By the criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in themIntercontinental Cup from 1999-2004 as only worth half a World Championship.
International prestige has been measured by the number of World Club Championships and European Champions Cups/Copa Libertadores won by those clubs, counting a World Club Championship as worth 3 continental championships; but counting the
......................W.....C......total score
1 Brazil……….. 10 ..22.........52
2 Spain………. 10.5 19.........50.5
3 Argentina…. 8…. 25........ 49
4 Italy …………...9…. 12.........39
Mexico 0 ... 37 ... 37
5 Uruguay …….6 …..8.......... 26
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider
the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but
by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider the
Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but >> by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider the
Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but, back in
the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
Nice try though. However, I will delete 'Admiral William Brown' from my Spotify playlist if you continue with this nonsense!!! ;-)
On 2022-11-17 15:46, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but, back in
the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
England, Germany, Spain, France, and Italy
Italy would be higher if the entire nation of soccer was not so
corrupt.
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
Futbolmetrix wrote:
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, MH wrote:
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
So Eurocentric. I can't believe you left out the Qing dynasty and the Mongol Empire. Not to speak of the Incas.Let us not forget the the Aztecs either, the originators of football
today... only because they needed something to do with all those heads.
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, MH wrote:
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world areSo Eurocentric. I can't believe you left out the Qing dynasty and the Mongol Empire. Not to speak of the Incas.
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, MH wrote:
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
So Eurocentric. I can't believe you left out the Qing dynasty and the
Mongol Empire. Not to speak of the Incas.
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 8:52:41 AM UTC-5, Futbolmetrix wrote:
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, MH wrote:
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world areSo Eurocentric. I can't believe you left out the Qing dynasty and the Mongol Empire. Not to speak of the Incas.
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
Very good point. If we go by largest land area under their historical empires, the 5 top countries in the world at present are:
1) UK
2) Mongolia
3) Russia
4) China
5) Spain
Tragically for Mark, no one from South America made the cut.
Very good point. If we go by largest land area under their historical empires, the 5 top countries in the world at present are:
1) UK
2) Mongolia
3) Russia
4) China
5) Spain
Tragically for Mark, no one from South America made the cut.
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 9:44:41 AM UTC-5, Blueshirt wrote:
Futbolmetrix wrote:
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:35:59 AM UTC-5, MH wrote:
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the
world are Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
So Eurocentric. I can't believe you left out the Qing dynastyLet us not forget the the Aztecs either, the originators of
and the Mongol Empire. Not to speak of the Incas.
football today... only because they needed something to do with
all those heads.
Another great point. I believe the Aztecs won the Footskull World
Cup 4 times in a row.
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but, back in
the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
Nice try though. However, I will delete 'Admiral William Brown' from my Spotify playlist if you continue with this nonsense!!! ;-)
Al Kamista wrote:
Very good point. If we go by largest land area under their historical empires, the 5 top countries in the world at present are:
1) UK
2) Mongolia
3) Russia
4) China
5) Spain
Tragically for Mark, no one from South America made the cut.I hope by historical land area you haven't included the Falkland Islands
as part of the UK's empire? Mark will very much not like THAT, and this discussion could get very Messi ! :-)
On 2022-11-17 15:46, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but
by at least 1 criterion, there is justification to consider the
Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top 5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but, back in the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
Nice try though. However, I will delete 'Admiral William Brown' from my Spotify playlist if you continue with this nonsense!!! ;-)That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
This is absurd not because those empires don't rate on an all time best list, but because of the verb "are" in the present tense.
Past glories of the South American leagues are irrelevant to considering which leagues are the strongest right now. Even the (for many of us) meaningless club world championship has been won by which ever team wins
in the Champions' league 9 years in a row, and 14 times out of the last
15. There is a far greater chance of the CL winner losing the European
Super Cup than the Club World cup (4 times in last 15 years), though
even that is now heavily slanted to the CL winner.
That list is like saying the most powerful nations in the world are
Rome, Spain, France, Great Britain and the USA.
Seeing the shenanigans of Qatar I'm of the opinion that all of football
these days is corrupt.
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 10:46:13 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to
consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification
to consider the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top
5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but,
back in the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
How can any criterion be biased? The only way I can think of is by
only considering 2022 rather than all time.
Mark wrote:
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 10:46:13 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to
consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification
to consider the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top
5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but,
back in the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
How can any criterion be biased? The only way I can think of is byQuite simply and in plain English... the top five domestic league Championships in 2022 do not include Brazil or Argentina by most
only considering 2022 rather than all time.
people's criteria. You are free to believe otherwise, but you are not convincing anybody here with your delusions.
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:06:09 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Quite simply and in plain English... the top five domestic league Championships in 2022 do not include Brazil or Argentina by most
people's criteria. You are free to believe otherwise, but you are not convincing anybody here with your delusions.
The top 5 in 2022, or the top 5, updated to 2022, taking into
consideration all the prestige gained in the past, over all time?
It still sounds as if you're placing too much emphasis on the last 20
years or so. (Or possibly, only considering 2022.)
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:06:09 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 10:46:13 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So there you have it. OK, that’s not the only criterion to consider, but by at least 1 criterion, there is justification
to consider the Argentinean and Brazilian Leagues among the top
5 in the World.
Using YOUR biased criterion, yes there is justification... but,
back in the real world, nobody else really thinks that way.
The top 5 in 2022, or the top 5, updated to 2022, taking into consideration all the prestige gained in the past, over all time?How can any criterion be biased? The only way I can think of is byQuite simply and in plain English... the top five domestic league Championships in 2022 do not include Brazil or Argentina by most
only considering 2022 rather than all time.
people's criteria. You are free to believe otherwise, but you are not convincing anybody here with your delusions.
It still sounds as if you're placing too much emphasis on the last 20 years or so. (Or possibly, only considering 2022.)
Mark wrote:
On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:06:09 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Quite simply and in plain English... the top five domestic league Championships in 2022 do not include Brazil or Argentina by most
people's criteria. You are free to believe otherwise, but you are not convincing anybody here with your delusions.
The top 5 in 2022, or the top 5, updated to 2022, taking intoNot all time, as it all goes in cycles. This discussion started over the
consideration all the prestige gained in the past, over all time?
RSS Coach Sacking competition, so clearly as it meant now.
On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 11:12:09 AM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
The top 5 in 2022, or the top 5, updated to 2022, taking into consideration all the prestige gained in the past, over all time?
Not all time, as it all goes in cycles. This discussion started
over the RSS Coach Sacking competition, so clearly it meant now.
