Big Gay Soccer Thread
-
The "big" clubs in England have much bigger venues to play in.
Man United play is a stadium (Old Trafford) that holds around 76,000 fans
Arsenal play in a stadium (Emirates Stadium) that holds over 60,000
Some of the lower teams play in very small stadiums
Stoke City play in a stadium (Britannia Stadium) that holds only 28,000
Watford play in a stadium (Vicarage Road) that only holds 21,000
I don't think the big clubs want to share that much of a difference in revenue
-
The "big" clubs in England have much bigger venues to play in.
Man United play is a stadium (Old Trafford) that holds around 76,000 fans
Arsenal play in a stadium (Emirates Stadium) that holds over 60,000
Some of the lower teams play in very small stadiums
Stoke City play in a stadium (Britannia Stadium) that holds only 28,000
Watford play in a stadium (Vicarage Road) that only holds 21,000
I don't think the big clubs want to share that much of a difference in revenue
The "big" clubs in England have much bigger venues to play in.
Man United play is a stadium (Old Trafford) that holds around 76,000 fans
Arsenal play in a stadium (Emirates Stadium) that holds over 60,000
Some of the lower teams play in very small stadiums
Stoke City play in a stadium (Britannia Stadium) that holds only 28,000
Watford play in a stadium (Vicarage Road) that only holds 21,000
I don't think the big clubs want to share that much of a difference in revenue
Well, it sounds to me like that the English Premier League isn't "premier" at all. It sounds like you have "minor league" like teams playing in the same league as "major league" teams.
Could you imagine the NFL(or MLB) having some stadiums seating @80 K...and some seating only 20-25K?
Yes, that sounds absurd to us.
Here, the largest NFL stadium is like 82K (Met Life....though AT&T could go to 100 K)
...and the smallest is the 52,525 the Vikings play in ....but that is a temporary stadium....to be replaced next year with a new stadium.
The Smallest is O.com stadium in Oakland: 56,057. Yes, there is some disparity....about 25K......but nothing like the over 50K disparity you note.
The disparity in MLB stadiums is: Dodger Stadium, largest at 56,000. TB Rays stadium at 31,000.
For the MLS here, stadium size is flexible.......several teams play in football stadia, but reduce the size for soccer: e.g, they take Gillette Stadium from 68K for the Patriots down to 20K for the New England Revolution.
The actual largest capacity MLS stadium is the 40,000 that the Seattle team plays in (reduced from 67,000 for the Seahawks)
Three MLS teams play in stadiums with about 18,000 capacity.
Hell, Akron U plays in a soccer only stadium that seats 5800.....but they could move over to Infocision Stad. with a 30K capacity.
I guess my point/question is: why do they allow for such a large disparity in stadium capacity in the EPL.....far larger than any US sport.
Hockey arenas in the NHL are all between about 16K at smallest and 22K at largest.
The NBA is even more uniform.....largest is 21,165 at the Palace at Auburn Hills for the Pistons. Smallest is 16,867 for the Pelicans...New Orleans.
-
The team in first place in the EPL is Leicster City.
They play in a stadium (King Power Stadium) that holds 32,000
That is about the average for the 20 teams that compete in the EPL every year
-
Whatever happens in MLS I hope it doesn't get dominated by a few teams, which is what has happened in football elsewhere.
Leicester, Watford are teams that will be relegated in a year or two. Man City will win the EPL. Teams like Tottenham, Liverpool and possibly West Ham will put pressure on top 4 places over the next few years as they build (or are given ?) big stadiums and have big fan bases. The same teams will otherwise compete for the glory. As much as it's refreshing to see Leicester do well it won't last and neither will Chelscum 's disaster start continue unfortunately.
I hope the MLS is great, so good luck with this and I hope you produce teams that can compete on the world scale.
-
Oh god, this is turning in to an 'educate gipper on why he's wrong' thread again. I'm out.
-
Oh god, this is turning in to an 'educate gipper on why he's wrong' thread again. I'm out.
Oh god, this is turning in to an 'educate gipper on why he's wrong' thread again. I'm out.
I don't think I said anything that I can either be right or wrong about.
(My postulation about the MLS coming on par with EPL etc. is simply that....a postulation....a "maybe someday in the future this could happen"....nothing right or wrong about that")
No....I asked about the disparity in stadium sizes in the EPL.....and how it affects competition there.
Do you deny that the teams with the larger stadiums generally dominate?
And I asked why you think that the MLS cannot compete internationally because of America's insistence on "sporting parity". I truly have no understanding what you mean by that.
I mean, if you don't know your sport well enough to give a cogent answer, just say so. There is no need to be snarky.
Yes, I was looking for information......but in doing so I gave a comparison with American sports.....which are apparently run on a different basis than European or South American sports.
