Over the past few years, there are two statements we have heard many times. They are:

Spain (La Liga) is better at producing and nurturing top, young talent than England (EPL) EPL is more competitive than the La Liga In my opinion, both statements are true. The result is that Spain has a far superior national team (both senior side and youth teams like U21, U21, U19, etc) than the England’s national team and their youth teams. Its also true, in my opinion, that the EPL is a far more competitive league than the La Liga, and is also the most watched football league, as we can see from the viewership figures.

Points 1 and 2 are connected in many ways, but we will first cover point 1 almost completely separate from point 2. Then we will cover point 2, and try to show how its connected.

Note: if I say “we”, I mean you and me, because I try to write these blogs in format whereby it feels like I am speaking to you directly and we are discussing the points.

POINT 1: Spain (La Liga) is better at producing and nurturing top, young talent than England (EPL)

Spain is nowadays the “model” that a lot of national teams are trying to use as the perfect example, and for England its just the latest model that they are trying to copy. I would be very surprised if a few years from now they dont take the German method as their new “model” to follow and copy. But lets look at Spain and their success for now.

Spain and their brilliance at senior level and in major tournaments didnt just come out of nowhere. They have been winning youth tournaments for a few years before they won their first major trophy, Euro 2008. Spain did what England are trying to do, in terms of making sure top quality youngsters emerge and the constant conveyor belt being strong (grassroots).

UEFA A & PRO Coaches in England vs EU rivals

Spain 14860 Germany 6570 France 2588 Italy 1810 Holland 1137 England 1010

In 2008, Spain had more UEFA A and Pro Licence coaches than other EU countries, and they had a total of 14,860 coaches. This was more than twice the number Germany had, and more than 10 times the number England had. But its even more surprising that it takes “just” 245 hours in England to get a Pro Licence, whereas it takes more than 3 times more time in order to get the equivalent in Spain, yet they have far more coaches than England. There are many reasons for England having far fewer coaches than their continental rivals, one of which is that their English FA coaching courses are much more difficult to complete and has many more obstacles. Leeds midfielder Michael Brown said the following about it in an interview with the Daily Mail.

“It’s a farce.” Brown said. “Originally I wanted to do it with the English FA but there’s obstacles in your way. There’s endless obstacles in the way. Endless. They make it difficult with dates, they don’t tell you the dates of the next course, they make it hard to proceed and that’s why all of the lads are jumping away from it. There were places on the B Licence in Wales so you do that. When you’ve got Roberto Martinez and Patrick Vieira on recent courses they can’t be doing it wrong. They’ve done it in Wales.”

In Spain, a person needs the same qualifications to work and coach in schools as he would need if we was coaching a top division Spanish club. The result is that the Spanish players are taught to play in a very similar playstyle, and players technical attributes, tactical understanding of the game and intelligence is worked on, and this helps their national team (senior and youth teams) play in a cohesive manner. Fernando Hierro said that Spain first started their work for becoming world football champions, by first working on the grassroots level, where they won many youth tournaments in the past 10-15 years before they first starting winning silverware for the Spanish national team, beginning with Euro 2008, then World Cup 2010, and recently Euro 2012. The English system is nowhere near similar to the Spanish system of working on grassroot football and its not surprising to see England not performing well in the major tournaments, and the youth tournaments, and more often than not are often criticised for not playing technical, aesthetic football.

England U21’s performance in Israel

The recently concluded U21 tournament was a pathetic performance by the England U21 squad, where they failed to pick up any points and lost all 3 matches to Italy, Norway and Israel. Many of England’s finest players that were eligible to play for the U21 in that tournament were absent. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Jack Rodwell and Phil Jones played in the England match vs Brazil, even though they could have instead played for the U21. We keep hearing how much younsters benefit from playing tournament football, at all sorts of levels. So, would it not have been more beneficial for those 3 players and the U21 squad’s prospects if they had instead gone to Israel? What was the point of selecting them for a friendly vs Brazil? Many other of England finer young players weren’t available, such as Jack Wilshere, Luke Shaw, Danny Welbeck, etc. I feel the performance of the England U21 would have been a lot better if even half of those that werent in Israel (for whatever reason) had managed to make it, but the situation is such that the best U21 players are needed in the England senior national team squad, thus depriving the U21’s of their best players when it comes to youth tournaments. One of the main questions we should be asking ourselves is, why are the best U21s needed in the senior squad that badly? Why aren’t there sufficient, top quality senior players already available for selection? But instead of the FA looking at itself and blaming itself partially, they seemed happy enough to put most of the blame on Stuart Pearce, and didnt renew his contract. I am no fan of Pearce and I dont think he was the right man for the job in the first place, but to me it looked like the FA were passing the buck, as usual. The English FA just aren’t visionaries, nor are they leaders. Let’s look at St George Park.

St George Park: It’s about time

This is a good idea, but its not something that hasn’t been done before by others. France for example is far ahead of England in this field and has many national academies, with the most well known being Clairefontaine, which has already produced players like Henry, Anelka, Gallas, Ben Arfa, etc. This is just one of 12 national academies that France has, which produces quality yougsters. England so far has just one kind of similar to it, St George Park, which arguably should have been in place many years ago, but wasnt due to the FA’s lack of foresight, arrogance, and due to them dragging their heels which resulted in the project being delayed and taking many extra years to complete. Clairefontaine, in contrast, was opened in 1988. The English FA seems to be one that reacts to what others are doing, instead of taking progressive initiatives to be the leaders.

But there is hope for England in the future, and St George Park is just one move. Many other smaller moves have been made which will eventually see England catch up to the likes of Spain and Germany. The Elite Player Performance Plan (EPPP), the Home Grown rule/quota, and England’s continuous poor performances on most senior and youth levels will lead to even more pressure on working towards fixing the problems and working on policies that will tackle the problem for the long term. Before, around a decade back, there were more than enough people that felt England’s poor performances was just a blip and not because quality development of young players was regressing. But nowadays you would be hardpressed to even find more than a hand full of people that think there isn’t something wrong with the system and want action taken to correct it. This realisation is the first step, and there are encouraging signs and developments that England could one day, a decade or so from now, return and be a major contender for tournament honours in the senior and youth levels on a consistent basis. For a long time Spain too was criticised for punching way below their weight, but look where they are now.

St George Park, is a project that means a lot more that just some academy. Its a sign of acceptance that things were flawed before, and that action had to be taken, but its also a sign that more quality coaches are needed in English football at all levels. Also, it is a sign that English players need to be developed in a way where they are technically as perfect as possible, and one sign of that is the FA encouraging coaches to put more insistence on young players playing more 5 a sides, and less of 11 a sides, so that each player can develop his technique, skills, decision making, and become more comfortable in possession of the ball.

