主题: Questions & Answers

I don't believe that they would tell me this... But I would have been able to compare it with a hungarian I/1 team.

I don't get why are you comparing to Slovakia and Czech. It's probably the most challenging thing in the game to play in Slovakia or Czech and win both CL and I.1 in the same season. Not a single Slovakian and Czech has yet managed to do that in soccer and only once it has happened in hockey (the team was knocked out early in NC that season). In fact, not a single Slovakian or Czech team has won the CL in soccer and only 3 times that has happened in hockey. The competition in those countries is so high that teams simply can't try to win every match or they'll lose a lot of energy. Because of that, the best teams can't also gain the same OTR in Czech and Slovakia than in other countries and compared to many top teams in countries with 4 league levels, their sponsors are even slightly worse.

In fact, no one has yet been able to show that countries with 3 or 2 league levels would have a clear disadvantage, if any, compared to other countries. I'm not going to check how does it look now but this is what I wrote 4 months ago:

"There are a lot of examples about teams that have been in top of International tables and tournaments even though they have been from nations of 3 or less league levels which is the cap for sponsor income reduction.

If we look at the champions' league table now, there are 4 teams in semifinals and they're from Belarus (3 league levels), Sweden (3), Slovenia (3) and Poland (5).

If you look at the teams who went to quarter finals, you can see that 6 out of 8 teams there are from leagues of only 3 divisions and thus reduced sponsorships. Not a single team reached quarter finals from Slovakia or Czech Republic.

If you look at the world's TOP10 overall team ratings, from top 10 teams 4 are from leagues of 3 or less league levels.

If you look at the world's TOP10 team strength table, 6 out of 10 teams are from leagues of 3 or fewer league levels.

If you look at those two tables again, you'll see that there's only one team from Slovakia or Czech Republic in both of those tables.

That's all possible despite the fact that overall only 41 % of teams in the football game are from leagues of 3 or less levels and 20 % are from Slovakia and Czech Republic. If you look at ice hockey standings, the situation is very similar. Now where is the huge distortion you're talking about?

Statistically there are 87 teams in league Asia which is 0,5% of all teams in the game. If the best team of Asia doesn't compete with the best teams of the game, is it unfair? I don't think it is because the best team of Azerbaijan (33 teams, 0.2% of all) has the third highest team strength of all teams in the game and can compete against anyone.

Personally I just can't see the problem unless the problem is that it's too easy for best teams in small countries. I'd really like the idea of giving everyone a chance to decide if they want to play in National league or International league. That way those small league teams could have the competition they really want."

I think the most challenging thing in the game to play football in Hungary and win both CL and I.1 in the same season.

I've got also some interesting statistics in ice hockey to prove that small countries actually have the advantage in the game:

Total number of teams in countries based on number of league levels:
5: 38% (4246)
4: 30% (3447)
3 (big sponsors): 10% (1162)
3 (small sponsors) 18% (1992)
2: 4% (463)

Big sponsors total: 78% (8855)
Small sponsors total: 22% (2455)


Clubs with TOP100 OTR in countries based on number of league levels:
5: 10
4: 34
3 (big sponsors): 13
3 (small sponsors): 36
2: 7

Bis sponsors total: 57
Small sponsors total: 43


That clearly show that small sponsor leagues have more teams in OTR TOP100 than what their share of all teams in the game is (43% vs. 22%). Some might say that it's easier to gain OTR in small countries and despite higher OTR, their sponsors are lower and thus their teams are worse so they can't compete against bigger nations. To counter that, I've also got statistics about the team strength.


Clubs with TOP100 team strength in countries based on number of league levels:
5: 10
4: 31
3 (big sponsors): 12
3 (small sponsors): 36
2: 11

Big sponsors total: 53
Small sponsors total: 47


Based on team strengths, it seems that those small sponsor leagues are even better than OTR would suggest. However, it's a late season and teams in small leagues have probably spend significantly less energy than those in bigger leagues which might explain why small league teams have better team strengths than what their share% of teams would suggests. What we'd like to know is if it's really easier to grow a top club and AOR22 and AOR17 is a better tool for that.


Clubs with TOP100 AOR22(AOR17) in countries based on number of league levels:
5: 19 (19)
4: 37 (39)
3 (big sponsors): 10 (10)
3 (small sponsors): 26 (25)
2: 8 (7)

Big sponsors total: 66 (68)
Small sponsors total: 34 (32)


Conclusion: It's seems that compared to number of teams, it's easiest to build a TOP100 AOR club in those countries where there are small sponsors because there are less competition. And it's even easier to reach high OTR in those countries. Countries with 5 league levels are doing considerably worse than what the number of teams in those countries would suggest. Countries with 4 league levels are doing slightly better than it suggest. Countries that have 3 levels but higher sponsors are those who had 4 levels in season 18 but have lost a level after that. It also seems that they (Canada, Sweden, Croatia, Other world) are not doing any better than countries with 3 levels and small sponsors but that's probably just a coincidence. Other world for example has always had quite a low competition compared to other nations but they’ve got plenty of managers. I’m not saying that it’s easier to get a good team with smaller sponsors. But it seems that it’s clearly easier to be in the game's TOP100 in those countries where there are smaller sponsors.

The thing I tell you is true !!

Whatever you count... in 2 seasons all swedish teams is ruined.... or worthless !

The teams could not compete in money...

Its not easier to get OTR !!!

The OTR win is based on the opponents... and smaller countreys have 4 rounds in NC !! How many rounds have the bigger countreys ???

THINK

how much do you get per season or week and i tell you how much i get!

I told you pure numbers. 32% of all teams in hockey are from countries with 2 or 3 league levels and 56% of teams in TOP100 OTR are from those countries. Based on only that fact, you can clearly see that it's easier for a single club to gain OTR to enter TOP100 if he plays in a small country.

Yes, they gain less OTR per win and have less competitive matches but they can win much bigger share of their matches than what one can do in big country and that's why it's easier for small country team to reach high OTR.

Have you noticed that all top teams in the game are in financial trouble? They have to sell some of their great players because they no longer have enough money to pay for them. That's not only Swedish teams but that's all teams in the game. You may wonder how is that possible and it's because teams have to pay for their free agents and season after season there are more of them in their clubs. You were unlucky that you lost your 4th division when that started to happen and thus the penalty for having many great players is even bigger for you than for other countries. And you couldn't adapt to that.

I dont talk about hockey.... we talk about the swedish soccer teams !!

And its a fact that something is very unfair and wrong. Its also fact that all Swedish clubs bleeds and going bankrupt or continue pkaying eith crap teams...

It is just a game...

The sponsor and league systems are similar in hockey and soccer. Also those numbers would be very similar in soccer but unfortunately I don't have pro there so it'd take too long for me to show the statistics.

You can't go bankrupt IF you have I.1 team no matter how much your Daily Costs are, the income from sponsors and tickets will always be bigger. As I said all good teams are having problems to pay for their free agents so it's not only Swedes who have to "continue playing with crap teams."

Happy New year and have fun playing the game!

I think some managers just need to realise that it is unrealistic to have a complete team filled with superstar players before you have developed your stadion and facilities and staff to maintain them costwise and trainingwise.

which is best raport for players training?

Amazing.... do you NOT think I have full on arena and fac or ???

As I wrote earlier here: it won't change, you won't have 4. leagues. There are few teams in Sweden. Only 211 pieces. You have to acquiesce in this. There is not an other opportunity.