Why are so many Champions League teams bad?

[bosox4283]

I didn't want this question to get buried in the Champions League thread, so I started a new thread.

I'm not a historian of the game, nor do I know much about the evolution of European soccer. I imagine that the influx of foreign capital has tilted the scales in the favor of the wealthy teams in the wealthy leagues.

So, I ask: why do so many teams just seem bad?

Consider through three matches:
- FC Basel: 1 pt, -5 GD
- Ludogorets: 1, -8
- Kiev: 1, -3
- Celtic: 1, -9
- Rostov: 1, -6
- PSV: 1, -4
- Warsaw: 0, -12
- Brugge: 0, -8
- Zagreb: 0, -8

Is it just too hard to form teams in these lesser leagues? Is money the sole factor influencing talent? Or have teams from less rich and smaller countries never been able to compete at a high level?

 

[soxfan121]

These clubs are not that bad; the clubs they are playing are that good. Money is not the sole factor, but it is a pretty huge factor. I haven't done the math, but I would not be surprised to find out that the combined budgets for those clubs listed above is just a significant fraction of Atletico de Madrid's overall budget, and we know their budget is a small fraction of Real Madrid's (or Barcelona's). The disparity between the haves (i.e. all of the EPL) and the have-nots is widening every year, and the best players in all those leagues are getting snapped up earlier and earlier by the Chelsea's of the world.

The CL may have looked competitive once upon a time but the top clubs are just playing a different game. Real Madrid's B team could probably whip up on that list above.

 

[DJnVa]

I read something earlier this year that said a mid-table EPL club is one of the richest 30 clubs in the world. And mid-table EPL teams don't sniff the Champions League.

Newcastle, which was relegated last year, is one of the 20 richest clubs in the world per some lists.

Brugge, who you listed above has a market value of less than $70 million. Newcastle's is $350 million. Real Madrid's is $3.5 BILLION.

 

[Kliq]

The Champions League itself is responsible for part of the gross inequality in club budgets, which allows an elite set of teams to pull away from the rest. The teams that consistently make the CL's knockout stage get a lot of TV money which allows them to spend more on players; essentially ensuring the teams that are good stay good.

This might be too simple of an explanation; but here is a hypothesis: The difference between revenue streams is remarkable between a team like Barcelona, or Real, or Man U, or Inter, etc. and a team like PSV, or FC Basel, or Salzburg, etc. Not only do those teams have the largest fanbases, sell the most merchandise and have the biggest crowds, but because they keep getting far in the CL, they rake it in off a TV revenue. A team like PSV, well their way into the black is to develop players and then sell them to the big clubs and that is how they make a lot of their revenue.

PSV straddles a fence between competitive global play and noncompetitive global play. In the Netherlands they, along with Ajax, are the top of the heap and will always contend domestically. It also helps that they are in a country that produces a lot of top-level talent. That means they will always be able to recruit a lot of young talent, both from their academy and from the fact that they can cherry pick top talent from smaller Dutch clubs. But because of their relative small size in comparison to the largest clubs in Europe, eventually the big clubs will come calling and naturally the player will want to earn the most money possible (as well as compete at a global level) and make his exit; likely before they hit their prime. Take Arjen Robben for example; he originally began his professional career playing for his local Eredivise team, FC Groningen. When he turned 18 and it was clear he was going to be a good player, PSV bought him. He played with them until he was 21 and his profile continued to grow until the big clubs became interested and soon enough he was sold to Chelsea.

In short, the elite teams make money because they win; the smaller clubs make money because they sell players to larger clubs.

 

[bosox4283]

Brugge, who you listed above has a market value of less than $70 million. Newcastle's is $350 million. Real Madrid's is $3.5 BILLION.

In short, the elite teams make money because they win; the smaller clubs make money because they sell players to larger clubs.

I'm drinking and watching this debate, so, for now: great responses.

 

[slamminsammya]

Power laws etc.

 

[InstaFace]

Those teams you listed did qualify to get their face pounded in by the big boys, through a series of winning increasingly lucrative qualifying rounds. Let's take a look at how these teams stack up and how they got to the group stage.

(Recall: Direct qualifiers to the group stage include the champions of leagues ranked 1-12, runners-up from leagues ranked 1-6, and 3rd-place teams from leagues 1-3, plus defending Europa or CL champions depending on their league finishes.)

