Sloppy wording on my part. I had acknowledged that 3 out of the past 20 championships haven't gone to Real/Barca.
Such as? The only one I can remember was the Alcorcón defeat of Real in last year's Copa del Rey. Big clubs are regularly defeated by lower league sides in the FA Cup. This season Premier League sides Newcastle, Sunderland, and Blackpool were all beaten by 3rd or 4th division opposition in the 3rd round.
Was talking about winning La Liga. Last upset in the UK was Blackburn in 1994-1995. In fact it was the only upset so to say, since every Premier League champion since the Premier League started has been either Man U, Arsenal or Chealski. In the same period Deportivo and Valencia has won 3 championships combined. The only real difference is that in the UK it is now 3 with Chealski since 2004 instead of two.
We're not discussing money, but the quality of the football on offer. Is La Liga BBVA better than the Portuguese Liga Sagres? Of course it is. Real Madrid's budget could pay for all the Portuguese teams put together. Isn't that beside the point too?
I would say that La Liga football is much more enjoyable to watch than most games in the Premiership. Spanish football is far more attacking and technical than the defensive kick and rush football most teams in England play.
Yes, the Spanish system guarantees that no one is able to challenge the mighty twosome. That keeps the league less competitive and less compelling. As far as the different styles of football to be seen in England and Spain, that's undeniable. Which you prefer is a matter of personal taste. I've heard some people claim to enjoy Serie A!
But saying that, it is changing. Getafe has been bought by big Arab money as has Malaga. So who knows, things can be changing in Spain as well. As for Spain being "less competitive".. well yes and no. If by less competitive you mean 2 teams in Spain vs 2 teams or 3 in England . then yes.
But to be fair this year was "odd" in England. The top teams dropped far more points against each other and especially against smaller teams than normal. This meant the gap between first and say 6th was far smaller than normal. For example, Manchester United drew 11 games.... that is a lot compared to previous winners of the Premiership. Chealski drew 5 last season and Man U 6 the season before that. The amount of lost games as approx the same. This meant that this years points number was quite low. The 80 points of Man U would have given them a 4th place just 2 years ago and 3rd place last year.
Now you can attribute this to the other teams becoming better or the usual suspects becoming weaker. Personally I think it is a combination of both with more leaning towards the usual suspects becoming weaker. I attribute these issue to too old teams or too inexperienced.
Only Man U managed to balance it well this year but next year without Giggs (maybe) and Scholes I suspect they will struggle. But even this year, when Giggs or/and Scholes were not on the pitch they struggled more than when they were on the pitch. I believe if you look at the games Man U drew or lost, then one or both of them were not on the pitch in a majority of the time. Also Man U suffered badly with central defender problems.
Arsenal has a young but far far to inexperienced squad still and it showed at key moments in key games. Time and time again they had meltdowns in every part of the field. Defence looked almost comical sometimes, their goal keeping problems were even more funny and then of course wit Van Persie out for a large part of the season, then they lacked a goal scorer.
Chealski is old boys football with Drogba, Lampart and Terry. They might be great players but the replacements are far from their standards and Terry and Lampart are showing their age with injuries and not up to par performances.
And then we have Liverpool who totally melted this year but came back strong without Gerrad even.
Only team to really surprise some what is Man City, but even they had their issues. Far too many games drawn or lost and of the top 4, they had the lowest goal difference. But saying that, Man City have the future (and money) ahead of them since their team is far more balanced than the other teams. They have the young, the experienced and the super stars in a good mix. Now they only have to learn to play together better and maybe add some quality defenders... real defenders, not defensive midfielder that have been re-schooled. Still pisses me off Football Focus punters putting Kompany as a defender.. he is NOT a defender and never has been.
So I would not attribute this years odd Premiership to be the future until there is more empirical evidence that things have changed from two to three teams fighting it out to more than that.
