German Football 20/21

[Blackwidow]

For people wondering why Bayern is dominating the league so thoroughly.

Money explains why they are always in the mix for the title and why they win 2 out of 3 years. But it does not explain why they won soon nine titles in a row. And will maybe beat the 81 points record Dortmund had in 2011/12 for the 7th or 8th time...

And I do not understand why Bayern is always picked out like they would be the only one that purchases players in the Bundesliga - especially when it is players that before have played Bundesliga 2 like Kimmich and Pavard.

 

[NoLogo]

Money explains why they are always in the mix for the title and why they win 2 out of 3 years. But it does not explain why they won soon nine titles in a row. And will maybe beat the 81 points record Dortmund had in 2011/12 for the 7th or 8th time...

And I do not understand why Bayern is always picked out like they would be the only one that purchases players in the Bundesliga - especially when it is players that before have played Bundesliga 2 like Kimmich and Pavard.

I think they touch on this as well though. The instability of most other clubs is the main cause for it. Just look at Schalke, a couple of years ago they were the third force in Germany, with a chance of aiming for second spot and now they are getting relegated and are in financial ruins.

And you get picked out because the best players in the Bundesliga, bar Reus maybe, usually end up joining Bayern and not Dortmund, Gladbach, Schalke or Leverkusen. And if you ask me it's no surprise considering you have the only team that is capable of winning international honors and well the pay helps as well.

The gist of the matter is that Bayern has been doing an excellent job over the last decade especially but also the decades before that. They are very stable. Always leading to establish new markets for their club but also for the Bundesliga as a whole and while I'm not a big fan of Bayern I think they are where they are on merit, while they might have had a bit of an advantage with having a big stadium in the past that wouldn't have carried them up to this day, they built on past success and got bigger and better and stronger, something a lot of other teams have failed to do.

 

[OleBoiii]

Money explains why they are always in the mix for the title and why they win 2 out of 3 years.

I don't care if the reason is money or dark magic conjured up by an evil wizard living in a hut in the middle of the Schwarzwald... Bayern winning every year just makes the league really boring to watch from a competitive standpoint.

No disrespect to Bundesliga teams, though.

 

[Zehner]

Money explains why they are always in the mix for the title and why they win 2 out of 3 years. But it does not explain why they won soon nine titles in a row. And will maybe beat the 81 points record Dortmund had in 2011/12 for the 7th or 8th time...

And I do not understand why Bayern is always picked out like they would be the only one that purchases players in the Bundesliga - especially when it is players that before have played Bundesliga 2 like Kimmich and Pavard.

Of course money explains that. That's not even a dig at Bayern, it's just a neutral observation. During every single one of those 9 years, the title was their's to lose. Even during the Klopp era, Bayern had the comfortably better team with Robben and Ribery in their primes. With a little bit of fantasy you could maybe argue that Dortmund started the season with an equally good team in 2019 but they bottled it.

I understand why everybody and their mother love 50 + 1 after the ESL story line but truth be told, you don't want the Bundesliga conditions either. There's no route to challenging Bayern for a Bundesliga team. The league is in desperate need for reforms.

 

[Zehner]

And on the other side that would just put way too many "happy to be here" clubs in the Bundesliga. Imagine Bochum, Fürth, Kiel, Bielefeld, Mainz, Augsburg, Freiburg and Union all in the Bundesliga at the same time...that's half the league. They've all worked hard to get there but the league would be less attractive with so many underdog teams around.

They earned their spot. The big dogs in the second league should ask themselves how it can be possible that such small clubs threw them out of the league.

And it's obviously not really a difficult assessment. It might have been born out of necessity but they implemented what Schalke, HSV, etc. are lacking. Emphasis on competence and innovation instead of platitudes and has-beens with questionable qualifications for their jobs.

Especially Schalke. If they even utilized 25% of their financial strength they would steam roll every team in the second division.

 

[Hansi Fick]

The league is in desperate need for reforms.

Can you suggest some examples of reforms you would deem necessary or helpful?

 

[Zehner]

Can you suggest some examples of reforms you would deem necessary or helpful?

No I can't.

 

[Rektsanwalt]

No I can't.

You already mentioned 50+1. And it's worth mentioning regarding Bayern.

 

[Kasper]

Introduce a salary and transfer cap. 50+1 without exceptions, exclude Wolfsburg, Hoffenheim, Leipzig and Leverkusen. Easy reform, thank me later.

 

[Hansi Fick]

Introduce a salary and transfer cap. 50+1 without exceptions, exclude Wolfsburg, Hoffenheim, Leipzig and Leverkusen. Easy reform, thank me later.

How would you determine the salary cap? Exclude in the sense of don't grant them a license? Or that they can stay exceptions?