So how long does it take for a League to lose the international
prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even 20
years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
Mark wrote:
On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 11:12:09 AM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
The top 5 in 2022, or the top 5, updated to 2022, taking into consideration all the prestige gained in the past, over all time?
Not all time, as it all goes in cycles. This discussion started
over the RSS Coach Sacking competition, so clearly it meant now.
So how long does it take for a League to lose the internationalThere's no point explaining it to you as you do not want to understand.
prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even 20
years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
Your own biased pov is all that matters to you. But nobody here takes
you - or your delusional posts - on this matter seriously.
On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 10:16:49 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So how long does it take for a League to lose the international
prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even
20 years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
There's no point explaining it to you as you do not want to
understand. Your own biased pov is all that matters to you. But
nobody here takes you - or your delusional posts - on this matter seriously.
If I didn't want to understand I wouldn't have asked. Maybe your own
biased point of view is all that matters to you.
Mark wrote:
On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 10:16:49 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So how long does it take for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even
20 years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
There's no point explaining it to you as you do not want to
understand. Your own biased pov is all that matters to you. But
nobody here takes you - or your delusional posts - on this matter seriously.
If I didn't want to understand I wouldn't have asked. Maybe your own biased point of view is all that matters to you.People here have explained it to you many times, but you still carry
on... re-read those posts.
I have no bias against South American football, I have €20 on Brazil to win the World Cup (@ 4/1) and drew Argentina in the work sweepstake. So
I'm rooting for both nations!!!
On Monday, November 21, 2022 at 2:14:46 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:them.
Mark wrote:
On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 10:16:49 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:People here have explained it to you many times, but you still carry
Mark wrote:
So how long does it take for a League to lose the international
prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even
20 years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
There's no point explaining it to you as you do not want to
understand. Your own biased pov is all that matters to you. But
nobody here takes you - or your delusional posts - on this matter
seriously.
If I didn't want to understand I wouldn't have asked. Maybe your own
biased point of view is all that matters to you.
on... re-read those posts.
Nobody has refuted my claim that, by the criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in them, Argentina and Brazil belong in the top 5 most prestigious leagues in the World. You admitted yourself that there's justification for including
The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still counts for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs.I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.
national teams are European.
I have no bias against South American football, I have €20 on Brazil to
win the World Cup (@ 4/1) and drew Argentina in the work sweepstake. So
I'm rooting for both nations!!!
I prefer South American football because European football is ruled by television and money, but I'm not biased against European football. I do try to be objective. 13 of my top 20 favourite football clubs are European. And 4 of my top 20 favourite
Nobody has refuted my claim that, by the criterion of international
prestige of the clubs playing in them, Argentina and Brazil belong in
the top 5 most prestigious leagues in the World. You admitted
yourself that there's justification for including them.
I prefer South American football because European football is ruled
by television and money, but I'm not biased against European
football. I do try to be objective. 13 of my top 20 favourite
football clubs are European. And 4 of my top 20 favourite national
teams are European.
On 2022-11-23 02:34, Mark wrote:them.
On Monday, November 21, 2022 at 2:14:46 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
On Sunday, November 20, 2022 at 10:16:49 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:People here have explained it to you many times, but you still carry
Mark wrote:
So how long does it take for a League to lose the international
prestige gained by its clubs? Surely more than 5 years, or even
20 years? I'd have thought more like 50-100 years.
There's no point explaining it to you as you do not want to
understand. Your own biased pov is all that matters to you. But
nobody here takes you - or your delusional posts - on this matter
seriously.
If I didn't want to understand I wouldn't have asked. Maybe your own
biased point of view is all that matters to you.
on... re-read those posts.
Nobody has refuted my claim that, by the criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in them, Argentina and Brazil belong in the top 5 most prestigious leagues in the World. You admitted yourself that there's justification for including
clubs. I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still counts for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its
Nobody takes the Scottish or Belgian leagues all that seriously any
more, but back in the late 60s, 70s, and early 80s they were among the
most prestigious leagues in Europe. So talking about 100 years is
pretty extreme.
Anyway you persist in ignoring the fact that this prediction contest is about the 5 strongest leagues in Europe in very recent history (andMaybe the problem was that nobody made it clear what was meant by top leagues or big leagues. And certainly nobody said in recent history or in Europe. Top League or big league is a bit vague. The most prestigious leagues, at least by the criterion of
right now), which most of us would agree are also the strongest in the
world because all the best South American, North American, Asian and
African players tend to play there.
On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 3:33:08 PM UTC, MH wrote:clubs. I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.
On 2022-11-23 02:34, Mark wrote:
The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still counts for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its
Nobody takes the Scottish or Belgian leagues all that seriously any
more, but back in the late 60s, 70s, and early 80s they were among the
most prestigious leagues in Europe. So talking about 100 years is
pretty extreme.
I think I'd still class the Belgian League as 1 of the top 10 in Europe.
How long would you say it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs?
international prestige of the clubs playing in them (in the whole world and considering all time), include Brazil and Argentina; and I think I've more or less established that in this thread.Maybe the problem was that nobody made it clear what was meant by top leagues or big leagues. And certainly nobody said in recent history or in Europe. Top League or big league is a bit vague. The most prestigious leagues, at least by the criterion of
Anyway you persist in ignoring the fact that this prediction contest is
about the 5 strongest leagues in Europe in very recent history (and
right now), which most of us would agree are also the strongest in the
world because all the best South American, North American, Asian and
African players tend to play there.
On 2022-11-25 02:12, Mark wrote:clubs. I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.
On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 3:33:08 PM UTC, MH wrote:
On 2022-11-23 02:34, Mark wrote:
The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still counts for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its
Nobody takes the Scottish or Belgian leagues all that seriously any
more, but back in the late 60s, 70s, and early 80s they were among the
most prestigious leagues in Europe. So talking about 100 years is
pretty extreme.
I think I'd still class the Belgian League as 1 of the top 10 in Europe.Maybe just. Between 1963 and 1986 Scotland ranked as high as 3rd In
Europe (UEFA rankings). They were in the top 5 nine times during that period, and ranked 6th six times, seventh once. Celtic, Rangers and
Aberdeen won trophies (1 EC1, 2 EC2) in that period, and Dundee United
lost a UEFA cup final as well as making the semi final of the European
cup. Kilmarnock made it as far as the semifinal of the European cup,
and Rangers and Celtic both lost finals (1967 CWC, 1970 European Cup)
So at the very least much more prestigious than they are now.
Belgium made it into the top 5 8 times out of 9 years in the last 9
years of the same time window. Bruges made some finals, Anderlecht won trophies. Standard Liege went far too.
