Three reasons why the A-League should adopt promotion and relegation

About "too big a difference between fully professional A-league clubs and some NPL clubs that are little more than shirt sponsors and clubhouses": here is a much bigger difference in case some posters haven't noticed - summer v winter. The biggest problem in the structure of our soccer is that the top-tier and the rest play six months apart. Does any of nation have such a seasonal split to deal with? Therefore, is there any sense in reversing the NSL's 1989/90 decision to surrender winter to the ellipsoidal codes, and return what is (almost) everywhere else a winter sport to . . . winter. Then P/R could be embedded in each state's premier competition, couldn't it?

Works fine in the NPL!

When you get to a $51B equivalent sporting revenue in the UK then you’ll have an argument against me. Until then, you are barely halfway. How embarrassing for you.

I like your confidence...self proclaiming that your argument was "the most compelling to date"....nice stuff! But reading exactly the numbers you provided, someone can argue the opposite...the biggest code in the US without P/R makes 18B...the biggest code in Europe's big5 (equal population) with P/R makes 28B. And yes, there are other sports in Europe too, not everybody plays/watches football. Meanwhile, the two biggest codes in Australia with a population of 7.7% of Europe's big5 make just 6% together of the revenue of Europe's biggest code....so less revenue per capita despite adding two codes instead of one. Obviously there are lot's of other factors in the equation, demographics, GDP, global audience etc...but by no means the statistics you sir provided show clearly that no P/R is the right way to go. Btw, what's the NBL ???

It's a question of priorities. There is a limited pool of sponsorship, TV rights, fans, etc in this country and it's spread over a remarkably wide area. Our population per m2 is very low. So costs in this country relative to available revenue streams is high and that revenue is subject to some pretty fierce competition. So, does football want to use a capital city franchise based system and try to grow their slice of that limited pie against cricket, AFL, NRL, etc, or do they want to accept their current revenue and standing (i.e. their executive egos) and create a more "pure" football structure and accept that their current resources will be spread more thinly --> less $$ for players, more decent player heading overseas, etc. Or, do they head into Asia all guns blazing to search for sponsorships and revenue streams to grow a pro/rel system? One thing you need to do if you implement relegation is remove the salary cap. Why should the wealthiest clubs accept being relegated, with all the damage that causes to their sponsors, players, staff (yes real people lose jobs), etc, because they were prevented from using all of their resources to stay in the top flight?

we don't need 14 to 20 teams, the Scottish league keeps a competitive top 6 while only having 12 teams. I believe a sustainable model would consist of 12-14 teams in the first division (with no salary cap but a salary floor, teams that get promoted must be professional or they will not be allowed in the first division), 8-12 teams in the second division (with a salary floor that ensures all teams are at least semi professional. I'm not sure if pro/rel to NPL would be possible but if it is that should be applied.

@ Chris....I doubt anyone could answer every possible scenario but it would be nice to see if we are 'blindly' heading into another NSL type situation. Pro/Rel is not the simple answer to all of footballs problems. True it could be part of the solution, but i think it will create more problems for clubs than it will fix. If you think that a 10 or 12 team league is too limiting for our juniors then increase it to a 20 team league, each new club paying 12 to 15 mil dollars for a license, now that would create a nice little nest egg. As far as me getting out to see games, that is totally irrelevant to this argument, the simple fact that I do at every level, juniors [to watch my grand son], local women's [to watch my daughter], state league [as a Salisbury Utd life member] as well as every A League home game that AUFC play, doesn't help this debate what so ever. Add to that we watch every A League and W league game that Fox broadcast, plus I get my EPL fix with Optus. So to be fair, I think we do our share for the sport in general. I've been called many things during my lifetime now I can add 'a poser' to it. I think you mistake genuine questions as a 'doom and gloom' approach, on the contrary I am a glass half full type but won't accept baseless statements from people looking for an online argument. Now who is being obtuse mate?

That's 152 words of waffle. Make a compelling argument against what I just said *and* keep to the point. Otherwise, don't bother joining this discussion. Funding is a key indicator in determining the level of elite sporting performance. The British Olympic program, of recent, is a good example of this. My argument is simple: increase revenue and you increase one's ability to fund across the entirety of football. Common sense does not say P/R will achieve this. Stability is a key ingredient in economic growth — something many businesses have learned the hard way post the 2008 GFC.

