Sunday 21 March 2010

Fair play

I have only been in the country for a few days, but I get the impression that American people don’t like Communism. Senator McCarthy certainly didn’t. But while the chances of my immediate deportation might be significantly increased by the following statement, I think that one of the best things about American sports is their communism.

Now I’m not talking about Bread Lines and Gulags here, but let’s face it, the idea that the team that wins the Super Bowl gets the last draft pick the following year is pretty anathema to the capitalist ideal. And I love it!

In the “EPL” (an acronym that still nauseates me to the core), if you win the league, you get some prize money, you use this to buy better players, and your chances of winning the league again next year go up.

Now I am a Manchester United fan, but even I see the attraction of a system that prevents one team from winning the league in 11 out of the last 17 seasons. And Manchester United is about the most tolerable example of enduring success in English football in the last decade. By which I mean that Alex Ferguson earned it.

When he arrived at the club in 1986, United were not a dominant force in the English game. Sure they had the legacy of Best and the Busby Babes (at which point, those reading this who understand football as a game of four quarters will probably conjure images of Hungarian hat-wearing honeys), but they hadn’t won the league for 20 years, and had even got relegated to the old second division as recently as 1974. Even the most bitter Liverpool fan would have to concede that Ferguson was incredibly astute in the transfer market in the early 1990s (at least before he temporarily lost his mind with the purchases of Kleberson, Jordi Cruyff, and the one-trick wonder). But he bought Peter Schmeichel, Eric Cantona and Roy Keane – arguably the three most influential players in the history of the Premier League, for the combined sum of £5.5m. That’s the same as Leicester paid for Ade Akinbiyi. Ferguson crafted a title-winning team out of nothing, and it is difficult to argue that United’s unprecedented success over the last 20 years has been undeserved, even if the vast majority of Englishmen have found it unpleasant, and even a Manchester United fan like myself might concede that it has been unexciting – or at least undiverse, which might amount to a similar thing (if you believe in “old adages”. Which I do. Even if only because I think adage is a nice word, and therefore adages must be nice things).

And I would add Arsène Wenger’s Arsenal to this category as well. Wenger made some great signings in his early years at Highbury, and Arsenal’s success during his tenure has also been earned, even if it has been less enduring (he added, smugly).

And then there’s Chelsea. Chelsea basically bought their 2005 title with money supplied by a profiteering Russian oiligarch. Which I find a little depressing. And add Manchester City to this category. If they do ever actually break into the top 4 (he added, even more smugly).

But the point is, whether it is “deserved” or bought, success in English football is self-perpetuating.

By contrast, in American sports, “many that are first shall be last and the last shall be first”. Now of course, there are teams that have enjoyed prolonged periods of success – due to great coaching, great players and great fans. And of course there are the Chicago Cubs.

But the NFL system is set up to mitigate against the concentration of power that characterises English football (and Spanish football, and Italian football, etc.) in at least two ways.

Firstly, the team that comes first in the previous year gets the last draft pick in the next year.

And secondly, the schedules for the teams that win their divisions are tougher in the following year.

I think this keeps things interesting, and is a “good thing”.


The number of teams that have won the English Premiership in the 18 years since its inception in 1992? 4. The number of teams who have won the Super Bowl in the same timeframe? 13. The number of different teams that have finished in the top 4 in England in the last 7 years? 5. The number of teams who have reached the NFC and the AFC Championship games in the same timeframe? 20.

I’ll take the American numbers.

2 comments:

  1. I think I need to challenge one statistic claimed by this Jonny guy. He states merrily that the "number of different teams that have finished in the top 4 in England in the last 7 years" is 5. Has he forgotten that, apart from the obvious Big Four, Newcastle were 3rd in 2002/03 and Everton were 4th in 2004/05. I reckon this makes the total 6. However, the overall thrust of his argument is hardly weakened.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And the NFL's salary cap is another big reason. But not all American sports are this way, for example Marx would say that there's a specter haunting baseball, because despite revenue sharing and the luxury tax, the Yankees have the four highest-paid players in the entire (thirty team) league. Their starting infield alone makes more than seventeen other teams; A-Rod makes as much as the Florida Marlins. Which reminds me, where is Marx buried? A communist plot.

    ReplyDelete