Support NeoGAF

[Stereogatari]

Actually yes.

Or they are supposed to.

Football clubs in the UK (and across most of Europe) exist primarly to serve their local community. They were set up by their local community, to serve their local community. The idea of foreign ownership of football clubs is a relatively new concept over the last two decades or so, and even then very few owners make money out of football clubs.

Football clubs in the UK and Europe existed and belonged to the fans and the community long before the influx of money in the game, and they'll be around long, long after the bubble bursts and the money is gone.

To be fair the whole "influx of money" thing happened long before foreign owners and the biggest clubs in larger metropolitan areas have long drawn crowds outside their local areas. Though I certainly think there is an erosion of the community feel in modern times, particularly when you don't have enough players you can relate to on the team or loads of tourists/day-trip/new fans in the stadiums.

Like I've recently been thinking once John Terry retires, unless our youth products establish themselves in the first team, I won't have the same direct connection to the team as I did before.

 

[Mohonky]

Man it feels weird to look at those team rankings. I was right into Football the year the Premiership was introduced. There are teams I normally associate with Premium league completely missing or sitting at the bottom of the Championship table.

Coventry never got over being shit by the look of it. In fact it seems they've just progressively become more shit now that they dropped another league.

 

[Stereogatari]

The US already has that equivalent. It's called not making the playoffs. And it usually creates some drama right at the end of the season year after year.

Ehhh kind of? I guess. I'd compare what you said to not qualifying for the Last 16 of the Champions League (the play-off equivalent of that competition).

Man it feels weird to look at those team rankings. I was right into Football the year the Premiership was introduced. There are teams I normally associate with Premium league completely missing or sitting at the bottom of the Championship table.

Coventry never got over being shit by the look of it. In fact it seems they've just progressively become more shit now that they dropped another league.

lol Coventry were in the PL the year I started watching football in 00/01. It is amazing how the landscape can change so drastically, something not as striking in American sports.

Like Leeds are a great example. When I first started watching football they were challenging for the league title and Champions League. Now they're struggling in league below, even had a year in the 3rd tier. Or Southampton, who were around, then went down and now are around again lol.

Or my team Chelsea. 6th, 6th, 4th in my first 3 seasons watching, and I celebrated that 4th like we won the league. Then 2nd, 1st, 1st, and trophies left right and centre. Now coming at least 4th is the minimum requirement. I used to play FIFA as my only way to see Chelsea win the league or Champions League, now those are things I get dissapointed about if the real team gets close and misses out.

 

[Liamc723]

Having read through the topic so far, it amuses me the situations we could've got in the past.

"Congratulations Derby County, you just achieved the record lowest points total in the history of the Premier League. Here's Cristiano Ronaldo for you trouble."

Not sure how it would've gone down at the old iPro.

As a Derby County fan, I wouldn't say no to that!

 

[Arkos]

It is used in the GAF Justice League, the premiere fantasy (American) football league on GAF, so there's that

 

[DC R1D3R]

dat moola baybay!

 

[Stereogatari]

As a Derby County fan, I wouldn't say no to that!

I don't think that's how it works, the draft pick is for up and coming youngsters, not already established superstars.

 

[gutter_trash]

Money.

The teams would sue because of all the money they would lose by relegation.

Sports in America exists to make money.

Toronto would fall into a depression seeing their Maple Leafs relegated for 40 years, LOL


*but seriously, the leagues in North-America have gotten too damn big and dilute the talent pool in sea of teams.
back in the old days, a team would have Lines of future Hall of Famers driving the team.
Today, all the good players are sprinkled around all over the league and there are no stand out teams anymore and it is all diluted and uninteresting.

 

[Kill3r7]

The sports culture and business structure is fundamentally different in the NA. Teams simply would not be financially viable if they had to face relegation. Also the leagues are much more balanced.

 

[TheWarrior]

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?


In American sports if you are a last place team you can rebuild through free agency and draft and get a chance to come back next year and win a championship.

Oh yeah and money capitalism evil boogeymen rabble rabble

 

[Kill3r7]

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?


In American sports if you are a last place team you can rebuild through free agency and draft and get a chance to come back next year and win a championship.

Oh yeah and money capitalism evil boogeymen rabble rabble

Juventus comes to mind though they were relegated for match fixing.