 

[Kasper]

How would you determine the salary cap? Exclude in the sense of don't grant them a license? Or that they can stay exceptions?

First thing would have to be decided by UEFA (no idea, maybe 3x current mean salary of the top 4 leagues). Yeah, don`t grant them a license. Maybe allow Leverkusen to change their model and stay, I have a soft spot for them.

 

[do.ob]

The one and only reform I want to see is to stop extending the solidarity principle of TV money distribution to plastic clubs, stop this situation where they use their bonus cash to act as a top four gate keeper. Maybe ban Horst Heldt from professional football for good measure.

 

[Hansi Fick]

First thing would have to be decided by UEFA (no idea, maybe 3x current mean salary of the top 4 leagues). Yeah, don`t grant them a license. Maybe allow Leverkusen to change their model and stay, I have a soft spot for them.

You would envisage a salary cap only if it's UEFA-wide? Or would you say DFL should enact one alone if must be?

And does a salary cap mean a cap on an individual player's wage or on the wage budget of a team?

 

[Zehner]

You already mentioned 50+1. And it's worth mentioning regarding Bayern.

Of course there are some approaches but I don't think I really possess the necessary background knowledge to judge what's really promising.

In general I believe financial gaps of these magnitudes can only be overcome by external investments. In regards to football, investors have a very bad reputation but they don't have to be like the Glazers or the sheikhs. In other industries, investors ensure that a startup can compete with established industry players and accelerate innovation. Then again I believe you have to put some regulations at place to ensure that it doesn't drift towards into the extremes - but how so, no idea.

Another point is that IMO the Bundesliga is very amateurish in regards to marketing itself. My club is almost traditionally interested in lots of young players from relatively unknown leagues. But for almost every single one of them you can find compilations on YouTube. But good luck doing that for Bundesliga players. During the Neymar at Santos days millions of his highlight reels were uploaded to YouTube while it was very difficult to find any videos of Mario Götze featuring Bundesliga footage since they deleted every piece immediately. The league is slowly warming up to it and putting highlight content on social media but it's still light years behind every other league. Really German so to speak.

And I also believe this has to do with the level of professionalism. Many Bundesliga clubs still appoint former players without any business experiences. If you think about it, it's actually incredible that people whose qualifications wouldn't even be enough to get a senior level job at a random cooperation are suddenly heads of companies/clubs that generate millions of profits annually. That's also a side effect of 50 + 1, by the way.

 

[Zehner]

The one and only reform I want to see is to stop extending the solidarity principle of TV money distribution to plastic clubs, stop this situation where they use their bonus cash to act as a top four gate keeper. Maybe ban Horst Heldt from professional football for good measure.

Yeah, but you're a conformist. I guess you'd be okay with seeing the same champion for the next 20 years. Did you also like the Super League? Because it essentially followed the same line of thought you just demonstrated.

 

[do.ob]

Yeah, but you're a conformist. I guess you'd be okay with seeing the same champion for the next 20 years. Did you also like the Super League? Because it essentially followed the same line of thought you just demonstrated.

If by conformist you mean that I'd rather see Bayern win another 5, before a billboard like Leipzig win their first, then I guess I am one. I'm not sure what you're referring to with your ESL comment though.

There are two things holding back potential challengers:
a) incompetence
b) a lack of money

Maybe you can make some kind of management seminar mandatory for licensing, but in the end clubs will have to overcome leadership and club culture problems themselves, no one else can help them there.

When it comes to money sustained growth is the only way. You keep going on about 50+1 again and again, but please, do actually take a look at the real world. Bundesliga has clubs that effectively operate outside of the bounds of the 50+1 rule. Are they challenging Bayern (beyond Leipzig having Nagelsmann for a few years)? Look at the rest of Europe. No one else has a 50+1 rule, they can all do what according to you will make Bundesliga great again. How many clubs are out there who grew from the size of your typical Bundesliga midtable club to a team that could reasonably challenge Bayern. Then subtract the clubs used for sports washing and then feel free to list the numerous clubs among the hundreds of candidates in Europe who took the path you are suggesting. One time payments are just that, you can buy a couple of good players once and by the next cycle the money and the players are gone.

The only way out of this is the one Dortmund took:
step 1: be a reasonably big club in the first place
step 2: do good work for a sustained period of time
step 3: make CL reliably enough you can actually calculate with the increased income without risking bankruptcy
step 4: gain international exposure, keep star players (for longer), create a team that is used to European competitions and doesn't choke on its inexperience

This is where the plastic clubs come in, because they keep cock blocking clubs like Gladbach or (recently) Frankfurt from reliably playing in Europe, while they themselves have absolutely no potential to grow into something that could challenge Bayern. And part of the reason why can do so effectively is that while other clubs get into deep trouble when they miss their targets they can just call up daddy's marketing department. You can act a lot more freely with that kind of safety net.
Subtract the plastics from the equation and Gladbach, from Favre onwards, probably make top four like 80% of the time. They would be a completely different club by now. Maybe not challenging Bayern, but a serious T2 team in the CL.
Even Dortmund, not that anyone has to feel sorry for them, will be set back a year or two at least by missing out on top four to Wolfsburg and Leipzig.