-
I will try to answer your questions Gipper, but this only imo. I think the clubs in the biggest cities (London, Manchester and Liverpool) are the teams that dominate and they also have the biggest stadiums with the most loyal support. That isn't coincidence. Virtually all have now been bought out by mega rich owners and in soccer that makes a big difference.
Let me give you an example of one obvious exception- a team I despise, Chelsea. The year they got promoted, to what became the EPL eventually, they were playing at home in their last game to Birmingham I think. They needed to win the game to be Div 2 champions. 12,000 attended. They are pathetic. That is their natural level of support. A wealthy Russian buys them and buys success and now they are a brand which everyone adores. They are the exception.
Man City, Manure (Man Utd), Liverpool and Arsenal are all big clubs. Tottenham ( who I don't like either, but for other reasons) are a big club in waiting and are from London. My team, West Ham (also London- Arsenal, Tottenham and West Ham are the only 3 big clubs in London), are also a big club in waiting, but to make the leap now need mega rich owners. Both Tottenham and West Ham have sizeable fan bases and are moving shortly in to big stadiums which they will both fill. West Ham dominate Essex and East London and Tottenham share North London with Arsenal, but dominate Hertfordshire.
England's second biggest city Birmingham should theoretically be able to compete, but it has some major let downs which stop it doing so. 1. Their fans suck- take a look at their half empty grounds when things go wrong. 2. They don't appeal to rich buyers because they are not in London or the North West. This is also Newcastle's problem, although their fans are loyal. On my theory the only other club that could make the transition to compete is Everton as they have great fans, are planning to build a bigger stadium, are in Liverpool, but....have no money.
Money is making other teams in England competitive, but only those teams with good fan bases and good stadiums plus good training facilities and academies will stay at the top. At this moment in time I can only see Manure, Man City (Citeh), Arsenal, Chelscum staying at the top. Liverpool, Tottenham and West Ham will soon be kicking down the doors to be let in. What money is doing is allowing these teams to buy players who can earn the top bucks, but crucially buy very good players who don't charge the top dollar as the 'big boys' get fleeced by the top players agents. To give you examples of this type of player West Ham have bought Dimitri Payet who is superb, but players like this are only now coming to West Ham because we are moving to the Olympic Stadium and can now pay their wages.
In terms of the MLS I see no reason why it won't be able to compete eventually. Americans produce world class athletes and take competition very seriously. The USA has lots of money and lots of people. Americans love sport. The only reason I say eventually is because soccer I believe still needs to grow in the USA and you still need to develop training academies and experienced coaches, but all this will come in time and I hope it does. I would love to see the day when American teams beat Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventos, AC Milan, and any English club apart from West Ham. And if you're ever over during our season and West Ham are at home, let me know and I will take you to a game, as I have 2 season tickets.
Loyaultie me Lie. If I hadn't seen such riches I could live with being poor! -
Also comparisons between NFL teams and EPL teams are difficult because of how long English clubs have been in existence. For example take the Cleveland Browns- a very successful franchise with a very loyal blue collar fan base that has fallen on hard times. Most of the teams, if not all of the teams, that now dominate English football didn't do so until (I'm guessing now since I can't be bothered to Google it) the late 50's onwards. It was the Munich air crash that made Manure famous until then they were just another team. Liverpool only became a world force in the 70's and 80's. Everton and Tottenham have won silverware on and off-mainly Cups, but never really dominated the league. Citeh were dreadful not that long ago. Chelscum have always been scum and still are. So these teams have never started brilliant and fallen by the way side, they've done it the other way round. Manure, the Spuds (Tottenham) and West Ham all have a tradition of playing attacking football. Arsenal used to be dire, but now play pretty football and want to walk the ball in the net.
You can't compare on fan loyalty because all the big clubs I have mentioned (apart from Chelscum as I refuse to think of them as a big club) have loyal blue collar fan bases. Arsenal is probably the exception here as they are usually referred to as Guardian newspaper readers (white collar) and are known for the morgue of their stadium (no noise).
Having said all that I do of course like in my mind to compare teams. Stoolers I compare to Chelscum. Ravens I compare to Tottenham (sorry London Dawg). Arsenal, Manure, Liverpool all have got to be linked with teams like the Giants (Man U), Redskins (Arsenal), Cowboys (Liverpool), but in no particular order really. Flaky support has to go with flaky support in the NFL so Villa with the Rams for instance. Everton could be a Vikings. Citeh could be a Green Bay.