 

[Draxal]

I was just wondering why promotion and relegation are not used in American professional sports. Take any European country, England for example. There are thousands of football clubs in different divisions all the way up to the Premier League where the best clubs play against one another. Every season the worst 3-4 teams are relegated to a lower division and have to earn their way back.

Are there any reasons not to have these systems in place other than to protect certain financial interests (owners of big teams and their sponsors?).

1. Size America is gigantic and there's significant infrastructure requirements to schedule a national(international as some leagues include Toronto), which aren't required in Europe's domestic leagues.
2. Competition from other sports, the big 4 sports leagues fight each other all the time. Doesn't look like there's more than 1 big sport in Europe.
3. Lack of competition from other leagues. People mistakenly call American socialist, it's an oligopoly, if there weren't so many European leagues the same would happen in Europe as it would make much more money that way. It's why oligopolies exist. The NFL and AFL almost bled each other dry back in the day, it just made much more sense for them to merge than fight each other.
4. College sports exist in America, and are a much stronger rival to pro sports than anything in Europe has.

 

[Elchele]

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?


In American sports if you are a last place team you can rebuild through free agency and draft and get a chance to come back next year and win a championship.

Oh yeah and money capitalism evil boogeymen rabble rabble

Yes, it has happened.

 

[crimzonflame]

I dont know much about football or how clubs work in England but someone from the UK told me that Everton are bitches. Is this true?

 

[ICKE]

Yes, it has happened.

Manchester City was playing in 3rd highest division just a few years ago. It has happened many times in different leagues but is rare of course. Also lower league teams have enjoyed success In cup competitions. Sometimes even semi - professionals from lower divisions have beaten big name clubs.

 

[enanogrande]

Nottingham Forest in the 80's is enough reason for me to always support pro/rel. Amazing what they did.

 

[poppabk]

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?

Manchester united
Chelsea
Liverpool
The thing is it doesn't really happen in the modern era as money has flooded into the sport making some teams practically unassailable.
Post Bosman ruling it would almost be impossible to return to the old days.

 

[Canis lupus]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

 

[Frustrated_Grunt]

One thing that would be cool to have in Europe is the kind of fanfare Americans have behind the high school and university teams. As far as I understand it even some of the non-footballing high schools and unversities in America have the school ethos and pride behind them and decent sized crowds watching games? I think there are some exceptions across the UK, but generally school/unversity teams are just playing on an empty field with no one cheering them on.

Hell that's even true of the youth levels of professional teams. Players don't get used to playing in big crowds until they're actually playing for the first teams (assuming they make it that far). Like recently there is a youth player from my team (Chelsea) who has been getting a few substitution appearances for the first team and so playing in front of 40,000 people. That would have been as novel an experience to him as it would be for us fans. He's 19, so in America he'd still be playing for his university and assuming he was at a major one then he'd be used to playing in front of much bigger crowds than 40,000 by now.

I still attend my old high school's football games occasionally, and the way they're able to draw a great crowd makes up for the lower level of play you'd expect from these teams. You're probably right that the instilling of school pride at an early age does help the students and local alumni attend on a consistent basis.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

One thing that would be cool to have in Europe is the kind of fanfare Americans have behind the high school and university teams. As far as I understand it even some of the non-footballing high schools and unversities in America have the school ethos and pride behind them and decent sized crowds watching games? I think there are some exceptions across the UK, but generally school/unversity teams are just playing on an empty field with no one cheering them on.

Hell that's even true of the youth levels of professional teams. Players don't get used to playing in big crowds until they're actually playing for the first teams (assuming they make it that far). Like recently there is a youth player from my team (Chelsea) who has been getting a few substitution appearances for the first team and so playing in front of 40,000 people. That would have been as novel an experience to him as it would be for us fans. He's 19, so in America he'd still be playing for his university and assuming he was at a major one then he'd be used to playing in front of much bigger crowds than 40,000 by now.

Yeah, highschool sports are definitely popular. Highschool football support in some areas is crazy.

Then with college i'd actually say college football attendance/support is actually higher than NFL with many college stadiums selling out at 90,000+(8 with over 100,000) seats while NFL stadiums are mostly 70,000 and under.