 

[Hansi Fick]

Of course there are some approaches but I don't think I really possess the necessary background knowledge to judge what's really promising.

In general I believe financial gaps of these magnitudes can only be overcome by external investments. In regards to football, investors have a very bad reputation but they don't have to be like the Glazers or the sheikhs. In other industries, investors ensure that a startup can compete with established industry players and accelerate innovation. Then again I believe you have to put some regulations at place to ensure that it doesn't drift towards into the extremes - but how so, no idea.

Another point is that IMO the Bundesliga is very amateurish in regards to marketing itself. My club is almost traditionally interested in lots of young players from relatively unknown leagues. But for almost every single one of them you can find compilations on YouTube. But good luck doing that for Bundesliga players. During the Neymar at Santos days millions of his highlight reels were uploaded to YouTube while it was very difficult to find any videos of Mario Götze featuring Bundesliga footage since they deleted every piece immediately. The league is slowly warming up to it and putting highlight content on social media but it's still light years behind every other league. Really German so to speak.

And I also believe this has to do with the level of professionalism. Many Bundesliga clubs still appoint former players without any business experiences. If you think about it, it's actually incredible that people whose qualifications wouldn't even be enough to get a senior level job at a random cooperation are suddenly heads of companies/clubs that generate millions of profits annually. That's also a side effect of 50 + 1, by the way.

Would you say that 50+1 is the main obstacle to a higher level of investment?

I ask because, of course, 50+1 doesn't limit outside investment at all, it "only" limits the voting power of outside investment.
You speak of "some regulations" that would need to be put in place in the absence of 50+1. well, that's where the proverbial dog is buried isn't it.
How exactly do you regulate in a way to maximize the benefits while minimizing the downsides, and how far away from 50+1 do you land with that in mind?
I'll hazard the guess that - not so far. But I'm not meaning to shut down debate or not have an open mind.

As for the rest, these are good points, but -- that people need to do better is not a reform one can implement.

About the last point, are you sure? How would removing 50+1 create a new class of potential club officials that are economic AND footballing experts?
And where are those now, if they exist?
Wouldn't it be rather that Klinsmann, Völler, Heldt, Schmadtke and Marcel Jansen just have a lot more money to waste, for a short while, before the whole thing collapses?
Or that the clubs have their German Ed Woodwards to deal with the money?

 

[Rektsanwalt]

Introduce a salary and transfer cap. 50+1 without exceptions, exclude Wolfsburg, Hoffenheim, Leipzig and Leverkusen. Easy reform, thank me later.

that would need to be done by the UEFA, that kind of salary and transfer cap. Otherwise the league might be competetive, but garbage in terms of quality compared internationally.

Of course there are some approaches but I don't think I really possess the necessary background knowledge to judge what's really promising.

In general I believe financial gaps of these magnitudes can only be overcome by external investments. In regards to football, investors have a very bad reputation but they don't have to be like the Glazers or the sheikhs. In other industries, investors ensure that a startup can compete with established industry players and accelerate innovation. Then again I believe you have to put some regulations at place to ensure that it doesn't drift towards into the extremes - but how so, no idea.

Another point is that IMO the Bundesliga is very amateurish in regards to marketing itself. My club is almost traditionally interested in lots of young players from relatively unknown leagues. But for almost every single one of them you can find compilations on YouTube. But good luck doing that for Bundesliga players. During the Neymar at Santos days millions of his highlight reels were uploaded to YouTube while it was very difficult to find any videos of Mario Götze featuring Bundesliga footage since they deleted every piece immediately. The league is slowly warming up to it and putting highlight content on social media but it's still light years behind every other league. Really German so to speak.

And I also believe this has to do with the level of professionalism. Many Bundesliga clubs still appoint former players without any business experiences. If you think about it, it's actually incredible that people whose qualifications wouldn't even be enough to get a senior level job at a random cooperation are suddenly heads of companies/clubs that generate millions of profits annually. That's also a side effect of 50 + 1, by the way.

I always wondered what the feck these clubs are doing sometimes. It's such an obvious case of "nepotism" (in the sense that known faces are privileged in an absurd way), that I really started doubting the sanity of club officials. Especially when it comes to football directors.

Regarding your other points, yes, you are mostly right I'd say. External investments are necessary, otherwise Bayern will be the dominant force forever. They're just too strong financially to not keep their hegemony if they aren't challenged by money from the outside.

