ENGL 110 Writing Contest Winners
The following students have won our 2009-2010 writing contest for ENGL 110: Composition and Research. A panel of student Writing Center consultants selected these papers out of a field of entries in recognition of their quality. The winner received a $100 gift certificate to The King's English Bookshop and the two runners-up a $50 certificate. Congratulations to the winners and their teachers and many thanks to all who entered!
Winner: Graham Beckstead • Runner-Up: Justin Morse • Runner-Up: Michael Toomey
Winner: Graham Beckstead, Position Paper on Rio de Jaineiro as an Olympic Host City
The announcement by the International Olympic Committee that Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, would host the 2016 Olympic Summer Games has become something of a buzz-worthy topic. Rio is one of the most populous cities in South America, and its world-famous beaches and festivals such as its Mardi Gras “Carnaval” and New Year celebrations, which attract millions of tourists every year, have made it a major center for international tourism (“Pan Am success,” par. 17). The city’s recognition has only been growing as it held the 2007 Pan-American Games and will also be home to the 2014 World Cup. Unfortunately, Rio’s reputation has suffered over the past decade as drug cartels and uncontrollable gang violence have overtaken its many slums, also known as “favelas,” making law enforcement in those areas extremely difficult and endangering the lives of thousands of civilians (Hersh par. 4).
Additionally, violence isn’t the only obstacle Rio must tackle in order to prepare for the Olympics. Questions have been raised not only regarding whether the city’s infrastructure could possibly be prepared for such an event, but also concerning whether Rio’s public transportation system will be able to handle the massive throngs of tourists visiting the city for the Games. The recent surge in violence, among these other factors, begs the question, “Is Rio de Janeiro fit to host the Olympic Games?”
Before we can answer this question, however, it is important we understand the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) selection process. Put briefly, a city who wishes to be considered for the Olympics first puts in its application. The IOC generally selects a small number of applicants, usually four, out a much larger pool. IOC officials then visit the potential host cities and evaluate them on-site. When the final decision is to be made, the IOC holds a three-round voting process (“2016 Summer Olympics” par. 2-5). The “candidate city” that survives all three rounds with sufficient votes is the city where the games will be held. In order for a bidder to be selected by the IOC, many factors are taken into account, public safety and city infrastructure being major categories.
Now that the Olympics selection process makes a little more sense, we can further discuss the Rio de Janeiro controversy. The South American tourism center beat out Chicago, Tokyo, and Madrid, and subsequently drew much criticism of the committee’s selection process. Specifically, the city’s ability to hold such a massive public event has been called into question (Macur par. 2). If that were the only factor under the Committee’s consideration, however, Rio would certainly never have made it to the candidacy round and Tokyo, by far the safest of the four cities, would have easily been given the opportunity (Hersh par. 28). The Olympics have the possibility of vastly improving the entire country’s development, so it is no wonder that today, national and international support for Rio has largely drowned out and quieted the opposition (Macur, par.30). This apparent dismissal of the notion that tourists may be affected or harmed by gang violence is rather foolish. It is a well-known fact that the gangs have targeted tourists for years, so the possibility of danger must be taken into serious consideration before any potential visitor books a 2016 flight to the new home of the Summer Olympics.
Some true-to-life examples provide credence to the stories of tourist-related gang violence. Olympic rower Doug Schroeder and gold medalist wrestling coach Steve Fraser fell victim to local criminals on separate occasions during public events in Rio. Schroeder was robbed at gunpoint during the 2007 Pan American games, while Fraser was mugged and severely beaten during the 2006 Pan American Wrestling Championships (Hersh par. 16-20). Professor Chris Gaffney, who lives in Rio performing research, says that mugging “eventually happens to everybody in the city, regardless of neighborhood” (qtd. in Hersh par. 15). With one of the world’s highest homicide rates, it seems the millions of international tourists visiting the city for the 2016 Games may be endangered by local crime spilling from impoverished to more affluent areas (Barrionuevo par. 14).
While tourists are being affected, much of the recent crime has involved scuffles with the police force. An October 20th article in the New York Times gives a prime example of the strength of the slum’s crime syndicates. According the article by Alexei Barrionuevo, drug traffickers shot down a law enforcement helicopter just outside of the arena where the Olympics’ opening and closing ceremonies are scheduled to take place, killing three police officers (par. 2). This kind of occurrence is evidence that the violence is not always isolated within the poverty-ridden shantytowns, but all too often can be seen on the streets of more tourist-centric areas.