 

[enanogrande]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

No, to found a team you have to 1) get approval from the league, and 2) pay the league a franchise fee (for MLS this fee is over $100 Million - I don't even want to guess what the fee would be like for bigger leagues like the NFL.)

Of course, it's doubtful any new teams will be approved seeing as the league and the owners are happy with 32 teams in most American leagues. This is the reason the much-rumored London NFL team is always said to be the Jaguars (or another team) moving to London instead of a brand new team.

 

[andycapps]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

No, you have to be approved. Most leagues are not expanding, it would be an issue of moving an existing team (likely suffering poor attendance) to your city. MLS is slowly accepting new teams but they're being strategic (and slow) about which markets those will be in and the entrance fees are pretty steep.

 

[Basileus777]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

Expansion is driven at the league level, mostly to move into new television markets. You need to get the existing owners to vote on and approve an expansion team. This hasn't really happened in most major sports since the 90s.

 

[TheWarrior]

Manchester City was playing in 3rd highest division just a few years ago. It has happened many times in different leagues but is rare of course. Also lower league teams have enjoyed success In cup competitions. Sometimes even semi - professionals from lower divisions have beaten big name clubs.

That's the kind of stuff I like to see, especially when I don't have a rooting interest in a particular team. This is my first year following the Premier league and football in general. Having a lot of fun just watching the games, especially since I don't follow any particular club yet.

The one thing I didn't understand was relegation and how it seemed to give teams a huge disadvantage. Seeing how the structure of the leagues are set up for the local community instead of the huge market franchises makes a lot of sense.

 

[Patryn]

No, to found a team you have to 1) get approval from the league, and 2) pay the league a franchise fee (for MLS this fee is over $100 Million - I don't even want to guess what the fee would be like for bigger leagues like the NFL.)

Of course, it's doubtful any new teams will be approved seeing as the league and the owners are happy with 32 teams in most American leagues. This is the reason the much-rumored London NFL team is always said to be the Jaguars (or another team) moving to London instead of a brand new team.

It's also important to note that the league IS the owners. They govern, and they vote on all the issues, appoint the commissioner, etc.

 

[ICKE]

It's also important to note that the league IS the owners. They govern, and they vote on all the issues, appoint the commissioner, etc.

I think there are many worthwhile elements in the American model. I definitely believe pro/rel is the better way to go but that doesn't mean that salary caps and other equity measures should not be adopted. That is why we are finally seeing some development such as the UEFA Financial Fair Play Regulations.

Kaiserslautern(who have been relegated multiple times since then) won the German League in 1998 after going down in 1996.

And they played against my local team (Helsinki) the following year in Champions League.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftE-zU8RN9Q 0-0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iquQzlYsqGg 5-2

Unforgettable times, that is why I love that there is a chance even for a small club to make an appearance in the biggest league of them all. One game, one draw, or even just one goal makes it all worth it.

 

[LyleLanley]

It's also important to note that the league IS the owners. They govern, and they vote on all the issues, appoint the commissioner, etc.

I think in the MLS that's even more true as the league owns a portion of every team. It makes free agency a joke.

 

[CheDominik]

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?


In American sports if you are a last place team you can rebuild through free agency and draft and get a chance to come back next year and win a championship.

Oh yeah and money capitalism evil boogeymen rabble rabble

Kaiserslautern(who have been relegated multiple times since then) won the German League in 1998 after going down in 1996.
So they won the 2nd league and the Bundesliga in successive years.

 

[Bumhead]

Seeing how the structure of the leagues are set up for the local community instead of the huge market franchises makes a lot of sense.

This is the big difference I think between the way the sports are viewed in the US vs UK and Europe.

Success and finance aren't the only things worth competing for. You don't have to be a huge profit driving franchise, or have a load of star players, to justify your existence as a club. Most football fans in the UK will probably never see their team win a major trophy or enjoy sustained periods of success at the top. There are 92 football clubs in the football league. Only 5 or 6 of them can make any sort of realistic claims of expectation of being able to finish in the Premier League top 4 on a regular basis.

There's a certain amount of bias here, seeing as my team are currently in it, but the English lower league system is in my opinion the greatest asset the English game has.

 

[345triangle]

the existence of college sports and the draft system is surely the answer.

in england, theoretically you could start a team with some mates from the pub and work your way up to the top of the premier league. that's just not how it works in the US.