Yes, bundesliga lacks professionalism in every aspect of the game, I totally agree. It's just the same with the rest of Germany and our society, right? I mean, the digital approaches of the bundesliga lag behind by maybe a decade.

 

[do.ob]

Yes, bundesliga lacks professionalism in every aspect of the game, I totally agree. It's just the same with the rest of Germany and our society, right? I mean, the digital approaches of the bundesliga lag behind by maybe a decade.

I think it's obvious that Bundesliga was slow to react when football started growing exponentially in the 90s, got more and more commercialized and more and more globalized. But I'm not sure the present tense is still on order. Commercially the league is still playing catch up to this date, but I think clubs have made the transition into the modern game quite a while ago. E.g. supervisory boards are filled with DAX executives, (formerly) highly ranked politicians and the likes, the management roles are more and more diversified: you don't have the one patriarch, but rather 2-3 people who share strategical responsibility of the sporting side.

 

[Kasper]

You would envisage a salary cap only if it's UEFA-wide? Or would you say DFL should enact one alone if must be?

And does a salary cap mean a cap on an individual player's wage or on the wage budget of a team?

I think it`s only doable if done UEFA-wide, so yes. There`s no way (and probably no point) that the DFL would introduce it if its not introduced in other leagues as well.

As for the last question, definitely both. Individual salaries could be adjusted similar to how its done in the NBA, wage budget of a team should definitely have a hard cap.

 

[HerrLeinad]

People that think getting rid off 50+1 would solve anything are deluded.
In France Bordeaux now has to go into administration because their american investors just pulled out. There are also plenty other such stories in Spain, Italy, France and even England.

It seems people look at PSG, Chelsea and City and think those are normal "investors". Those won't happen in the Bundesliga due to various other factors and especially the english ones were only possible due to the extremely strong national money especially the huge TV income, not to mention Britain's (London's) role in the world of finances and how the rich and powerful are attracted by that. Those are things you can't replicate anywhere or at any time.
No investor is coming to Germany and will then close the gap to Bayern, that is just delunsional. What is actually gonna happen is they MIGHT invest in smaller/mid tier clubs and will displace clubs like Dortmund, Gladbach etc.
This has already happened to a certain extent thanks to Leverkusen, Hoffenheim, Wolfsburg and Dortmund.
And yes, the "traditional" clubs can and should have done a better job but that doesn't change the fact that investors make the job even harder and not really adding much value in regards to a league's attractiveness. To achieve that you have to spent insane money and no real "investor" is doing that. So in the end it's all about hitting the lottery and getting someone like Abramovich, the Qataris etc. and hope that the BL is attractive enough for their sportswashing...

 

[Cheimoon]

People that think getting rid off 50+1 would solve anything are deluded.
In France Bordeaux now has to go into administration because their american investors just pulled out. There are also plenty other such stories in Spain, Italy, France and even England.

It seems people look at PSG, Chelsea and City and think those are normal "investors". Those won't happen in the Bundesliga due to various other factors and especially the english ones were only possible due to the extremely strong national money especially the huge TV income, not to mention Britain's (London's) role in the world of finances and how the rich and powerful are attracted by that. Those are things you can't replicate anywhere or at any time.
No investor is coming to Germany and will then close the gap to Bayern, that is just delunsional. What is actually gonna happen is they MIGHT invest in smaller/mid tier clubs and will displace clubs like Dortmund, Gladbach etc.
This has already happened to a certain extent thanks to Leverkusen, Hoffenheim, Wolfsburg and Dortmund.
And yes, the "traditional" clubs can and should have done a better job but that doesn't change the fact that investors make the job even harder and not really adding much value in regards to a league's attractiveness. To achieve that you have to spent insane money and no real "investor" is doing that. So in the end it's all about hitting the lottery and getting someone like Abramovich, the Qataris etc. and hope that the BL is attractive enough for their sportswashing...

But what might be a solution instead, then? I mean, I agree with what's been said before, and in general, I don't think it's helpful to bridge the gap with Bayern by trying to bring more money into the BL. It's not like more money has been this awesome thing that made football more fun. But what good way does anybody see to bring other clubs close to Bayern's level of quality, and/or Bayern's level down a bit (insofar as that's desirable at all).

 

[hasanejaz88]

The only thing the BL needs to do is make the share of tv revenues more equitable between the 18 clubs, that's it. No need to scrap the 50+1 rule as the risks far outweigh any benefits.

 

[Hansi Fick]

But what might be a solution instead, then? I mean, I agree with what's been said before, and in general, I don't think it's helpful to bridge the gap with Bayern by trying to bring more money into the BL. It's not like more money has been this awesome thing that made football more fun. But what good way does anybody see to bring other clubs close to Bayern's level of quality, and/or Bayern's level down a bit (insofar as that's desirable at all).

