What's the point in cheering for a mid level European soccer team?
- Thread starter PastorOfMuppets
- Start date
- Status
blazeuk
Member
I support Everton because they're my local team (so are Liverpool and my family are split down the middle on who they support, but in the end Everton were my choice). We are one of the most successful clubs in England and while the last 20 years have not been too kind on us, switching to another club who are winning things doesn't make you a supporter, it just makes you a glory hunter who doesn't really have any feelings towards the club you supposedly support.
Success brings you much wider support but the local support will always be there.
Success brings you much wider support but the local support will always be there.
If we make it out of the group stage this year I will count it as a victory.
Broder Salsa
Banned
Why do you Americans like socialism in sport so much anyway?
enanogrande
Member
.... Forza Depor joder!!!
Cuz unlike the Bolton Wanderers, the Cleveland Browns *could* actually win the title at some point. You don't have to relegate your dreams to the shitbasket permanently.
Allforce
Member
Because it levels the playing field, adds parity, and makes the sports infinitely more exciting and dramatic to watch year to year.
EVERY sport. In the 80's and 90's certain teams started just throwing money at the best players in the goal of buying titles, and the respective leagues (in time) said "Nope", and instituted a salary cap. It was in the interest of preserving the integrity of the sport and giving every team a fair shot at being competitive.
Nobody is questioning why anyone is a fan of a middle-of-the-pack Euro football team, the question is more how do you stay motivated when the odds are so heavily against you winning any sort of title?
A lot of EuroGAF has chimed in with their personal reasons which is fine, it's just very hard to understand from a US point of view where playoffs and championships are the benchmark for success for our professional teams.
smh
Who is to say Bolton couldnt be bought by some rich guys and be a force one day? Wasn't too long ago that Manchester city were a laughing stock
HerbertFish
Member
Doesn't necessarily level the playing field. In nba it has certainly made things worse. Mlb which doesn't have a cap and only a few teams that pay luxury tax has a ton of parity despite this.
secondspace
Member
Is it really winning if the LA and NY teams are being artificially held back?
enanogrande
Member
The draft is a bad system, needed only because of the existence of College sports. In Europe, every team has an academy, and stars routinely come out of the most obscure teams. The problem lies with teams not having enough money to keep their stars - something which happens in US sports all the time, where players rarely retire at the team they're drafted in.
A salary cap (probably never coming), better revenue sharing (probably eventually coming), and more lucrative european places (I've long been a proponent of rolling the EL into the CL and have one mega european cup where the best 6-7 teams of each big league gets in) would go a long way to making european football more competitive, but please keep the draft out of any of these discussions.
A salary cap (probably never coming), better revenue sharing (probably eventually coming), and more lucrative european places (I've long been a proponent of rolling the EL into the CL and have one mega european cup where the best 6-7 teams of each big league gets in) would go a long way to making european football more competitive, but please keep the draft out of any of these discussions.
Exactly, success is relative to your countries/clubs standing, which makes watching them exciting even if they are "mid-table".
And again, why do you cheer for USA during the World Cup? (If you dont, I apologize for making assumptions)
The_Hitcher89
Member
Yep. Even though it could hamstring us, a salary cap, watertight FFP and transfer cap would go a long way I think. All 3 would be full of easily exploited loopholes though I fear.
If I didn't know what match this was from I would've thought something awful had happened to both teams here.
You have to have a draft if you have a salary cap/revenue sharing because otherwise there's nothing stopping the richest teams from spending tons of money on identifying the best prospects, signing them (paying bonuses), and spending the most money on player development.
That's what's happened in pro baseball in the US (there's a draft for players from the US but signing international players was wide-open until a few years ago). Kids sign big contracts at 16 and then go to a baseball academy the team has setup in the Dominican Republic.
I can't really watch European football because of the lack of salary caps. Knowing how much influence elites have on the success of certain teams kind of taints it for me. I would never hope my local team would get bought out by some rich asshole.
But, man, MLS is pretty boring. And I'm sure as hell not going to cheer for a Chicago team (closest one).
Edit: Oof, and I can't stand advertising on jerseys.
But, man, MLS is pretty boring. And I'm sure as hell not going to cheer for a Chicago team (closest one).
Edit: Oof, and I can't stand advertising on jerseys.
enanogrande
Member
No you don't. If you're already going out of the way to instate a salary cap and, in baseball, things like 6 years of team control over rookies, what's stopping you from implementing limits on scouting/recruiting? No signing prospects outside of your 'recruiting area' is a viable option. The draft is one solution to the problem, but it's not the only one.
The only time I can see a draft being needed is in cases - and I would say this is a case only found in the US - where a team is based in a region where there is no real amateur fandom of the game. Something like Hockey for instance - having lived in South Florida for many years, I think I can safely say the Panthers wouldn't be able to compete if they had to have a youth academy of local players. But this problem doesn't translate to European soccer - every city has hundreds of youth teams churning out outstanding talents.
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
but the NBA is still more 'fair' and competitive then your average Euro Football league.
appaws
Banned
I would say 95% of Americans cheer for the teams from their hometowns regardless of whether they win or not. Maybe there are a small number of people who just jump on a winning bandwagon, but I think they are generally looked at with derision by others.
