Yes, and the meat has to be halal to welcome our Islamic brothers to the Everton family.
- Status
bluemangroup
Player Valuation: £70m
Feels like you are trying to goad somebody, mooms, cant think who.
SerenityNigh
now you're gonna hear about it
In American sports we call them "small market" teams. Not sure what the brits say. Better you than me asking the dumb questions, although I'll ask my share in due time.
Bipolarbear
Player Valuation: £225k
In Australia we call them "Minnows", but everyone loves an underdog!
The Hibbert Agenda
Player Valuation: £20m
My dad used to go out to dingy bars late on weeknights looking to underdog any minnow he could lay his hands on...
cbpointblank
Player Valuation: £2.5m
I'm not sure it's quite the same thing, though. "Small market" refers more to the size of the city or glamour of the location. It's also more of a big deal in baseball specifically, where because of crap revenue sharing it's all but impossible for, say, the Kansas City Royals to consistently compete with the Yankees. One of the big reasons why the NFL dwarfs everything else here is because they have rules in place that encourage parity. Not that you don't still get dominant teams/dynasties, but it's actually possible for the worst team in the league to become title contenders in a few years by drafting/signing wisely.
Just completely different from the Prem/football in general where rich owners of power clubs can just spend, spend, spend their way to trophies.
We use that word, but things are different here... in nobody's book would Everton be classed as minnows.
You need to be in the lower divisions of the football league before you can even think about using that label for a team.
SerenityNigh
now you're gonna hear about it
It's different, but I think a reasonable comparison. I don't know about "minnows," so I won't comment on that, but in American sports largely dominated by revenue sharing and salary caps, certain teams in "large markets" have a huge competitive advantage. This is specifically true in baseball, but in other sports (albeit, more basketball than NFL) as well there are teams that can create a competitive advantage apart from league revenue.
What's different about EPL teams is that more tv money is provided to more successful teams, so investment in a club is heavily leveraged--if your team is more successful, you make more money; if your team is less successful, you risk administration. Outside of a few teams with bi££ionaire owners or those with massive revenue streams (usually these two are the same), most teams end up the in a similar position financially*. (*I understand this is where CL play fits in; free added revenue at very little added cost)
Aside from my use of the term, "small market," I'd guess we'd more or less agree that until Everton can create it's own revenue streams independent of league revenue (ie, CL competition or other commercial) it will financially be in the same position as most of the rest of the league.
[Now I'm ready for my noob flogging?]
Toffeelover
Player Valuation: £80m
Rubbish he will get out, there is no getting rid of him he will walk the corridors for all eternity. Mums will be telling their kids "beware of the the bid bad bill kenwright"
Reckon if you were sold we could give the club more than 100 mill??????????
roydo
in memoriam - 1965-2024
Mate, to give you some idea, there is an inbuilt (un)natural historic order in English footie. In the old days, the top sides evolved from the largest urban areas; not a surprise really, as the only income back then was gate money, and an occasional loan from a local business man to build a stand or two. That natural order is, by and large, reasonably intact, (although followers of Preston, Huddersfield and a few others might disagree!). What that means is that even clubs who are going through a ****e period, such as Leeds/Sheffield x 2/Wolves, could still attract massive gates for certain games, and their fans believe, not without reason, that they "belong" at the top table.
Pretty much every current PL "Top" club have had a poor run in my lifetime. Chelsea & Man City have been in the 3rd tier of the league; Utd have been in the old Div 2; Spurs, Villa & Newcastle have all tasted relegation. The RS have been well below expectations for 20 plus years.
The difference now is the funding of the game through Sky, predominately. No longer are the clubs finances dependent on the gate, although that is obviously important, and the temptation of, mainly, overseas owners to buy a club, and promote their "brand" in lucrative markets is massive. It is why Cardiff City are bankrolled by an Asian outfit, who invested to get them into the PL, and even changed their colours from Blue to Red! It is why Swansea, Norwich et al can spend a lot of cash, because they now have riches, and little debt, previously unimagined.
So those clubs above have used the PL cash to move up from their traditional place in the natural order of English footie. Fair play to them I say.
Now somehow, and I will leave it to others to suggest why, but Eberton, despite being an ever present in the top flight for pretty much ever, have never been able to attract the owner with sufficent cash, ambition, ego, whatever, to take us from our historic/traditional membership of the top 4 in England, to the sort of global status that Arsenal, (soon) Spurs, City, Chelsea, and yes, I am afraid, the RS enjoy.
My 2 cents anyrate.
Bipolarbear
Player Valuation: £225k
You guys are awesome, it's hard to study at Uni when I am getting such good history lessons on here 
First of all, can everyone go easy on the new guy, he is from Tasmania therefore has 2 heads and is most likely the offspring of intra-family relations.
Second, to answer your original question, yes football is quite different to Aussie rules in that AFL trade players whereas football clubs purchase players (or their registration), and there is no salary cap.
Due to clubs not needing to trade players, you will always have clubs with more money buying the better players from lesser teams, and those players happy to join the richer clubs to get more pay.
This is not a new thing, if you ask some of the older posters on here, I'm sure they will be able to tell you all about the itme we were the "Mersey Millionnaires" and could afford pretty much any player we wanted, even in the late 80s/early 90s we were competing for the top transfer targets in the country. The wealth is certainly more concentrated now and not a reflection of teams success. It used to be that a successful team became a rich team, nowadays it is the other way round - wealth comes first.
As sad as it is, I don't think too many clubs are really willing to try and break that cycle - as long as they stay in the premier league and get their 10s of millions each year, their chairmen are happy. Some have tried to break into the top 4 by spending big (Newcastle, Villa, Spurs) but only Spurs have really challenged for it on a consistent basis due to having huge financial backing (Wealth before success)
Second, to answer your original question, yes football is quite different to Aussie rules in that AFL trade players whereas football clubs purchase players (or their registration), and there is no salary cap.
Due to clubs not needing to trade players, you will always have clubs with more money buying the better players from lesser teams, and those players happy to join the richer clubs to get more pay.
This is not a new thing, if you ask some of the older posters on here, I'm sure they will be able to tell you all about the itme we were the "Mersey Millionnaires" and could afford pretty much any player we wanted, even in the late 80s/early 90s we were competing for the top transfer targets in the country. The wealth is certainly more concentrated now and not a reflection of teams success. It used to be that a successful team became a rich team, nowadays it is the other way round - wealth comes first.
As sad as it is, I don't think too many clubs are really willing to try and break that cycle - as long as they stay in the premier league and get their 10s of millions each year, their chairmen are happy. Some have tried to break into the top 4 by spending big (Newcastle, Villa, Spurs) but only Spurs have really challenged for it on a consistent basis due to having huge financial backing (Wealth before success)
- Status