France - not in the top five even once . In spite of St. Etienne making
a final in 1976. Best they did was sixth.
I'd still class the Dutch and Portuguese Leagues as among about the top
6 in Europe too, and their clubs haven't won much since about the turn
of the century. I'm not sure about the Scottish League. Was it really
THAT prestigious? Could it have been that it didn't have much prestige
to lose in the first place? (Maybe I should look up past finalists in
the Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup, so I'm in a better position to make an informed opinion there.)
It is pretty easy to look this up, and Bert Kassies's web site has
really nice graphs like this https://kassiesa.net/uefa/graphs/country-graph.php
How long would you say it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs?In terms of current perception of threat from its teams. Less than 10.
On Friday, November 25, 2022 at 10:31:06 PM UTC, MH wrote:
On 2022-11-25 02:12, Mark wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 3:33:08 PM UTC, MH wrote:
On 2022-11-23 02:34, Mark wrote:
The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still countsNobody takes the Scottish or Belgian leagues all that seriously any
for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained
by its clubs. I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.
more, but back in the late 60s, 70s, and early 80s they were among the >> most prestigious leagues in Europe. So talking about 100 years is
pretty extreme.
I think I'd still class the Belgian League as 1 of the top 10 in Europe.
Maybe just. Between 1963 and 1986 Scotland ranked as high as 3rd In
Europe (UEFA rankings). They were in the top 5 nine times during that period, and ranked 6th six times, seventh once. Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen won trophies (1 EC1, 2 EC2) in that period, and Dundee United
lost a UEFA cup final as well as making the semi final of the European
cup. Kilmarnock made it as far as the semifinal of the European cup,
and Rangers and Celtic both lost finals (1967 CWC, 1970 European Cup)
So at the very least much more prestigious than they are now.
Yes, more prestigious than I realized too by the sounds of it.
Belgium made it into the top 5 8 times out of 9 years in the last 9
years of the same time window. Bruges made some finals, Anderlecht won trophies. Standard Liege went far too.
France - not in the top five even once . In spite of St. Etienne making
a final in 1976. Best they did was sixth.
I'd still class the Dutch and Portuguese Leagues as among about the top
6 in Europe too, and their clubs haven't won much since about the turn
of the century. I'm not sure about the Scottish League. Was it really
THAT prestigious? Could it have been that it didn't have much prestige
to lose in the first place? (Maybe I should look up past finalists in
the Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup, so I'm in a better position to make an informed opinion there.)
It is pretty easy to look this up, and Bert Kassies's web site has
really nice graphs like this https://kassiesa.net/uefa/graphs/country-graph.php
They do look quite nice graphs.
How long would you say it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs?
In terms of current perception of threat from its teams. Less than 10.
Mmm, maybe this is why people are disagreeing with me so strongly. I think it takes probably at least 50-100 years for a
League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs, other people think it's more like 5-20 years.
How much prestige do they lose in less than 10 years? Are you saying they start losing prestige that quickly, but take 50
years or whatever to lose all the prestige, or are you saying the leagues lose all their prestige in less than 10 years?
On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 2:35:39 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2022 at 10:31:06 PM UTC, MH wrote:
On 2022-11-25 02:12, Mark wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 3:33:08 PM UTC, MH wrote:Maybe just. Between 1963 and 1986 Scotland ranked as high as 3rd In
On 2022-11-23 02:34, Mark wrote:
The closest anyone's come is by casting doubt on whether the prestige gained more than 5 years or so ago still countsNobody takes the Scottish or Belgian leagues all that seriously any
for as much. Which brings us to the question of how long it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained
by its clubs. I think it would take at least 50-100 years. Nobody's even attempted to prove me wrong about that.
more, but back in the late 60s, 70s, and early 80s they were among the >>>>> most prestigious leagues in Europe. So talking about 100 years is
pretty extreme.
I think I'd still class the Belgian League as 1 of the top 10 in Europe. >>>
Europe (UEFA rankings). They were in the top 5 nine times during that
period, and ranked 6th six times, seventh once. Celtic, Rangers and
Aberdeen won trophies (1 EC1, 2 EC2) in that period, and Dundee United
lost a UEFA cup final as well as making the semi final of the European
cup. Kilmarnock made it as far as the semifinal of the European cup,
and Rangers and Celtic both lost finals (1967 CWC, 1970 European Cup)
So at the very least much more prestigious than they are now.
Yes, more prestigious than I realized too by the sounds of it.
Belgium made it into the top 5 8 times out of 9 years in the last 9
years of the same time window. Bruges made some finals, Anderlecht won
trophies. Standard Liege went far too.
France - not in the top five even once . In spite of St. Etienne making
a final in 1976. Best they did was sixth.
I'd still class the Dutch and Portuguese Leagues as among about the top
6 in Europe too, and their clubs haven't won much since about the turn
of the century. I'm not sure about the Scottish League. Was it really
THAT prestigious? Could it have been that it didn't have much prestige
to lose in the first place? (Maybe I should look up past finalists in
the Cup Winners Cup and UEFA Cup, so I'm in a better position to make an >>> informed opinion there.)
It is pretty easy to look this up, and Bert Kassies's web site has
really nice graphs like this
https://kassiesa.net/uefa/graphs/country-graph.php
They do look quite nice graphs.
Mmm, maybe this is why people are disagreeing with me so strongly. I think it takes probably at least 50-100 years for aHow long would you say it takes for a League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs?
In terms of current perception of threat from its teams. Less than 10.
League to lose the international prestige gained by its clubs, other people think it's more like 5-20 years.
How much prestige do they lose in less than 10 years? Are you saying they start losing prestige that quickly, but take 50
years or whatever to lose all the prestige, or are you saying the leagues lose all their prestige in less than 10 years?
'Prestige' is a wishy-washy concept with practically no bearing on actual playing strength.
And I would venture to say that this is where you lose people with your dogged insistence on decades-old
laurels: at the root of it, a football match - any football match - is not about history, pedigree, or 'prestige',
despite a lot of obfuscation surrounding the matter; it's about determining a result on the pitch. We wouldn't
watch live matches if we didn't care about that (and I think that's where your comparison with the Beatles earlier
in this thread falls completely flat - we are watching a sporting competition whose main attraction is, or should be,
that it is something we *haven't* seen before). Therefore, as regards the 'prestige' of these matches, current playing
strength matters much, much more to the large majority of spectators than any titles won half a lifetime ago.
