EPL Talk - Latest Comments in Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

John — Mon, 26 May 2008 13:24:39 -0000

This sounds interesting but i dont think Uefa would aggree as each league is limited to a certain amount of teams being promoted to either an automatic spot or a qualigying spot in the champions league.

And surely the team at the end of 38 games which has scored the most goals and defended the best to concede the least amount deserves recognition..........

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Fri, 09 May 2008 18:55:29 -0000

Ray, the problem is that it IS broke.

Goal difference, by the way, is not sufficient, it is a dumb, semantical concept that should not be the first tiebreaker.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Ray Horner — Fri, 09 May 2008 17:43:02 -0000

Re: E.P.L. Playoffs:
What a stupid idea! No!,Never!; what's the point?
38 games is enough to decide a champion and the goal difference is sufficient to break a tie.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Tue, 06 May 2008 13:12:40 -0000

You said it Lonnie, this has been a great debate.

I think the most common solution we've come up with is that the champion should be determined after 38 games, but the CL and UEFA Cup places could be won in some sort of playoff format much like the Dutch League does it. It seems like most people agree that something has to be done to shake the current system up, but to what degree and how that shake up would be formatted is the great debate.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Lonnie — Tue, 06 May 2008 13:03:25 -0000

Personally I think the idea of totally scrapping the reward for being consistent through the season is a poor one.

This has been a good debate and I'm not picking on you personally Michael but something you posted struck me: "I like my champions as teams who can rise to the occasion on a big night. I like the teams who can show up when it truly, truly matters most. No one will ever convince me that every game means the same; you can’t tell me that the 13th game of the year is the most important as the last one, and I like teams who are able to turn it on at the end of the year for that stretch run."

What about the team that plays consistently and wins matches against any or all opposition. The Liverpool side of the last couple seasons would mop up after having rested through 'nothing' league games against Wigan and the like.

What I would say to that argument is that if the league games are essentially going to be made less meaningful then why play them at all? Just make the league a big cup runoff and be done with it. Playoffs have their use but at what cost?

In the NHL, only half the teams are eliminated after the end of the regular season. They then play another two months to decide a champion. Hockey in June? It's ridiculous.

Even baseball has gotten a bit overblown with the playoff format. The divisional champions are rewarded with very little after a grueling 162 game schedule.

Clearly, a compromise would be a better way to go.

I much prefer the idea that the title still goes to the team that accumulates the most points over the course of the season. This ensures some integrity to the regular season. Let the playoffs settle the "money" positions for European play and I would also adopt the Dutch relegation/promotion playoff system. The more I look at it, the more it makes sense.

I know Kartik advocates the Mexican league system but being relegated only after a second poor season seems a bit too generous. If your poor, then you need to step aside and rebuild. Can you imagine Derby County staying up for another season. Good lord, what would be the point? Not to be too harsh to the club but even if they did stay up due to the "mexican rules" what would they accomplish next season? They could finish 10th and probably be relegated anyway.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Simon — Tue, 06 May 2008 12:28:55 -0000

Michael
Still disagree with you on the teams, Sunderland and Boro were still in the mire at the end of April - and Portsmouth had they won this weekend would have been 2 points off of 5th with one to play - thats very much something to play for. Man City also were in for 5th until they collapsed against Fulham in a great game.

As for Boro - yes in the past they are typically well clear but they werent this year. West Ham and Spurs certainly have been the best examples of teams doing nothing all year but no way I can allow teams outside the top 8 into a playoff system. 12 out of 20 is just too many.

I think your idea has merit though, I think Kevin Keegan echoed your sentiments last night without offering a solution. I love numbers and stats and certainly think the format can be worked with as its not perfect but I know the FA wont ever do anything unless the big teams ask for it - this is bad unfortunately.

I don like the MLS play off system - being a DC United fan I got to see DC choke last year after being dominant through the league - if there was any system of playoffs I could somewhat endorse it would be baseball as so few qualify but thats getting away from trying to keep everyone involved at the end.