I was going to say a more equal TV money distribution would be a start, and probably the easiest thing to implement.
Last season, Bayern got three times what the lowest team got, 105m € to 34m €. What about changing it to more like, say, 90m to 50m?
I'd be all for that.

However, let's think this through for a minute in terms of the objective everyone of you has - which is having someone else win the league other than Bayern.
A more equal distribution would not just mean less money for Bayern, but also less money for BVB, Leipzig, Leverkusen, while significantly boosting the budget of teams like Freiburg. What it would achieve, would be more equity between the upper half and the lower half of the table.
In terms of competivity though, Bundesliga's problem is not the competivity between, say places 1-7 and the rest of the league. Teams like BVB or Leverkusen lose to mid-to-lower table teams all the time. Rather, it is the competivity between place 1 and places 2-18.
And it's very arguable that losing those 5-15 millions to lower table clubs will more hurt BVB, Leipzig, Leverkusen's ability to consistently rack up points like you'd need for a title challenge, than it would Bayern's.
Because Bayern's overall financial advantage, stemming from the massively bigger commercial income, would still be most relevant.

So ironically, I would propose that a more equal TV distribution might do nothing for a more competitive title challenge, or even hurt it (as opposed to competivity over the rest of the table).
And it's probably not for nothing that it's also clubs like BVB and Leipzig resisting a more equal distribution.
I still think it should be done.

 

[uamini]

People that think getting rid off 50+1 would solve anything are deluded.

No investor is coming to Germany and will then close the gap to Bayern, that is just delunsional.

I don't really understand that stance since Leipzig is a textbook example of what you can achieve when you don't care about 50+1. Sure they're not on Bayern's level yet but they've arguably been better than any other German team in the past 2 years.
If Bayern had to deal with 5 Leipzig-type clubs + Dortmund then they'd definitely have a harder time winning every year.
Yes, opening the doors to investors can go terribly wrong but if it's done right then the odds of building a competitive team from scratch are much higher.

 

[Acrobat7]

Abolishing 50+1 and opening the door to investors also means Bayern receive even more money since they are by far the most attractive target

 

[uamini]

I was going to say a more equal TV money distribution would be a start, and probably the easiest thing to implement.
Last season, Bayern got three times what the lowest team got, 105m € to 34m €. What about changing it to more like, say, 90m to 50m?
I'd be all for that.

As far as I know a signficant amount of that sum is because of Bayern playing in European competitions though. They "only" got 70m € for domestic tv rights which is just 20m € more than a team like Freiburg. So I'm not sure if it's even possible to distribute the Champions League media money as well.
And of course Bayern always have the same answer: if you give us less money then we'll do worse in European competitions so less people will be interested in the Bundesliga and media rights will be sold for less money. It's a classic vicious cycle...maybe teams should try to earn more in international competitions to lessen the difference (which is easier said than done).

 

[Hansi Fick]

As far as I know a signficant amount of that sum is because of Bayern playing in European competitions though. They "only" got 70m € for domestic tv rights which is just 20m € more than a team like Freiburg. So I'm not sure if it's even possible to distribute the Champions League media money as well.
And of course Bayern always have the same answer: if you give us less money then we'll do worse in European competitions so less people will be interested in the Bundesliga and media rights will be sold for less money. It's a classic vicious cycle...maybe teams should try to earn more in international competitions to lessen the difference (which is easier said than done).

That's to a good part BS though. The league wouldn't need to listen to that.
As I tried to argue, the lion's share of our advantage doesn't come from TV money, but from commercial income. But again, doesn't that make the challenger teams actually more reliant on an unequal TV distribution for their performance than us?

But I'm confused now, do the 105m really contain CL TV money? Or is 'domestic' vs 'international' money the difference between the sale of Bundesliga TV rights in Germany vs to other countries?

 

[do.ob]

I don't really understand that stance since Leipzig is a textbook example of what you can achieve when you don't care about 50+1. Sure they're not on Bayern's level yet but they've arguably been better than any other German team in the past 2 years.
If Bayern had to deal with 5 Leipzig-type clubs + Dortmund then they'd definitely have a harder time winning every year.
Yes, opening the doors to investors can go terribly wrong but if it's done right then the odds of building a competitive team from scratch are much higher.

Leipzig will never grow. Look at Leverkusen. They've been the third most sucessful club of the last 30 years or so, yet they would probably go the way of their Uerdingen brethren if it wasn't for Bayer's marketing budget. Leipzig look strong at the moment, because they have Nagelsmann, but they are still firmly below Bayern and they won't grow much further than this, because keeping your billboard in the top four is one thing, trying to attack the €400m (or whatever it is these days) annual revenue gap towards Bayern with corporate money, to maybe have a chance at winning the title is another matter entirely. The league needs it's traditionally big clubs to consistently make top four, but that's ten times harder with these plastic clubs at the top.

