I like your takes, but to keep it fair you'd have to integrate them into the draft even with the other teams and have same salary caps etc. Besides that though it would throw the whole divisions and conferences model into frenzy, so you'd need a brand new schedule system too
I don't know how it works in the UK, I'm not really a soccer fan I just know Mexican soccer from my girlfriend and I always thought it was stupid the way relegation works. It would make more sense if, like you said it was a way to encourage teams to get better. But it's really not. In Liga MX the last place team got sent down to Ascenso MX and the first place team from Ascenso MX got sent up. The problem with that, the reason I think it's stupid is that someone ALWAYS has to be last place. Even if every owner spends as much money as they can, every GM makes the best possible moves, every coach calls the best plays every game, and every player gives it 100% at all times someone STILL has to come in last. Now during the pandemic they stopped doing relegation in Liga MX, and instead they get fined for coming in last place. To me that's a better system. It doesn't kill the team, and destroy their TV revenue and ticket sales by making them essentially a minor league team, so it's bad but no THAT bad. I think a better way to make it work for American Football and Baseball etc would be to start with a $1,000,000 fine if you come in last in your division (a lot of money to you or me, but not to a pro sports franchise) then double it every year til you stop coming in last, and maybe if you don't come in last 2 years in a row you get your money back. That way it's not some world shattering thing of you happen to come in last one year even though you tried your hardest, but it could be really bad if you don't put money into making your team better and cheap owners would end up spending more by being habitually cheap than by just trying to actually be good. There is one other huge problem though where I think this would work for MLB but NOT for the NFL. Salary cap. The way salary cap works in the NFL it kinda guarantees every team is going to suck sometimes. If you want to actually build a Superbowl winning team you either have to get really lucky drafting and developing players or you have to go and sign some big contracts that are back loaded so that you can make your team better this year at the expense of big cap hits a few years down the road. For example to build their 2020-2021 Superbowl winning team and their contending teams the next two seasons the Tampa Bay Bucs back loaded a bunch of contracts then they were pretty much screwed last year and this year with no money to spend filling holes in their roster. If Baker Mayfield hadn't showed up and WAY over performed his contract they would have been awful. Not because the owners or GM were being cheap but because the rules stopped them from spending any more money on signing new players.
It's an interesting question to ask, but there is another reason that it wouldn't work in the NFL -- it would get in the way of some of the big stories of the NFL. The Detroit Lions finally becoming a contender. The Buccaneers going from being an after-thought to the winner of the Superbowl. The Texans going from one of the worst teams in the league to a contender in one year. If any of those teams had been relegated, those stories likely wouldn't have happened. It's an extension of "Any given Sunday" -- "Any team, any year."
You're not really correct when you say there's no motivation to improve. League rules strongly encourage teams to improve and compete. There's a salary cap, but also a salary floor that ensures teams spend all available cap space. Money you don't spend this year carries over to the next with a 3 year minimum spending floor. You cannot be a cheap team in the NFL. Rules prevent it. If you must spend the entire salary cap, you're motivated to spend it building the best team. There's no motivation to overpay mediocre players to field a bad team. This is in contrast to the MLB where there have been teams with 30 million dollar payrolls and 300 million dollar payrolls competing in the same league and same season
That’s true. My point is that some teams suffer from poor management. Relegation might compel owners to be more proactive in addressing management issues. A salary cap doesn’t necessarily improve a poorly managed team.
@@nflunveiled I dunno. Coaches and GMs who don't produce don't stick around long. The draft system would probably collapse and be untenable in such a system. It would relegate the brightest young stars to the 2nd division. If only 10-15% of teams are promoted every year, getting drafted by a 2nd division team forces many of those players to play in the bush league for 4-5 years. Revenue sharing must remain equal among both leagues or teams will never climb out of the promotion/relegation loop. Yay, you got promoted to the NFL. What happens now when you don't have the talent on your roster to compete? You finish in the bottom 10% of the league and get relegated. Finally let's look at the most popular relegation league in the world, the EPL. Does the system really encourage teams to go for championships? Since it's inception the league is dominated every year and era by 2-3 teams, and it's usually the same 4-5 clubs providing those teams at the top of the league. Relegation and promotion adds some meaning and excitement to otherwise meaningless games, but literally none of the teams at the bottom of the premier League and the top of the champions league are hoping to compete for the EPL crown as an organization. They're realistically hoping to become one of the teams that finish #6-#17 every year and maintain their standing in the EPL and the revenue that comes with it
@@patrickledonne5547 To your point original point on motivation to improve, my thought was given people are motivated more by pain than pleasure relegation could motivate an owner that otherwise is content with mediocrity (or worse) to improve. Bad teams are not punished, they are actually rewarded. Not saying bad team = badly run, but some are. There are teams that just seem to have an ingrained culture of incompetency. Maybe motivate those ones to get their act together or feel the wrath of division 2. Not saying it would actually work. The EPL has no salary cap. So the rich teams buy up all the talent and are the only ones competing. A salary cap definitely levels the playing field, but it doesn’t necessarily motivate a team to improve. Relegation is not supposed to turn a worse team into a championship contender, it makes the bottom half of the league more exciting/meaningful.
