Writing from the University of Michigan, soccer economics guru Stefan Szymanski has set out a critique of the Dyke commission proposals for the future of the English game. One of his fundamental points is that the report fails to define adequately what the problem is, making it difficult to come up with appropriate solutions.
Writing from the University of Michigan, soccer economics guru Stefan Szymanski has set out a critique of the Dyke commission proposals for the future of the English game. One of his fundamental points is that the report fails to define adequately what the problem is, making it difficult to come up with appropriate solutions.
As far as the controversial ‘B’ team proposal is concerned, he points out that there is an analogy with the takeover of minor league baseball teams by major league teams in the 1950s. Fans still regard this as a retrograde step, even in a system with no promotion and relegation.
He suggests that there may be a hidden agenda in terms of reducing the number of professional clubs. This has been discussed for over fifty years. England does have more such clubs than is usual, reflecting the historic origins of the game. In other markets, rationalisation takes place through the exit of producers, but the loyalty of fans and their strong identification with their club stops this happening in football.
Going beyond what Szymanski says, the number of professional clubs means that there is less need for ‘B’ teams than in Spain or Germany. Such ‘B’ teams would, of course, bring little or no away support with them, reducing revenues for the home side.