Maybe reducing the size from 20 to 18 would help and may having relegation playoffs and more UEFA qualification playoffs would help - I dont know. A champion should be a champion though, you win the league and you shouldnt have to face the prospect of one bad ref decision or a penalty shoot out loss to take that all away from you.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Dave's Football Blog — Tue, 06 May 2008 10:03:49 -0000

Re: Comment 43 -- UEFA Cup qualifiers change more often than Champions League qualifiers. Yes, Everton and Tottenham get there often, but Bolton, Middlesbrough and Newcastle have been there recently as well. So I don't really buy the argument that you need more than 4 teams competing for the final Champions League spot. You want to reward success, not mediocrity.

Plus, you want to create something that both fans and clubs can accept. A 4-thru-7 playoff is much easier to swallow than a full-on playoff, because there are promotion playoffs just like that all throughout the lower English leagues. However, these playoffs don't decide the league champion, only the final promotion spot. Likewise, a 4-thru-7 playoff for the final Champions League spot wouldn't discredit regular-season success. The league champ is still the champ, and the top three still go directly to the CL group stage.

There's also the fact that an MLS Cup-style playoffs in the Premier League would add a month to an already long schedule. Maybe you could get away with that if you pulled the Premier League out of the Football League Cup and just let the fizzy drink divisions play for that, but it's still too big a jump for most fans to swallow.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Mon, 05 May 2008 22:36:48 -0000

Gotta be honest with you Sanjay, I think it's the second one, at least it is for me.

I like my champions as teams who can rise to the occasion on a big night. I like the teams who can show up when it truly, truly matters most. No one will ever convince me that every game means the same; you can't tell me that the 13th game of the year is the most important as the last one, and I like teams who are able to turn it on at the end of the year for that stretch run.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Sanjay — Mon, 05 May 2008 20:19:48 -0000

I guess it all comes down to a simple question/argument:
---- Do you reward a team for being consistent throughout and doing very well for over 30 weeks?
----Or, do you reward a team for getting it done, when it matters the most. For winning during the business end of the season, clutch time??

Personally, I think it should be the first, but then thats just me. What do all of you'll think..?

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Eric — Mon, 05 May 2008 19:52:35 -0000

Dump the current Carling Cup format for something like this postseason playoff plan.

You still give Full Honors to the Season Champion as current, runner-up gets direct pass into CL. The Champ and Runners up are less motivated, however, it will be a seperate piece of hardware to vie for, the Champ wanting to prove it again, the others wanting the chance to knock them off and hoist a trophy . . .

Current Carling Cup set-up couldn't be less intersting, as most big clubs send their youth out and a loss is not a huge fan dis-appointment. If this were in place this year, do you think that the 2nd place (ManU or Chelsea) wouldn't love the opportunity for revenge? Remeber, they won't be meeting in the CL final every year.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Mon, 05 May 2008 17:54:44 -0000

Simon, here's why I listed the four teams you argued shouldn't have been there:

Yes, mathematically Sunderland and Middlesbrough just recently became safe, but we've known that they were going to be safe for a month now because there were teams just that much worse below them. Take a look at Middlesbrough's recent history, and they've basically checked out around the three-quarter mark every year because they're mid-table, and you can say the same for other teams as well (Newcastle, Blackburn, Man City).

Why did I list Portsmouth? Because ever since they made it to the FA Cup Final, they've taken their foot off the gas in the league and are playing for Europe solely through that final. They've had an outside shot at fifth, but they haven't been playing competitive league games since winning their semifinal.

Same for Manchester City, who only just passed an apathetic Portsmouth team this weekend. Again, mathematically City were in with a shout for fifth, but they've had three or four teams in between them and Everton and they haven't really been playing for a while now either.

You mentioned the NFL and everyone knows that the Patriots were the best team in the league last season. With that said, they couldn't get the job done when it mattered most. Sorry, if you can't rise to the occasion and play your best, you don't deserve to win no matter how well you played during the regular season.