EPL clubs academies have been moving towards producing more of the “continental players”, and the big clubs have taken steps towards that. Manchester United for example, relatively recently, have started to play more continental formations such as the 4-2-3-1 in the youth teams and putting more focus on developing each young players technical ability. Take the likes of Cleverley for example, who is a good technical central midfielder, or Welbeck who has good technique and has been tipped to become the new Kanu if his development goes well. But i think the best example has to be Evans, who despite being a centre back, is very comfortable in possession, dribbling, and is more than a decent passer with good vision (especially when kept in mind that he is a centre back). More EPL clubs in England are doing the same sort of thing too. Even the first team playstyle in the top EPL clubs seems to be moving more towards the continental style, and drifting away from the more “typical English way”. It will take some years to see results, but there does seem to be action being taken at all levels of English football. One of the most encouraging signs though, is that the FA admit they will look into making more national academies around England, which is a setup that France have had for many years now and have always produced quality talented players that top clubs all around the EU have tried to buy when they mature, or tried to get them at a much younger age so that they can continue development in their academies.

English player’s biggest obstacles: Them staying in England, and overcoming the culture difference

But in order to overcome continental rivals, it is important that talented, young English players be able to overcome a certain obstacle and do things that their counterparts from other EU countries seem to have no problem in doing. Which is, leave their English clubs and join bigger clubs in continental Europe when the opportunity arises so that they can be developed better. But why is that not already the case?

The 3 main reasons, in my opinion, are:

The top English players tend to be in big demand by the top EPL clubs, and thats where they tend to go. The Home Grown Quota will only make sure that this keeps on happeneing, and the top EPL clubs will also pay above market value transfer fees for those players, which could be termed as “the English players premium price”. Despite Point 1 being true, England isn’t producing enough world class English players, and so the best ones (which arent many) tend to go to the top EPL clubs (which helps inflate those players transfer fees, due to demand for top English players being high among top EPL clubs, but the supply of top English players being lower than required in order to keep price normal, thus creating the “English players premium price”), and there are next to none left that would interest the top continental clubs. Equally as important as point 1 and 2, is the culture gap problem that English players dont seem as comfortable overcoming as their continental counterparts. Aside from world class English players that have already reached their mid-20s, it is the younger English players (those in their late teens and early 20s) that should give stronger weightage to offers from the continent. But this clearly isnt the case, and most of the aspiring young English players prefer continuing their development in smaller EPL clubs, or in the lower divisions, and bide their time till a top EPL club is interested in them (assuming the player is good enough, or just about good enough to fill the Home Grown Quota), or they prefer to join the top EPL clubs academy even though they know there isnt much chance of progression into the first team (such as clubs like Chelsea) and they ignore offers from equal-sized clubs or a little smaller clubs in mainland Europe. English players need to overcome this, because it has become an obstacle for English players and the England national team. Take England’s rivals for example, such as France, Spain, Italy and Germany. All 4 of them have multiple developed players in other major leagues (other their own top domestic league), and they even have many younger players in academies of clubs in other countries with strong domestic leagues. (continuation of point 3). but there is hope for English players. Recently i read an article about the demise of Scottish football, and how having a poor domestic league has silver linings. In that article, i read that despite the SPL (Scottish Premier League) being far less competitive, having a lower standard, and having far less money than major EU leagues, there is a chance that the Scotland national team could become a lot stronger than it is now and begin to regularly qualify for major tournaments. The logic they presented made sense. Due to the SPL being a lot poorer (in terms of quality and financially) than major EU rival leagues, most SPL clubs know that in order to survive, they will have to prioritise producing quality young Scottish players that they will have to export to EPL clubs (or other EU leagues) where they continue their development into top players. Something like this is already happening in the La Liga, and its only recently that most SPL clubs have started using the same approach. A lot of teams in EU will look to the SPL as a league that will prioritise developing young talented players, from whom they can buy them for cheap (at least when compared to similar players from other equally sized or bigger EU leagues). Eastern, Central and Southern European countries are starting to tap into this as well, and are going to increase their scouting efforts in the SPL, as long as most SPL clubs take up the policy of developing young talents for export and survival. (continuation of point 3). Top EPL clubs have no reason to venture down the same road as the SPL clubs, and they dont need to export their talent. But the smaller EPL clubs and those in lower English leagues, already have this approach somewhat, but it will be a even more watered down version of what the SPL clubs will have in the future. But with the EPL getting richer, and the gap between the EPL and lower English leagues getting bigger and bigger each year, the teams in the lower English leagues will have to focus even more on developing young talent for export to clubs higher up the food chain in the English heirarchy, or abroad. The reluctance of young English players to move abroad (unlike their counterparts from other EU countries), is what needs to change so that they can take advantage of future developments and trends. These young players should constantly focus on becoming better players and going wherever they have to in order to become better players. Its better for a young English player to go to a midtable German or French club where he can play first team football and become a better player, instead of going to a top EPL club where they will hardly get first team action for a few years which could kill their development. As the gap between the finances of EPL and lower English teams keeps increasing, and as long as young English players get over the “culture gap”, then English football leagues (other than EPL) could be a great area for good EU clubs to scout for talent, and when the English players go abroad, they can develop into very good players that increases the number and quality of English players that the England national team coach would consider when picking a squad. England is lagging behind its EU conterparts in terms of exporting its youngsters abroad, and this needs to change. But the circumstances need to first appear in order for this change to happen, but i can see that happening in the not too distant future.

POINT 2: EPL is more competitive than La Liga. But why?

Now, we are going to discuss Point 2, which was about why the EPL is more competitive than the La Liga. We are going to look at a lot of figures, so take your time and look at them slowly and try to understand what they mean, knock-on effects of the figures, etc.

But before you look at the figures, the main figures I want you to keep in mind, is that in 2011/12, 62.2% of players in the EPL were foreigners, whereas “only” 37.5% of players in the La Liga were foreigners. Keep this figure in mind, as you are looking at the figures below.

TABLE 1

Below are the 2011/12 broadcasting payments made to each club from their respective leagues. The figures are in millions of pounds sterling.

