Football league clubs in the FA Cup last 16

[Olé]

We already know that a majority of teams in the last sixteen will be "lower league" teams which don't play in the Premiership.

It is already certain that the "EFL" will provide 9-12 of the 16 teams in the next round - Wolves and Brighton both need replays.

Six top flight teams - Bournemouth, Liverpool, Arsenal, Newcastle, Burnley and one of Palace/Spurs - lost out in all Prem ties.

Another seven - Huddersfield, Cardiff, Leicester, Fulham, Southampton, Everton, West Ham - have been victims of cup upsets.

Have the margins narrowed between average Prem sides and up and coming Championship teams in a stronger second tier?

Or are the financial stakes in the Premiership just too high now for their clubs to take the FA Cup seriously as a competition?

If it's the former, perhaps it's time for fairer distribution of wealth; if it's the latter, perhaps we're paying these clubs too much.

So either way, maybe it's time to stop over-paying (and fawning over) them all and acknowledge the depth of league football.

(Fun fact: relegated sides get well over £40m each in parachute payments. EFL solidarity payments range from £4m - £400k).

[miser]

I think it's a bit of both. The lower prem teams probably have a bit more talent, but it's hamstrung by the fear of relegation. They don't at times even have the ambition to beat the top 6. More a case of saving themselves for the games which "matter". Not surprised they cannot raise themselves for the cup. Value for money they are not. 

[Leveller]

A more interesting point, surely, is how the 5th round draw will pan out?

With a maximum of seven PL clubs, at least one quarter finalist will be EFL. In reality, all PL ties in the fifth make it likely that there will be two or three. At the unlikely extreme, there could possibly be only four PL teams in the 5th round who could be drawn together, leaving six EFL quarter finalists.

[BTRFTG]

Premiership players/squads are technically light-years better than EFL. Just look around this forum at posts relating to our supposed ex best players being bit parts struggling in failing Premier sides.

On the redistribution of wealth (as Bob Mills used to say: "If I'd wanted a lecture on Communism I'd have asked for it,") the divide is wholly unreasonable, but to caution the only way "we" can do something about it is to cease purchasing the Premier product. That has an impact not only what we receive via the trickle down, but also the over-inflated sums the Reids and Bryans of this world command and, at current rates anyway, our ability to access the Palmers and Kalas'.

With a few exceptions I don't believe clubs disregard the FA Cup (most who lost yesterday put out strong squads.) For me the difficulty relates to what I call 'The Mark Flatts Effect'. Many of you will recall Mark. He came to us highly touted from Arsenal and made his full debut at home to Tranmere. In the warm up the ball stuck to his feet like **** to a blanket, he juggled, jinxed - boy was there nothing the kid couldn't do? And then we kicked off and got the ball to him. I recall Tranmere had Nevin and Aldridge in their line up, I don't recall the name of the lump at centre half who, too, had been watching Flatts skills and promptly went through him so hard Mark nigh on ended up in Row Z (those days first one was free from the Ref.) The look on Flatts face showed he hadn't a clue what was going on, this wasn't the tippy-tappy protected training his youth experience at Arsenal had prepared him for. And that's the problem, from a very early age the talent are cosseted and protected (Jeez they barely play competitive football,) such they're not able to cope with, let alone comprehend a 'Welcome To The Football League.' Players for whom effort and action are all, skill was never an option. You may count the number of league games Flatts played in his career on both hands. 

That's EFL's advantage over the Premier when it comes to the cup.

[SedRA]

14 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Premiership players/squads are technically light-years better than EFL. Just look around this forum at posts relating to our supposed ex best players being bit parts struggling in failing Premier sides.

On the redistribution of wealth (as Bob Mills used to say: "If I'd wanted a lecture on Communism I'd have asked for it,") the divide is wholly unreasonable, but to caution the only way "we" can do something about it is to cease purchasing the Premier product. That has an impact not only what we receive via the trickle down, but also the over-inflated sums the Reids and Bryans of this world command and, at current rates anyway, our ability to access the Palmers and Kalas'.

With a few exceptions I don't believe clubs disregard the FA Cup (most who lost yesterday put out strong squads.) For me the difficulty relates to what I call 'The Mark Flatts Effect'. Many of you will recall Mark. He came to us highly touted from Arsenal and made his full debut at home to Tranmere. In the warm up the ball stuck to his feet like **** to a blanket, he juggled, jinxed - boy was there nothing the kid couldn't do? And then we kicked off and got the ball to him. I recall Tranmere had Nevin and Aldridge in their line up, I don't recall the name of the lump at centre half who, too, had been watching Flatts skills and promptly went through him so hard Mark nigh on ended up in Row Z (those days first one was free from the Ref.) The look on Flatts face showed he hadn't a clue what was going on, this wasn't the tippy-tappy protected training his youth experience at Arsenal had prepared him for. And that's the problem, from a very early age the talent are cosseted and protected (Jeez they barely play competitive football,) such they're not able to cope with, let alone comprehend a 'Welcome To The Football League.' Players for whom effort and action are all, skill was never an option. You may count the number of league games Flatts played in his career on both hands. 