The thing of teams moving cities does not happen that often. For example, I think only 5 NFL teams have ever moved cities in the modern era.
PastorOfMuppets
Banned
A lot of people misinterpreted my question as "How come people don't just cheer for the best teams in a given sport?"
That's not what I meant to ask. The relegation mechanic in European soccer leagues allow for drama for the bottom feeder teams. You can see a team work its way from the D-League up to the A league over a period of several years like many other people have pointed out.
But only a few teams are subject to relegation every year. In the EPL, the bottom three get relegated and three from the Football League get promoted.
Meanwhile, at the very top of the league, you have an elite group of four or five teams that compete with each other to win the EPL crown.
The problem with that is that the EPL is a 20 team league. Slots 1-3 and 17-20 are the only ones that are worth watching over the long term. What about teams that are perennially in the 6-14 slots? They are never going to be bad enough to be relegated and never going to be good enough to win the championships. They have essentially stagnated in the middle and are competing for nothing.
North American sports has several different mechanisms that allow for teams to improve in the future and there is an expectation that a team that sucks now can be middle of the road later and maybe get over the hump. It may not necessarily happen but there's a realistic chance of it happening. And also the reverse. There's nothing currently in North American sports that resembles the 20 year run of dominance the Big Four have had in EPL or the ridiculous dominance of Bayern Munich in the Bundesliga (23 championships over 51 years).
That's not what I meant to ask. The relegation mechanic in European soccer leagues allow for drama for the bottom feeder teams. You can see a team work its way from the D-League up to the A league over a period of several years like many other people have pointed out.
But only a few teams are subject to relegation every year. In the EPL, the bottom three get relegated and three from the Football League get promoted.
Meanwhile, at the very top of the league, you have an elite group of four or five teams that compete with each other to win the EPL crown.
The problem with that is that the EPL is a 20 team league. Slots 1-3 and 17-20 are the only ones that are worth watching over the long term. What about teams that are perennially in the 6-14 slots? They are never going to be bad enough to be relegated and never going to be good enough to win the championships. They have essentially stagnated in the middle and are competing for nothing.
North American sports has several different mechanisms that allow for teams to improve in the future and there is an expectation that a team that sucks now can be middle of the road later and maybe get over the hump. It may not necessarily happen but there's a realistic chance of it happening. And also the reverse. There's nothing currently in North American sports that resembles the 20 year run of dominance the Big Four have had in EPL or the ridiculous dominance of Bayern Munich in the Bundesliga (23 championships over 51 years).
The_Hitcher89
Member
You have to consider that finishing 4th would as good as a trophy for everyone except for Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea and Arsenal, and it's a much more achievable target for the likes of Liverpool, Spurs and Everton
It's the top 4 that get into the Champions League. and normally the 5th and 6th placed teams go into the Europa League, so the top 6 is important, not just the top 3. As for teams in the bottom half, all of those will be fairly fearful of being dragged into a relegation battle, so there's always incentive to cheer them on. Also, every team in English football competes in the FA Cup, and teams that are mid table in the Premier League will look to compete in that and the League Cup (with the added bonus that winnning either of those will put you in the Europa League) so there's always something to compete for. Then, on top of that, every team has rivals that they'll look to finish above.
Edit: What I'm trying to say is that it's very rare for a team to have nothing to play for, especially year on year.
alexthekid
Member
If the difference is because of greed, it is the other way around. NA sports, clubs and Leagues are built and structured to generade profit. The parity is just a measure to reach that goal. In europe though, many of the teams main goals is to achieve succes, climb the ladder and win. Greed is a way to reach that goal, an order i very much approve of.
(This isnt true for all clubs/leagues, Newcastle and Ashley
)I support my home club, who are yet again looking to just about avoid relegation to League 1 again.
It's just wanting to see your home town, in my view, represented well. There's still "excitement" in wanting to see us not have to fight back up to the Championship again. Just ONE year Huddersfield, let's sit comfortably.
It's just wanting to see your home town, in my view, represented well. There's still "excitement" in wanting to see us not have to fight back up to the Championship again. Just ONE year Huddersfield, let's sit comfortably.
European sports teams are not like american sport.
Teams are not franchises from brands.
You do not support for BULLS which now they're on chicago or LAKERS they're now on Los Angeles.
Teams are attached to a city and sponsors is just a way to get money. European sports teams have territorial, political and economical feelings. That's why.
Teams are not franchises from brands.
You do not support for BULLS which now they're on chicago or LAKERS they're now on Los Angeles.
Teams are attached to a city and sponsors is just a way to get money. European sports teams have territorial, political and economical feelings. That's why.
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
FYI to all the Europeans here....
