Ok pete, here we go. i am about to state my argument from the beginning, and i have stated the proof to back my argument up.
My argument is that the English Premier League has become dominated by the big 4 clubs, Manchester United, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea. The reason is because they have much much bigger budgets than some of the smaller clubs. this does not allow the smaller clubs to regularly compete for the league title.
Proof:
in 2005/2006, the top 4 clubs had a combined turnover of 488 million pounds.
in comparison, the clubs that were ranked 5th to 8th in terms of turnover(newcastle, Tottenham, manchester city and everton) had a combined spend of 271.5 million points, which represents only 56% of the turnover of the big 4.
clubs down the bottom of the list as far as turnover were as little as 10 million. this represents a 10 fold difference in turnover between the biggest clubs and the smallest clubs.
link:
http://www.footballeconomy.com/stats/st ... ver_01.htmThe gap between the bigger clubs and the smaller clubs is widening, because of the extra exposure and marketing opportunities that are afforded to the bigger clubs, and this allows them to generate more revenue. this is present in the numbers for the turnover of each club, but is also very evident in the ladder.
some stats about the big 4 clubs with regards to ladder position
manchester united have finished top 3 every year since the beginning of the premier league
arsenal have finished outside the top 4 only 3 times.
liverpool have finished outside the top 5 only 3 times.
chelsea have been top 6 every year since 1996/1997. in 2003, they were bought by a russion oil tychoon, and they spent 100 million on players. since that time, chelsea have finished in the top 2 every single year.
the big 4 clubs have finished in the top 4 positions on the ladder ever year since 2005/2006, and have occupied 4 of the top 5 positions every year since 2002/2003
So pete, i ask you. what is wrong with my argument?