Redondo, it's a waste of time engaging in football discussions with people who don't understand football. You either get it, or you don't. Understanding football culture & what are the drivers to developing footballers will never be found on a Wikipedia page. The only question for football's decision makers is: What is the best domestic club football structure to create the best pathways to produce the best quality footballers. Common sense tells us the structure will involve Pro/Rel. Case Studies tell us the structure will involve Pro/Rel. So, it's now up to the decision makers: Do we want a football club structure in Australia that produces the best pathway for footballers? Or, do we want to follow the other sports in Australia and strive to create a sporting competition that's a glorified reality TV show that plays for 6-7 months a year making decent TV money but fails to produce decent footballers?

Which is why I added the EFL's revenue. The revenue drop-off following this division is significant, therefore making all other divisions within this operation meaningless relative to their franchise counterparts. In other words: by all means, add up the entire revenue stream of every division in English football and it will still get smashed by the NFL. Let's also not forget the amount of content you are talking there. The NFL plays significantly fewer matches, yet achieves a far greater revenue stream — once again, highlighting the strength of a franchise model with salary capping vs P/R. Of course, you'll make the argument that indeed the population of the US is five times that of the UK, and you'd be right. This is why I added the other major sporting competitions within the USA; competitions vying for commercial sponsorship and fans. Add up the entire revenue of all sports in the UK, then compare it to the USA. It gets towelled on every metric no matter what illogic argument you want to spin. Open vs Closed: I've made the most compelling argument to date on this forum as to why it would be a mistake moving to P/R here in Australia. You'll need to do better than that Redondo. I'd even suggest I've convinced the most hardcore P/R fan within this very thread that they might want to think twice about what they wish for.

In a sense, the EPL is simply the best performing commercial division of an operation that includes, via p/r, the Championship, League 1, League 2 and the various conference leagues that offer promotion to League 2. The consolidated value of that operation is much more than just the EPL’s revenue. The US and Aus sports you’ve listed are entirely self-contained. You could say their value is simply their total revenue. Those sports also benefit from cultural attachment and scarcity, in that the sports are culturally very significant in their home countries but are not played much anywhere else (mostly). Your comparison is too simplistic to be useful.

Pro/Rel is a purists pipe dream.

Well said.

I don't think MLS said they would yet, but this article suggests the lower tiers are interesting in doing something about it first. https://www.si.com/soccer/2019/01/14/usl-jake-edwards-future-expansion-promotion-relegation What it also points to is that the priority should be taking steps towards professionalising the NPL. That could even involve new teams forming in that league before promotion begins. At the moment it's too big a difference between fully professional A-league clubs and some NPL clubs that are little more than shirt sponsors and clubhouses. US are obviously bigger, wealthier and more capable but Australia should be taking steps now.

I think Pro/Rel is a must. Yes relegation would be devastating for a club, that is the point! That's why such battles are intense, its because they matter! A clubs immediate future is in jeopardy, the jobs of staff and players as well as the hopes and dreams of supporters. That's what galvanizes the team and supporter groups alike. Conversely, how exciting is promotion? Surely a fantastic journey for a club and its supporters. Is your glass half full or empty? The A-league finally becomes the true pinnacle of football in Australia linked to the A2 (and even a zoned/conferenced A3?). Places where our disconnected and in some cases disenfranchised old soccer community lives. Pro/Rel IMO has great potential to bring these factions together ultimately leading to much greater engagement and interest in the A-league across the wider football community.

“Insular, protectionist policies works for the Mickey Mouse sports in Australia because their only focus is being the best in Australia.” You do follow the ALeague, yes? And yetin the same breath, you’re suggesting a system designed specifically to promote and foster young Aussie players. Brilliant.

“The bottom line: do we want a football club structure in Australia that produces the best pathway for footballers? Or, do we want a reality TV show that plays for 6-7 months a year making decent TV money but failing to produce decent footballers?” So hang on... Is the purpose of a re-designed ALeague merely to create pathways for decent young Aussie players? Or is it to create a league with the highest level of competiton, the highest standard of soccer, with the highest level of commercial returns?

So you want me to answer every possible scenario and nut out every financial outcome for you? We need a pro/rel system. We need a pathway for our juniors that isn't stymied by 10-12 A-League clubs. We are not other codes of football that combined, doesnt have the player base football has. In the meantime Rodger, how about you get out and watch a game? All this doom and gloom from posers who have at best a passing interest and more likely a hatred for the game.

We could have a fully professional league of say 24 fully professional teams across two divisions and we could have it tomorrow. The only thing stopping us is the greedy, anti-football NPL clubs. They held football back in this country for decades and they continue to hold us back.

That comment is a bit lazy in itself. Any combination of teams is possible although unlikely. In context of the whole comment the ‘national’ competition is important. I’d be surprised if pure p/r starts straight off “when it does come in...”.