Should pro sports have a relegation system?

[chiefzilla1501]

I had a really interesting conversation with a dude who loves international soccer.

The English Premiere league has what they call a relegation system. The worst three teams every year basically get demoted to a minor league type system. I would love to see baseball use this system. It would be a much more effective system than installing a salary cap, in my opinion. Too many owners are cheapskates because they have no motivation to win. In many cases, you see teams tanking at the end of the year because there's a huge incentive for being the worst team in the league. My buddy said this system forces owners to spend, to care about winning, and to be held accountable for poor results because now they get dinged when their team is terrible.

I know this would never happen because it would be such a culture shock and owners would never agree to it. But what do people think of this idea in American sports?

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

Do they factor in injuries? In football, more so than any sport, if one player gets hurt that could instantly make you one of the worst teams in the league. That doesn't sound fair.

Plus this sounds like a great way to turn off a lot of fans and instill a desire to root for the team they are much more comfortable knowing will have a chance to be playing for the championship next season. It could be hard for a lot of people to root for a team that shuffles back and forth between playing for nothing and playing for something. I could be wrong on that though.

Has there been an injury situation in the NFL that has instantly made a team one of the two worst in the league?

Your thoughts are interesting the idea though is that you are always playing for something...more teams are playing for "something" even if it's not always what they want. A relegation fight is a dramatic thing...imagine the games you are playing are for your ability to stay up in the league. Sometimes when a team avoids relegation battles in the last day the fans celebrate as if tis a championship...it's nice not to get the drop.

But if you do fall down? The leagues below are good well respected leagues there isn't shame in being in the championship league (the second level) even the goal is to be in the top. If you do go down the next goal is to get back up. Always playing for *something*

[htismaqe]

If pro sports in the US had a relegation system, Kansas City would likely only have one professional team...

[|Zach|]

Prison Bitch disagrees the NFL is a model of socialism.

Pretty much means that is spot on.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Has there been an injury situation in the NFL that has instantly made a team one of the two worst in the league?

Peyton Manning off the top of my head as an extreme 180. I would bet there are other instances in football and basketball where a mediocre team's best player goes down so that what was once a middle of the pack team is now one of the worst in the league. When that happens what is an average team is all of the sudden at risk of being relegated because of injury even though the team was certainly building and doing what they could to compete.

So they don't factor in injuries? I suppose in soccer one injury probably doesn't doom you as much. What if Kevin Durant goes down? His team falls apart and one of the best players in the game is playing in a secondary league. That would really just leave a bad taste if we are deprived of seeing the best play against the best. Sure its rare for such extremes, but it is a possibility.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

If pro sports in the US had a relegation system, Kansas City would likely only have one professional team...

Not really, because the gap from AAA to MLB is quite substantial, as bad as the Royals have been. The teams in Buffalo and Indy wouldn't have any prayer to compete at the MLB level and would be ruining the MLB game by going 40-122 each year. It's non-applicable anyway since AAA teams serve in conjuction with MLB teams as their feeder system so you'd have to sever that relationship to even consider a relegation model.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

Not really, because the gap from AAA to MLB is quite substantial, as bad as the Royals have been. The teams in Buffalo and Indy wouldn't have any prayer to compete at the MLB level and would be ruining the MLB game by going 40-122 each year. It's non-applicable anyway since AAA teams serve in conjuction with MLB teams as their feeder system so you'd have to sever that relationship to even consider a relegation model.

Of course, the entire structure, particularly of MLB, is designed in a way that would prevent relegation.

That's not the point.

If the NFL and MLB had relegation systems, the Chiefs and Royals would have been relegated 20 years ago.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Prison Bitch disagrees the NFL is a model of socialism.

Pretty much means that is spot on.

For the record Roger Goddell disagrees and admitted on 60 mins NFL is a form of socialism.

[Prison Bitch]

You are under some weird delusion that nfl teams compete against each other. That the Broncos and Chiefs are actually adversaries. When in reality they're working together as franchisees under the umbrella of the master franchiser ("NFL inc" in New York), competing together against other entertainment options.

[POND_OF_RED]

A relegation system in the NFL would be interesting. It'd be funny to see how fast the "black hole" becomes the "empty hole"

[Predarat]

With the way the current systems are structure it would be very difficult. It would pretty much have to be a brand new league starting from the ground up. With Minor Leagues and the NCAA it would be almost impossible to do this correctly.

[Prison Bitch]

If someone wanted to argue the nfl or MLB aren't "capitalist" they should argue they have anti trust exemptions in Congress to limit competition. Which is totally against the theory of capitalism. Ie them destroying the USFL in the 80s.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

You are under some weird delusion that nfl teams compete against each other. That the Broncos and Chiefs are actually adversaries. When in reality they're working together as franchisees under the umbrella of the master franchiser ("NFL inc" in New York), competing together against other entertainment options.

Roger disagrees. It is a huge entity where the best could benefit from being good on the field and off the field. That isn't what happens. No matter you performance as a business or as a sports teams you get a huge chuck of the pie. Yayyyyyyy!

The commish of the league has admitted this socialist model himself dude.

[Valiant]

Originally Posted by Nightfyre

This $1 concessions idea has legs. Motivate the owner to make a competitive product or not make money.

You can still make money on dollar draws. Just not a lot.

[alnorth]

No. Relegation systems are reeruned, and anyone who suggests it probably does not understand why sports are popular in the US.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Roger disagrees. It is a huge entity where the best could benefit from being good on the field and off the field. That isn't what happens. No matter you performance as a business or as a sports teams you get a huge chuck of the pie. Yayyyyyyy!

The commish of the league has admitted this socialist model himself dude.

I really, really hate when people misrepresent a person's actual quote:

GOODELL: It is a form of socialism. And it's worked quite well for us. So we try to combine socialism and capitalism.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/20...l_is_socialist

This is precisely what a franchisor model (or in it's extreme form, a Cartel) does. Socializes common costs and revenues, while collectively driving overall profits as a group in the marketplace.