- FC Basel (current UEFA rank #19), 1, -5: direct Group Stage qualification as Swiss champs (association ranked #12)
- Ludogorets (#83), 1, -8: 2nd Qualifying Round as Bulgarian champs (assn #29), beat teams ranked #344, #190, and Czech team Viktoria Plzen (#43)
- Dynamo Kyiv (#26), 1, -3: GS, Ukrainian champs (assn #8)
- Celtic (#54), 1, -9: 2QR, beat Lincoln Red Imps (#407), Astana (#137, who of course later beat West Ham), and Beer'Sheva (#205)
- Rostov (#146) 1, -6: 3QR as Russian (#7) runners-up; beat #38 Anderlecht and then Ajax (#30).
- PSV (#33), 1, -4: GS (assn #10) as Eredivisie defending champs
- Warsaw (#74), 0, -12: 2QR as Polish champs (assn #18), beat #335, #249, then defending Irish champs Dundalk (#359)
- Brugge (#47), 0, -8: GS (assn #9) as Belgian champs
- Zagreb (#82), 0, -8: 2QR as Croatian champs (assn #17), beat #297, #237, and then Red Bull Salzburg (#48)

Few of these guys are pushovers. Some are even semi-powers: PSV and Kiev reached the R16 in the Champions League last year, Basel too the year before, and PSV took Atleti to PKs after two scoreless draws. Meanwhile, Besiktas (#62, from Turkey) is ahead of Benfica in their group, Copenhagen (#82) is ahead of Porto on GD, it's not hopeless from those from the lower leagues.

Of those 9 you listed, 3 clearly belong in the group stage (Basel, Kiev, PSV), 2 are borderline (Brugge, Celtic), and 4 are foreseeably hopeless (Warsaw, Zagreb, Ludogorets, Rostov). But even among the hopeless group, Rostov beat two top-40 teams, Zagreb beat the defending Austrian champs, and even Ludogorets took out a quality team in Viktoria Plzen. Only Legia Warsaw won the cupcake-draw lottery, among the whole of the 32 group stage teams. And as for Rostov, their compatriots, Russian champs CSKA Moscow aren't doing much better, on 2 points, -1 GD.

So where do you draw the line? Consider how incredibly stoked the fanbases of those 4 how-did-they-get-here teams are. How much their fortunes are rising and the ROI for their owners is skyrocketing with that group stage cash. Teams making the group stage are guaranteed EUR 12M, plus 0.5M per point they earn in the stage, plus a weighted distribution of TV cash. That's a jackpot to these teams, especially the ones outside the Euro zone (Kiev, Rostov, Ludogorets, and Basel too not that it matters to them).

The underperforming mid-major powerhouses (Basel, PSV and Kiev) would clearly still be in the group stages even in a rejiggered alignment. Sometimes clubs have down years. PSV ousting Manchester United last year, that's the stuff of legends - that's a big argument for why even have a champions league in the first place. They won't pull off miracles every year, but they're the teams from whom miracles are possible. When they pull it off, it's because they're the "whole is greater than the sum of the parts" teams that have just gelled despite a deficit in natural talent relative to big-5 leagues. And those 3 netted EUR ~30M each the last 2 years for their respective R16 runs

What would be an improvement? More teams in the playoff round, with more #4s and some #5s from the uber-leagues? I could maybe support that, but it would seem that that would just reinforce and institutionalize the financial advantage of the big leagues, rather than dangling a carrot for smaller leagues that is within plausible reach. Being a mid-major league champion who earns their way into the big-boy rounds should be among the highest achievements these guys can aspire to. Meanwhile, it's way more exciting to them than it would be to mid-table teams in the EPL, whose fans would rightly feel like they were being awarded a prize they didn't really deserve.

Basically, I'm fine with a handful of minnows in the group stages

 

[acf69]

4 time european champions Ajax' annual turnover is less than the last place team in EPL receives just in TV money. Get used to always the same teams/countries are doing well. Greed will be the undoing...

 

[InstaFace]

well, in Ajax's case, Johan Cruyff ain't walking through that door, and if he did he'd be old and gray and saying "Braaaaaaaiiinnnssss".

You can't minimize the advantages that the big boys have, but you can put some carrots out there for overperforming minnows to get something both emotionally and financially meaningful. I think the current system isn't all that bad, and any tweaks that would improve it would be minor overall.