Real Madrid 119.0 Manchester City 60.6 Barcelona 119.0 Manchester United 60.3 Valencia 40.8 Tottenham Hotspur 57.4 Atletico Madrid 39.1 Arsenal 56.2 Sevilla 26.4 Chelsea 54.4 Betis 24.7 Liverpool 54.3 Villareal 23.8 Newcastle United 54.2 Getafe 15.3 Everton 48.9 Espanyol 14.5 Fulham 47.4 Athletic Bilbao 14.5 West Bromwich Albion 46.6 Real Sociedad 12.8 Swansea City 45.9 Zaragoza 12.8 Norwich City 45.6 Osasuna 11.9 Sunderland 44.4 Malaga 11.9 Stoke City 43.6 Mallorca 11.9 Queens Park Rangers 43.3 Levante 11.9 Wigan Athletic 42.9 Sporting 11.9 Aston Villa 42.1 Granada 11.9 Bolton Wanderers 40.6 Rayo 11.9 Blackburn Rovers 40.3 Racing 11.1 Wolverhampton Wanderers 39.1

Table 1 just shows how unfair the TV distribution method is in La Liga, and how much fairer it is in the EPL, if competitiveness is the main factor used in judging how competitive a league is.

In La Liga, each club arranges its own TV deal individually, and so the big clubs get a huge share of the total TV pie, whereas smaller clubs get a much smaller deal. As a result, the big clubs keep getting bigger, and the smaller clubs keep getting smaller, through this revenue source alone. People subscribe so that they can watch Barca and RM play, on their TV sets. But they also pay to watch them compete every week against a team, in the Liga. Out of 38 matches, only 2 are Classico’s. The other 36 matches are against other teams, and the “other team” is very much needed in order for people to keep wanting to watch Barca and RM on TV, and in order for Barca and RM to want to get a huge slice of the TV money, because without the 18 teams participation, there will only be 2 Classicos and no way RM and Barca will get 119 million pounds from their TV deal just for those 2 matches, because no subscriber will pay full price (of 38 matches) just to watch 2 Classico’s over the course of a season. The other 18 teams should be paid fairly for their participation in the league, and enough money so that they too have a chance to grow into big clubs, otherwise, RM and Barca will be the only 2 big teams in La Liga, whereas the other 18 clubs will be their “unofficial slaves”.

I could go into depth as to why this sort of deals are unfair, but that isnt the point of this post. I could go into detail about the anti-competition behaviour of Barca and RM, the big part these two play in making so many Liga clubs small and almost bankrupt, and why I laugh at Barca fans suggestions that Barca is “more than a club”, and why I also laugh at RM’s unofficial title as a gentleman-like club. If these two clubs were so great, they would behave like great clubs, and not behave like they have so far (regarding their Liga TV deal), that have a rivalry on the pitch, but secretly backstage work together in making sure they continue to dominate La Liga by using unfair means of handicapping the other 18 clubs in La Liga. As far as my opinion is concerned, Barca and RM are 2 great teams, but they are not great clubs due to this farce that they willingly orchestrate behind the scenes, and do everything possible in making sure the other 18 clubs remain poor by stealing their rights and money. One example of their cheap tactics is preventing the other 18 teams from meeting and putting together proposals to force LFP to have a collective system of distributing the TV revenue, like the ones in place in the EPL and Bundesliga. Sevilla president, Del Nido, has been trying for years to organise such meetings and proposals to help the other 18 clubs win back their rights from Barca and RM, but those 2 clubs use their power and influence in the LFP, media and government, in order to prevent Del Nido and the smaller Liga clubs from succeeding. Thats why, I dont respect Barca and RM as clubs, and they will pay the price for acting like tyrants over smaller Liga clubs than themselves.

Now lets look at the EPLs method of distributing the TV revenue.

1.) 50% of total TV revenue split equally between the 20 clubs.

2.) Another 25% paid in merit payments (depending on where a club finishes in the final League table)

3.)Remaining 25% paid in facility fees each time a club’s matches are on TV in the UK.

Each club is guaranteed a minimum of 10 facility fee payments, while all international broadcast revenue is split equally amongst the 20 clubs.

For the full breakdown of the 2011/12 EPL TV revenue distribution figures, click on the link below:

http://www.footballtransfertavern.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/PL-payments-2011-12-359×500.jpg

The result of this is their for everyone to see. Manchester City (2011/12 EPL Champions) made only 20 million pounds more than Wolves (who were relegated that year, and with parachute payments not included in calculations). So, Wolves made 2/3 of what City made from their EPL TV deal. As for RM and Barca, they each made 110 million pounds more than Racing. So, Racing made less than 10% of what RM and Barca made each from their own TV deal.

RM and Barca, combined make around 42.7% of total TV revenue from La Liga.

Manchester United and City combined makes around 12.5% of total TV revenue from EPL.

City EPL TV money : Wolves EPL TV money

1.5 : 1

Barca/RM Liga TV money: Racing Liga TV money

11 : 1

The result of the TV revenue breakdown differences ends up making the EPL the more competitive league than the La Liga, because the figures show that the EPL is generally the “buying league”, whereas the La Liga is the “selling league”. I will explain this statement below.

In 2011/12, the net transfer spending (expenditure more than sales) in the EPL was -362.6 million pounds, which averaged out to -18 million pounds average net transfer spending for every EPL club. The net transfer spending (loss) in the EPL, excluding the top 4 clubs (United, Chelsea, City, Arsenal) was -219 million pounds, which averaged out to -13.6 million pounds average net transfer spending for every EPL club outside the top 4.

In 2011/12, the net transfer profit (sales more than expenditure) in the La Liga was +68.3 million pounds, which averaged out to +3.4 million pounds average net transfer profit for every La Liga club. The net transfer profit in the La Liga, excluding the top 2 (Barcelona and Real Madrid) was +97 million pounds, which averaged out to +5.4 million pounds average net transfer profit for every club outside the top 2.

Those statistics of the Liga dont give the full picture. The wage bill of the Top 2, and the disparity between their wage bills and the rest of the La Liga is also an important factor to consider, as well as the ability of Barca and RM to spend bid whenever they want as witnessed in previous transfer campaigns. If Barca and RM dont go on spending sprees in the transfer market, its because they are happy with the squad or couldn’t get their key targets, not because they dont have the money, because the figures show they are capable of doing so due to large TV contracts from La Liga, big matchday revenue, and they have very valuable brands from which they can derive big commercial revenue and sponsorships, and are top 2 in Total Revenue tables. Lets look at what others in the Liga, or Spain in general, say about lack of competition in the Liga.

Sevilla president Jose Maria Del Nido : “Our league is not the worst rubbish in Europe, but in the whole world. It’s a third-world competition where two clubs steal the money that the rest of us fight for.”

