Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Is this the weakest Premier League of all time ?

Covered EndCovered End
edited June 2017 in Other Football and Sports
Nearly half the league would look no more out of place in League 1.

Discuss.

Arsenal
Bournemouth
Brighton
Burnley
Chelsea
Crystal Palace
Everton
Huddersfield
Leicester
Liverpool
Man City
Man Utd
Newcastle
Southampton
Stoke
Swansea
Tottenham
Watford
West Brom
West Ham
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Cordoban AddickCordoban Addick
    That's the Tories for you, ruined the First Division.
  • Options
    IAIA
    Yes. Like every league, every year, this is the worst in living memory.
  • Options
    ForeverAddicktedForeverAddickted
    So who should be there?
  • Options
    Covered EndCovered End
    ForeverAddickted said:

    So who should be there?

    Well, Charlton are arguably a "bigger" club than 6 of them and even we are probably a mid level Championship club.

    They all obviously deserve to be there, I'm not suggesting otherwise.

    But Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Watford, Burnley, Swansea.
  • Options
    newyorkaddicknewyorkaddick
    I was thinking just that today - realised it when every team I looked at seemed to have an easy first few games.
  • Options
    dizzeedizzee
    And the top sides aside from Chelsea are all woeful at the moment.
  • Options
    cafc_harrycafc_harry
    Eh? Smaller clubs making phenomenal progress makes the league weaker? Not in a million years. Our second division would give most top divisions around Europe and the world a very good go.
  • Options
    killerandflashkillerandflash
    Last season was a very weak top flight outside the top 6/7, when you consider Soton finished 8th with 46 points and GD of -7!

    I hope next season the teams from 8th downwards can close the gap to the top teams a bit
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    SDAddickSDAddick
    But it was only last year that it felt like any team could beat anyone on any given day. Some of that was weakness, but I also think some of it was a parity in the league driven by the insane amounts of money. There is no way these teams are weaker than say, a decade ago when you had Stuart Pearce's Man City losing out on 7th place to Steve McLarren's Middlesbrough despite putting David James on as a forward.

    Okay, so some of that was just to remind us all of that lovely memory. But still, even though Boro reach the Uefa Cup final the next year, they were pretty bad. And I think it was the next year (or year after) that City went six months without scoring at home.

    Lastly, I would argue that the Championship is as strong as it has ever been, which means that the gap between bottom half Prem and upper Championship is pretty small.

    I think what's perceived as weakness is just as much about parity.
  • Options
    cafcfancafcfan
    I would think the likes of Sky and BT are worried they are going to be losing subscribers.

    Last season, unbelievably, Liverpool had 29 of their 38 PL matches shown live on television. telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/17/liverpool-set-record-29th-premier-league-tv-game-season-weekend/ So, that's over three quarters of their matches NOT happening at three o'clock on a Saturday afternoon.

    It is clear, surely, that armchair supporters are going to be fed a similar diet this year? Yes folks, it will be wall-to-wall Mancs, 'pool, Arse, Spurs and Chelski. Swans will not be on the menu very often and just a side order of Toffees and Cherries will be offered washed down with a quick swig of Claret.

    Even Sky must realise that through ennui and an over-riding sense of déjà vu they are in danger of losing viewers who are not supporters of the big six? But they know they can't show the likes of Burnley very often without vast swathes of viewers reaching for the off button. It must be a dilemma for them.

    So, while I have sympathy with Henry's view that the teams are there on merit, surely no one is going to be thinking I must rush home to watch Bournemouth vs Huddersfield? The truth of the matter, both to their die-hard supporters and the casual viewer is that the likes of Aston Villa, Leeds, Derby, Forest, Sunderland, Birmingham and, yes, even The Massive are indeed more attractive propositions.

    I'm afraid, even more so this season, that football on TV will be a bit like the sporting equivalent of watching re-runs of Waking the Dead on the Drama channel.

    Still, the top tier has been weaker in the past. Who can forget 1989-90 when Charlton, Millwall, Palace and Wimbledon were all in the First Division? TV viewers of the day must have been so glad that there wasn't wall-to-wall coverage in those heady days!
  • Options
    Stu_of_KunmingStu_of_Kunming
    edited June 2017
    Covered End said:

    ForeverAddickted said:

    So who should be there?

