IS winning the league

[Korea 734]

built on having depth and best of luck in terms of injury, but not necessarily the best team (starting 11)?

[El Ninodinho 19]

built on having the biggest squad and best of luck in terms of injury?

It's a combination of having the most talent, depth on the squad, and not catching the injury bug during important stretches of the season. Having depth and talent are most important though because if a central player goes down you can always have someone fill in right away and production should not drop off. As far as talent goes, to compete in the EPL, you need it. That's why over the next few years the only true contenders for trophy are City, Chelsea, Man U, and Spurs and Arsenal would have outside shots.

That's why as an American I've always been confused as too why leagues in Europe do not implement as salary cap system. Money pretty much runs all the leagues of the world, whoever has the most of it fields an immense squad that the lower teams just cannot compete with over a full season.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

It's a combination of having the most talent, depth on the squad, and not catching the injury bug during important stretches of the season. Having depth and talent are most important though because if a central player goes down you can always have someone fill in right away and production should not drop off. As far as talent goes, to compete in the EPL, you need it. That's why over the next few years the only true contenders for trophy are City, Chelsea, Man U, and Spurs and Arsenal would have outside shots.

That's why as an American I've always been confused as too why leagues in Europe do not implement as salary cap system. Money pretty much runs all the leagues of the world, whoever has the most of it fields an immense squad that the lower teams just cannot compete with over a full season.

Salary caps are awful. They are socialism for the super rich and they create a league of mediocrity. I agree that money wins (I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise based on results) but I'd rather have 10-15 very good to excellent teams competing at the top of Europe than 200 mediocre teams. There are things that could and should be done to bring the level of spending down so that more teams can compete though.

[El Ninodinho 19]

Salary caps are awful. They are socialism for the super rich and they create a league of mediocrity. I agree that money wins (I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise based on results) but I'd rather have 10-15 very good to excellent teams competing at the top of Europe than 200 mediocre teams. There are things that could and should be done to bring the level of spending down so that more teams can compete though.

They work pretty well in keeping the playing field level in American Sports. Every fan usually has at least one superstar to look forward to see playing, which cannot be said for the EPL where most of the lower table teams don't have any real world class players.

But I agree I don't know what sort of measures the leagues of Europe could take, but something needs to be done with some of these ridiculous transfers and player wages.

[manpe 10,861]

built on having the biggest squad and best of luck in terms of injury?

Definitely not. The squad limit is 25 players for every team, so if you have 25 crap players who never get injured, you're not gonna win the league. In short, it's about depth, balance and talent/skill imo. If you get a few injuries and don't win the league because of it then frankly you don't deserve to, because having all those 3 aforementioned ingredients would mean you always have adequate replacements. I don't see much room for luck in winning the league, I think whoever wins it deserves it. It's not a cup competition where luck and missing players can make a huge difference.

And of course you need someone to manage it all carefully and meticulously, picking the right players at the right time at the right moments.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

They work pretty well in keeping the playing field level in American Sports. Every fan usually has at least one superstar to look forward to see playing, which cannot be said for the EPL where most of the lower table teams don't have any real world class players.

But I agree I don't know what sort of measures the leagues of Europe could take, but something needs to be done with some of these ridiculous transfers and player wages.

They don't work in the US. Basketball is the most uneven sport in the world. Going into the season, only 2 or 3 teams had any chance to win and I'd be very surprised if the Heat don't win it. NFL works because there are so few games but the NFL, the winner isn't the best team, it's just a team that happens to get hot, avoid injuries at the right time, and gets some luck. I follow the NHL and have done so for a long time. Prior to the salary cap, the league was infinitely better. You had bad teams and great teams. Now, you have a lot of OK teams. I find that generally dull. I want to watch teams like Barcelona, ManU, Juventus, Bayern ,Chelsea, etc...not teams like Sunderland and Levante and Parma. Parity means mediocrity.

Even so, salary caps don't really work. Since 2000, in North American sports, here is how many different teams have won their championships.

NBA (salary cap)-6

NFL (salary cap)-10

MLB (no salary cap)-10

[Korea 734]

They work pretty well in keeping the playing field level in American Sports. Every fan usually has at least one superstar to look forward to see playing, which cannot be said for the EPL where most of the lower table teams don't have any real world class players.

But I agree I don't know what sort of measures the leagues of Europe could take, but something needs to be done with some of these ridiculous transfers and player wages.

I disagree.

Sports team in NFL and NBA are def. not on even plane ( I don't watch neither MLB or Hockey). Especially the good teams.

Definitely not. The squad limit is 25 players for every team, so if you have 25 crap players who never get injured, you're not gonna win the league. In short, it's about depth, balance and talent/skill imo. If you get a few injuries and don't win the league because of it then frankly you don't deserve to, because having all those 3 aforementioned ingredients would mean you always have adequate replacements. I don't see much room for luck in winning the league, I think whoever wins it deserves it. It's not a cup competition where luck and missing players can make a huge difference.

And of course you need someone to manage it all carefully and meticulously, picking the right players at the right time at the right moments.

You know depth is squad size right?

Injuries are def. huge, it destroyed both Barca ( last year) and Man City in winning the league.

[English Freak 456]

They work pretty well in keeping the playing field level in American Sports. Every fan usually has at least one superstar to look forward to see playing, which cannot be said for the EPL where most of the lower table teams don't have any real world class players.

But I agree I don't know what sort of measures the leagues of Europe could take, but something needs to be done with some of these ridiculous transfers and player wages.

That's great for American sports. A salary cap system for EPL doesn't make any sense.

I like the strength of the EPL and the amount of top-class footballers that have joined the EPL in recent seasons.

As for the lower table teams not having any world-class players...well that's what makes the EPL interesting.

There's always two races in the EPL. One race is for the title/top 4 and the other race is for survival.

I love watching the mediocre teams (without any world-class players) fight their way out of relegation.

[English Freak 456]

You know depth is squad size right?

Injuries are def. huge, it destroyed both Barca ( last year) and Man City in winning the league.

Depth is NOT squad size.

You could have 5 mediocre players on the bench but that doesn't mean they add depth to your squad.

Like at Chelsea, we have Turnbull and Hilarious as squad size but neither of them "add depth" to our GK position.

[Korea 734]

Depth is NOT squad size.

You could have 5 mediocre players on the bench but that doesn't mean they add depth to your squad.

Like at Chelsea, we have Turnbull and Hilarious as squad size but neither of them "add depth" to our GK position.

Obviously, every team has the same amount of players on a team...

What I meant by squad size was significant players that contribute aka depth.

Let me edit squad size now....

[bushman 2,043]

Depth of any team depends on the ability to purchase quality players.

Those teams that are able to spend, pay high prices, salaries to players are & will be preferred by players.

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

YES.

LOOK AT MANU.

[Santiago. 1,500]

Man Utd are easily deservedly Champions.

They have been the most consistent team and suffered through multiple accounts of injuries and still managed to do all they could to get the goals they desperately needed, whereas the likes of City and us, did not do enough.

Consistency plays an important role in the league as it is one of the 3 criteria Champions should have. City and Us lacked it.

[edetarod 2,155]

playing the right teams at the right time

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

Man Utd are easily deservedly Champions.

They have been the most consistent team and suffered through multiple accounts of injuries and still managed to do all they could to get the goals they desperately needed, whereas the likes of City and us, did not do enough.

Consistency plays an important role in the league as it is one of the 3 criteria Champions should have. City and Us lacked it.

BUT NOT WITH THE BEST SQUAD.