12/21/24
February 05, 2007
"We've Got The Software, We Just Need The Formula": Moneyball strategies applied to English football. And why baseball is like the Championship, but not the Premier League. From the ever readable Observer Sports Monthly.
Cool story owlhouse....cheers.
posted by smithers at 07:57 AM on February 05, 2007
Terrific articles and I'm digesting them in small chunks, so you'll pardon me if I post a number of unconnected questions and thoughts here. For example, it is often said of Major League Baseball (whose seasons run to 162 games) that even the best teams are going to lose 54 times and even the worst teams are going to win 54 times - it's what you do in the other 54 games that counts. The Championship is a bit like this. But the Premiership isn't. The best Premiership teams are going to win almost all their games and the worst teams are going to draw or lose almost all theirs, and there's not a lot anyone can do about it, no matter how many small advantages they try to eke out What makes the Premiership different in this way? Is it the sheer amount of money and the lack of constraints on how it can be spent compared to American sports? If so, why aren't the oligarchs (owners) in the EPL banding together to lower costs? Is ownership more about prestige than profit?
posted by yerfatma at 08:40 AM on February 05, 2007
The heads of the major clubs are not banding together to lower costs because there's still a lot more money to be made, or there are still ways to narrow the streams of existing money, so that more of it goes exclusively into their pockets. There's a clamour to stay in the Prem this year because the team that finishes bottom of the Prem next season will still be granted £30,000,000 in prize money thanks to the new TV deal. Once that amount of money starts to slosh around for finishing last, it will become impossible for Championship sides to compete with even run-of-the-mill Premier sides without discovery of an outside benefactor with bottomless pockets. Added to the increasing value of the TV deals, the advantage in stadium size will increase the advantage in revenue further. Manchester United fit in more than 70,000 every home game. Arsenal now can seat more than 60,000. Liverpool's new stadium is expected to seat about 60,000. Chelsea lag way behind on this front, with a capacity of 42,000, but until Mr Abramovich gets bored, that doesn't really matter. By contrast, Fulham average less than 22,000 a home game. Spurs average 35,000. That's a 40,000x[Ticket Price] advantage to Man United over Spurs, at least 19 times a season. Almost all of the major European leagues are distilling down to a small number of club who can win the title and thus earn the money to buy the players to ensure they win it again in a delightful self-reinforcing circle. I think the coming widening of the already vast disparity between the Championship and the Permiership will finally lead to the formation of a previously mooted "Premier 2" second division, filled with the likes of Wolves and Sunderland and "my" Ipswich, desperate to hang onto the Premier's coat-tails, with the Championship then consigned to Third Division status. Then, as the public begin to tire of the same story every season, we get into mythical scenarios, such as an invitation to Celtic and Rangers to join the English divisions, or a return to the idea of a European League, where the clubs competing withdraw from their domestic competitions entirely. I guess this is what happens when your clubs are publically traded companies and not franchises.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 10:21 AM on February 05, 2007
I'll also be interested to see what the heads of the major European clubs do about, new UEFA President, Michel Platini's intention to limit the number of clubs awarded Champions League spots to three per country, regardless of the size of the Football Association's purse.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 10:24 AM on February 05, 2007
Once that amount of money starts to slosh around for finishing last, it will become impossible for Championship sides to compete with even run-of-the-mill Premier sides without discovery of an outside benefactor with bottomless pockets. The interesting thing about the relegation system is that it might entice a number of benefactors to take a shot at £30,000,000. In the US you can't join a league by dint of success. It takes census data, politics and payoffs to the existing team owners. This would allow an investor a shot at a big payoff, though the expected value of one payoff might not be worth enough to go through with it.
posted by yerfatma at 12:06 PM on February 05, 2007
Also, it provides a bit of a strange situation where the three teams who get promoted out of the Championship this year are in a better position than those who are currently in the Prem and get sent the other way, despite the fact that they're earning much less this year. Investors might take a flier at the likes of Derby, I suppose, knowing that even if they finish bottom next season, they'll pocket enough money to outspend the rest of the Championship the season after.
posted by Mr Bismarck at 12:15 PM on February 05, 2007
Investors might take a flier at the likes of Derby I've been giving "come hither" looks to potential investors for years, Mr B. However, even 30 million quid won't cover the existing debts.
posted by owlhouse at 05:58 PM on February 05, 2007
Great link, thanks.