@@nflunveiled relegation is not intended to make the bottom half of the league more exciting. It's intent is to keep a league open and ensure the best competition. As I said the problem is the entire system would need to torn down and rethought. If the NFL were to split into 2 leagues of 16 teams with one league being a "B" league and a relegation/promotion system the draft system becomes less tenable. Every year the 16 brightest young players will be drafted into the Bush league. If only 2 teams are promoted per year most of these young stars will spend their prime years in the bush league. What about revenue? The NFL salary cap is approaching 300 million. A lot of that revenue is from the TV deal. Will the "B" league make as much on their TV deal as the A league? Will they be able to sell out a stadium without reducing ticket prices? After all their games are basically meaningless since they can't possibly win the super bowl or make the playoffs. Will revenue still be shared evenly between both leagues? If not are "B" league teams expected to operate with huge losses? If the "B" league only earns enough revenue for a $100 million salary cap, how do they compete when they get promoted to the NFL and it's 300 million dollar payroll when they have a roster full of NFL backups on their 100 million dollar payroll. Even if you have unlimited money to spend in free agency you can't build a competitive roster in one year if you have a roster full of rejects and backups as the core. Such a scenario would very likely create a 14 team NFL with the other 18 teams fighting every year for the 2 available promotion spots, then getting relegated year in and year out. The NFL has grown and grown in large part because of the parity they created while the MLB just keeps fading and fading now that they have a select few powerhouse franchises and a couple dozen smaller market also rans.
@@patrickledonne5547 valid, some of these points would been worthwhile to go in depth in the video as to why it can’t work. Relegation definitely opens a whole can of worms, but on the original point of motivation, relegation can definitely be a motivator. Of course, the system the NFL has works well. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
This sounds like the worst idea ive ever heard. If its not broke.. you know maybe you should do a video about dropping relegation and adopting NFL policys.
An interesting thing regarding Europe trying something sorta like a "No Relegation" format has been desperately tried in the past few years. The mega clubs of Europe (a couple each in Spain, Italy & England) wanted to change the current system to be one where those Mega Clubs could Never get Relegated out of their mid-week / European-Champions League (a mid-week competition where the best of individual countries play not domestically but internationally -- exactly the same as if ACC, SEC, Big-10, etc had two competitions, one on Saturday where Big-10 only plays against Big-10, and another League where the best of Big-10 plays the best of ACC, SEC, Pac-10, etc). But in the same way we in the US hate the idea of Relegation in the NFL, fans across the world screamed so hard against the mid-week European "Super League" where the mega clubs couldn't get Relegated, that the people supporting it had to give up. A wise man once said, "If it Ain't Broke, don't fix it!"
Dumbest idea ever. The problem, of course, is that there are no teams that could enter the NFL to take their place. The worst team in NFL history is roughly 17 billion times better than any other non-NFL-football team in history. .... On the other hand, I have been advocating for 15 years that the NBA should create a system like the rest of the world has. 20'ish NBA teams in a Top League with Relegation and Promotion from newly-established Lower Leagues would work absolutely perfectly. My idea works moreover because the NBA Draft is an absolute farce!
One of the other problems is that of Rivalries. When I started watching (Real) football 15 years ago and spent a few months trying to choose my Lifelong team (I chose Arsenal) one of my criteria was a team with a MAJOR arch-rival. See, in the US, we would NEVER allow a situation where Newcastle and Sunderland can't play each other. How many billions of years have Southampton and Portsmouth been away? Are Millwall and West Ham even rivals anymore?! And you guys Across The Pond are suppose to be even more about tradition and history than we Americans. (Incidentally, the NBA has NO rivalries with any history or tradition; it's bizarre.) When Leeds Utd finally got back to the Prem no one even cared (mostly) when they played manchester-divided! As an NFL fan I would not allow a universe to exist in which my beloved Minnesota Vikings could not bully and humiliate the bears and packers two games every year!
I like your takes, but to keep it fair you'd have to integrate them into the draft even with the other teams and have same salary caps etc. Besides that though it would throw the whole divisions and conferences model into frenzy, so you'd need a brand new schedule system too
Could work if the ufl can be challenging!!! Also expand the CFL!!!
