And how did they qualify for the Champions League? By winning the Europa League so their league form isn't really germane to their qualification.
The Giants have a one game lead over the Dodgers for the best record in MLB currently. The NFL only plays 16 (sorry now 17 are they literally trying to kill their players)? so you have NEVER had a team with a ten game lead and a quick look at last years NBA standings show a 1 game difference between the top two teams. Again to quote Judas, I mean Rafa Benitez, FACTS!
i mean this season they have this and now it is norm for every season. nba when west was dominating they were leading their conference by 10 games and eastern by 15-20 games. baseball when most teams were 100 wins necxt closer opponent was 5-7 games behind. nfl same thing leagues are boring to begin with but if they would wipe the liptik of the pig it would be boring even more for 28 teams out of 32
The only reason most teams have something to play for in Europe is European competitions. Outside of MLS there is no continental championship in North America similar to the Champions League or Europa League. In fact leagues without extensive entries into continental competition, like Greece, Belgium and the Netherlands, have introduced playoffs of one form or another to keep things interesting.
Yep, the overall standings are available online for any season. It's rare for a team to have a 10 win lead. It's happened in NBA but it's rare.
It's a difference in what's seen as important. The objective here is the former. I think it's definitely true that single table doesn't conclusively prove which team is best. It's just difficult to make a realistic case that play-offs come closer to doing it. The clubs agree too. Look at how the European Cup evolved into the champions league. What was the point of the group stage? Was it because it was thought it was more exciting? No. It was thought it would reduce the chances of the richer clubs being knocked out, because it's harder for a weaker side to finish in the top two of a four team group than it is for them to beat a better side over two legs. It's also why many US sports have best of 3/5/7 game series in their play-offs. It reduces the odds of lesser teams beating the better ones - yet if the "high pressure head-to-head games prove who is best" idea really was true, the better teams would be wanting as few games as possible in the play-offs.
This happens in p/r much more than our system MLB in 2019 had 10 teams at 91 or more wins. A 93 win team didn't make the playoffs. This is much more the case than not. NFL had 10 teams at 10 wins or more Even in the random seasons we have a runaway team how is it different than Bayern in the Bundesliga most years? Or the Prem that saw Liverpool win by 18pts? That was two years after City won it by 19 ... They still would have qualified for European play with their league form/record/finish ... Which, is what I stated. 50/50 clubs qualify for Europe play. Sevilla just happened to do something else and qualify for better European play than what their 50/50 season results qualified them for. Oddly enough being the season's best is a pretty good indicator in the NBA: https://www.google.com/amp/s/charte...s-the-best-nba-team-win-the-championship/amp/ It's paltry in MLB for WS winners ... But nature of baseball itself and difference between teams that finish with best record vs 2-4 is more often minimal
Here is the NBA format for 2020-21. It's not established to determine the best team. Each team will play three games against each intraconference opponent (42 total games per team), with each pairing featuring either two home games and one road game or one home game and two road games. Within each team’s division, the league office has randomly assigned which two opponents will be played twice at home and which two opponents will be played twice on the road. • All five teams from within a division will play all five teams from one other intraconference division twice at home, and all five teams from the remaining intraconference division twice on the road. • Each team will play two games against each interconference opponent (30 total games per team), with each pairing featuring one home game and one road game.
Could be applied to some of the anti pro/relers too. For some reason, they never seem to get the same flak here. Nor do they end up getting banned as this guy will sooner or later.
It's emotional watching your team win or lose a playoff final, but I suspect almost all fans want to see their teams win an automatic promotion spot than have, say, a roughly one in four chance of winning the promotion playoffs.
You're assuming the only two possibilities are a vote or a rather dubious playoff system where participants are selected by the votes of a selection committee.
This describes me. My local team is USL and I’d rather see that league continue to improve and grow on its own terms over a scenario where MLS promotion is the goal. As a neutral I hope NISA can stick around for the long haul as well. I like seeing the different ideas out there.
The Ivy League schools are the only ones sitting out, but that’s their choice, they aren’t excluded or ineligible or anything. But it’s more that, with 24 teams, everyone who has a legitimate shot to win it is probably in it. Sort of like March Madness: yes, there is subjective criteria for getting selected, but I don’t think fans of teams who don’t get selected could legitimately have won it all. Every system is flawed, but the FCS has proven for decades that FBS’s arguments against having expanded playoffs to decide the champion is a load of crap.
Ok, sure, but we’re still talking almost 110 schools: I’m not sure that 20 team difference throws FCS’s playoff model out the window
But we can't have the student-athletes out of class!!! Expanding the playoffs in FBS would hurt the student athletes!!! The main reasons as to why the FBS has introduced a full blown playoff system, is because it's a Good-Old-Boy Network sport, and they don't want to have their champion and "post seaons" having sanctioning by the NCAA (can't say I blame them either). That would mean the NCAA would get a cut. Currently the College Football Playoff is overseen by the conferences, it's not an official NCAA title. At the end of the day they are holding onto traditions that are honestly holding back the sport long term. Sure, Bowl games reward the "smaller" schools for having decent-good seasons, but they also allow the Big 5 Conferences to hold everyone else back. Let's be honest here though: A 16 or even 20 team playoff would bring in FAR more money for the conferences then the Bowl games do. Figuring out the equity, and how to integrate the handful of independent schools, and the less glamorous conferences into the picture is the real question. The Power 5 aren't going to want to do that.
They need a champions league. You win the conference, next season, your conference is all the other conference winners - power 5, slightly less powerful 5, fantastic 4, etc. You get the big bowl that used to be on New Years Day vs the winner of the college playoff. Since you didn't participate in your conference in season 2, in season 3, you drop back to your conference, season 2 conference winner plays in champs league. You wan't your traditional rivalry game - fine, you give up your annual 60+ point drubbing of NeighborState Ag & Tech. Notre Dame never gets to play in the champs conference. It's my riduculously far fetched proposal, deal with it...
lol talking about basicly amateur sport college football like pro and like they are proffecional. most unprofecional athletes in the world are american league sport athletes and behold they all came from college. you just see the difference between jokic , nurkic ,anta and luka how they act when somebody annoyes them and wanting to controll what they have too say. i mean europeans dont care about american bravado and b.s. they doin front of mic or on court crap talk and media in usa is so pissed so they intentionaly try to say they suck and not the best mvp or player in league because that player disaded he will not get into american b.s. of if i do not talk i can not show i am the best lol ANOTHER REASON I REALLY CAN NOT STAND AMERICAN SPORTS
I mean, you seemingly live in Bosnia. How much do American sports intrude in your life? It would be like me getting all hot and bothered over how the KHL or the Japanese baseball league run their business. That would be a pretty weird obsession.
Yes it is exciting - these clubs are the 'losers', other clubs are 'winners', they don't get any favours from anybody, who's to blame for the mess Derby County are in right now? Yes that's right - its Derby County! Nobody forced Derby County to spend more than their means did they? If they wan't to become 'winners' then they are going to have to start putting some work into it no? There are REAL consequences to losing in England, that's what makes the emotions of the sport so bloody high! Brentford drew 3-3 with Liverpool yesterday in a stunning game of attacking football, they were watched in a packed stadium and by hundreds of millions of eyeballs worldwide, Brentford are currently 'winning'. Derby County are 'losing'. Luckily for Derby they CAN turn their fortunes around but the further you fall the harder it is to get up again. English football is bloody hard, that's why its so exciting, that's why the emotions in the stands runs so high, that's why it is by far the worlds most popular sports league. Exciting innit.