As suggested by Michael, UEFA's five-year-ranking does an eminently serviceable job in comparing the playing
strengths of European Leagues over time (and Bert's site is the go-to place to sample the data) and should always
be the starting point for any discussions along these lines, much more than any criteria you claim to have
'established' ex cathedra in various RSS threads.
We might not like a lot of the results of these matches for all the reasons stated - inequalities in money etc. - but we still
care about them. Because if not, I would humbly suggest spending your time on something better suited to your tastes.
Ciao,
Werner
'Prestige' is a wishy-washy concept with practically no bearing on actual playing strength.
And I would venture to say that this is where you lose people with your dogged insistence on decades-old
laurels: at the root of it, a football match - any football match - is not about history, pedigree, or 'prestige',
despite a lot of obfuscation surrounding the matter; it's about determining a result on the pitch. We wouldn't
watch live matches if we didn't care about that (and I think that's where your comparison with the Beatles earlier
in this thread falls completely flat - we are watching a sporting competition whose main attraction is, or should be,
that it is something we *haven't* seen before). Therefore, as regards the 'prestige' of these matches, current playing
strength matters much, much more to the large majority of spectators than any titles won half a lifetime ago.
On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 8:57:06 AM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
something we haven't seen before). Therefore, as regards the
'prestige' of these matches, current playing strength matters much,
much more to the large majority of spectators than any titles won
half a lifetime ago.
I think history and prestige matter a lot too.
And I'd have thought most other football fans would feel the same.
Mark wrote:
On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 8:57:06 AM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
something we haven't seen before). Therefore, as regards the
'prestige' of these matches, current playing strength matters much,
much more to the large majority of spectators than any titles won
half a lifetime ago.
I think history and prestige matter a lot too.I don't!
And I'd have thought most other football fans would feel the same.Who are these "other football fans" and why are they not here to back
you up? As the football fans that do post here don't seem to think much
of your point of view!
Has anybody got any evidence of how the majority of fans feel about this? Have any surveys ever been done or anything?
Yes, I accept that I can only speak for myself; i haven't done any
survey of football fans views on this. But equally, who are these
large majority of spectators that current playing strength matters
more to?
Has anybody got any evidence of how the majority of fans feel about
this? Have any surveys ever been done or anything?
Mark wrote:
Yes, I accept that I can only speak for myself; i haven't done anyMost of the people here for a start!
survey of football fans views on this. But equally, who are these
large majority of spectators that current playing strength matters
more to?
Putting international prestige of a club over a 50/60 year year period
before current playing strength is something I've seriously not heard
any fan use as criteria for judging that football team ... until now!
Has anybody got any evidence of how the majority of fans feel aboutWhy don't you start one?
this? Have any surveys ever been done or anything?
On Wednesday, November 30, 2022 at 10:27:41 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
Yes, I accept that I can only speak for myself; i haven't done any survey of football fans views on this. But equally, who are theseMost of the people here for a start!
large majority of spectators that current playing strength matters
more to?
Putting international prestige of a club over a 50/60 year year period before current playing strength is something I've seriously not heardIt had crossed my mind. I'm not sure exactly how I'd word the question. (Or maybe even questions, plural.) Any ideas?
any fan use as criteria for judging that football team ... until now!
Has anybody got any evidence of how the majority of fans feel about this? Have any surveys ever been done or anything?Why don't you start one?
There's also the problem that I'd only have rssers to ask, so an extremely small sample size, so it would hardly be any stronger evidence than what Futbolmetrix suggested. It might be worth considering doing it though.
So, having at least kind of semi-established that by the criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in them, Brazil and
Argentina belong in the top 5 most prestigious leagues in the world
Mark wrote:
So, having at least kind of semi-established that by the criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in them, Brazil andNo. They do not and are not. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Argentina belong in the top 5 most prestigious leagues in the world
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 3:23:24 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Mark wrote:
So, having at least kind of semi-established that by theNo. They do not and are not. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
criterion of international prestige of the clubs playing in them,
Brazil and Argentina belong in the top 5 most prestigious leagues
in the world
But you agreed twice earlier in this thread that, by that criterion,
there is justification for including them in the top 5.
Instead of flogging a dead horse create an internet poll/survey (or something) and put your views to the test...
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 9:19:51 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:the most important criterion. Now I want to test them further by discussing other criteria.
Instead of flogging a dead horse create an internet poll/survey (or something) and put your views to the test...Well, aren't I already putting them to the test by creating a thread "Top 5 Domestic League Championships In The World" on rss, and discussing them here? We've semi-established that Brazil and Argentina belong in the top 5 by what I probably think is
On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 8:48:32 AM UTC, Mark wrote:
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 9:19:51 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Instead of flogging a dead horse create an internet poll/survey (or something) and put your views to the test...Well, aren't I already putting them to the test by creating a thread "Top 5 Domestic League Championships In The World" on rss, and discussing them here? We've semi-established that Brazil and Argentina belong
in the top 5 by what I probably think is the most important criterion. Now I want to test them further by discussing other criteria.
So no other criteria are anywhere near as important as the one we've discussed? I've more or less proved that Brazil and Argentina do belong in the most prestigious 5 leagues in the world?
On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 9:47:24 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
So no other criteria are anywhere near as important as the one
we've discussed? I've more or less proved that Brazil and Argentina
do belong in the most prestigious 5 leagues in the world?
Jeez! No!
Werner Pichler wrote:
On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 9:47:24 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
So no other criteria are anywhere near as important as the one
we've discussed? I've more or less proved that Brazil and Argentina
do belong in the most prestigious 5 leagues in the world?
Jeez! No!I gave up with the common sense... I'll just ignore Mark's delusional
biased nonsense from now on.
FWIW, these are the nations with the top football leagues according to
Mark, and nobody else in the world ... but even so, it's 100% official
and it's been proven. (So there!)
1) Argentina
2) Brazil
3) Uruguay
4) Peru
5) Ecuador
6) Paraguay
7) Islas Malvinas
8) Cameroon
9) Outer Mongolia
10)Micronesia
Loads of other countries
211) England
On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 9:23:28 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
Werner Pichler wrote:
On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 9:47:24 AM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
So no other criteria are anywhere near as important as the one
we've discussed? I've more or less proved that Brazil and Argentina
do belong in the most prestigious 5 leagues in the world?
Jeez! No!I gave up with the common sense... I'll just ignore Mark's delusional biased nonsense from now on.
FWIW, these are the nations with the top football leagues according to Mark, and nobody else in the world ... but even so, it's 100% official
and it's been proven. (So there!)