    Well, Charlton are arguably a "bigger" club than 6 of them and even we are probably a mid level Championship club.

    They all obviously deserve to be there, I'm not suggesting otherwise.

    But Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Watford, Burnley, Swansea.


    With enough money you could win the league playing in an empty stadium, so I'm not sure size of clubs holds any relevance.

    Which of those teams would look out of place in league one? Any of them coud lose a few players and still smash the league to bits.
  • Options
    cabblescabbles
    I think Huddersfield could really struggle based on what I saw of them in the champ. Sure they'll buy players but I think it could be a very, very hard season.
  • Options
    ForeverAddicktedForeverAddickted
    cabbles said:

    I think Huddersfield could really struggle based on what I saw of them in the champ. Sure they'll buy players but I think it could be a very, very hard season.

    See them going one of three ways... they'll either be like Wigan when they first came up, they'll end up like Derby and could become the worst ever Premier League side or they'll be like Blackpool who'll give it a damned good shot but ultimately fall short.
  • Options
    redlaneredredlanered
    ForeverAddickted said:

    cabbles said:

    I think Huddersfield could really struggle based on what I saw of them in the champ. Sure they'll buy players but I think it could be a very, very hard season.

    See them going one of three ways... they'll either be like Wigan when they first came up, they'll end up like Derby and could become the worst ever Premier League side or they'll be like Blackpool who'll give it a damned good shot but ultimately fall short.
    Just about the only option you have ruled out is a top 6 finish!
  • Options
    dizzeedizzee
    cafc_harry said:

    Eh? Smaller clubs making phenomenal progress makes the league weaker? Not in a million years. Our second division would give most top divisions around Europe and the world a very good go.

    Aaaaaand the British media have succeeded...
  • Options
    JiMMy 85JiMMy 85
    cafcfan said:

    I would think the likes of Sky and BT are worried they are going to be losing subscribers.

    Last season, unbelievably, Liverpool had 29 of their 38 PL matches shown live on television. telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/17/liverpool-set-record-29th-premier-league-tv-game-season-weekend/ So, that's over three quarters of their matches NOT happening at three o'clock on a Saturday afternoon.

    It is clear, surely, that armchair supporters are going to be fed a similar diet this year? Yes folks, it will be wall-to-wall Mancs, 'pool, Arse, Spurs and Chelski. Swans will not be on the menu very often and just a side order of Toffees and Cherries will be offered washed down with a quick swig of Claret.

    Even Sky must realise that through ennui and an over-riding sense of déjà vu they are in danger of losing viewers who are not supporters of the big six? But they know they can't show the likes of Burnley very often without vast swathes of viewers reaching for the off button. It must be a dilemma for them.

    I think Sky are at a major turning point over the next 18 months. Youngsters don't want Sky or can't afford it. Their viewing figures for last year were dropping like a stone (putting a load of effort into promoting Red Monday and getting top figures only to show a drab 0-0 draw didn't help) and online streaming is rife, despite their renewed efforts to thwart it. Having BT sports is enough for many to get a football fix, particularly with streaming to supplement it.

    If one of the big streaming guns comes in (Netflix, Google) then we might finally see them lose their grip on sport.

    That said, they're building up a huge war chest to fight for the next round of rights. It's going to be a very interesting time for them one way or another.
  • Options
    adsads
    redlanered said:

    ForeverAddickted said:

    cabbles said:

    I think Huddersfield could really struggle based on what I saw of them in the champ. Sure they'll buy players but I think it could be a very, very hard season.

    See them going one of three ways... they'll either be like Wigan when they first came up, they'll end up like Derby and could become the worst ever Premier League side or they'll be like Blackpool who'll give it a damned good shot but ultimately fall short.
    Just about the only option you have ruled out is a top 6 finish!
    Could happen if they keep up their 15 year unbeaten record. Will be rammed once the 10000 lapsed season ticket holders return
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    SantaClausSantaClaus
    I think it's encouraging that so many of the poorly run, overly indebted perennials (Aston Villa, Sunderland, Charlt) have disappeared.
  • Options
    Chris_from_SidcupChris_from_Sidcup
    I like the fact that there are 2 new premier league sides this season. I'd much prefer to see some newer sides having a go, than see Villa and Sunderland struggling to get 40 points for the umpteenth time.
  • Options
    kings hill addickkings hill addick
    JiMMy 85 said:

    cafcfan said:

    I would think the likes of Sky and BT are worried they are going to be losing subscribers.

