away island nations can not do as well as interconnected mainland nations) 7) Climate (outdoor activities not being hindered by the weather being too cold & snowy or too rainy) Football is an interesting sport. Not just due to its entertaiment value & intriguing tactical aspect but also being helpful for the analysis of a nation's characteristics or even a continent's characteristics. Tribute of footballers that makes them look like action movie heroes
What i meant by using the term "Non Western countries" = Russia, Ukraine, China, etc... Additionally it should be rephrased that the table shows how much the best of pros make on average (about 1 mil euros per year for a footballer in big 5 leagues). But not all pros are high earners
I found a new chart of average annual salary. Perhaps this one is more up to date than the table above. https://www.statista.com/statistics/675120/average-sports-salaries-by-league/ But the chart does not collect datas from small leagues. What a shame. CSL here probably means the Chinese Super League.
I've added a new group of football associations into my rankings. Its called "Occasional participants in only low tier club football tourneys". What does it mean? It means that these football associations did get qualified for Europa League or Europa Conference League. But the national teams from these football associations have never qualified for a major international football tourney (euro or wc). Based on international football records, i have to place Georgia at the top of the new group due to Georgia making it to league B of UEFA Nations League while all other associations in the new group are still staying in league C or D of UEFA Nations League. Kosovo is placed at the bottom of the new group due to Kosovo having only 1 Conference League participation & lacking h2h datas in club football & international football. Liechtenstein, Lithuania & Estonia all are equal with Kosovo in the number of Conference League participation but since the 3 associations (Liechtenstein, Lithuania & Estonia) have a good amount of h2h datas, it was easy for me to place them above Kosovo and then rank the 3 associations based on their h2h records against each other. Then there are 2 associations left to be ranked - Luxembourg & Armenia. These two have somewhat similar achievements in club football & international football (multiple qualifications to a low tier club football tourney, being close to the 95th position in the FIFA rankings & the Elo ratings). The 2 minor things that Armenia has over Luxembourg are the better h2h vs Georgia & the higher number of seasons of being in the top 45 of the UEFA coefficient rankings. However in terms of reputation, Armenia has quite some big problems in their club football while Luxembourg is aiming to be another Iceland and pouring investment into its stadium & academy. In short, the prospect of Luxembourgish football is better than that of Armenian football, and thus i have to rank Luxembourg above Armenia. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...ropes-whipping-boys-transformation-pitch.html https://vk.com/wall-52709524_994077?lang=en https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...h-fixing-scandal-FIVE-teams-disqualified.html https://inbedwithmaradona.com/journal/2015/4/14/armenian-football-is-stuck Reputation of Armenian football h2h club football rankings My updated rankings 1) England 2) Spain 3) Germany 4) Italy 5) France ==================== ↑ UCL contenders 6) Portugal ==================== ↑ UCL KO competitors 7) Russia 8) Ukraine 9) Netherlands 10) Belgium ==================== ↑ UCL regulars 11) Turkey 12) Greece 13) Switzerland 14) Austria 15) Scotland 16) Czech Republic ==================== ↑ UCL non-regular participants 17) Denmark 18) Croatia 19) Sweden 20) Serbia 21) Poland ==================== ↑ Top Representatives For A Region 22) Norway 23) Romania 24) Bulgaria 25) Slovakia 26) Slovenia 27) Hungary ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Tourneys of International Football & Club Football (Eastern Mediterranean) 28) Israel 29) Cyprus ------------------------- (Former USSR) 30) Belarus 31) Kazakhstan 32) Azerbaijan 33) Moldova ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Only Club Football Tourneys (British Isles) 34) Wales 35) Republic of Ireland ------------------------------------- (Western Balkan) 36) Albania 37) North Macedonia ------------------------------------- (Ice Hockey nations) 38) Finland 39) Latvia ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants in Tourneys of International Football & Low-tier Club Football (Western Balkan) 40) Bosnia & Herzegovina ------------------------------------------ (North Atlantic Island) 41) Iceland ------------------------------------------ (British Isles) 42) Northern Ireland ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Only International Football Tourneys (Caucasus) 43) Georgia ------------------------------------- (mini-state in Benelux) 44) Luxembourg ------------------------------------- (Caucasus) 45) Armenia ------------------------------------- (Basketball nations) 46) Lithuania 47) Estonia -------------------------------------------- (micro-state in Switzerland) 48) Liechtenstein -------------------------------------------- (Western Balkan) 49) Kosovo ==================== ↑ Occasional Participants In Only Low-tier Club Football Tourneys
International Politics In Football Organizations In modern days being a UEFA chief = meeting with criminals. Ceferin revealed that as a UEFA chief, he has met many more criminals than when he worked as a lawyer whose job was to defend criminals in courtroom. The reality is that when you work in fifa or uefa, some compromises have to be made in order to bring other nations that have no rule of laws and are run by corrupt leaders into the world of football. Is this a negative thing or a positive thing? To me, its more positive than negative because it gives more common people a chance to see the performances of good teams & more athletes a chance to compete against them.
Why MLS being a retirement league both a good & a bad thing? The cons of being seen as the last destination for footballers: MLS is not taken seriously. I would even bet that the top Portuguese clubs would beat top MLS clubs because the top Portuguese clubs have been competing against the top clubs itw in ucl tourneys while MLS dont. The pros of being a destination for footballers: US club football puts less pressure on footballers to perform on a weekly basis. Also America offers them good lifestyle, good enviroment for their families (schools, beaches, etc...) & bussiness opportunities for athletes after finishing their professional careers History Different specie Different Sportballs What an amazing sport. Not only bring different species together but also different sports together.