1) Argentina
2) Brazil
3) Uruguay
4) Peru
5) Ecuador
6) Paraguay
7) Islas Malvinas
8) Cameroon
9) Outer Mongolia
10)Micronesia
Loads of other countries
211) EnglandIt's not biased. And it's not nonsense.
Nobody's come up with any other criteria other than the one by which we have established (or at least kind of semi-established) that Argentina and Brazil do belong in the most prestigious 5 Leagues in the world.
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currently
perceived* of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork in order to own
the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
1 Premier League £1,600,000,000
2 Bundesliga/2. Bundesliga £945,000,000
3 La Liga £851,000,000
4 Serie A £797,000,000
5 Ligue 1/Ligue 2 £500,000,000
And to counter the accusation of Eurocentrism, the MLS is in 6th, the Brasileirão in 7th, and the J League in 10th.
I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible
suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currently perceived* of
a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to
fork in order to own the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
1 Premier League £1,600,000,000
2 Bundesliga/2. Bundesliga £945,000,000
3 La Liga £851,000,000
4 Serie A £797,000,000
5 Ligue 1/Ligue 2 £500,000,000
And to counter the accusation of Eurocentrism, the MLS is in 6th, the Brasileirão in 7th, and the J League in 10th.
I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion
to measure the prestige *as it is currently perceived*
of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork >in order to own the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
In article <ec345b32-1d15-4440-a11b-551196560fbbn@googlegroups.com>, Werner Pichler <wpichler@gmail.com> wrote:
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion >> to measure the prestige *as it is currently perceived*
of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork >> in order to own the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
To make sense, the numbers need to be normalized by each country's PPP GDP. Which becomes something like "paying for top football in relation to the size of the economy".
The list then:
1. Premier League
2. La Liga
3. Primeira Liga
4. Serie A: 264
5. Bundesliga/2
DK
On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 9:36:37 AM UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currently
perceived* of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork in order to own
the broadcasting rights.
Come on, that was a wildly speculative hypothesis! You actually took it seriously? How can that be a more sensible criterion than just stating "these are the most prestigious leagues because I said so"?
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
1 Premier League £1,600,000,000
2 Bundesliga/2. Bundesliga £945,000,000
3 La Liga £851,000,000
4 Serie A £797,000,000
5 Ligue 1/Ligue 2 £500,000,000
Shocking! Who could have thought?
And to counter the accusation of Eurocentrism, the MLS is in 6th, the Brasileirão in 7th, and the J League in 10th.
Interesting
I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.
Hmm...I think I'll have to agree.
On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 9:36:37 AM UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.Hmm...I think I'll have to agree.
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all
sorts of other objectively measurable things
Plus, how often does a rising star from the US, Canada, Mexico,
Morocco, Japan, Korea, Algeria, Ghana, Egypt, Nigeria etc. say to
himself " I need a new challenge, and to improve as a player I really
need to play in the Uruguayan/Brazilian/Argentine league. Sure, a lot
of it is about money, but players are also motivated by other things
than money. They are not picking Botafogo over Man United of
Inpendiente over Real MAdrid because of the past glories of those clubs.
On 2022-12-10 09:59, DK wrote:
To make sense, the numbers need to be normalized by each country's PPP GDP. >> Which becomes something like "paying for top football in relation to the sizeBut isn't the price that broadcasters pay predicated on their ability to >market (and subcontract broadcasting rights) to very large countries
of the economy".
The list then:
1. Premier League
2. La Liga
3. Primeira Liga
4. Serie A
5. Bundesliga/2
with a much lower per capita GDP ? Or are these numbers ONLY for within >country broadcast, and other broadcasters have to bid for the rights for >their countries ?
Why?I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.Hmm...I think I'll have to agree.
And incidentally, you didn't originally suggest it as a direct measurement of prestige.
[SNIP]
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup,
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 9:19:22 AM UTC-5, Mark wrote:their ads, broadcasting companies are going to pay a lot of money to have the rights to that match. Therefore, there is likely a very strong correlation between the amount of money broadcasting companies are willing to pay for a league and that league's
Because if a large quantity of football fans are willing to watch a match from a particular league, advertisers will want to pay a lot of money to place their ads at the time of that match. And if advertisers are willing to pay a lot of money to placeWhy?I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.Hmm...I think I'll have to agree.
(Gosh, I can't believe I am getting trolled like this...)
majority of fans feel about this? Have any surveys ever been done or anything? "And incidentally, you didn't originally suggest it as a direct measurement of prestige.You weren't asking about "prestige" either
"Yes, I accept that I can only speak for myself; i haven't done any survey of football fans views on this. But equally, who are these large majority of spectators that current playing strength matters more to? Has anybody got any evidence of how the
And I suggested that perhaps looking at the money that broadcasting entities are willing to pay for different leagues is a good indication of what the majority of football fans worldwide think.
On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 9:36:37 AM UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currentlyCome on, that was a wildly speculative hypothesis! You actually took it seriously? How can that be a more sensible criterion than just stating "these are the most prestigious leagues because I said so"?
perceived* of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork in order to own
the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
1 Premier League £1,600,000,000Shocking! Who could have thought?
2 Bundesliga/2. Bundesliga £945,000,000
3 La Liga £851,000,000
4 Serie A £797,000,000
5 Ligue 1/Ligue 2 £500,000,000
And to counter the accusation of Eurocentrism, the MLS is in 6th, the Brasileirão in 7th, and the J League in 10th.Interesting
I hereby establish that this criterion is more sensible than yours.Hmm...I think I'll have to agree.
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:27:05 AM UTC, MH wrote:
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all sorts of other objectively measurable things
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements of
the best teams are better than measurements of the best players.
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't
necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements of the best
teams are better than measurements of the best players.
I've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no
sense.
There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued into
teams by virtue of having won something decades ago.
Werner Pichler wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements of the best
teams are better than measurements of the best players.
I've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely noI'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks that!!!
sense.
There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued intoBut, but , but, what about international prestige? Is that not
teams by virtue of having won something decades ago.
important? I mean, who cares what teams win today, it's what other
teams won fifty-four years ago that counts, right?!
Can we now make 'prestige' from decades gone by official RSS policy and ignore all this common sense and logical thinking malarkey when we are discussing things like this?!
<rolls eyes>
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:27:05 AM UTC, MH wrote:
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all sorts of other objectively measurable things
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements ofI've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no sense. There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued into teams by virtue
the best teams are better than measurements of the best players.
of having won something decades ago.
E.g. Saint-Étienne are in severe danger of getting relegated to the third division this
season. In no rational worldview are they the 'best' team in France right now, even
though they still have won the most championship titles. Rather, they suck.