 

[fletcherpost]

Here's a recent article from the Guardian about Man City's revenue last season.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/oct/18/manchester-city-record-income-2015-16-season

"City announced they earned £391.8m from TV-rights income, sponsorship, ticket sales and all commercial activities last season, when Manuel Pellegrini’s team finished fourth in the Premier League and reached the Champions League semi-finals for the first time."

"Total income from matches last season increased 21% to £52.5m, TV income was up 19% to £161.4m, and the club stated their commercial earnings, mostly sponsorship, were slightly up, 3% to £177.9m. The relatively small increase in that income is understood to be attributed to major commercial deals now being spread across the other football clubs Sheikh Mansour owns under the City group: New York City and Melbourne City. All the announced figures, for earnings, profit and for staff costs, relate specifically to Manchester City, a spokesman said."

To offer some perspective; Celtic are over the moon to be getting around £25M to £30M for getting to the Champions League. The Scottish Premier League TV deal is neglible.

Some of these other European Clubs that play in Poland or Belgium or Holland or wherever will always struggle. The market will always favour the bigger domestic leagues in terms of TV deals. We want good competitive football, we want players we recognise, we want big matches week in week out (one of the reasons the EPL is such a great earner is that it's so competitive, and no surprise Leicester are going to coast into the last 16 of the CL).

It's a step up in class to play in the CL, but the step up is negligible for the biggest sides from the biggest leagues. But for everyone else, they go back to their domestic leagues and it's a big step down, whereas any english team playing in the CL midweek who has Palace or West Brom at the weekend knows they've got a really tough week ahead of them. It's knackering, but it don't half keep you match sharp.

Not as much strength in depth in the Spanish League but if you have the revenues of Barca and Real, you can and do buy any player. Even Italian teams have struggled a bit of late going deep in the CL. And, we;re still waiting for PSG to win the damn thing. The last team to win from the 'smaller' leagues was Porto and they were special.

Things might become more equal somewhat when the footie bubble bursts and there's less money about the game. As things are it's only going to get worse.

 

[InstaFace]

Things might become more equal somewhat when the footie bubble bursts and there's less money about the game. As things are it's only going to get worse.

What evidence do you have that the bolded will be the case? Debts are getting serviced, TV deals expanding (EPL -> USA chief among them), and most of the big money being tossed about is transfer money going from one pocket to the other within the industry.

If Brexit or the slow European economy were to cause economic malaise, perhaps extra football dollars would be the first that households would claw back on - but history suggests that even that's unlikely.

 

[wonderland]

Match day 4 was a lot closer. Of the 16 matches, 13 were either draws or one goal games. One of the three with a margin of two goals or greater was the Barca-Man City.

 

[Vinho Tinto]

What evidence do you have that the bolded will be the case?

It's like the mortgage market. Prior to '08, everyone knew it was a bubble. But if you spent 10 years prior betting against it you got rolled in the market. So yes, there is a bubble going on, but when does it burst? And if it bursts, does it matter? Most of Deloitte's top 10 clubs are now pulling in money at a global level. So if there is a domestic dip in interest, like the NFL is experiencing here, they can potentially offset that with an up swing overseas.

There was always a financial gap, but the massive fissure in finances began with the creation of the Champions League and the English Premier League in the 90s. The hard charge towards revenue growth has been so successful that the CL revenue is no longer a end all/be all for the top clubs in the world. Barca's new deal with Nike guarantees them more money than winning the CL.

 

[coremiller]

Another issue for CL minnows is that mostly they're the dominant team in their domestic leagues, with the result that in most of their domestic matches, the opposition is going to sit back, park the bus, and hope to escape with a draw. In the CL the opposite is the case. The tactics and types of players you need to win your domestic matches are very different from what you need to succeed in the CL. It's extremely difficult to build a squad and develop tactics to succeed in two such different environments at the same time.

Meanwhile, the big clubs can generally play the same style in the CL that they do the rest of the time.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

I like how this thread was bumped immediately after Legia Warsaw scored a couple of screamers en route to drawing 3-3 against Real Madrid (in an empty stadium, no less).

 

[InstaFace]

That game is remarkable for another reason: the last time RM gave up 3 in a non-exhibition match was last Nov 25th, also in the CL group stage, where they beat Shakhtar Donetsk 4-3 (shortly after the 0-4 loss to Barca). Very impressive by Legia - and they almost had all 3 points.