You and I do agree that this will never happen, although I think if you would've asked someone ten years ago if Game 39 would happen at some point, they'd laugh it off and send you to the asylum. You made good points in what some of the problems in the game are right now and I couldn't agree more with them, but another is the fact that the league has become stale at the top with the same teams winning over and over just because they have rich owners and more money to spend on talent. Why not just divide the Premiership into two leagues -- the "Big Four" and the rest? That's basically what it is now and I'm afraid if something isn't done about it, it's going to stay that way because the TV money and Champions League bonus money basically all goes to the big teams. My proposal is to make the league less about the top four and more about the twenty teams as a group.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Simon Burke — Mon, 05 May 2008 16:08:00 -0000

Interesting one this - I see the sentiment behind it and whereas I disagree and more importantly know it will never happen, I think the idea is well thought out.

One thing Michael - how many teams to you think have nothing to play for at the end?
I'll list what you list:
Liverpool
Blackburn
Portsmouth (in the league)
Manchester City
West Ham
Tottenham
Newcastle
Middlesbrough
Sunderland

Sunderland and Boro got out of trouble within the last week so that excludes them.
Man City and Portsmouth have only just been excluded from 5th - Pompey blew it this Saturday. I'd say your list there is really 5. Boro werent clear by the 29th game as you mention above in a typcial season.

Some fella aboves mentions the Patriots and Giants - he's right. The Giants negated the whole
NFL Season to me - they split a game each but the Pats lost only one game and have really nothing to show for it. The GIants were lucky to even be in the playoffs and won it all. They arent the best team.
At least 3 teams competed for the title this year, and Liverpool should have - thats an improvement over recent years. I wouldnt change the league structure.

If people were to do it and the TOP TWELVE qualified that would be too many. Christ, if a club like Wigan put together a decent run of penalty shoot out wins they'd win it. This wouldnt be good for anyone outside of Wigan (sorry Wigan fans).

Of all the ills in football I dont think this is the worst right now - diving, agents, high prices, defensive football, Mike Reilly being allowed to ref at Old Trafford - these are the real crisis'...

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

kkfla737 — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:46:17 -0000

Well I doubt Gerrard will be the captain of England, if he is clearly Capello is a fool.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Alex Hleb — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:27:06 -0000

you can never win with steven gerrard as your potential captain, thats why we didnt make the euros.

i know i know they won the champions league but that was one time. one time out of many. one time!

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Alex Hleb — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:21:57 -0000

et pardon ma francais mais j'aime regarder un peu de foot francais aussi.

i also enjoy the dutch league, all clogs aside.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Alex Hleb — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:18:53 -0000

i follow la liga.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

kkfla737 — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:46:03 -0000

Alex Hleb,

You seem to have a fun time personalizing every argument. What ails you? Another trophy less Arsenal season, or something else? You disagree with Michael as most people do. That's fine, but your rambling responses here about the MPL.

In addition above you mis characterize completely what Americans who are engaged in this sport think.

Alex Hleb, do you follow any FIFA sanctioned first divisions outside of England?

I suggest you broaden your horizons before shooting the messenger time and time again. Perhaps if you and other Anglo snobs were more open to new thinking England wouldn't be sitting at home this summer during the Euros.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Dave M — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:45:44 -0000

re: ad hominem, mea culpa.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Alex Hleb — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:29:39 -0000

would the MPL also have playoffs for relegation as well?
And a play off for who gets to visit the queen for tea at the end of the season.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

kkfla737 — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:19:40 -0000

You guys can bash this idea all you want and I am usually very critical of MLS as some recent posts on my website indicate, posts now being discredited by the legion of MLS apologists over at Big Soccer, BUT:

Last season the MLS lucked out and got a game on the very last game of the regular season between the two teams fighting for the last playoff spot. The game was placed last on the calender because it also featured the two biggest MLS signings of the year. David Beckham, for the hype and Blanco for the substance and his ability to bring Mexican and Club America fans to MLS once and for all.

