I was just about to post saying something along those lines myself.
I get the arguments about levelling up the competition, and making things more interesting. From the point of view of the players, though, unless I'm misunderstanding things, they've basically got no say in where they end up playing (to start with at least, I don't know whether once they're more established they get more of a choice?). What's the interest for them in being told "You've got to go and play for Swindon" (for example)? And that's without taking into account the issue ThreeSixes mentions of the number of different leagues/countries available to them, something which I would imagine isn't necessarily the case (certainly not to the same extent) with sports such as NFL, NHL, etc., where those sports aren't played in as many countries.
The other thing I don't understand is that such a system appears to be rewarding failure. Is there not a risk that near the end of the season, once a team realises they have no chance of winning anything, they'll decide to lose all their remaining matches to finish as low as possible in order to have a better pick in the following season's draft?
I say all of that as someone with absolutely zero knowledge of American (or Australian) sports. Maybe there's a perfectly valid reason why the above aren't really an issue, if that's the case, feel free to put me right.
Madrid, 3x6, Chris and others all raise very valid points about why a salary cap won’t work well in English Football.
Yes, having other leagues and other counties (basically more options) might mean players will simply play elsewhere. In Aussie Rules and most USA sports, they don’t have that option.
Yes, young players are traded into a particular club and have little say. It is a problem here because often the best player(s) ie No1 draft pick stays at the original club the required 2 years, they develop him, then he is traded and goes off to his preferred club. By “preferred club” I mean the club that gives him the most money. Players play for their “preferred club” in all sports approximately 1% of the time.
Actually that’s not quite true. Here in Oz, quite a lot of players do request to get traded to their “home” team, or their supported team. But they end up with less bargaining power and probably less wages when they do that.
The problem of poor teams in a season basically aiming to finish last (tanking we call it) IS an issue here. But there is quite a stigma attached to it and it doesn’t appear to happen regularly. But probably happens. That said, it’s not a massive gain to finish last. We are talking about the best player v 2nd best player (or 19th v 20th). So unless there is a real standout youngster available, it doesn’t matter. But generally over a few years, poorer teams get better players in.
Oh, and someone mentioned transfer fees. There are no transfer fees here in AFL. All transfers are by draft. ie player swaps or you get the other teams picks at the next draft. So a poorer team that year has better draft picks available to them to trade for current established players at other clubs (if they chose).
The other thing as I said before, none of this can work if the individual clubs and players are not willing to make it work. And if the central governing body is not strong. How strong is the EFL? Oh......