Financial expert, Jose Maria Gay de Liebana(Spanish economist, professor Financial Economics and Accounting in the University of Barcelona) has often criticised the TV revenue distribution model and lack of competitiveness it causes in the La Liga. He said the following: “Valencia, for example, generate less money through television than a smaller team from England. In other leagues, clubs are compensated equally,” he said. “Money in England and Germany, for example, is distributed fairly and logically, whereas Madrid and Barca are allowed to monopolise the income in Spain. That has seen them overshadow their rivals at home – and the same thing is happening on a European level.”“The Spanish league is not growing, there are only two teams, which are growing: Barcelona and Real Madrid. The remaining clubs are in the same position they were five years ago. Spanish football is dying and I think it has around five years left to live and the grounds are proving me to be correct, because it is no longer attractive”

Atlético president Enrique Cerezo said: “The rest of Europe laughs at us”

La Liga’s CEO, Francisco Roca Pérez,said: “It’s not a question of having two teams very dominant, it’s a question that this dominance is getting too big…We have a low degree of competitive balance across the board. Spain is probably the worst example right now. we are the only league in Europe, with our brothers from Portugal, that still sells divisional rights individually – it’s not very advantageous for the Spanish league.”

Rafael Hernandez, Freelance Football Journalist, Barca and Spain fan said: “Spanish League is showing the final symptoms of a terminal disease. Crisis ravaging Spain, FCB and RMA duopoly destroying football. All the talent in the other 18 teams leaving for other leagues if the Big 2 don’t want to sign them. How many years until the league dies? Fans don’t fill the stadiums because the ticket prices are skyrocketing and a disrespect. It’s not their fault, but the clubs. If the TV money was well distributed the teams could improve their stadiums, lower ticket prices, sign better players. I give it 5 years and the league will be a wreck where Barcelona and Real Madrid always win and 2 matches out of 38 decide the league. Some matches cause problems to RMA and FCB, some entertainment too, but in 5 years it’ll be terrible to watch, boring goalfests. My point is, if you think it’s bad now, It’ll be a lot worse in 5 years, then the league will be completely destroyed. Spanish teams need more resources and FCB/RM sucking all the money for them.”

What you usually see in the EPL is all, or at least most clubs, capable of buying players and increasing the standard and quality of their squad. Usually matches are tough and competitive, where on any given day there can be upsets and the top teams having to struggle to win matches. There are usually 5-6 teams fighting to get into the top 4 (Champions League spots) and they can on any given day beat each other. In the La Liga, things are different. Usually positions 3-20 are very competitive and entertaining. But these clubs have next to no chance of beating Barca and RM, and the Top 2 end the season with a big points gap over their closest rivals in 3rd spot. Before the La Liga starts, everyone asks the same question, “will Barca win the Liga, or RM?”. The differences in competitiveness in EPL and Liga are mainly due to the differences in TV revenue distribution.

TABLE 2A

This table shows the difference between (I) what each club currently gets from their 2011/12 TV deal from their leagues and (II) the average each club would get if if the TV money of their league was split completely equally. Therefore, it shows [I – II], or in other words, [I minus II].

The figures for (I) are in Table 1. Figure for (II) of La Liga is 28 million pounds (rounded up to nearest million), and Figure for (II) of EPL is 48 million pounds (rounded up to nearest million). The figures in Table 2 are in millions of pounds.

Real Madrid 91 Manchester City 12.6 Barcelona 91 Manchester United 12.3 Valencia 12.8 Tottenham Hotspur 9.4 Atletico Madrid 11.1 Arsenal 8.2 Sevilla -1.6 Chelsea 6.4 Betis -3.3 Liverpool 6.3 Villareal -4.2 Newcastle United 6.2 Getafe -12.7 Everton 0.9 Espanyol -13.5 Fulham -0.6 Athletic Bilbao -13.5 West Bromwich Albion -1.4 Real Sociedad -15.2 Swansea City -2.1 Zaragoza -15.2 Norwich City -2.4 Osasuna -16.1 Sunderland -3.6 Malaga -16.1 Stoke City -4.4 Mallorca -16.1 Queens Park Rangers -4.7 Levante -16.1 Wigan Athletic -5.1 Sporting -16.1 Aston Villa -5.9 Granada -16.1 Bolton Wanderers -7.4 Rayo -16.1 Blackburn Rovers -7.7 Racing -16.9 Wolverhampton Wanderers -8.9

The figures in Table 2A show how the TV revenue distribution is a major factor in why the EPL is competitive from top to bottom, and why the La Liga is competitive from positions 3-20 but they are realistically of no threat to Real Madrid’s and Barcelona’s dominance.

TABLE 2B

This table is just made as an illustration. This table on the right hand side shows how much each club in the EPL made from their share of the TV deal, as a percentage. That percentage was then applied to the Liga TV deal (using the total Liga TV deal pot instead of the EPL TV deal pot), and then applied to each Liga club using EPL TV right deal rules (not perfectly accurately because its just an illustration). So, in this illustration, Valencia CF made the same % out of the Liga pot as Tottenham did out of the EPL pot. so on and so forth for each club, and the clubs are matched horizontally. This is just an illustration, and no adjustments were made for certain EPL revenue distribution rules such as merit fees, facility fees, etc.

Liga TV deal pot total=557 million pounds

EPL TV deal pot total=968.1 million pounds

All figures in the left hand side of the table below are in millions of pounds.

Real Madrid 34.87 Manchester City 6.26% Barcelona 34.87 Manchester United 6.23% Valencia 32.86 Tottenham Hotspur 5.9% Atletico Madrid 32.3 Arsenal 5.8% Sevilla 31.3 Chelsea 5.62% Betis 31.24 Liverpool 5.61% Villareal 31.2 Newcastle United 5.6% Getafe 28.1 Everton 5.05% Espanyol 27.23 Fulham 4.89% Athletic Bilbao 26.79 West Bromwich Albion 4.81% Real Sociedad 26.4 Swansea City 4.74% Zaragoza 26.23 Norwich City 4.71% Osasuna 25.56 Sunderland 4.59% Malaga 25.06 Stoke City 4.5% Mallorca 24.89 Queens Park Rangers 4.47% Levante 24.67 Wigan Athletic 4.43% Sporting 24.23 Aston Villa 4.35% Granada 23.34 Bolton Wanderers 4.19% Rayo 23.17 Blackburn Rovers 4.16% Racing 22.5 Wolverhampton Wanderers 4.04%