    Last season, unbelievably, Liverpool had 29 of their 38 PL matches shown live on television. telegraph.co.uk/football/2017/05/17/liverpool-set-record-29th-premier-league-tv-game-season-weekend/ So, that's over three quarters of their matches NOT happening at three o'clock on a Saturday afternoon.

    It is clear, surely, that armchair supporters are going to be fed a similar diet this year? Yes folks, it will be wall-to-wall Mancs, 'pool, Arse, Spurs and Chelski. Swans will not be on the menu very often and just a side order of Toffees and Cherries will be offered washed down with a quick swig of Claret.

    Even Sky must realise that through ennui and an over-riding sense of déjà vu they are in danger of losing viewers who are not supporters of the big six? But they know they can't show the likes of Burnley very often without vast swathes of viewers reaching for the off button. It must be a dilemma for them.

    I think Sky are at a major turning point over the next 18 months. Youngsters don't want Sky or can't afford it. Their viewing figures for last year were dropping like a stone (putting a load of effort into promoting Red Monday and getting top figures only to show a drab 0-0 draw didn't help) and online streaming is rife, despite their renewed efforts to thwart it. Having BT sports is enough for many to get a football fix, particularly with streaming to supplement it.

    If one of the big streaming guns comes in (Netflix, Google) then we might finally see them lose their grip on sport.

    That said, they're building up a huge war chest to fight for the next round of rights. It's going to be a very interesting time for them one way or another.
    Towards the end of last season Sky managed, quite successfully, to block some of the Premier League 'pirate' streams. However they failed to stop those that have a VPN so it won't matter how much they pay for the broadcasting rights, the number of people watching it without paying Sky will increase. The more they charge the more will leave them. Even without a Kodi box many will find the Sky subscriptions too expensive. It is already more than £60 a month. Unless one watches all the games it makes more sense to go to the pub and nurse two pints through a game.
  • Options
    dizzeedizzee
    I say ITV should buy some rights and air the best match on a Saturday. Then they can charge ridiculous amounts for the advertising. They can put adverts in between stoppages in play. This then means that kids from all different backgrounds can watch football!
  • Options
    BadgerBadger
    I wouldn't be surprised in future if some of the bigger established clubs in the Premier would be looking to set up and run their own TV stations.
  • Options
    ValleyGaryValleyGary
    haha i know right, i mean Leicester! Leicester!!! What have they ever done?
  • Options
    dizzeedizzee
    edited June 2017
    ValleyGary said:

    haha i know right, i mean Leicester! Leicester!!! What have they ever done?

    Lost to Charlton at the Valley?

    I'm more impressed by that than them winning the Prem.
  • Options
    AddickRamAddickRam
    cabbles said:

    I think Huddersfield could really struggle based on what I saw of them in the champ. Sure they'll buy players but I think it could be a very, very hard season.

    On Paper yes, but they was written off in the championship.

    They got promoted playing the German style of football based on movement, team spirit and efficiency. The Germans know how to adapt and evolve, they don't have 1 set way of playing makes them very unpredictable.

    I watched the likes of young English talent like Izzy Brown & Kasey Palmer play with Spanish technique & dutch flair with pace and purpose, some teams couldn't get near the ball chasing shadows, Hudds need a out and out goalscorer.

    I think they could follow the likes of Bournemouth and Swansea, need to get that recruitment right and have more strength in depth.

    Compared to the 3 teams that came down from the Premier League last season, Huddersfield at least have a plan & play competitive with desire every game.

  • Options
    redmanredman
    Badger said:

    I wouldn't be surprised in future if some of the bigger established clubs in the Premier would be looking to set up and run their own TV stations.

    They already do. Manure, Liverpool and Chelski to my knowledge. However they don't show live games due to the agreement to negotiate live TV together. They shows repeats as well as interviews, U-21 games, etc. They are all subscription channels. LFC used to free. When there was a live game on they could be at the ground but not show the match. It could be quite comical as they could show the crowd live.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!