6 squabbling amongst themselves with 5 of them having a low-ish glass ceiling is the best thing that could happen for Bayern's dominance.

 

[uamini]

Leipzig will never grow.

Yeah, that might be true. However that's partly due to Red Bull's business model. They seem mostly interested in promoting a young team that plays fast and aggressive football.
That doesn't mean that there aren't investors out there who'd have bigger plans. And I'm not denying that it would still be incredibly difficult to catch up to Bayern but wouldn't the odds be much higher than for an organically grown club?
Or let me put it that way: 50+1 falls, freshly promoted Schalke 04 are immediately taken over by the same Qatari who own PSG. Would you bet against them building a team that rivals Bayern?

 

[do.ob]

Yeah, that might be true. However that's partly due to Red Bull's business model. They seem mostly interested in promoting a young team that plays fast and aggressive football.
That doesn't mean that there aren't investors out there who'd have bigger plans. And I'm not denying that it would still be incredibly difficult to catch up to Bayern but wouldn't the odds be much higher than for an organically grown club?
Or let me put it that way: 50+1 falls, freshly promoted Schalke 04 are immediately taken over by the same Qatari who own PSG. Would you bet against them building a team that rivals Bayern?

RB chose their business model, because it's cost efficient. It's not like their marketing derpartment was like: "yeah we could spend €500m a year and build a true top team, but going for youth is more us".
And yes, most clubs like Schalke would never invite the Qataris into their club, but sure, they would probably have the right motivation and funding to challenge Bayern. But if your intention is to get rid of 50+1 in hopes of getting one of the oils states to white wash their human rights abuses in Bundesliga, then please just be honest and say so. Because all that talk about reasonable investors lending clubs a helping hand in doubling their revenue is just bullshit.

 

[Boavista]

Who's to say RB Leipzig won't grow? I get that there might not be much incentive for Red Bull to invest more beyond the ambition of having them play in the Champions League, but I think that ignores other aspects. Leipzig isn't Wolfsburg or Leverkusen in terms of city or location. It's a much larger, fast growing city in an area devoid of many alternatives in terms of football clubs. Their "history" might make them unpopular to traditional football fans, but those already support other clubs anyway. If anything I think most somewhat comparable examples of clubs, with controversial owners, show that after a while it just becomes normal. I've heard or read somewhere that Leipzig heavily promotes their club among school aged children for instance. Looking at Leipzig's attendance figures, they're close to full capacity on average, so clearly there's interest in the area. Maybe in a few years they might even have a proper league rivalry, if Dynamo Dresden gets promoted. Going by Dynamo's support, those matches could be quite a spectacle and would go a long way in legitimising them as a club.

Besides, Red Bull isn't really comparable to any owner. They've created a niche for themselves in their sports and event sponsoring, that is a pillar for them as a brand. I actually think Leipzig have a lot of potential to grow as a club, and while that's still very reliant on Red Bull's budget, that might not be the case for ever. I guess that would depend on whether RedBull would allow other sponsors. So yeah there might be a glass ceiling, but I don't think it's equivalent to VW or Bayer, who maybe have to support their teams because they're sort of stuck with them but don't really care one way or another.

Are there any reliable figures on how much Red Bull has put into the club? @uamini Leipzig might be a textbook example of what you can achieve when you don't care about 50+1, but I think they're also a really good example of what you can achieve within that budget range. Of course they shouldn't have that kind of budget in the first place, and they benefit not only from being able to take more risks, but also from their club network. However clubs like Schalke, Hamburg or even Stuttgart maybe could have had that kind of budget, if they hadn't been so mismanaged in the past decade. In my opinion, what Leipzig is doing as a club isn't out of the reach of what other clubs could achieve if they didn't keep shooting themselves in the foot. I mean look at Hertha's recent investment spree too, and how badly that's turned out.

 

[Blackwidow]

As far as I know a signficant amount of that sum is because of Bayern playing in European competitions though. They "only" got 70m € for domestic tv rights which is just 20m € more than a team like Freiburg. So I'm not sure if it's even possible to distribute the Champions League media money as well.
And of course Bayern always have the same answer: if you give us less money then we'll do worse in European competitions so less people will be interested in the Bundesliga and media rights will be sold for less money. It's a classic vicious cycle...maybe teams should try to earn more in international competitions to lessen the difference (which is easier said than done).

Why just talking about Bayern in that aspect? It is the same for every CL team... If you take from Bayern you take from the others, that even depend more on the extra income to have a competitive squad that can hold the team's place in the league but have extra players for the additional matches, too.

