I lifted this paragraph off the Barclay Premier League (soccer) Wiki page...I read it and it made me think of the P5 vs G5 deal....

One of the main criticisms levelled at the Premier League is the increasing gulf between the Premier League and the Football League. Since its split with the Football League, many established clubs in the Premier League have managed to distance themselves from their counterparts in lower leagues. Owing in large part to the disparity in revenue from television rights between the leagues,[83] many newly promoted teams have found it difficult to avoid relegation in their first season in the Premier League. In every season except 2001–02 (Blackburn Rovers, Bolton Wanderers and Fulham) and 2011–12 (Queens Park Rangers, Norwich City and Swansea City), at least one Premier League newcomer has been relegated back to the Football League. In 1997–98 all three promoted clubs were relegated at the end of the season.

At least they are given a chance based on performance. That's more opportunity than the P5 will provide if they get their way.



Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

They are given half a chance. Once promoted, the teams can't keep up due to the difference in operating budgets. Most if not all are relegated back down within a few years. This system of constant promotion and demotion actually hurts the top lower level clubs. Winning momentum is lost and good rival tries are halted. Teams that are promoted need to be given several years to prove that they belong. One season is just not enough time.

(04-13-2014 12:05 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  They are given half a chance. Once promoted, the teams can't keep up due to the difference in operating budgets. Most if not all are relegated back down within a few years. This system of constant promotion and demotion actually hurts the top lower level clubs. Winning momentum is lost and good rival tries are halted. Teams that are promoted need to be given several years to prove that they belong. One season is just not enough time.

How would that work? It would create a logjam where you could have a dominant team in the next lower league but they get stuck there for several years while those other recently promoted teams get their 'several years' to prove they belong up there.

The disparity in TV rights money between the Premiership and the lesser leagues exists for the same reason that the SEC gets a lot more for its games than does the AAC: A disparity in viewer interest. That's not a correctable problem except by the lower-paid league developing greater fan and viewership appeal so as to merit more money.

Interesting comparison but more apples to oranges. The teams that can weather the first year in the Premier League have a better chance of sustaining success. The main difference is that we are talking about a whole conference as opposed to individual teams.

It's more like NCAA D1-FBS football for a few reasons:

A few teams are the absolute cream of the crop and are competing for the top championship every year or the entry into the top competitions like the Champions League, who's equivalent for this conversation is the Access Bowl system. Arsenal-this year is a disaster, ManU-same, Chelsea, Liverpool, and Man City would be closest to Alabama, Ohio State, Stanford (of today), Oregon (of today), or the Michigan and Notre Dames of old.

A lot of teams are always competing for the middle of the table. They'll jump up to the top 4 every once in a while, but most are trying for Europa (or high non-BCS bowls).

Then there are your traditional bottom feeders and recent call-ups that remind you of Duke-until recently, Kentucky, Northwestern-until recently, Army, Baylor-until recently, etc. The main difference here is that those teams would have been regulated and probably teetering between the Premier league and Championship every year. Teams like Boise would have gotten their deserved shot at the big time.

We would be the Championship.