Oh this would suck. My Bengals woulda been relegated multiple times including the entirety of the 90’s.
🏈 and ⚽️are two completely different would never work
I don't know how it works in the UK, I'm not really a soccer fan I just know Mexican soccer from my girlfriend and I always thought it was stupid the way relegation works.
It would make more sense if, like you said it was a way to encourage teams to get better. But it's really not. In Liga MX the last place team got sent down to Ascenso MX and the first place team from Ascenso MX got sent up. The problem with that, the reason I think it's stupid is that someone ALWAYS has to be last place. Even if every owner spends as much money as they can, every GM makes the best possible moves, every coach calls the best plays every game, and every player gives it 100% at all times someone STILL has to come in last.
Now during the pandemic they stopped doing relegation in Liga MX, and instead they get fined for coming in last place. To me that's a better system. It doesn't kill the team, and destroy their TV revenue and ticket sales by making them essentially a minor league team, so it's bad but no THAT bad. I think a better way to make it work for American Football and Baseball etc would be to start with a $1,000,000 fine if you come in last in your division (a lot of money to you or me, but not to a pro sports franchise) then double it every year til you stop coming in last, and maybe if you don't come in last 2 years in a row you get your money back. That way it's not some world shattering thing of you happen to come in last one year even though you tried your hardest, but it could be really bad if you don't put money into making your team better and cheap owners would end up spending more by being habitually cheap than by just trying to actually be good.
There is one other huge problem though where I think this would work for MLB but NOT for the NFL. Salary cap. The way salary cap works in the NFL it kinda guarantees every team is going to suck sometimes. If you want to actually build a Superbowl winning team you either have to get really lucky drafting and developing players or you have to go and sign some big contracts that are back loaded so that you can make your team better this year at the expense of big cap hits a few years down the road. For example to build their 2020-2021 Superbowl winning team and their contending teams the next two seasons the Tampa Bay Bucs back loaded a bunch of contracts then they were pretty much screwed last year and this year with no money to spend filling holes in their roster. If Baker Mayfield hadn't showed up and WAY over performed his contract they would have been awful. Not because the owners or GM were being cheap but because the rules stopped them from spending any more money on signing new players.
interesting idea
It's an interesting question to ask, but there is another reason that it wouldn't work in the NFL -- it would get in the way of some of the big stories of the NFL. The Detroit Lions finally becoming a contender. The Buccaneers going from being an after-thought to the winner of the Superbowl. The Texans going from one of the worst teams in the league to a contender in one year. If any of those teams had been relegated, those stories likely wouldn't have happened. It's an extension of "Any given Sunday" -- "Any team, any year."
yep true
You're not really correct when you say there's no motivation to improve. League rules strongly encourage teams to improve and compete. There's a salary cap, but also a salary floor that ensures teams spend all available cap space. Money you don't spend this year carries over to the next with a 3 year minimum spending floor. You cannot be a cheap team in the NFL. Rules prevent it. If you must spend the entire salary cap, you're motivated to spend it building the best team. There's no motivation to overpay mediocre players to field a bad team.
This is in contrast to the MLB where there have been teams with 30 million dollar payrolls and 300 million dollar payrolls competing in the same league and same season
That’s true. My point is that some teams suffer from poor management. Relegation might compel owners to be more proactive in addressing management issues. A salary cap doesn’t necessarily improve a poorly managed team.
@@nflunveiled I dunno. Coaches and GMs who don't produce don't stick around long. The draft system would probably collapse and be untenable in such a system. It would relegate the brightest young stars to the 2nd division. If only 10-15% of teams are promoted every year, getting drafted by a 2nd division team forces many of those players to play in the bush league for 4-5 years. Revenue sharing must remain equal among both leagues or teams will never climb out of the promotion/relegation loop. Yay, you got promoted to the NFL. What happens now when you don't have the talent on your roster to compete? You finish in the bottom 10% of the league and get relegated.
Finally let's look at the most popular relegation league in the world, the EPL. Does the system really encourage teams to go for championships? Since it's inception the league is dominated every year and era by 2-3 teams, and it's usually the same 4-5 clubs providing those teams at the top of the league. Relegation and promotion adds some meaning and excitement to otherwise meaningless games, but literally none of the teams at the bottom of the premier League and the top of the champions league are hoping to compete for the EPL crown as an organization. They're realistically hoping to become one of the teams that finish #6-#17 every year and maintain their standing in the EPL and the revenue that comes with it
@@patrickledonne5547 To your point original point on motivation to improve, my thought was given people are motivated more by pain than pleasure relegation could motivate an owner that otherwise is content with mediocrity (or worse) to improve.
