|
I think to start with you have to consider that European countries are significantly smaller than the US in terms of both population and land mass. Couple that with the fact that there isn't really any unified league structure across Europe and the simple fact is that there's simply nowhere for teams to relocate too. It simply isn't possible for FC Dusseldorf to pick up shop and relocate to sunny Aberdeen. Couple that with major cities already have a pretty high density of teams, I think there is something like 19 pro soccer teams in London alone, so the local city councils aren't particularly likely to play favorites for one city over the other. That said, I don't know that your thesis is entirely accurate either. Financing for stadiums in both Europe is pretty complex and it isn't necessarily a strictly public or private thing on either side of the Atlantic. There is normally a ton of infrastructure costs associated with building a stadium that is footed by somebody. Some countries have national stadiums for different sports which are publicly financed, and may or may not be used for other events than national team games. For instance in England you have Wembley Stadium, which hosts England soccer games, the NFL, concerts, Twickenham which hosts England Rugby, the NFL, and various other stuff, and then the Olympic Stadium, which is now home to West Ham United. Basically all of the stadiums built in Germany for the 2006 World Cup got taken over by local club teams. It really is just not a cut and dried thing.
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
ChinaBob posted:Does "taken over" mean leased out to or bought? My gut says leased because as an American it's hard to imagine a sports team assuming debt-- but I have no idea. City builds a stadium -> club leases it from the city is pretty much how it works in the US as well. Most publicly financed stadiums are paid for by municipal bonds. The actual cost to the city is because those bonds are tax exempt, not any actual direct payment by the city or taxpayers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Uh Why would the Rams move to Los Angeles? Nobody even likes them there
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
I think people are maybe missing the forest for the tress here a little bit. For one, no one really gives a poo poo about lower division soccer, much like nobody really gives a poo poo about minor league baseball. Yeah, they have fan support and blah, blah, blah the revenue differences are orders of magnitude apart. To put it in perspective, if the Premier League consisted of just 5 teams, you would have a team in London, a team in Manchester, and a team in Birmingham and the teams could move about pretty freely ransoming one city or another. Conversely if you had 120 NFL teams every city of any consequence in the US would have one or more NFL teams, and there would be nowhere for any team to move to. Los Angeles isn't going to build a stadium to help the Toledo Mud Hens relocate, because they already have 6 teams. e: To the OP here's something else you might also want to consider. I know that the Broncos pay a percentage of parking revenue to the city as part of their lease agreement. I'm fairly certain that's a pretty common agreement in the US. The problem with that in Europe is that many stadiums don't have parking. For some teams as much as 95% of their fans take public transit or walk to the games. Simplex fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Sep 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
ShaneMacGowansTeeth posted:I could tear this apart and say how wrong it is, but I'll just point at Jamie Vardy whenever anyone says lower league football is rubbish. Quick Wikipedia search for 2015 revenue per club by league Premier League - $227 million Championship - $29 Million League One - $7.5 Million League Two - $5 Million
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:29 |
|
|
dex_sda posted:The MK Dons story is really all that needs to be said. It was an actual attempt at relocation, with an attempt at appropriation of the history of Wimbledon FC. Supporters would have none of it and literally formed a new football team instantly. It had to start from the bottom, the 9th tier, without the finances or any players. code:Marenghi posted:Money isn't the be all and end all. In fact there's considerable benefits to lower league football speicifically due to it's lower revenue. That said Premier League attendance is much higher than lower league attendance, not just in raw numbers, but in percent of stadium capacity as well. I can't find numbers, but I'm guessing if you included things like cup matches and European games, attendance for Premier League teams might be higher than all other professional leagues combined.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2016 21:39
|
|