The figures in Table 2B show what the effects of using an EPL style distribution of TV revenue would look like if it was applied to the Liga. As we can see from those figures, a lot of the smaller clubs would have more money, which could in theory be used for transfer, wages, invested in infrastructure, etc. Also, RM and Barca would be making less money from their TV deal than Wolves did from theirs. This is mainly due to the total Liga pot being far smaller than the EPLs. But why is this the case? This is the case because after years of Barca and RM hogging a huge portion of the Liga TV money, the other Liga clubs have become perennial selling clubs, and the league is not of much interest to worldwide football fans other than RM and Barca fans. Ask yourself this, when you went for a holiday to Asia or the USA, how many shirts of Valencia CF, or Atletico Madrid, or Sevilla have you seen people wearing, whether original jerseys or fake? me personally, in 23 years (thats my age at the time of writing this) i have seen maximum 2 Valencia CF shirts, one of which was a fake. never seen anyone wearing Sevilla shirts, 1 Villareal shirt (my friend was a huge fan of Riquelme, but i doubt he supports them now that he is no longer there) and i have seen a half a dozen Atletico Madrid shirts so far. never seen Betis shirts, or Sociedad, etc. Now ask yourself, how many Barca and RM shirts do you see when you travel the world? i have seen more than i could ever count. 99% of Liga fans around the world are either fans of Barca or RM. Now lets compare the Liga with the EPL. How many Arsenal shirts have you seen? i have seen more Arsenal or Tottenham, or even Newcastle shirts around the world (excluding the UK) than all the Liga club shirts combined (excluding Barca and RM). Thats the problem with the La Liga. The other 18 teams are so weak, that hardly anyone around the world even thinks about them, let alone support them. Even within Spain, statistics show that around 60% of fans support either Barca or RM. The only time a lot of RM and Barca fans that i have met even think about Sevilla for instance, is when there is a player they want to buy from them (Sergio Ramos, Dani Alves, etc), or when they are about to play them in a match. With the Liga TV deal as it is presently, i agree with Professor Jose Maria Gay when he says that Liga will kill itself within 5 years, and i agree with Sevilla President del Nido when he says the Liga is the worst league in Europe in terms of competitiveness.

TABLE 2C

This table uses the assumptions of Table 2B. We first take the total revenue of RM and Barca (from Table 3), then deduct the current Liga TV deal from both those clubs (140 million euros each), and then add the Liga TV deal share of RM and Barca had EPL-style rules been used (those figures are from Table 2B).

Real Madrid’s new total revenue under those rules=513-140+41=414 million euros

Barcelona’s new total revenue under those rules=483-140+41=384 million euros

The new Total Revenue table of football for 2011/12 season would look something like this:

1.) Real Madrid 414 (instead of 513) 2.) Manchester United 396 3.) Barcelona 384 (instead of 483) 4.) Bayern Munich 369

As you can see, such an action would have greatly reduced RM’s and Barca’s power in the transfer market (due to less money to spend on wages and transfer fees). Arguably RM and Barca would have further reduced revenue than what Table 2C shows, because less money for transfer fees and wages, would result in less world class stars in those 2 squads, thus effecting their performance on the pitch (especially in the Champions League) and would overall culminate in them earning a lot less commercial revenue. For example, it is well known that RM’s brand and commercial revenue has increased dramatically due to their policy of buying stars, and especially Cristiano Ronaldo is a major factor behind RM’s marketing operations. So, lets say if this reduced Broadcasting money did result in less Commericial Revenue (which i am sure it would have), then what would RM’s and Barca’s new total revenue look like? For arguments sake, lets say they would have then earned the same amount from sponsorships, that Manchester United the same year. Lets look at the result of this in Table 2E, but lets first look at the revenue breakdown of the top 8 football clubs based on total revenue, as things stand in real life and without using any assumptions.

TABLE 2D

Total Revenue=Matchday revenue+Broadcasting revenue+Commercial revenue

All figures are in millions of euros, and these figures are from 2011/12 season.

Club Total Revenue Matchday Broadcasting Commercial 1.) Real Madrid 513 126 199 188 2.) Barcelona 483 116 180 187 3.) Manchester United 396 122 129 145 4.) Bayern Munich 369 86 82 202 5.) Chelsea 323 96 140 87 6.) Arsenal 291 118 108 65 7.) Manchester City 286 38 109 139 8.) AC Milan 257 34 127 97

TABLE 2E

Now, lets use the assumptions that we talked about in Table 2C. Figures are in millions of euros.

1.) Manchester United 396 2.) Real Madrid 371 (instead of 414, which was previously 513) 3.) Bayern Munich 369 4.) Barcelona 342 (instead of 384, which was previously 483)

Real Madrid’s figure calculation=414 (figure from Table 2C) – 188 (figure from Table 2D) + 145 (figure from Table 2D)=396

Barcelona’s figure calculation=384 (figure from Table 2C) – 187 (figure from Table 2D) + 145 (figure from Table 2D) = 342

These new figures end up putting Manchester United in pole position of the Total Revenue Table for 2011/12, and Bayern is sandwiched between the 2 Spanish giants. But the biggest indication from these figures is that Real Madrid and Barcelona would be nowhere near the same force they are now in the transfer market and wont have outstanding squads like they have now, due to less revenue meaning less money to spend on transfers and wages.

TABLE 3

The figures are of Total Revenue of the Top 30 clubs, are in millions of euros, from the 2011/12 season.

1.) Real Madrid 513 2.) Barcelona 483 3.) Manchester United 396 4.) Bayern Munich 369 5.) Chelsea 323 6.) Arsenal 291 7.) Manchester City 286 8.) AC Milan 257 9.) Liverpool 234 10.) Juventus 196 11.) Borussia Dortmund 190 12.) Inter Milan 186 13.) Tottenham Hotspur 179 14.) Schalke 04 175 15.) Napoli 149 16.) Marseille 136 17.) Lyon 132 18.) Hamburg 122 19.) AS Roma 116 20.) Newcastle United 116 21.) Valencia 112 22.) Benfica 112 23.) Atletico Madrid 108 24.) Ajax 105 25.) Stuttgart 104 26.) Everton 100 27.) Aston Villa 99 28.) Fulham 99 29.) Sunderland 96 30.) Galatasaray 95

Table 3 is relatively straightforward. But what I wanted to explain is the “knockon effect”. Clubs like RM and Barca have big stadiums, and since they are top clubs that compete for the league title and are strong contenders in the Champions League, they thus have large matchday revenue, dependant of course as well on ticket pricing. Manchester United and Arsenal also make large matchday revenue and around the same region as Barca and RM. Others could join them as well, such as Bayern and Dortmund, but due to Bundesliga clubs charging far less for tickets, they arent in the mix in this revenue generator. But TV deals that Barca and RM have in the Liga has a knockon effect, since it is much bigger than the TV deals their main rivals in Europe have. This difference has the knockon effect which allows them to gain a big advantage over their main European rivals when it comes to the transfer market and competing for the signature of world class players. The knockon effect continues, and with the signings of multiple top quality players in every position, they are attractive to sponsors due to their brand value increasing, this they have large commercial revenues, which are only bettered by Bayern Munich. This combination of high matchday revenue, unfairly large TV revenue from La Liga, signing top players and having large commercial revenue, ends up making them top dogs in the transfer market every year for the past few years, and it also makes the La Liga a two horse race because of the disparity in earnings between the Top 2 and the rest of 18 clubs in La Liga.