Bad teams are not punished, they are actually rewarded. Not saying bad team = badly run, but some are. There are teams that just seem to have an ingrained culture of incompetency. Maybe motivate those ones to get their act together or feel the wrath of division 2. Not saying it would actually work.
The EPL has no salary cap. So the rich teams buy up all the talent and are the only ones competing. A salary cap definitely levels the playing field, but it doesn’t necessarily motivate a team to improve. Relegation is not supposed to turn a worse team into a championship contender, it makes the bottom half of the league more exciting/meaningful.
@@nflunveiled relegation is not intended to make the bottom half of the league more exciting. It's intent is to keep a league open and ensure the best competition.
As I said the problem is the entire system would need to torn down and rethought. If the NFL were to split into 2 leagues of 16 teams with one league being a "B" league and a relegation/promotion system the draft system becomes less tenable. Every year the 16 brightest young players will be drafted into the Bush league. If only 2 teams are promoted per year most of these young stars will spend their prime years in the bush league.
What about revenue? The NFL salary cap is approaching 300 million. A lot of that revenue is from the TV deal. Will the "B" league make as much on their TV deal as the A league? Will they be able to sell out a stadium without reducing ticket prices? After all their games are basically meaningless since they can't possibly win the super bowl or make the playoffs. Will revenue still be shared evenly between both leagues? If not are "B" league teams expected to operate with huge losses? If the "B" league only earns enough revenue for a $100 million salary cap, how do they compete when they get promoted to the NFL and it's 300 million dollar payroll when they have a roster full of NFL backups on their 100 million dollar payroll. Even if you have unlimited money to spend in free agency you can't build a competitive roster in one year if you have a roster full of rejects and backups as the core. Such a scenario would very likely create a 14 team NFL with the other 18 teams fighting every year for the 2 available promotion spots, then getting relegated year in and year out. The NFL has grown and grown in large part because of the parity they created while the MLB just keeps fading and fading now that they have a select few powerhouse franchises and a couple dozen smaller market also rans.
@@patrickledonne5547 valid, some of these points would been worthwhile to go in depth in the video as to why it can’t work. Relegation definitely opens a whole can of worms, but on the original point of motivation, relegation can definitely be a motivator. Of course, the system the NFL has works well. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
This sounds like the worst idea ive ever heard. If its not broke..
you know maybe you should do a video about dropping relegation and adopting NFL policys.
nah soccer is boring. I also agree, if it ain't broke don't fix it. The system works great. Just made this video for some fun.
@@nflunveiled Np i still gave you a sub my friend.
An interesting thing regarding Europe trying something sorta like a "No Relegation" format has been desperately tried in the past few years. The mega clubs of Europe (a couple each in Spain, Italy & England) wanted to change the current system to be one where those Mega Clubs could Never get Relegated out of their mid-week / European-Champions League (a mid-week competition where the best of individual countries play not domestically but internationally -- exactly the same as if ACC, SEC, Big-10, etc had two competitions, one on Saturday where Big-10 only plays against Big-10, and another League where the best of Big-10 plays the best of ACC, SEC, Pac-10, etc). But in the same way we in the US hate the idea of Relegation in the NFL, fans across the world screamed so hard against the mid-week European "Super League" where the mega clubs couldn't get Relegated, that the people supporting it had to give up. A wise man once said, "If it Ain't Broke, don't fix it!"
Dumbest idea ever. The problem, of course, is that there are no teams that could enter the NFL to take their place. The worst team in NFL history is roughly 17 billion times better than any other non-NFL-football team in history. .... On the other hand, I have been advocating for 15 years that the NBA should create a system like the rest of the world has. 20'ish NBA teams in a Top League with Relegation and Promotion from newly-established Lower Leagues would work absolutely perfectly. My idea works moreover because the NBA Draft is an absolute farce!
One of the other problems is that of Rivalries. When I started watching (Real) football 15 years ago and spent a few months trying to choose my Lifelong team (I chose Arsenal) one of my criteria was a team with a MAJOR arch-rival. See, in the US, we would NEVER allow a situation where Newcastle and Sunderland can't play each other. How many billions of years have Southampton and Portsmouth been away? Are Millwall and West Ham even rivals anymore?! And you guys Across The Pond are suppose to be even more about tradition and history than we Americans. (Incidentally, the NBA has NO rivalries with any history or tradition; it's bizarre.) When Leeds Utd finally got back to the Prem no one even cared (mostly) when they played manchester-divided! As an NFL fan I would not allow a universe to exist in which my beloved Minnesota Vikings could not bully and humiliate the bears and packers two games every year!