Ciao,
Werner
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:14:21 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
And despite the fact that all that money takes away the best players from Argentina and Brazil, those 2 countries still
produce successful teams even in the last 5 years. There's more evidence that Argentina and Brazil are producing some of
the best teams than there is for France and Italy doing so.
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:14:21 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:27:05 AM UTC, MH wrote:
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all sorts of other objectively measurable things
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements ofI've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no sense.
the best teams are better than measurements of the best players.
There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued into teams by virtue of having won something decades ago.
E.g. Saint-Étienne are in severe danger of getting relegated to the third division this
season. In no rational worldview are they the 'best' team in France right now, even
though they still have won the most championship titles. Rather, they suck.
Ciao,
Werner
It makes them (one of) the most successful over all time. That gives them prestige. The fact that Benfica haven't been
Champions of Europe since 1962 doesn't make them no more prestigious than Skonto Riga.
And despite the fact that all that money takes away the best players from Argentina and Brazil, those 2 countries still
produce successful teams even in the last 5 years. There's more evidence that Argentina and Brazil are producing some of
the best teams than there is for France and Italy doing so.
So much for not wanting to be ungracious. The vast majority of
nonsense in this thread has come from the very person that's
complaining about it. Please read and learn.
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 2:30:56 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:14:21 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:27:05 AM UTC, MH wrote:
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all
sorts of other objectively measurable things
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements ofI've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no sense.
the best teams are better than measurements of the best players.
There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued into teams by virtue of having won something decades ago.
E.g. Saint-Étienne are in severe danger of getting relegated to the third division this
season. In no rational worldview are they the 'best' team in France right now, even
though they still have won the most championship titles. Rather, they suck.
Ciao,
Werner
It makes them (one of) the most successful over all time. That gives them prestige. The fact that Benfica haven't beenIf it's prestige, it's a sort of sad kind of prestige, don't you think? Like grandpa in his rocking chair
Champions of Europe since 1962 doesn't make them no more prestigious than Skonto Riga.
getting misty-eyed about what a stud he once was.
Or Al Bundy perpetually reminiscing about how he once scored four touchdowns in a single game!
And despite the fact that all that money takes away the best players from Argentina and Brazil, those 2 countries stillHow so? In the last five years, the results of your precious Club World Cup would rather indicate that even
produce successful teams even in the last 5 years. There's more evidence that Argentina and Brazil are producing some of
the best teams than there is for France and Italy doing so.
the UAE Pro League would be ahead of Argentina, wouldn't they?
Mark wrote:
So much for not wanting to be ungracious. The vast majority ofNo, the nonsense comes from you as you refuse to listen to anyone or
nonsense in this thread has come from the very person that's
complaining about it. Please read and learn.
the alternative criteria that they have provided links to to reject
your position. You just keep banging on and on and on... nobody
supports your position which you have explained here many many times.
We do understand it, but we don't agree with it. But you still carry
on... I prefer sarcastic old git to ungracious though!
If you seriously think in 2022 that the Brazilian and Argentinian
leagues are bigger than the [English] Premier League then I can only
say that IMO it's a delusional position based on a clear anti-English
bias. I've given up trying to discuss this with you as you only want to accept YOUR own criteria and point of view... try looking out of the
window and see what's going on in the real world.
... or go out and about and ask other football fans what they think and
see what they say about it.
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 2:24:36 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 2:30:56 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
It makes them (one of) the most successful over all time. That gives them prestige. The fact that Benfica haven't been
Champions of Europe since 1962 doesn't make them no more prestigious than Skonto Riga.
If it's prestige, it's a sort of sad kind of prestige, don't you think? Like grandpa in his rocking chair
getting misty-eyed about what a stud he once was.
Or Al Bundy perpetually reminiscing about how he once scored four touchdowns in a single game!
Prestige is prestige. I don't see how prestige can be sad.
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 2:24:36 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:2010.
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 2:30:56 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 3:14:21 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:36:31 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 3:27:05 AM UTC, MH wrote:
We could also look at things like total value of all players as per
Transfermarkt, Number of players represented at the world cup, and all
sorts of other objectively measurable things
The problem with these is that having the best players doesn't necessarily meaning having the best teams. Measurements ofI've re-read this a couple of times and it still makes absolutely no sense.
the best teams are better than measurements of the best players.
There simply is no such thing as a 'quality' imbued into teams by virtue
of having won something decades ago.
E.g. Saint-Étienne are in severe danger of getting relegated to the third division this
season. In no rational worldview are they the 'best' team in France right now, even
though they still have won the most championship titles. Rather, they suck.
Ciao,
Werner
Prestige is prestige. I don't see how prestige can be sad.It makes them (one of) the most successful over all time. That gives them prestige. The fact that Benfica haven't beenIf it's prestige, it's a sort of sad kind of prestige, don't you think? Like grandpa in his rocking chair
Champions of Europe since 1962 doesn't make them no more prestigious than Skonto Riga.
getting misty-eyed about what a stud he once was.
Or Al Bundy perpetually reminiscing about how he once scored four touchdowns in a single game!
1 match, decided in a penalty shoot-out, is hardly strong evidence; especially when River Plate then went on to beat the Champions of the continent that Al-Ain are from 4-0. French and Italian teams haven't even qualified for the Club World Cup sinceAnd despite the fact that all that money takes away the best players from Argentina and Brazil, those 2 countries stillHow so? In the last five years, the results of your precious Club World Cup would rather indicate that even
produce successful teams even in the last 5 years. There's more evidence that Argentina and Brazil are producing some of
the best teams than there is for France and Italy doing so.
the UAE Pro League would be ahead of Argentina, wouldn't they?
Mark wrote:
So much for not wanting to be ungracious. The vast majority ofNo, the nonsense comes from you as you refuse to listen to anyone or
nonsense in this thread has come from the very person that's
complaining about it. Please read and learn.
the alternative criteria that they have provided links to to reject
your position. You just keep banging on and on and on... nobody
supports your position which you have explained here many many times.
We do understand it, but we don't agree with it. But you still carry
on... I prefer sarcastic old git to ungracious though!
If you seriously think in 2022 that the Brazilian and Argentinian
leagues are bigger than the [English] Premier League then I can only
say that IMO it's a delusional position based on a clear anti-English
bias. I've given up trying to discuss this with you as you only want to accept YOUR own criteria and point of view... try looking out of the
window and see what's going on in the real world.
... or go out and about and ask other football fans what they think and
see what they say about it.