Had the revenue distribution model in La Liga been fairer, such as the one used in the EPL or Bundesliga, then the other 18 clubs in the Liga would stop being selling clubs, they could then keep hold of their best talent, reinforce their squad with quality players from the international market, increase competitiveness at the top end of La Liga, increase each individual clubs brand value, increase commercial revenue, attract more international viewers thus further increasing broadcasting revenue, etc.

The problem is that the longer Barca and RM benefit from this unfair TV deal, and more the other 18 clubs get weakened, the more Liga gets devalued by international consumers, and the knockon effect continues much further, and I would let your imagination figure the rest out. But that isnt the only fear. The longer such a TV deal goes on, the further behind the other 18 clubs fall behind their counterparts in leagues such as EPL and Bundesliga, thus worsening the Spanish UEFA coefficient in the future and Liga will continue having 2 clubs that are buying teams, whereas the other 18 clubs will continue to be selling teams (despite them being good at developing talent, very technical playstyle, etc). For example, out of the Spain Confederation Cup squad, only 2 players dont play for Barca, RM or clubs outside the Liga, and they are Soldado (Valencia) and Jesus Navas (Sevilla, but he just joined Manchester City). Compared to the England squad, even though their squad is not as talented as Spain’s, their talent in at least more spread out among the EPL clubs.

Real Madrid and Barcelona are sitting on top of Europe when it comes to total revenue, but this mammoth wealth has lately been built more on the fact that they have successfully turned the other 18 Liga clubs into their slaves than using their own blood, sweat and tears.

TABLE 4

Below is a table which shows how many teams in the Top 30 from the table above came from each league.

English Premier League 11 German Bundesliga 5 Italian Serie A 5 Spanish La Liga 4 French Ligue 1 2 Turkish Super Lig 1 Dutch Eredivisie 1 Portuguese Premeira Liga 1

Since we are comparing the EPL and La Liga, let’s see how many of those leagues representatives in the Top 30 of Total Revenue, weren’t playing in the UEFA Champions League that year (2011/12) and thus weren’t benefiting from Champions League money.

English Premier League 7 (Liverpool,Tottenham,Newcastle,Everton,Villa,Fulham,Sunderland) Spanish La Liga 1 (Atletico Madrid)

Table 3 in relatively straightforward. It just shows the top 30 clubs, in terms of Total Revenue, from the 2011/12 season.

Table 4 shows how many of those clubs in the list, that are from the Liga or EPL, made it to the list without having Champions League money that year. Again, the disparity between the Liga and EPLis quite clear. Only one 1 Liga club out of the 4 made it to the list without CL money (Atletico Madrid), and 7 out of 11 EPL clubs made it on to the list without CL money (Liverpool, Tottenham, Newcastle, Everton, Villa, Fulham, Sunderland). Now keeping this is mind, lets jump to Table 5, and its not surprising to see La Liga have only 5 representatives in the top 50 football club brands, whereas the EPL had 14 representatives.

TABLE 5

Top 50 Football Club Brands

In the top 50 football club brands (based on value), by BrandFinance, La Liga had 5 representatives, whereas EPL had 14 representatives. (Link to the full BrandFinance pdf is in the link below. Click on the link, and then check the right hand side on the new opened page).

http://brandirectory.com/league_tables-table-the-brand-finance—football-50-2013.html

Spain’s representatives (La Liga) (Total=5) Real Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Atletico Madrid, and Sevilla. (Total=5) England’s representatives (EPL) (Total=14) Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester City, Tottenham, West Ham, Newcastle, Aston Villa, Everton, Fulham, Sunderland, Stoke, and West Brom. (Total=14)

Table 5 shows how many, and which, Liga and EPL clubs were in the top 50 football club brands. It isn’t surprising to see EPL have so many representatives due to the more fair TV revenue distribution in the EPL (and due to the league being more popular and rich when compared to rival EU leagues), and it isn’t surprising to see La Liga having so few representatives due to the Liga TV deal strongly in favour of Barca and RM (and to the detriment of the other 18 clubs). How can smaller clubs in Liga be expected to make good brands and increase commercial revenue, when they get such a small unfair share of Liga TV revenue pie which results in them not being able to keep hold of their best players, have difficulty paying wages on time, can’t think of even buying a player without first thinking about who to sell or get off the wage bill, not even being able to pay tax to the authorities, etc? How will these clubs ever grow, or they supposed to be happy with remaining as slaves to Barca and RM when its comes to their share of the Liga TV deal?

TABLE 6

Final positions in the BrandFinance table, using only Liga and EPL clubs.

Position EPL club La Liga club 2013 Brand Value Brand Rating 2 Manchester United 837 AAA+ 3 Real Madrid 621 AAA+ 4 Barcelona 572 AAA 5 Chelsea 418 AA 6 Arsenal 410 AA+ 7 Liverpool 361 AA 8 Manchester City 332 AA- 12 Tottenham 219 AA 26 Valencia 83 AA- 29 West Ham 82 A 30 Newcastle 81 AA 31 Aston Villa 80 AA- 33 Everton 78 AA- 34 Fulham 75 A+ 35 Sunderland 72 A+ 37 Atletico Madrid 67 AA- 41 Stoke City 59 A+ 43 Sevilla 56 AA+ 47 West Brom 54 A

Q.) How the Strength of the Brand was calculated? (BrandFinance 2013, Page 23)

A.) “These are calculated using Brand Finance’s Brand Strength Index analysis, which benchmarks the strength, risk, and future potential of a brand relative to its competitors, on a scale ranging from AAA+ to D. It is conceptually similar to a credit rating. The data used to calculate ratings comes from various sources including Bloomberg, annual reports, websites such as transfermarkt.co.uk and Brand Finance original research.”

I have picked out a few points as highlights from Table 6, which compares the positions of the Liga and EPL clubs that appeared in the BrandFinance Top 50.

