European Clubs are in Major debt
There are fans out there that want the MLS to be exactly like the Euorpean leagues. Just looking at the levels of debt and how many clubs are in debt I am thankful for the methodical process of MLS and the salary cap.
4 months ago
Ryan Gates
21 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Can you say "credit bubble"?
I do wonder about Italy though. Too many empty seats there, even in places like Milan unless it’s the derby.
That's what she said.
by yepyou'reright on Jan 25, 2012 12:25 PM PST reply actions
I know we don't have the best talent in the world in our league
But after looking at the salary caps of the teams this past year, I really think the league is set up to survive. They can continue to raise things as we bring in more talent to the league, but for now it seems to be set up right, in a way that owners aren’t losing money by running a team.
How big is Euro soccer?
It’s the size of two NFLs.
The ESPN article says soccer generated “$16.6 billion for top-tier European clubs.” I don’t know where the cutoff is, but the NFL is estimated to have made $8.3 billion in revenues from all its teams. (Forbes estimate)
NFL for the most part is profitable and has no large issues with debt.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
Also
NFL has 8.3 Billion dollars in revenue for 32 teams while UEFA has 300+
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
by Ryan Gates on Jan 25, 2012 3:27 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
"top-tier clubs"
Whatever that means. But the $16.6 is a limited number of the total clubs in Europe.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
As an aside/tangent
How much would EPL teams kill for crowds that college football gets in the U.S.? I know Nou has 95k seats, but MU has the biggest stadium in the EPL at something like 85k. There’s like 15 college football stadiums with higher capacity than that.
NFL stadiums are starting to catch up to college ball, but still lag behind.
And baseball has gone smaller.
But yeah, here’s the run down of the EPL:
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/attendance/_/league/eng.1/barclays-premier-league?cc=5901
High: ManU, 75,451
Low: QPR, 16,931
Avg: 34,481
In terms of raw numbers of people who attend sports events, US beats everyone save probably Australia by a long shot. I wouldn’t doubt that per capita those who go to sports events is well above other nations. We have so many more options that are well attended.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
So, I guess I'm the guy that has to say it... (mostly cuz I'm not a Euro follower):
This is the model the talking heads want us to follow with MLS? Pfffft, whatever.
Blazers win!
It all changed because of an EU Court of Justice ruling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosman_ruling
It is often referenced as the point where modern football started.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
To be fair
It might have bad results with imbalanced leagues and loads of debt, but why shouldn’t players be able to play where they want? I mean, I choose to live and work in Portland, because Portland is the best place EVER. So if I were a footy, I’d sign my huge DP deal with the Timbers. Why shouldn’t I be able to do that?
Mexico wont let you just willy-nilly go to Chivas because they offered a larger salary with NAFTA in place
Bosman has much more to do with EU labor rights than it does with football.
Art 45
1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union.
You make a fair point about player movement, but the facts are about moving between EU member states.
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
Modern football actually started when Sky Sports started paying unlimited money for TV rights to European leagues
the Bosman ruling was big, but it wasn’t until Sky bathed every major European league in money that things got out of control. In England alone, you have Blackburn Rovers, Leeds, Newcastle, and Nottingham Forest who gambled with someone else’s money and lost to varying extents – Newcastle almost went broke spending money they didn’t have, and Leeds and Blackburn Rovers have never recovered from their dependence on TV money which subsequently went missing when NTL went broke (Newcastle) and when Leeds didn’t stay in the Champions League and lost their guaranteed TV money.
You now have Saudi/Dubai princes buying teams as hobbies and pouring unlimited funds into them (Manchester City, Paris St Germain, etc), which leaves teams that try to be responsible about their finances (Arsenal) totally playing catch-up.
UEFA has introduced Financial Fair Play, but it remains to be seen whether that will be a joke or not – I think it will, but we’ll see starting next year.
right around
the 1990’s I believe….
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
I'm assuming it coincided with the creation of the EPL?
Sometime after 1992?
Jag kom, jag såg, erövrade jag.
Yep
1992 was the first year of the Premier League, and Sky Sports was a major driver in that. Ever since then, the league has been awash in money. There were other companies that tried to outbide Sky for TV rights, like NTL, that drove themselves and some teams into bankruptcy doing it.
I believe the next TV rights package in England is up for bid this year, and it’s expected to fetch somewhere around £3 billion for domestic rights and close to £1 billion for overseas rights.
Money
Then said TV rights gets distributed to all the EPL teams. Teams like QPR and Leeds then heavily relied upon the money to actually run but when they got relegated they could not pay their salaries and there was a spiral down. Essentially happened to every team in EPL and those that got promoted for 1 year were even worse.
Contributing editor to Stumptown Footy the Portland Timbers SBN blog.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