But M’ritser must understand that the discussion is about PRESENT, not history. The best leagues are the competitions where the best players play, not where they grew up. And the BEST players play where the BIG MONEY is. Yup, Europe is full ofBrazilians and Argentines, and Africans. Still, the very best of them play in England, Spain, Germany*, Italy, France.
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC+2, Mark wrote:since 2010.”
“1 match, decided in a penalty shoot-out, is hardly strong evidence; especially when River Plate then went on to beat the Champions of the continent that Al-Ain are from 4-0. French and Italian teams haven't even qualified for the Club World Cup
One confederation has one and only ONE champion. The French and the Italian competitions have had NO UEFA champion since 2010 (Inter Milano)…
I say it again:
“Put that pipe away… that bottle too!”
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 12:30:38 PM UTC, ions...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC+2, Mark wrote:
“1 match, decided in a penalty shoot-out, is hardly strong evidence; especially when River Plate then went on to beat the
Champions of the continent that Al-Ain are from 4-0. French and Italian teams haven't even qualified for the Club World Cup
since 2010.”
One confederation has one and only ONE champion. The French and the Italian competitions have had NO UEFA champion > >since 2010 (Inter Milano)…
Exactly! But yes, I think I can see what you're alluding to. If we're only taking the last 5 years into consideration then the
results in the Club World Cup aren't very relevant. But then how do we compare teams performance from different
continents?
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 3:02:52 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 12:30:38 PM UTC, ions...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC+2, Mark wrote:
“1 match, decided in a penalty shoot-out, is hardly strong evidence; especially when River Plate then went on to beat the
Champions of the continent that Al-Ain are from 4-0. French and Italian teams haven't even qualified for the Club World Cup
since 2010.”
One confederation has one and only ONE champion. The French and the Italian competitions have had NO UEFA champion > >since 2010 (Inter Milano)…
Exactly! But yes, I think I can see what you're alluding to. If we're only taking the last 5 years into consideration then theBy doing the exact thing you seem to have such a problem with: we determine where the *best players*
results in the Club World Cup aren't very relevant. But then how do we compare teams performance from different
continents?
ply their trade and, in the absence of direct confrontations, get in this manner a good approximation of what
to expect if they played each other every other week. Or, as Lléo suggested, we look at the percentage of
players at the World Cup as the highest international competition. Or, as you seem to insist that 'best' teams
are winning teams, just the percentage of World Cup winners for the last couple of editions.
I daresay in all these criteria Italy will come out ahead of Argentina.
What makes no sense is putting Copa Libertadores on the same pedestal as the UEFA Champions League while at
the same time completely ignoring other confederation-wide competitions such as the CONCACAF, AFC or CAF
Champions League editions.
Ciao,
Werner
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 12:43:37 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 1:12:15 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
Prestige is prestige. I don't see how prestige can be sad.As wise men have said - to give tradition its proper due you have to pass on the flame, not venerate the ashes.
Those replica trophies that Benfica have (I think you get replica trophies for winning the European Champions Cup anyway)
haven't been burned. They still stand strong. Eventually they'll erode away (or whatever eventually happens to metal objects),
but that will take decades at least.
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:14:08 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 3:02:52 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 12:30:38 PM UTC, ions...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:12:15 PM UTC+2, Mark wrote:
“1 match, decided in a penalty shoot-out, is hardly strong evidence; especially when River Plate then went on to beat the
Champions of the continent that Al-Ain are from 4-0. French and Italian teams haven't even qualified for the Club World Cup
since 2010.”
One confederation has one and only ONE champion. The French and the Italian competitions have had NO UEFA champion > >since 2010 (Inter Milano)…
Exactly! But yes, I think I can see what you're alluding to. If we're only taking the last 5 years into consideration then theBy doing the exact thing you seem to have such a problem with: we determine where the *best players*
results in the Club World Cup aren't very relevant. But then how do we compare teams performance from different
continents?
ply their trade and, in the absence of direct confrontations, get in this manner a good approximation of what
to expect if they played each other every other week. Or, as Lléo suggested, we look at the percentage of
players at the World Cup as the highest international competition. Or, as you seem to insist that 'best' teams
are winning teams, just the percentage of World Cup winners for the last couple of editions.
I daresay in all these criteria Italy will come out ahead of Argentina.
What makes no sense is putting Copa Libertadores on the same pedestal as the UEFA Champions League while at
the same time completely ignoring other confederation-wide competitions such as the CONCACAF, AFC or CAF
Champions League editions.
As far as I know, nobody is ignoring the other continents. Results in the World Club Championship over the whole of history
suggest that European and South American club football are stronger than in the other continents though.
On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 1:12:15 PM UTC+1, Mark wrote:
Prestige is prestige. I don't see how prestige can be sad.As wise men have said - to give tradition its proper due you have to pass on the flame, not venerate the ashes.
Ciao,
Werner
As far as I know, nobody is ignoring the other continents. Results in the World Club Championship over the whole of history
suggest that European and South American club football are stronger than in the other continents though.
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 9:34:33 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
If you seriously think in 2022 that the Brazilian and Argentinian
leagues are bigger than the [English] Premier League then I can
only say that IMO it's a delusional position based on a clear
anti-English bias. I've given up trying to discuss this with you as
you only want to accept YOUR own criteria and point of view... try
looking out of the window and see what's going on in the real
world.
That's not true either. Apart from possibly Werner, nobody other than
you has mentioned the English League in this thread. And I'M the very
person that asked about other criteria. It was everybody else that
were slow to mention other criteria. I could quite easily have just
accepted the fact that by the criterion in the OP, I'd (to some
extent) proved my point, and left it at that. But I want to discuss
other criteria as well.
... or go out and about and ask other football fans what they think
and see what they say about it.
That's exactly what I'm doing. You said to test my views by
discussing them with other football fans, and I'm doing exactly that
here on rss.
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currently perceived*
of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork in order to own the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country
On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 2:36:37 PM UTC, Werner Pichler wrote:the most prestige, interest from fans etc. It’s why I follow those leagues anyway.
In this very thread Futbolmetrix came up with the very sensible suggestion to measure the prestige *as it is currently perceived*
of a league by the amount of money TV/streaming services are willing to fork in order to own the broadcasting rights.
Here's the list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_countryThe top 5 domestic leagues, in terms of how successful their clubs have been over the whole of history, include Argentina and Brazil. I think we can at least agree about that. I suppose I’ve always assumed that that would lead to those leagues having
So, why don’t they attract the TV attention they deserve? Why is there more TV money going to France, Germany etc? I think I can think of 5 possible reasons.Uruguay, another nation that should be in the top 5. It’s also likely to be a reason why there’s less TV money in Argentina. I don’t think it explains why there’s less TV money in Brazil though.