Valencia (often 3 rd or 4 th best Spanish team, and pretty consistent participant in the Champions League) has a brand value that is less than half the brand value of Tottenham, and is less than one quarter the brand value of Liverpool. The question is, if the Liga deal was fairer, wouldn’t Valencia have a much stronger brand value, more commercial revenue, and wouldn’t they be able to keep hold of their best players, have a stronger squad and challenge Barca and RM for the league title?

or 4 best Spanish team, and pretty consistent participant in the Champions League) has a brand value that is less than half the brand value of Tottenham, and is less than one quarter the brand value of Liverpool. The question is, if the Liga deal was fairer, wouldn’t Valencia have a much stronger brand value, more commercial revenue, and wouldn’t they be able to keep hold of their best players, have a stronger squad and challenge Barca and RM for the league title? Stoke and West Brom have a brand value almost similar to Sevilla.

Clubs like Newcastle, West Ham and Aston Villa have a higher brand value than Atletico Madrid, even though the Spanish club has achieved more success in Europe in recent years, and has had players like Falcao.

The reason brand values are important is because it is a major factor in determining the size of the clubs commercial revenue, number of sponsors, size of sponsorships, etc. Due to the EPL deal distributing a lot more fairly than Liga, the EPL clubs are essentially buying clubs while Liga are mostly selling clubs, which continues to make the EPL more attractive to viewers and thus sponsors, and this continues to make the Liga less attractive to viewers and clubs outside the Top 2 in Spain struggle to increase commercial revenue, increase sponsorships, increase brand value, etc.

Even the Bundesliga and Serie A have more clubs in the Top 50 brands than the Liga. Thats why i never understand how Barca and RM fans can call the Liga competitive, especially when its compared to the major rival EU leagues, and their opinions of this matter are often worthless to me. There is a famous saying, if you want to know the character of a man (Barca & RM), dont ask his friends or superiors, instead ask those that are under him or weaker than him. Often when i go to English versions forums of the other 18 Liga clubs, they say how they hate the way Barca and RM behave, how they steal all the TV money, how the actions of the Top 2 has been a major factor in the league being uncompetitive and making most of them into selling clubs and they barely have two pennies to spend, etc.

Football over the past few years has seen clubs starting to focus time, effort and administration personnel into increasing sponsorship revenue and brand value. So its important that clubs work on it now, otherwise they will be left behind by their competitors a few years from now. Currently EPL clubs and Bundeliga clubs are well played to not only benefit from increasing broadcasting revenue due to fair, viable league TV revenue distribution methods, but also the knockon effect leads to these clubs buying better players, increasing the quality of the league and its brand value as well as the individual club in question and its brand value. The Liga on the other hand only has 2 clubs growing well, the other 18 clubs are barely growing, and many of them are selling clubs that have to sell players in order to survive. If the TV revenue system isn’t changed in Liga, majority of their clubs will continue to see their brands and commercial revenue suffer, and an even bigger gap will open between them and clubs from rivals league (EPL, Bundesliga, Serie A).

TABLE 7

Comparison table. EPL vs LaLiga

EPL EPL La Liga La Liga Total Revenue of EPL clubs 2.9 billion Euros 1.8 billion Euros Total Revenue of La Liga clubs Total Wages of EPL clubs 2 billion Euros 1.1 billion Euros Total Wages of La Liga clubs Wages to Revenue ratio of EPL 0.689 : 1 0.611 : 1 Wages to Revenue ratio of La Liga Total Revenue of clubs outside Top 4 places in EPL (*) 1.604 billion Euros 0.804 billion Euros Total Revenue of clubs outside Top 2 places in La Liga Averaged Revenue of each club outside Top 4 in EPL 0.1 billion Euros 0.0447 billion Euros Averaged Revenue of each club outside Top 2 in La Liga Total Revenue of Top 4 clubs in EPL 1.296 billion Euros 0.996 billion Euros Total Revenue of Top 2 in La Liga Averaged Revenue of each club in Top 4 in EPL 0.324 billion Euros 0.498 billion Euros Averaged Revenue of each club in Top 2 in La Liga Total Revenue of Top 4 : Total Revenue of non-Top 4 (in ratio format) 0.808 : 1 1.23 : 1 Total Revenue of Top 2 : Total Revenue of non-Top 2 (in ratio format) Averaged Revenue of any Top 4 club : Averaged Revenue of any non-Top 4 club (in ratio format) 3.24 : 1 11.14 : 1 Averaged Revenue of any Top 2 club : Averaged Revenue of any non-Top 2 club (in ratio format) Total Wages of Top 4 (EPL) 0.8 billion Euros 0.467 billion Euros Total Wages of Top 2 (La Liga) Averaged Wages of Top 4 in EPL 0.2 billion Euros 0.2335 billion Euros Averaged Wages of Top 2 in La Liga Total Wages of clubs outside Top 4 (EPL) 1.2 billion Euros 0.633 billion Euros Total Wages of clubs outside Top 2 (La Liga) Averaged Wages of clubs outside Top 4 in EPL 0.075 billion Euros 0.035 billion Euros Averaged Wages of clubs outside Top 2 in La Liga Total Wages of Top 4 : Total Wages of non-Top 4 (in ratio format) 0.67 : 1 0.74 : 1 Total Wages of Top 2 : Total Wages of non-Top 2 (in ratio format) Averaged Wages of any Top 4 club : Averaged Wages of any non-Top 4 club (in ratio format) 2.67 : 1 6.67 : 1 Averaged Wages of any Top 2 club : Averaged Wages of any non-Top 2 club (in ratio format)

Averaged Revenue of Top 4 club in EPL : Averaged Revenue of Top 2 club in Liga (in ratio format) 0.324 billion euros : 0.498 billion euros 0.65 : 1 Averaged Wages of Top 4 club in EPL : Averaged Wages of Top 2 club in Liga (in ratio format) 0.2 billion euros : 0.2335 billion euros 0.856 : 1 Averaged Revenue of non-Top 4 club in EPL : Averaged Revenue of non-Top 2 club in Liga (in ratio format) 0.1 billion euros : 0.0447 billion euros 2.237 : 1 Averaged Wages of non-Top 4 club in EPL : Averaged Wages of non-Top 2 club in Liga (in ratio format) 0.075 billion euros : 0.035 billion euros 2.142 : 1

(*) Revenue of Tottenham was included instead of Chelsea, since Chelsea won the Champions League that season and were given the final Champions League place, even though Tottenham had ended up 4th in the EPL whereas Chelsea ended up 6th in the EPL.

(**) Top 2 (La Liga)= Barcelona and Real Madrid.

(***) Top 4 (EPL)= Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea, and Arsenal.