Actually it was the iniative of Bayern that got the other 3 CL participant to give together 20 million EUR to e.g. 3rd league clubs in trouble with Corona last season!

If you want to take from Bayern you have to take from their competitors that depend more on that money, too...

And if you e.g. distribute the national media income less performance related you harm clubs like e.g. Freiburg that have overperformed in the recent seasons but because of their infrastructure really rely on that more of income compared to e.g. Cologne with the bigger stadium and infrastructure.

If we talk about it... Hertha might go down despite big money shots by their investor...

 

[Cheimoon]

The league needs it's traditionally big clubs to consistently make top four, but that's ten times harder with these plastic clubs at the top.

Given how everything else appears to.not actually work, I get the impression that's the real answer here: for the clubs with serious financial potential to finally (finally! FINALLY!) get their act together and become permanent presences at the top. But BVB messed up another season, Schalke is going down, and HSV is very far off anything. I suppose there are other such clubs as well, but barring a serious implosion at Bayern, I guess the gap isn't going to close any time soon.

 

[stefan92]

Given how everything else appears to.not actually work, I get the impression that's the real answer here: for the clubs with serious financial potential to finally (finally! FINALLY!) get their act together and become permanent presences at the top. But BVB messed up another season

That's the real problem - Wolfsburg is only able to "block" a CL place for BVB, because they are just doing a very good job with far less financial power than Dortmund has. Of the 50+1 only Leipzig have exceptional high budgets that should guarantee them the CL, Wolfsburg is just a midtable club in that regard.

And I agree that Leipzig has a higher ceiling to grow than Wolfsburg, Leverkusen or Hoffenheim - those are coming from areas with traditional and successful big clubs near them. Leipzig is the only club representing east Germany in the Bundesliga, there is no choice if you want to follow local/regional Bundesliga football.

 

[Zehner]

Very insightful posts in here. I especially like @do.obs. It really is unfair that all those plastic clubs profit from the great audiences the traditional teams lure to the Bundesliga. And moreover, they prevent them from sustainably entering European competitions, severely limiting their growth potential.

Here's a radical idea that would tackle all these problems: The clubs who draw the biggest audiences could found an own league so that teams with lesser reach don't steal the revenue that rightfully belongs to them. In that league, a proportion of the revenue could even be shared by broadcasting percentages. Boys, this might really work. We could even say that the 15 teams with the biggest commercial impact are guaranteed starters so that they can plan reliably and grow sustainably.

I mean, the ultimate goal most be to just vote for the winner because in the end we all know sports is a popularity contest but I don't think this is possible as of yet.
The important thing is that we shouldn't allow ourselves to be distracted by silly arguments like "Schalke just managed to get relegated with the third highest budget in the league", it's obviously the plastic clubs which are to blame for their fall from grace.

 

[do.ob]

Who's to say RB Leipzig won't grow? I get that there might not be much incentive for Red Bull to invest more beyond the ambition of having them play in the Champions League, but I think that ignores other aspects. Leipzig isn't Wolfsburg or Leverkusen in terms of city or location. It's a much larger, fast growing city in an area devoid of many alternatives in terms of football clubs. Their "history" might make them unpopular to traditional football fans, but those already support other clubs anyway. If anything I think most somewhat comparable examples of clubs, with controversial owners, show that after a while it just becomes normal. I've heard or read somewhere that Leipzig heavily promotes their club among school aged children for instance. Looking at Leipzig's attendance figures, they're close to full capacity on average, so clearly there's interest in the area. Maybe in a few years they might even have a proper league rivalry, if Dynamo Dresden gets promoted. Going by Dynamo's support, those matches could be quite a spectacle and would go a long way in legitimising them as a club.

Besides, Red Bull isn't really comparable to any owner. They've created a niche for themselves in their sports and event sponsoring, that is a pillar for them as a brand. I actually think Leipzig have a lot of potential to grow as a club, and while that's still very reliant on Red Bull's budget, that might not be the case for ever. I guess that would depend on whether RedBull would allow other sponsors. So yeah there might be a glass ceiling, but I don't think it's equivalent to VW or Bayer, who maybe have to support their teams because they're sort of stuck with them but don't really care one way or another.

Sure, Leipzig have a better natural basis for growth, but that has its limits as well and as soon as you draw the circle a bit wider people will ask themselves "why go for plastic, when you can get organic?".
As for the bolded: Leipzig will forever be associated with Red Bull and their marketing value will forever be soaked up by the soda cans. Whatever "real" sponsorship deals they can get will be greatly diminished by that. For reference Leverkusen supposedly pocket €6m annually from their shirt sponsor and their shirt supplier is Jako.

