Typically the "second division" teams in this country are owned by their respective first division "parents" so there is no reason why they would want to fight to make it into the top division even if they are allowed to.
Yeah, I understand, we have sort of the same thing over here, with many of the high profile teams also having a second tier team. This second tier team can never get any higher than 2 divisions under the first tier team. So when for example Brondy I.F. has their main team in the best league, their second tier team, no matter if they win year after year, can never proceed beyond the 3. best league. This is to prevent the two teams ending up in the same league, for example if the main team one year did so poorly that they were relegated to the second best league, and the second tier team did so good they were promoted from the third best to second best league as well.
Major teams have second tier teams in order to secure actual play time for the players not quite good enough to earn starting positions on the major team. They get a chance to fight for a spot, so to say.
As far as competition goes we have salary caps and revenue sharing which make our leagues actually much more competitive than almost all European football leagues. Our leagues don't have a relegation battle but we do have something better and that is a battle for playoff spots. Every year there are maybe a handful of teams who are tanking it at the end of season but that is because they get more benefits for being worse (higher draft picks next season).
While I can see where you're coming from, I don't agree that salary caps and revenue sharing make your leagues more competitive. Rather I believe that such techniques make your league as a whole much more level, meaning that the differences are balanced out, thus making every year start out more "fair". And while this is incredibly fair and just in many ways, it does not necessarily further competition as such - it just removes one teams ability reap the benefits of long-term investments and general power building.
Why is battle for play-off spots necessarily better? We have a cup, knock-out tournament played alongside the league, in order to secure lower level teams a possibility for advancement and fame.
And you mention teams tanking it - you guys have a carrot at the top, spots in the play-offs, but no stick at the bottom, where we have relegation. So while it's exciting as hell to follow the top 4 teams to see who wins, it's also great fun to follow the bottom 4 teams to se who just exactly stays clear of relegation, who actually gets relegated, and who gets promoted from the second best league.
I have troubling accepting the fact that some teams actually choose to play sub standard in order to gain advantages next year. I prefer when teams try to win every match they play, any other thing is in my eyes not nearly as competitive.
Draft picks is another element that is non-existant in European football leagues. Here the professional teams don't have a lower level academy type structure which develops amateurs into future professional players. Most players develop their skills through high school/college teams and then they declare themselves available for the draft. To use a football analogy instead of Porto selling Cristiano Ronaldo to Manchester United for £12 million here it would be like Christian Ronald of Port High School getting picked 1st by the worst team in the MLS last year. The draft pick system is completely unworkable in Europe but here it can make bad teams become better really fast.
Does this mean that you can't play professionally, not referring to skill but to the difference between paid and non-paid, until you make it into the draft rounds?
How do you handle all the guys not good enough for the majors and maybe even not quite good enough for college sports as well? Is it just tough luck for those guys, or are you able to play in for example a third tier league and still earn a decent enough living?
I am sure the European system could work here it's just that our current system is so culturally ingrained. There are no benefits to switch to European system either. I think both systems are fine. There is no need for one to move to another.
You're right, but I also believe that one shouldn't turns one's back on things that are obviously better, just because of tradition. And that goes both ways.