Has a team that has ever been relegated to a lower division come back to win a championship? I honestly don't know the answer to this so maybe someone in Europe can help?

countless times.

my team, southampton, is challenging for a champions league place this year. we were in the third division four years ago and facing financial collapse.

 

[Zeus Molecules]

Fine. The Knicks would be funnier anyways. I want a D-league team to play in the Garden.

For what? So Melo could score a 100 on some scrubs?

There is barely enough basketball talent parity for 30 teams to exist.

 

[GungHo]

I'm okay with losing the Buccaneers and the Titans.

 

[Khaz]

It's also important to note that the league IS the owners. They govern, and they vote on all the issues, appoint the commissioner, etc.

So they're their own little club and decide who can play with them and share all that TV money. And of course they organise the league so that fans of every team has a chance to be pleased and continue to give them money. Such sportsmanship.

 

[LyleLanley]

So they're their own little club and decide who can play with them and share all that TV money. And of course they organise the league so that fans of every team has a chance to be pleased and continue to give them money. Such sportsmanship.

It's not like there aren't teams in all of the American leagues that are constantly bad.

 

[Dusk Soldier]

I wouldn't. The only people the salary cap effects are the stars.

The salary cap keeps salary inflation in check. Salaray inflation does help lower tier players.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

The existing teams have to approve the league expansion, the city/state you're starting in has to agree to build you a stadium, and your players are drafted from an existing pool of free agents and the next lottery.

I think the fastest expansion team to turn it around in recent memory was the Orlando Magic, they were historically awful for a few years then got #1 draft picks in back to back years and landed Shaquille O'Neal and Chris Webber (who they flipped for Anfernee Hardaway). A year after, they signed Horace Grant from the cheapskate Bulls owner and went to the NBA Finals.

This is the big difference I think between the way the sports are viewed in the US vs UK and Europe.

Success and finance aren't the only things worth competing for. You don't have to be a huge profit driving franchise, or have a load of star players, to justify your existence as a club. Most football fans in the UK will probably never see their team win a major trophy or enjoy sustained periods of success at the top. There are 92 football clubs in the football league. Only 5 or 6 of them can make any sort of realistic claims of expectation of being able to finish in the Premier League top 4 on a regular basis.

There's a certain amount of bias here, seeing as my team are currently in it, but the English lower league system is in my opinion the greatest asset the English game has.

The US has this, it's just the NCAA leagues are the source of this local fervor. Duke, Kentucky, Louisville, Kansas, UNC, UConn, basketball will never die in those places, and in many instances the NCAA teams have a bigger following than the closest NBA teams. Same with Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, LSU, Notre Dame, USC, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, and others in football.

As long as we have perennially exciting college sports, there is no place for lower leagues squeezed in between those local favorites and the pros.

 

[Thornton Reed]

I'm a Chelsea fan and I get just as upset when we get knocked out of the Cups as I did in the pre-Abramovich days. But I agree that the general perception towards Cups is negative. Just like the answer to this thread, it's all about the MONEY!

The cups were once a great ticket into Europe but the 'big clubs' aren't interested in the uefa cup. Now if the EPL gave up one of the campions league spots to the FA cup then the cups will have a fresh new perspective

 

[CheDominik]

The cups were once a great ticket into Europe but the 'big clubs' aren't interested in the uefa cup. Now if the EPL gave up one of the campions league spots to the FA cup then the cups will have a fresh new perspective

Yeah it's sad how much CL expansion has devalued the UEFA Cup.

 

[gutter_trash]

So how does the American system work? You found a team with enough players and money, you're automatically in the MLS or NBA?

Nope, the League has a huge say in it.

Not any rich guy can prop up a team in any geographical local and decide to enter the league.

The higher ups, the commissioner, the board of owners have a say.

TV market also plays a huge influence who gets a team and who doesn't. If the league want to expand its TV market in part of the country that is ripe and worth expanding in, they will got here

then you get oddities like NHL's Bettman trying to expand markets in the desert of Arizona where nobody gives a shit.
.............

And big influencial tems can cock block expansion teams. Say the Toronto Maple Leafs (even if they are losers) have allot of weight and have cock blocked a rich guy who wanted to open a franchise in South Ontario (South Ontario is hugely populated and ripe). So when The Leafs say NO to any new team in South Ontario, then the league listens

 

[The_Dama]

Don't forget that there are 4 major sports in the US (basketball, football, baseball, and hockey), in Europe, there's basically only soccer.