That's the real problem - Wolfsburg is only able to "block" a CL place for BVB, because they are just doing a very good job with far less financial power than Dortmund has. Of the 50+1 only Leipzig have exceptional high budgets that should guarantee them the CL, Wolfsburg is just a midtable club in that regard.

And I agree that Leipzig has a higher ceiling to grow than Wolfsburg, Leverkusen or Hoffenheim - those are coming from areas with traditional and successful big clubs near them. Leipzig is the only club representing east Germany in the Bundesliga, there is no choice if you want to follow local/regional Bundesliga football.

Given how everything else appears to.not actually work, I get the impression that's the real answer here: for the clubs with serious financial potential to finally (finally! FINALLY!) get their act together and become permanent presences at the top. But BVB messed up another season, Schalke is going down, and HSV is very far off anything. I suppose there are other such clubs as well, but barring a serious implosion at Bayern, I guess the gap isn't going to close any time soon.

No one needs to feel sorry for Dortmund, they have enough money that they only got themselves to blame. But for clubs like (currently) Gladbach who have been well run for a decade now, but still can't break into top four reliably, it's a real problem. Frankfurt is looking like another candidate. Maybe Stuttgart if they can keep it up for a few more years.

 

[Hansi Fick]

And I agree that Leipzig has a higher ceiling to grow than Wolfsburg, Leverkusen or Hoffenheim - those are coming from areas with traditional and successful big clubs near them. Leipzig is the only club representing east Germany in the Bundesliga, there is no choice if you want to follow local/regional Bundesliga football.

East German fans tend to be rather locally-conscious and rivality-proud though. I can't imagine any Dynamo Dresden fan (with Dresden being the second biggest city) would follow RB just because they're also East German.. a certain bloody severed bull's head thrown onto the pitch comes to mind.

Aue had a fan friendship with Chemie/Sachsen Leipzig, no idea whether thye've transfered that love towards RB after the former has perished.
Erfurt hate Jena and are friends with Lok Leipzig, if I'm not mistaken, who are still around as last remnant of the Axis powers along with BFC and Lazio..
Can't imagine there'd be a lot of love lost between those clubs and RB.
Just because none of those clubs are in the top flight doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[Zehner]

Would you say that 50+1 is the main obstacle to a higher level of investment?

I ask because, of course, 50+1 doesn't limit outside investment at all, it "only" limits the voting power of outside investment.
You speak of "some regulations" that would need to be put in place in the absence of 50+1. well, that's where the proverbial dog is buried isn't it.
How exactly do you regulate in a way to maximize the benefits while minimizing the downsides, and how far away from 50+1 do you land with that in mind?
I'll hazard the guess that - not so far. But I'm not meaning to shut down debate or not have an open mind.

As for the rest, these are good points, but -- that people need to do better is not a reform one can implement.

About the last point, are you sure? How would removing 50+1 create a new class of potential club officials that are economic AND footballing experts?
And where are those now, if they exist?
Wouldn't it be rather that Klinsmann, Völler, Heldt, Schmadtke and Marcel Jansen just have a lot more money to waste, for a short while, before the whole thing collapses?
Or that the clubs have their German Ed Woodwards to deal with the money?

Yes, of course it is. As an investor I won't spend a fortune to a club and then hope that a former pro player who at best has as much economic knowledge as a fresh college graduate knows what he's doing. The actual sporting facet aside, most Bundesliga clubs are setup incredibly unprofessionally.

That aside, your points are valid. But the amount of professionalism definitely depends on the club leadership and if said club leadership is a seasoned and innovative business man instead of a former official with little to no expertise in leading a venture then he'll obviously appoint different people for different positions. I'd argue that Leipzig is currently the most innovative and well managed club in the Bundesliga, Bayern aside. And that's not because they spent fortunes (which they did, relatively speaking) but because they could design the club with it's infrastructures and organization from scratch and were able to appoint the right talents in the right positions without having to give a flying feck about the vanity and consent of aging club authorities. They're essentially the Bundesliga equivalent to a startup disrupting an established business with outdated structures and DNA.

So the money is only one aspect but the league is also in a dire need for an outside injection of professionalism, innovation and "business sense".

And I'm not believing that anything of this is going to change anytime soon. We've just witnessed how Schalke in the worst position they faced in their entire history (and that's quite telling) disapproved the signing of Ralf Rangnick. Imagine a financially top 15 club in Europe under Rangnick's tutelage, with the structures and concepts of RB Leizig at work. They could've set the direction to international and domestic glory again but it failed because some vane old men didn't want to give up control of the club. Schalke under Rangnick would've been a force to be reckoned with, now they're just same old Schalke, only in division 2. Rich but dumb.

 

[Zehner]

Oh and on a side note, I'd like to challenge the broadcasting quotes that have been cited here. If you take a look behind the methodology, this really is bullshit.