Nah it's not.
Literally most of the big names in the EPL were bought out last two decades (since 2003). Even nothing teams like Man City and now Newcastle.
Also, SkySports do pay ridiculously amount. You cannot convince me that the EPL was a better product when Abramovic bought Chelsea. In fact, the EPL was relatively poor at the time, and the English national team is laughably poor in international competitions.
- - - Updated - - -
It's the oil money that made the EPL great.
1. Man City - oil
2. Newcastle - Oil
3. Chelsea - oil
Am I missing something?
Literally most of the big names in the EPL were bought out last two decades (since 2003). Even nothing teams like Man City and now Newcastle.
Also, SkySports do pay ridiculously amount. You cannot convince me that the EPL was a better product when Abramovic bought Chelsea. In fact, the EPL was relatively poor at the time, and the English national team is laughably poor in international competitions.
- - - Updated - - -
It's the oil money that made the EPL great.
1. Man City - oil
2. Newcastle - Oil
3. Chelsea - oil
Am I missing something?
Serie A had just one of these factors at the turn of the millenium - the history. Maybe two if we consider in that context the stadiums weren't SO terrible. And we were attracting oil money - I'm sure the Tamoil deal was a world record at the time.
Without 2006 it's possible Serie A would have been able to compete with EPL better than La Liga but EPL would still have won out. The conservative mindset of Serie A would have dragged us down inevitably - from the snail's progress in modernising the stadiums and media packaging to Milan and Inter not rejuvenating their squads after their CL victories. That plus 2006 sealed the deal. Tamoil was 2004- at which point Serie A could have kept pace with EPL but even by 2011 the gap was enormous. The balance of top players in EPL vs Serie A had completely changed. Often moving directly a la Shevchenko- and then Milan failing to see the bigger picture and invest that income accordingly.