Americans support losing Teams here too, im getting an impression in this thread that people think Americans don't support home teams, there are many teams with great emotional support behind them but are not constantly on top or winning; (Knicks, Packers, Pacers, Devils, Celtics, Raiders, Mets, Cubs...etc)
Americans support losing Teams here too, im getting an impression in this thread that people think Americans don't support home teams, there are many teams with great emotional support behind them but are not constantly on top or winning; (Knicks
, Packers, Pacers, Devils, Celtics, Raiders, Mets, Cubs...etc)I don't want to get too sidetracked, but that's the reason i don't understand the popularity of college sports in the US. I'm not a big fan of the major american sports but i would assume that the skill disparity between the leagues and the college teams is huge, why is it that they're so successful anyway?
FYI to all the Europeans here....
Americans support losing Teams here too, im getting an impression in this thread that people think Americans don't support home teams, there are many teams with great emotional support behind them but are not constantly on top or winning; (Knicks
I'm getting the impression that Americans are the ones arguing along those lines and the euros questioning why wouldn't they support their home teams or teams they are somehow attached to. But I'm an European so I look at this from that point of view.
I support Sheffield Wednesday, my home town team.
We have won one trophy in my lifetime and have spent 14 years outside the Premier League. In 2010 we were an hour away from going bust and have yo-yo'd between The Championship and League One for over a decade.
I wouldn't change a single thing about it.
Football can be supported for allsorts of different reasons. To me, everything I love about football is tied around my support for a club that I actually get to go and watch live home and away with my friends. It's the social element, the shared experience with people I actually know, the experience of going to matches (which isn't even remotely replicated by watching on TV) and the sense of home by supporting the team from the city I was born, raised and currently live in. Or one of the two professional teams here, anyway.
For me there is absolutely no value in watching, buying merchandise for and "supporting" a team from potentially hundreds of miles away just because they win things.
Different strokes for different folks. The strength of the lower league system in British football especially is actually what makes it special. It's actually pretty unique, even amongst the major European nations.
EDIT: Regarding entertainment value, anyone who thinks entertainment can only be found at the top level of the game is delusional, or paying too much attention to Sky Sports over inflated sense of purpose. I've been watching second division football all year (and like I said above, 2nd and 3rd division football for the last 14 years) and two of the worst matches I have ever seen were this seasons games between Man U vs Chelsea and Arsenal vs Chelsea. Absolute dross.
We have won one trophy in my lifetime and have spent 14 years outside the Premier League. In 2010 we were an hour away from going bust and have yo-yo'd between The Championship and League One for over a decade.
I wouldn't change a single thing about it.
Football can be supported for allsorts of different reasons. To me, everything I love about football is tied around my support for a club that I actually get to go and watch live home and away with my friends. It's the social element, the shared experience with people I actually know, the experience of going to matches (which isn't even remotely replicated by watching on TV) and the sense of home by supporting the team from the city I was born, raised and currently live in. Or one of the two professional teams here, anyway.
For me there is absolutely no value in watching, buying merchandise for and "supporting" a team from potentially hundreds of miles away just because they win things.
Different strokes for different folks. The strength of the lower league system in British football especially is actually what makes it special. It's actually pretty unique, even amongst the major European nations.
EDIT: Regarding entertainment value, anyone who thinks entertainment can only be found at the top level of the game is delusional, or paying too much attention to Sky Sports over inflated sense of purpose. I've been watching second division football all year (and like I said above, 2nd and 3rd division football for the last 14 years) and two of the worst matches I have ever seen were this seasons games between Man U vs Chelsea and Arsenal vs Chelsea. Absolute dross.
The_Hitcher89
Member
Arsenal vs Man Utd as well. And Liverpool vs Man Utd was fucking terrible, as much as I enjoyed the result
94/95 NEVA FORGET
terrisus
Member
Because:
1) There's still a difference between finishing 5th and finishing 15th. Just because you don't get a trophy for it doesn't mean you can't be excited if your team improves from, say, 13th to 9th over the course of a few years. Watching sports isn't just a "You win a trophy or you're a failure" matter.
2) They enjoy watching the games. No matter how good, bad, mediocre, or whatever else a team is doing, one can still enjoy watching their games. It's not like if a team doesn't achieve a certain result or position or whatever that it's not worthwhile to watch. Some people just enjoy the games.
3) Because that's the team that you root for.
I don't agree with you. I've seen plenty of interesting matches even on amateur level here in Brazil.
i think the more pertinent question would be, how do you feel that your mid-table club has no fucking shot of ever winning the league? Every year it is the same fucking teams contending for the title.
In the UK Premier League this season, Liverpool are top and they haven't won it in 24 years. Manchester City and Chelsea are close behind. Last season Man Utd won it by a landslide. No one was anywhere near them. Now they are 7th. Also, Atletico Madrid are top of the Spanish leagues. I couldn't even tell you when they last won it.
Anyway, teams should have to earn their success, not have it randomly handed to them on a plate.
Shalashaska
Member
I needed a team to play as in Football Manager years ago and didn't want to go the route where I could just buy every player with a big team.
At the time there was a hockey player with the last name Blackburn so I chose them to play as. Been following them ever since
bean breath
Member
I think I've got the jist of it now. Consolation prizes. You're all content with winning a consolation prize.
That would be like us caring about divisional and conference championships.
That would be like us caring about divisional and conference championships.
Not quite this season.
- Status