MLS has in its thirteen year history provided one boring match after another with some moments of brilliance in between but generally not the sort of gripping excitement European or Mexican football provides.

This game however was brilliant, and as gripping as any match all year long in football, other than Iraq's Asian Cup triumph which super ceded all.. Toyota Park was over flowing and loud as could be. Fire fans stood and sang the whole match and game ended with a stoppage time goal by John Thorrington, late of Man U and Bolton which saw the Fire through.

Without a playoffs system that game would have been a completely meaningless last weekend game where the park may have been half empty, with two teams that like many of their counterparts in the PL would have checked out on the season.

Inspite of tradition, a case can be made for playoffs in this sport.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Alex Hleb — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:17:55 -0000

the MPL.

will there be a 39th game in the MPL?

with an eastern and western conference, and four divisions-
geordies, mackems,smoggies like-
sunderland
newcastle
middlesborough

Scousers like-
Liverpool
Everton
Wigan
Bolton
Manchester United
Manchester City

Brum and what not-
Birmingham
Aston Villa
Derby

Cockney Blokes-
Reading
Fulham
West Ham
Tottenham
Portsmouth

Posh-
Chelsea
Arsenal

There would also be an allstar game.
It would be the World against the Geezers.
Cristiano Ronaldo as striker with Eboue on the right. Imagine the possobilities,

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Mon, 05 May 2008 14:06:02 -0000

It's a debate that could go on forever and ever, so I mean nothing will ever really be solved either way. As Liverpool John said, I just wanted to provoke thoughts about some options to make this league more exciting than it is. In terms of the excitement and passion of the games on the field, the league is second-to-none, but the same teams are winning those games for the most part, so I'm just trying to think of new ways to make it more inclusive.

Just to touch on your last point about relegation, I wouldn't touch that at all. If there was a 12-team playoff as well as the current format of three teams getting relegated, that would leave only five teams stuck in the middle as opposed to the 10 or so (give or take one) that we have now. I said it in my post and was echoed by a commenter, I think there's something structurally wrong when in most years, the battle to determine who ISN'T the worst team is more exciting and gets more attention then the race at the top. Having a playoff would allow a fight at the top while keeping that same heartache and nervousness a relegation battle provides, so it'd be the best of both worlds in that regard.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

jm — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:53:02 -0000

Perhaps the "big four" thing does have something to do with it. But there is a key distinction between two positions:

1) Wanting the league to determine the best team because it has sporting value.

2) Wanting the league to determine the best team because one's own team is one of the best.

Now, I'm probably not neutral enough for (2) to not be a reason at all. I am undoubtedly swayed by my interest in Arsenal's success.

I also, however, support measures to change some aspects of the financial structure of the league in order to prevent the punishments of relegation and the boons of Europe to lead diminished competition.

Tournaments are great. I am also a fan of the NY Giants, and loved every minute of our victory over the Patriots in the NFL. Were we the best team? Nope. But we played the best for a few days, and that was good enough. Playoffs are great fun. Yet, in most American sports you have to choose between a playoff structure (which rewards the team of the moment) and a league championship (rewards the team of the season). The great advantage of the EPL is that one does not have to choose due to the tradition behind the FA Cup. This allows for both the thrill of tournament style competition, but also the long, bitter struggle to determine the best team.

This is all to support the claim that the champion should be determined by the league format. I have no real view on whether or not a playoff would be good for the final European few spots, or for the relegation spots. I have not yet settled my opinions on how it would effect the financial intricacies and intrigues of relegation.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:44:02 -0000

Good points, Liverpool John.

Re: Should the Premiership Have Playoffs?

Michael — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:43:12 -0000

Oh and just to clarify, by making "noise", I don't mean in terms of sound, I mean they would be capable of making a deep run backed by their boisterous crowds