http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2014/08/football-transfers
In the article How to spend £75m, Game Theory Sports
investigates the history of soccer transfers. Last summer the Premier League
saw the third most expensive transaction in soccer history. Liverpool, who was
predicted to place fifth in the league, dealt superstar Luis Suarez to
Barcelona for £75 million, which is equivalent to $124 million. The contract
for the Suarez ranks in the top 50 most lucrative contracts of all time. The
two footballers that have bigger contracts than Suarez are Lionel Messi from
Barcelona and Gareth Bale from Real Madrid.
In the past, it
has been difficult for Premier League teams to replace their most valuable and
fittingly their most expensive players. Game Theory Sports looked at the change
in soccer teams wages since there has been a positive correlation, around 90%,
between wages and league rank. Three years ago Liverpool also sent another
star, Fernando Torres, to Chelsea for £50 million or $81 million. As a result,
Liverpool received 20 less points toward their standings during the season.
Liverpool went from finishing second in the league, to sixth and then eighth in
the subsequent years. The correlation seems obvious that trading expensive and
valuable players would result in worse performance, but that has not always
been the case. Manchester United, Arsenal, and Everton have all experienced
similar result after trading away some of their best players as well.
In an attempt to
replace their star in 2011, Liverpool purchased another star from Newcastle,
Andy Carroll. The problem with the transaction was that Newcastle knew that
Liverpool had excess in cash flow, thus inflating the cost of replacing the footballer.
Also, by trading away valuable players, teams are helping their rivals. In all,
it is better for teams to keep their star players rather than cashing them in.
It is always ideal to keep your most valuable, but it is inevitable when a player has such high worth for owners to see the opportunity to make money. In the end this sport is also a business and a business needs money to be successful. In the case of Liverpool, they sold Suarez for £75 million but to replace him they bought 6 cheaper, very talented players. So far their preformance has fallen a little bit which does not make fans, including myself very happy, but from a business standpoint, they are still making the same amount, possibly more with Liverpool in the Champions League, and they still have leftover cash from the Suarez sale, so overall they have made money this past transfer window.
ReplyDeleteProfessional sports is a business. Athletes are treated as commodities by selling themselves through their performance on the field or how they maintain themselves in their personal life and media. The players are going to go to where the money is, and we see that in all professional sports across the board. I agree that clubs should refuse to sell out their top players for large sums of money because in the end it is detrimental to the team. I am very surprised Suarez is the third most paid soccer player in the world since he is infamously known for his dirty play and vast patterns of suspensions.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line usually follows the money. Players sign with teams who offer the best contracts in terms of money. Then again, are teams actually hurting to the extent from what the article is informing us? There's no one man team in soccer therefore with cashing in these highly paid athletes, management can find several players to bring in with that paycheck. Perhaps a team cashes a player in for $100 million and gets 2-4 additional players for that price. These new recruits are more spread out on the field rather than the one player we cashed in, therefore, statistics should improve across the map. Consequently, the team should be stronger as a unit instead of focusing on a single player who's trying to achieve the same task.
ReplyDelete