The rich 5 have stronger economies. So a higher percentage of people in those countries can afford to watch football on TV, buy from the companies paying for advertising etc.
A lot of fans seem to be attracted by big-name players rather than big-name clubs for some reason.
A lot of fans seem to have a recentism bias, and would rather watch Freiburg v Union Berlin just because they’re doing well this season, rather than see true heavyweights like Independiente and Boca Juniors play each other.
There’s lots of French people living in France. French people are going to be more likely than other nationalities to watch French football, Germans more likely to watch German football etc. This would explain why there’s more TV money than in
For those reasons, there’s more demand for TV broadcasts of matches in the rich 5 leagues. And the money just multiplies.piece of evidence.
There’s also the fact that TV money is evidence of popularity, rather than prestige. There’s obviously a correlation between the 2, but they’re not exactly the same thing.
So, I suppose in summary, I may have been wrong to assume other people viewed things the same way as me, and under-estimated other people’s preference for current strength and for top players rather than top teams. But there are weaknesses in this
On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 8:54:59 AM UTC, Mark wrote:piece of evidence.
So, I suppose in summary, I may have been wrong to assume other people viewed things the same way as me, and under-estimated other people’s preference for current strength and for top players rather than top teams. But there are weaknesses in this
There's still at least 2 criteria we haven't discussed.
Strength in depth. England scores badly on this one,
How well organized the league is. To avoid any accusations of bias, I'd better mention that, historically at least, Brazil scores badly on this one.playing in it even if they weren't good enough to end higher than 4th in their domestic league? I'm not sure what's meant by a big club, but part of it seems to be being successful in the past. UEFA seemed to think that including more of these 'big'
Also, a question has occurred to me. If the majority of fans go by current strength, why is the Champions League so popular? Wasn't the whole idea of including teams that weren't champions based on the idea that more of the big clubs would end up
On 2022-12-23 02:10, Mark wrote:piece of evidence.
On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 8:54:59 AM UTC, Mark wrote:
So, I suppose in summary, I may have been wrong to assume other people viewed things the same way as me, and under-estimated other people’s preference for current strength and for top players rather than top teams. But there are weaknesses in this
There's still at least 2 criteria we haven't discussed.
Strength in depth. England scores badly on this one,??? the English league currently has the most teams in it that could go
far in the CL and possibly win it (which would be followed almost
inevitably by winning the world club championship, btw, for whatever
that is worth). Six at least. COmpare to 1 or 2 in France and Germany,
3 max in Spain, and 3 or 4 in Italy.
All of Manchester United, City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs
have made it all the way to the CL final since 2006. Can any league
match that? Nope.
as their top league only has 1 division these days, while most other
nations have 3 or more divisions with literally dozens of teams in total. Non-starter as an argument because there is promotion and relegation
between the so-called Premier league and the Football League. In terms
of competitiveness, nothing changed when the EPL split from the rest -
it was just a marketing ploy which for some reason has been far more successful than it should have been. Germany did not suddenly get
stronger when they added a 3rd Bundesliga (i.e a nationally rather than regionally organized 3rd level), since all those clubs were there
anyway, playing in Regional leagues feeding into BL2. In fact one could argue that the Bundesliga was strongest when the second league was split
in two, and had not been unified into one 2 BL yet.
On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 3:59:21 AM UTC, MH wrote:
All of Manchester United, City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and
Spurs have made it all the way to the CL final since 2006. Can any
league match that? Nope.
Actually Brazil can beat it by quite a long way.
Mark wrote:
On Saturday, December 24, 2022 at 3:59:21 AM UTC, MH wrote:
All of Manchester United, City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and
Spurs have made it all the way to the CL final since 2006. Can any
league match that? Nope.
Actually Brazil can beat it by quite a long way.Actually, they can't ... as no Brazilian team plays in the Champions
League! ;-)
Mark wrote:
On Tuesday, December 13, 2022 at 9:34:33 PM UTC, Blueshirt wrote:
If you seriously think in 2022 that the Brazilian and Argentinian leagues are bigger than the [English] Premier League then I can
only say that IMO it's a delusional position based on a clear anti-English bias. I've given up trying to discuss this with you as
you only want to accept YOUR own criteria and point of view... try looking out of the window and see what's going on in the real
world.
That's not true either. Apart from possibly Werner, nobody other thanIn a previous post you left out the English and French leagues, so it
you has mentioned the English League in this thread. And I'M the very person that asked about other criteria. It was everybody else that
were slow to mention other criteria. I could quite easily have just accepted the fact that by the criterion in the OP, I'd (to some
extent) proved my point, and left it at that. But I want to discuss
other criteria as well.
was natural to assume that you felt the Argentinian and Brazilian
leagues would replace THEM in any top five list. If you don't believe
that, then state what are the top five leagues in your opinion and just
what European leagues would those two South American leagues replace?
You HAVE been given criteria.
I said wages, you can throw-in transfer fees paid on top of that,
others have said TV broadcasting and streaming rights. You could also
add sponsorship fees in to that too, as it's all linked. Also, where
top players want to play and top managers want to manage. Global
popularity might also be a criteria. There is plenty of different
criteria there but you have continued with international prestige based
on clubs winning trophies decades ago. It's true football in Europe is
all about money nowadays, which probably isn't a good thing but you
can't put the toothpaste back in to the tube! In 2022, it is what it
is... and that's the crux of this discussion, we are talking about NOW.
YOU may not like it but some of the biggest and most well known clubs
in the world play in the English Premier League. So I'm sure most
people would consider the English Premier League a top league with a
lot of strong sides in it... at this moment in time anyway.
And of course, an English club are the current FIFA Club World
Champions! :-)
... or go out and about and ask other football fans what they think
and see what they say about it.
That's exactly what I'm doing. You said to test my views byActually, my original idea was to start a survey or online poll. Of
discussing them with other football fans, and I'm doing exactly that
here on rss.
which there are plenty on the internet that are able to be set up by
people [like you] wanting to test out an idea. It doesn't always have
to be about re-making Star Wars!
Asking people here on RSS isn't really going to give you a decent representative sample as there's only around 20 or so regular posters here... I'll let the maths guy give you the actual percentage
breakdown of getting a proper sample size needed to your question! ;-)
But after saying that, you have been given responses but you don't seem happy with them. <shrugs>
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 38:00:05 |
| Calls: | 6,708 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,241 |
| Messages: | 5,353,570 |