So I have saved my best comparison to last. The Browns and West Ham are the perfect match. West Ham have a song we sing every game some words of which are: " I'm forever blowing bubbles, pretty bubbles in the air, they fly so high, nearly reach the sky, then like my dreams they fade and die, fortunes always hiding, I've looked everywhere, I'm forever blowing bubbles, pretty bubbles in the air!" Now you tell me how we are not too dissimilar? Two proper blue collar teams, with fanatical support, desperate for success, but never getting it (recently in the Browns case although it probably appears forever for you natives), yet have hope as they both could so easily turn it around as they have wealthy owners and good stadiums. I'm telling you, if you're Browns and interested in Soccer you should be a Hammers fan (West Ham)!
-
Deputy - I'm a browns fan and a villa fan. The suffering is mutual and perfectly symmetrical, conjoined by Randy Lerner. It may be my humble opinion but villa are the soccer brethren of the browns.
-
Sorry Chris mate, respect your suffering, but apart from your owner there is no comparison. Villa have poor fans in general and by that I mean they are fair weather supporters. Browns fans are loyal. Nope, its definitely the Hammers for any Browns fans out there wanting to follow an English club
-
Arsenal?
-
If I'm just arbitrarily picking an English soccer team I'm going to pick a good one.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Cysko man! Come on! Choose a team similar to the Browns- Arsenal are consistently good, solid support, a nice bunch, but quiet...so quiet! Shooosh.....no, you still can't hear them, that was a pin drop!!
-
And Chris mate, Villa haven't really suffered, no where what West Ham have. When was the last time you went down?
Loyaultie me Lie. If I hadn't seen such riches I could live with being poor! -
Cysko man! Come on! Choose a team similar to the Browns- Arsenal are consistently good, solid support, a nice bunch, but quiet...so quiet! Shooosh.....no, you still can't hear them, that was a pin drop!!
Why would I ever choose to support a bad team? I was born into browns fandom.Cysko man! Come on! Choose a team similar to the Browns- Arsenal are consistently good, solid support, a nice bunch, but quiet...so quiet! Shooosh.....no, you still can't hear them, that was a pin drop!!
-
Ah ha, that's the thing, West Ham are on the verge of greatness, will have an iconic stadium next year, have superb support and a better kit. Trust me Cysko the Arse are shit ?
-
My team is Liverpool. My Mom's family is from there. Just like I was born into the Browns fandom, I was also born into being a Liverpool fan
-
I will try to answer your questions Gipper, but this only imo. I think the clubs in the biggest cities (London, Manchester and Liverpool) are the teams that dominate and they also have the biggest stadiums with the most loyal support. That isn't coincidence. Virtually all have now been bought out by mega rich owners and in soccer that makes a big difference.
Let me give you an example of one obvious exception- a team I despise, Chelsea. The year they got promoted, to what became the EPL eventually, they were playing at home in their last game to Birmingham I think. They needed to win the game to be Div 2 champions. 12,000 attended. They are pathetic. That is their natural level of support. A wealthy Russian buys them and buys success and now they are a brand which everyone adores. They are the exception.
Man City, Manure (Man Utd), Liverpool and Arsenal are all big clubs. Tottenham ( who I don't like either, but for other reasons) are a big club in waiting and are from London. My team, West Ham (also London- Arsenal, Tottenham and West Ham are the only 3 big clubs in London), are also a big club in waiting, but to make the leap now need mega rich owners. Both Tottenham and West Ham have sizeable fan bases and are moving shortly in to big stadiums which they will both fill. West Ham dominate Essex and East London and Tottenham share North London with Arsenal, but dominate Hertfordshire.
England's second biggest city Birmingham should theoretically be able to compete, but it has some major let downs which stop it doing so. 1. Their fans suck- take a look at their half empty grounds when things go wrong. 2. They don't appeal to rich buyers because they are not in London or the North West. This is also Newcastle's problem, although their fans are loyal. On my theory the only other club that could make the transition to compete is Everton as they have great fans, are planning to build a bigger stadium, are in Liverpool, but....have no money.
Money is making other teams in England competitive, but only those teams with good fan bases and good stadiums plus good training facilities and academies will stay at the top. At this moment in time I can only see Manure, Man City (Citeh), Arsenal, Chelscum staying at the top. Liverpool, Tottenham and West Ham will soon be kicking down the doors to be let in. What money is doing is allowing these teams to buy players who can earn the top bucks, but crucially buy very good players who don't charge the top dollar as the 'big boys' get fleeced by the top players agents. To give you examples of this type of player West Ham have bought Dimitri Payet who is superb, but players like this are only now coming to West Ham because we are moving to the Olympic Stadium and can now pay their wages.
In terms of the MLS I see no reason why it won't be able to compete eventually. Americans produce world class athletes and take competition very seriously. The USA has lots of money and lots of people. Americans love sport. The only reason I say eventually is because soccer I believe still needs to grow in the USA and you still need to develop training academies and experienced coaches, but all this will come in time and I hope it does. I would love to see the day when American teams beat Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventos, AC Milan, and any English club apart from West Ham. And if you're ever over during our season and West Ham are at home, let me know and I will take you to a game, as I have 2 season tickets.