Table 7 is a comparison table of EPL and Liga, using different tools. Each of the points and figures in that table are very important, and take the time out to look at the figures carefully. What is important to remember when viewing Table 7 is asking yourself how each factor contributes to:

Making the Liga uncompetitive (in terms of challenging Barca and RM), and compare the figures with the EPLs and see why the EPL is considered a more competitive league where even the best teams really have to struggle to win a lot of their games.

Making EPL a league where most clubs are termed as “buying clubs”, and making the Liga a league where most clubs are termed as “selling clubs” and many of their products are sold to EPL and its clubs.

CONCLUSION

Now that you have seen all the figures and thought everything over for a while, the statistic that we were supposed to keep in mind before we started this exercise was that in 2011/12, 62.2% of players in the EPL were foreigners, whereas “only” 37.5% of players in the La Liga were foreigners. The reason the EPL has so many foreign players is due to the league being richer, and more teams having money to spend and compete for players in the transfer market, and a major factor that allows this to happen is the TV rights distribution in the EPL is a lot more fairer on the smaller clubs. This results in less English players being regulars in the EPL, and even fewer are starters (especially in the top clubs). This has resulted in less playing time for developed English players, and even less playing time for young, developing English players. As Roy Hodgson said: “I go to quite a few games these days and there are no English players. One has to be very careful talking about the Premier League and the Englishness of it because two thirds of the players are not English. We have one of the lowest numbers of homegrown players and that must put us at a major disadvantage to other nations.”

Spain on the other hand have many clubs in La Liga that aren’t strong enough to compete in the transfer market, and often have to sell before they consider buying players. For example, in 2012/13 season, 10 Liga clubs spent less on players than they earned from player sales, 2 Liga clubs had net transfer spending of 0 (one of which was Real Madrid), and only 8 Liga clubs had net transfer expenditure. In the EPL, 4 clubs made a profit from transfers, 16 clubs had net transfer expenditure. Due to present, but avoidable, circumstances, the La Liga has to recruit players for small fees (preferably free transfers or young Spanish players), and they get the playtime they need to develop, thus increasing the pool of Spanish players available for national team selection. Liga clubs mostly prefer to buy Spanish players due to lessened fees involved, and a lot of them are young players, and they continue their development in those clubs and they become as good as they could be. So, despite the Liga being overall far less competitive than the EPL, the flipside is that the present circumstances of both leagues results in Spain having a much better chance of having a bigger national player pool than England, along with having players that are generally of higher quality, especially the senior players and youngsters around the age of 18-21. Of course, Spain does have a better understanding and methods of producing quality young players, many more coaches, etc, but the state of their top national league also plays a big part in Spain being top dogs in international tournaments. England on the other hand has arguably the most competitive league, but the flipside is that this weakens their national teams options and chances of ever winning a European Championship or World Cup, or playing the likes of Spain, Germany, France, etc off the park.

As things stand right now, the question that England and EPL fans need to ask themselves is, would you prefer England to be as good as Spain in international tournaments, at the expense of making the EPL uncompetitive by following the same TV rights revenue distribution system that the La Liga has right now?

As things stand right now, the question that Spain and La Liga fans need to ask themselves is, would you prefer La Liga becomes very competitive by following the EPL/Bundesliga method of TV revenue distribution, at the price of seeing Spain no longer be strongest, or strong, favourites in international tournaments?

There is certainly hope for La Liga becoming competitive, without having to seriously harm Spains standing in world football. But that depends of LFP growing a set, Barca and RM allowing things to change, politicians getting involved and helping the smaller clubs fight for their rights, and the smaller clubs uniting and making a stand,such as playing reserve/youth teams vs Barca and RM as a sign of protest until their demands are met, because as things stand what do the smaller clubs have to lose? Most of them are already selling clubs, many of them are in debt, and economists saying that if things don’t change within the next few years then Spanish football and Liga would be dead.

There is also hope for England and their chances of becoming strong favourites, in future, for international tournaments, without having to weaken the EPL. The FA needs to become pioneers and have progressive, sustainable and effective long terms policies for development of young English talent. They need more national academies like France have. The Elite Player Performance Plan has some promise, FFP may help bring through more English players to the EPL first team squads. Its also good to see the EPL accept the home-grown quota and still be competitive, but its important that their coaches and academies do better on the training pitch by lessening the amount of players that play “the English way” and instead focus on making their young players more complete technically, intelligent on the ball, etc. According to Deloitte, the new EPL TV deal (which will give each club an average of 25 million pounds), will make the EPL clubs richer, stronger in the transfer market, and we will see even more EPL representatives in the top 30 Deloitte Money League (total revenue) and even more EPL representatives in the BrandFinance league (brand value). i agree with that, and as the EPL becomes more attractive, the broadcasting revenue will increase and that alone will help the smaller EPL clubs tower over their Liga counterparts in the transfer market, and the top EPL clubs will close the revenue gap between them and the Spanish Top 2, and thats before the knockon effects on commercial revenue is even factored in. I dont expect the Liga TV deal to grow much, and if the distribution of revenue continues to be unfair to the smaller Liga clubs, then i expect their league to collapse in the next 5-10 years. Barca’s and RM’s actions are making their fellow Liga clubs (slaves) so poor, that they will run into even more difficulties, such as servicing debts, keeping hold of talented players, etc. When the the other Liga clubs have run out of patience, i wouldn’t be surprised if they put youth teams and reserve teams in match vs Barca and RM, as a sign of protest so that the whole world will see, and this will shame the authorities and especially Barca and RM to act and try to find a long term solution for the Liga.

Hopes

I hope this blog piece has helped show how the finances and affairs of the EPL and Liga have contributed to the state of the England and Spain national team, and why the EPL is competitive wheras the Liga isnt. It took over a week to write this and research this stuff. I dont know what I will write on next, but there are a few topics I can write about which are somewhat linked to what you have just read. Let me know your thoughts if you are interested in sharing them.

I hope England learns from its mistakes and improves the quality of young English players so that it can be on par with those from Germany, Spain, etc. i hope Spain learns from its mistakes and makes the Liga TV distribution fair before its too late, otherwise La Liga will disappear in a few years.

Useful links to check out

http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/sports/football/annual-review-of-football-finance/infographic-2013/index.htm

http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GB/uk/industries/sportsbusinessgroup/sports/football/deloitte-football-money-league/c0d0cc64dac5c310VgnVCM3000003456f70aRCRD.htm

http://brandirectory.com/league_tables-table-the-brand-finance—football-50-2013.html

http://www.football-espana.net/28297/madrid-and-barca%E2%80%99s-tv-effect

http://www.football-espana.net/32102/great-spanish-exodus

http://comparetheleagues.com/