In other countries, especially in sports like football (soccer), teams from major urban centers tend to dominate leagues and championships, often because of higher financial resources. However, this doesn’t seem to be the case in the United States, where titles in major sports like basketball and American football are more evenly spread among cities or regions. For example, about football in other countries, it seems almost impossible for a team located in a city similar to where the Green Bay Packers are located to be relevant. Just look at the history of the Premier League, Bundesliga, or La Liga.Perhaps the question is more about why titles are more evenly distributed among regions in these sports in United States, comparing with other countries.
In: Other
Professional sports in the United States exist (largely) as a cartel to make money for the owners. Hence you don’t see the relegation system over here, as that can mess with the money. As part of that, most professional sports have made it part of their rules that cap spending on player salaries.
It’s somewhat similar to the Financial Fair Play rules being enforced in European football right now. Only instead of being tied to revenue, there tends to be a max limit on what can be spent, so richer clubs can’t outspend the others. Additionally, European football pays out based league position. US sports tend to pay out equally, with the exception you get a little bit more for premium TV games.
The US sport that has the closest structure to European football is baseball. And similar to football, you’re beginning to see the concentration of elite talent in the biggest markets that will support that spending. Similar to European football, the beginnings of professional baseball dates back to the late 1880s. I’m not sure if that’s a coincidence in the financial structure or if they’re related.
Latest Answers