The systems works in the US.

 

[Bumhead]

The US has this, it's just the NCAA leagues are the source of this local fervor. Duke, Kentucky, Louisville, Kansas, UNC, UConn, basketball will never die in those places, and in many instances the NCAA teams have a bigger following than the closest NBA teams. Same with Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, LSU, Notre Dame, USC, Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, and others in football.

As long as we have perennially exciting college sports, there is no place for lower leagues squeezed in between those local favorites and the pros.

That's slightly different though in that they're all isolated closed shops, aren't they? There's no way for a college team to graduate to the NFL, right?

The beauty of the lower league system in football is that dreams do happen. A team can get promoted from bottom to top. A team from a lower division can compete with (and more regularly than you might expect, beat) a top side in knockout cup competition.

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

 

[The Albatross]

The UK lacks the enormous collegiate sports system that effectively fills this vacuum in the US. It's not a regular occurrence (e.g., once every few years), but it's not uncommon for colleges and universities to be promoted and demoted between more prestigious conferences and also into better divisions of sports. Conferences usually add or drop a team, probably, once every 5 years, with then some more notable shakeups as well (like the ACC taking on the best teams from the Big East 5 or 6 years ago for football and basketball, whenever that happened) With hundreds of colleges in the US competing with each other in nearly every type of organized sport, there is no vacuum of a ladder system of clubs.

With the collegiate sports system in the US, most moderate cities have at least 5 colleges competing in athletics. My city of 185,000 people has 13 colleges in it. On any given night I could go to a basketball game, any Friday or Saturday in the Fall there's at least 2 college football games within a few miles of me, and in the spring there's 3 college baseball teams. Now, admittedly, only one of these schools is D1, but still, the competition is there, and so it's tough for a city of 185,000 to support not only 10+ college sports teams, but also a small time semi-pro or pro team in a variety of sports.

 

[arkon]

I cannot parse this double negative.

Where's the double negative?

 

[Kill3r7]

That's slightly different though in that they're all isolated closed shops, aren't they? There's no way for a college team to graduate to the NFL, right?

The beauty of the lower league system in football is that dreams do happen. A team can get promoted from bottom to top. A team from a lower division can compete with (and more regularly than you might expect, beat) a top side in knockout cup competition.

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

The gap is massive. The difference between college sports and pro sports is the equivalent of Real Madrid playing a semi-pro team.

 

[The Albatross]

That's slightly different though in that they're all isolated closed shops, aren't they? There's no way for a college team to graduate to the NFL, right?

The beauty of the lower league system in football is that dreams do happen. A team can get promoted from bottom to top. A team from a lower division can compete with (and more regularly than you might expect, beat) a top side in knockout cup competition.

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

It's very different, but I think the point is that it's tough for a local community to support a small club/organization when it's already supporting a local college, or in many cases, 4 or 5 colleges.

But, to answer your question, college teams could never compete with any NFL team. Every once in a while there is a dominant college team, like say Alabama in the 2000s, or Miami in the 1980s/90s, and somebody says that they could beat the worst NFL team, or something, but the game wouldn't even be competitive. Every NFL team is made up of the best of the best college players in the country, the level of coaching far exceeds coaching in any college organization, and the preparation is completely different. The best college football team of the last 20 years wouldn't score a single touchdown against the worst NFL team of the last 20 years.

There are semi-pro and amateur sports organizations in the US that have promotion systems like this, but when there is such a strong professional and collegiate system of sports and teams, they can't compete in terms of local or regional interest.

 

[Subitai]

The TV money itself isn't the problem. The problem is that all the money is coming from advertisers who count on seeing the logos they paid to show up everywhere on TV would no longer be sure what they bought would be on TV. If the Knicks are relegated, then they aren't on TV nearly as much, so no one outside of NYC and hardcore hoops fans will see them. Splitting TV revenue from rights buyers doesn't do anything to hurt owners and players that much. It is the advertisers who balk at potentially losing most of their ROI. Unless the advertising model changes, there will be no relegation in the US.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

That's slightly different though in that they're all isolated closed shops, aren't they? There's no way for a college team to graduate to the NFL, right?

