View Single Post
06-24-2012, 10:08 AM
No strings on me
Jussi's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Finland
Posts: 48,136
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by LOFIN View Post
Although I don't agree with a majority of your posts in this thread, I somewhat agree with you on this. Allthough in my oppinion, parity is great for sport and competition, the NA way of doing it is ridicilous. I hate the artificial parity NFL and NHL has (salary cap, draft, revenue sharing). It's a joke. I mean you should have an even playingfield to some extent, for an example TV money distributed evenly to every team in the league (unlike in La liga for some time when only Real and Barca got a slice thus widening the gap between them and the poorer teams even more). However, local revenues and marketing is only the business of that particular team and if some teams do it better and earn money, well that's good for them. You earn your position among the top tier. If your team or city isn't good/interresting enough, tough luck son. If your team isn't playing in the top tier, you have to accept it and hope you and your team can maybe play there in the future. I'm not a rich man atm either, but then I should try to improve my situation, and if I can't, well that's how it is then.
Well the North American sports market isn't entirely comparable with the European football market. In European football there's competition from multiple leagues for players, driving up their prices where as in NA there's basically the big market cities, like New York, LA, Boston, Philly, Toronto(in hockey). So parity is more needed in NA due to it's business/profit orientated franchise structure. In Europe it's isn't that required however the current situation is far less ideal too when relegation/promotion can be decided by financial situations instead of performances on the pitch.

Jussi is offline   Reply With Quote