That's EFL's advantage over the Premier when it comes to the cup.

Not sure thats entirely true. You have 'technically superior' players from relegated teams such as Stoke and Swansea who are clearly struggling in the championship. The performance of a player and whether they are capable to play in the PL is down to a number of attributes. 

For example, I don't think its technique that Joe Bryan struggles with, probably more with tactical and mindset issues. 

[JamesBCFC]

There's a difference in quality, but it is nowhere near the chasm that the media would want you to believe it is.

[chinapig]

33 minutes ago, RedSA said:

Not sure thats entirely true. You have 'technically superior' players from relegated teams such as Stoke and Swansea who are clearly struggling in the championship. The performance of a player and whether they are capable to play in the PL is down to a number of attributes. 

For example, I don't think its technique that Joe Bryan struggles with, probably more with tactical and mindset issues. 

Indeed. Cardiff's players for instance haven't suddenly become technically superior because they are in the PL.

The Premier League is in effect 3 leagues, with wide variations in technical ability.

[Spike]

2 hours ago, Olé said:

We already know that a majority of teams in the last sixteen will be "lower league" teams which don't play in the Premiership.

It is already certain that the "EFL" will provide 9-12 of the 16 teams in the next round - Wolves and Brighton both need replays.

Six top flight teams - Bournemouth, Liverpool, Arsenal, Newcastle, Burnley and one of Palace/Spurs - lost out in all Prem ties.

Another seven - Huddersfield, Cardiff, Leicester, Fulham, Southampton, Everton, West Ham - have been victims of cup upsets.

Have the margins narrowed between average Prem sides and up and coming Championship teams in a stronger second tier?

Or are the financial stakes in the Premiership just too high now for their clubs to take the FA Cup seriously as a competition?

If it's the former, perhaps it's time for fairer distribution of wealth; if it's the latter, perhaps we're paying these clubs too much.

So either way, maybe it's time to stop over-paying (and fawning over) them all and acknowledge the depth of league football.

(Fun fact: relegated sides get well over £40m each in parachute payments. EFL solidarity payments range from £4m - £400k).

There will never be a distribution of wealth in a profit driven sport. The gap between the two leagues is immense and that's the way the top people/teams want it because it favours them. The amount of money the top 6 teams take in just be being top 6 means they're almost guaranteed a top 6 spot if the system stays the way it is and they also hold all of the bargaining chips too. 

I'd love to see an almost NHL-like system put into football but it'll never happen because the NHL is so far ahead in terms of competition around the world that it's always going to be the top league. If England took that restructured NHL system then all the best players in the world would up and leave for Spain, Italy, Germany and maybe even China unless they all changed their systems too. 

Simple put, it is what it is and whilst money is priority it's highly unlikely to change.

[BTRFTG]

55 minutes ago, RedSA said:

You have 'technically superior' players from relegated teams such as Stoke and Swansea who are clearly struggling in the championship. The performance of a player and whether they are capable to play in the PL is down to a number of attributes. 

Whilst true, I'd argue they remain technically superior but it's the other motivational factors that influence performance that lead their teams to struggle. In that respect I think few of them care. Many are shipped in once teams have been promoted, so they've scant experience of working their way through the leagues or what was laughably once called 'loyalty'. Kiss the badge my ****. They've usually been signed on lucrative contracts and if they've no get-out clause they're stuck living in some dump of a city and their prime incentive us to get out asap once the gravy train looks to run out of steam. Roll up sleeves and socks? This mob have several layers of body armour protection underneath their kit to keep them discrete from their situation. If the result  means teams struggling and having to offload, as Windsor Davies was apt to say: "Oh dear, how sad, never mind." They see themselves as executive officers, not trench troops.

It also works the other way. We've temporarily Kalas, Palmer et al who work their socks off but are akin a new breed spawned by The Premier, the Consultant Footballer. They know they'll never be starting regulars at an established Premier club, but are able to grab some of the rewards on offer. They're motivated by delivering a decent performance wherever they play, but where that is is of little or no consequence. They're highly paid gunslingers for hire. Have boots, will travel.

[BobBobSuperBob]

23 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

There's a difference in quality, but it is nowhere near the chasm that the media would want you to believe it is.

Not in a one off

Over 38 games 

Yes

[steviestevieneville]

The bottom 6 /7 clubs are no better than the top of the championship imo 

[JamesBCFC]

15 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Not in a one off

Over 38 games 

Yes

The top clubs absolutely.

 

But Newcastle/Huddersfield et al.

I don't think so.

 

I think they'd have the upper hand over a season of course, they are better than the top Championship clubs, that's why they are a division above. But the gap between the top of the Championship and bottom of the Premier League I don't think is as big as Sky etc make out.