The beauty of the lower league system in football is that dreams do happen. A team can get promoted from bottom to top. A team from a lower division can compete with (and more regularly than you might expect, beat) a top side in knockout cup competition.

The rivalries have existed for decades for most big time schools and professional teams, the fans wouldn't want those to go away. In the case of the Ivy leagues, we're talking over a century of H2H matchups. It's a bigger deal for Georgia to play Auburn in football than it is for them to play the Atlanta Falcons. Hell, it's a bigger deal for Georgia to play Auburn than it is for the Falcons to play anybody judging by the last Falcons game I went to.

The amateur/professional divide and the existence of "student athletes" also stops this from happening. You have to be a full time student in good academic standing to be an NCAA division 1 athlete; you only have 4 years of eligibility. Though teams will always have inherent advantages due to prestige, coaches, money, facilities, location, and flat out bribes/lowered academic standards/cheating, the NCAA system for the most part keeps the top 50 or so schools within striking distance of one another.

The NCAA basketball tournament offers plenty of opportunity for upset. While a #1 seed has never lost in the first round, there are annually big examples of teams coming out of nowhere to shock one of the embedded favorites due to their unusual play style. The college football bowl series is a bit more controversial, as your team has to go undefeated to even have a chance of sniffing the NCAA championship. But every good team gets to play at least another reasonably good team they otherwise never would have played at the end of the year, and fans travel and pay big money to see this for the novelty, prestige, and bragging rights for their school.

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

The gap is astronomical. There are nearly 1000 NCAA teams, and just under 500 NBA players, and people argue right now that the talent is spread too thin.

The NCAA is closer to the relegation system in that regard. Teams that struggle in conference play, or teams seeking a bigger market/money deal, can move between conferences. Teams that absolutely struggle to pick up fans and talent can drop from Division I to Division II or vice versa, though it is rare.

 

[LyleLanley]

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

The college kids would get absolutely murdered, possibly literally. Not to mention the problems of making unpaid college athletes play against NFL professionals.

 

[Patryn]

Would a knockout competition incorporating both the NFL and college football not work? Is the gap in quality so large that it wouldn't be at least competetive?

On any given college football team, there are generally fewer than 10 players that are ready to be drafted at any one time.

Even among that 10, it's likely only a handful are ready to start right away in the NFL.

In addition, there are differences in rules between college and NFL, including things like when the clock stops, what constitutes a catch, etc.

Basically, it's pretty much guaranteed that any college team would get destroyed by an NFL team.

 

[Irminsul]

There's a certain amount of bias here, seeing as my team are currently in it, but the English lower league system is in my opinion the greatest asset the English game has.

Yeah, even though my team plays in the top tier in Germany, I'd definitely agree with you that lower leagues can be pretty great. I regularly visit games of my local team, which is a really nice deviation from all this inflated drama and star players of the top level.

Also, it's one of my goals in life to visit a lower-league game in England. Football in its "purest" form if you like. What's the highest level where terraces with standing places are still allowed in England? Maybe it's just my German perspective (where they are some sort of holy grail, at least for organised fans), but for me, football is best watched being stuffed into a small standing area from where you can only see half the pitch. Or at least sometimes it is

Yeah it's sad how much CL expansion has devalued the UEFA Cup.

The worst thing is that you can be literally relegated to the UEFA Cup / Europa League from the CL. End this shit and the EL would be worth a lot more.

Nope, the League has a huge say in it.

Not any rich guy can prop up a team in any geographical local and decide to enter the league.

Well, it's not like the league doesn't have anything to say in European football. All clubs are usually organised in a group (additionally to the domestic FA), which regulates licencing and other stuff. Every club has a say in it and each of them has to request a licence for each season. It's just that the league system itself is open, so the "normal" process is that promoted / relegated clubs just play in their new league the next season.

Don't forget that there are 4 major sports in the US (basketball, football, baseball, and hockey), in Europe, there's basically only soccer.

The systems works in the US.

Nah, I wouldn't say that. It's more like that football is really big and the only sport really popular in all of Europe. You have things like rugby in England and France, and in the latter case, Rugby attendances do rival football attendances if I'm not completely wrong. Then there's handball for a lot of Northern and Central Europe (a clear distant second to football, but still there) and, in some cases, basketball or ice hockey.