I will try to answer your questions Gipper, but this only imo. I think the clubs in the biggest cities (London, Manchester and Liverpool) are the teams that dominate and they also have the biggest stadiums with the most loyal support. That isn't coincidence. Virtually all have now been bought out by mega rich owners and in soccer that makes a big difference.
Let me give you an example of one obvious exception- a team I despise, Chelsea. The year they got promoted, to what became the EPL eventually, they were playing at home in their last game to Birmingham I think. They needed to win the game to be Div 2 champions. 12,000 attended. They are pathetic. That is their natural level of support. A wealthy Russian buys them and buys success and now they are a brand which everyone adores. They are the exception.
Man City, Manure (Man Utd), Liverpool and Arsenal are all big clubs. Tottenham ( who I don't like either, but for other reasons) are a big club in waiting and are from London. My team, West Ham (also London- Arsenal, Tottenham and West Ham are the only 3 big clubs in London), are also a big club in waiting, but to make the leap now need mega rich owners. Both Tottenham and West Ham have sizeable fan bases and are moving shortly in to big stadiums which they will both fill. West Ham dominate Essex and East London and Tottenham share North London with Arsenal, but dominate Hertfordshire.
England's second biggest city Birmingham should theoretically be able to compete, but it has some major let downs which stop it doing so. 1. Their fans suck- take a look at their half empty grounds when things go wrong. 2. They don't appeal to rich buyers because they are not in London or the North West. This is also Newcastle's problem, although their fans are loyal. On my theory the only other club that could make the transition to compete is Everton as they have great fans, are planning to build a bigger stadium, are in Liverpool, but....have no money.
Money is making other teams in England competitive, but only those teams with good fan bases and good stadiums plus good training facilities and academies will stay at the top. At this moment in time I can only see Manure, Man City (Citeh), Arsenal, Chelscum staying at the top. Liverpool, Tottenham and West Ham will soon be kicking down the doors to be let in. What money is doing is allowing these teams to buy players who can earn the top bucks, but crucially buy very good players who don't charge the top dollar as the 'big boys' get fleeced by the top players agents. To give you examples of this type of player West Ham have bought Dimitri Payet who is superb, but players like this are only now coming to West Ham because we are moving to the Olympic Stadium and can now pay their wages.
In terms of the MLS I see no reason why it won't be able to compete eventually. Americans produce world class athletes and take competition very seriously. The USA has lots of money and lots of people. Americans love sport. The only reason I say eventually is because soccer I believe still needs to grow in the USA and you still need to develop training academies and experienced coaches, but all this will come in time and I hope it does. I would love to see the day when American teams beat Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Juventos, AC Milan, and any English club apart from West Ham. And if you're ever over during our season and West Ham are at home, let me know and I will take you to a game, as I have 2 season tickets.
Could the difference be that in American sports leagues there is so much "revenue sharing" that while there are certain disparities, the money isn't the biggest thing?
Is there no revenue sharing in the EPL. Primarily national broadcast revenues. That is what keeps parity.
In the NFL/NBA/NHL there are salary caps/floors which somewhat take disparate money revenues out of the picture.
MLB does not have a salary cap.....and for some time it was a big problem. The big money teams were always winning....or at least in the picture to win......Yes, the Yankees.
But lately.....even though the Yankees/Dodgers and others still have the big money, downtrodden, lower revenue teams have become competitive:
The Kansas City Royals are now champs after 20 years of bottom feeding. The Pittsburgh Pirates, the Houston Astros, even the Cubs.....all with extensive bottom feeding histories have now become the teams to watch.
While there is no salary cap in baseball....there is revenue sharing....which may be why these former forlorn clubs are now competitive.
Could the same happen there? Is there revenue sharing?
-
If I'm just arbitrarily picking an English soccer team I'm going to pick a good one.
If I'm just arbitrarily picking an English soccer team I'm going to pick a good one.
Then it wouldn't be an arbitrary choice, it would be a FRAK like choice, no? Arbitrary would mean random....not backing the best.
If I were to choose, I too would probably choose Liverpool. My uncle lived there and was a Liverpool supporter. (so, that choice would not be arbitrary). Though, I think he was more into rugby. He gave me a Liverpool Rugby jersey when I went to visit him 40 years ago. And my cousin....his son...is a big rugby guy. He travels the world following rugby. (he.....an Englishman....says most soccer players are preening pansies.....his words)
-
And Chris mate, Villa haven't really suffered, no where what West Ham have. When was the last time you went down?
And Chris mate, Villa haven't really suffered, no where what West Ham have. When was the last time you went down?
What are you asking him?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login