Gang violence is not the only issue that critics cite to detract from Rio de Janeiro’s Olympic bid. The presence of the gangs has created other equally severe problems within the city’s law enforcement. In the past, the unwritten policy in regards to policing the slums was for the police to stay out of the slums and, rather than stop the drug cartels, they would turn a blind eye as long as the violence stayed within the slum borders (Barrionuevo par. 5). This policy not only encouraged drug cartels to take over regional slums, but also allowed corruption in the police force to reach unprecedented levels, with off-duty cops taking vigilante positions within the favelas, providing protection from the local drug lords, for a price (Duffy par. 3). With the vigilantes basically being supported by the government, although unwillingly, it is evident that along with new tactics in policing the slums, extensive internal reform is necessary.
Not everyone is totally opposed to the selection of Rio, however. Steve Fraser, the wrestling coach who was mugged, feels that if people follow proper safety precautions set by the Brazilian government, then there should be little for the public to worry about (qtd. in Hersh par. 21). The city already has plans to invest in a more effective, better-trained police force by 2012 (Barrionuevo par. 22). City officials in Rio recognize that the Olympics committee still has the ability to pull out, so they will do everything in their power to keep that from happening, meaning a vast improvement in security. Rio police chief Allen Turnowski says, “We have the capacity to control any part of the city we want. The problem is we can’t stay to finish the job…. It will take time” (qtd. in Anderson 55). Whether the six years until the Olympics (or even the four years until the World Cup) will be enough time, remains to be seen.
While Rio has major plans to restructure their police force, they have already shown promising evidence that they can, when necessary, effectively decrease crime levels throughout the city. Every year during the holidays of Carnaval and New Year’s, the city attracts over two million tourists for the celebrations. And every year, there are no major issues regarding the public safety of tourists. Each celebration generally goes off without a hitch. In addition to the holidays, Rio hosted the ’07 Pan American Games, an event similar to the Olympics, but only including participants from South American nations. During these games, an additional 15,000 police officers successfully aided in dropping crime rates (“Pan Am success” par. 14). While funding for the Pan Am Games may have been handled poorly, such as the as-yet-unfinished city train service (built specifically for the Pan Am games), one cannot deny that there were few major security issues (Shaw par. 14). All-in-all, the 2007 games went off without gangs causing trouble with civilians in the designated safe zones.
So, if Rio’s security risks are seemingly under control by 2016, what other obstacles must the city overcome? Robert Shaw of the UK Telegraph argues that transportation and access to the intended Olympic athletic facilities are not as efficient or convenient as they should be (par. 13). However, these transportation issues will be cleared up with the improvements set for the 2014 World Cup, according to the Brazilian sports minister Orlando Silva (qtd. in “Pan Am success” par. 19). The aforementioned public train service should also be completed by the time the Olympics roll around, aiding the problems with transportation. Local airports are being renovated, new hotels are being built, and many other advances are being made to prepare for the two upcoming international events Rio will be hosting (Grohmann par. 5).
If the fact that Rio is hosting the World Cup played a part in persuading the committee to select the city, location had an even more important role. In the 113 years of its existence, the Olympics have never been held in South America (Macur par. 5). So it would seem it is due time to recognize that the continent as a whole was being deprived of an opportunity. Out of all the possible South American cities, though, Rio de Janeiro is really one of the very few equipped with the necessary funds and facilities to accommodate such a major international event. Only Buenos Aires, Argentina, can compete with the infrastructure and economy of Rio. So, if the committee really wanted to bring the games to South America in 2016, it really had no other option.
Even if Rio is the best choice for a South American Olympic host, the question remains: “Is Rio de Janeiro fit to host the Olympic Games?” The answer is … well, no. That is, not at the moment. If the Olympics were to be held this year, rather than in 2016, chances are they would be a major disaster. Today, at least, Rio de Janeiro is simply not prepared enough to host one of the largest public events in the world, especially the police force. These current conditions are the reason the city is having trouble convincing critics it will be safe by 2016. After all, while other cities may have problems with violence in their neighborhoods, very few places are so bad the police will only enter accompanied by armor, or will no longer enter those areas at all (Hersh par. 14).
However, if the city can properly implement the plans it has put in place for the World Cup and Olympics respectively, there is a good chance both events will be shining successes. With proper effort and funding, the police should be able to gradually eradicate the severe corruption within their system and significantly decrease the extreme levels of crime outside, making the city safer for tourists and locals alike. By no later than 2014, Rio de Janeiro’s infrastructure will be well-prepared to host major sporting events like the Olympics, and as long as the police can keep the gang violence out of the public sphere, Rio will be remembered for the great Games they host, and not the problems they encounter.
Works Cited
“2016 Summer Olympics.” Wikipedia. Wikipedia.com, 18 Nov. 2009. Web. 19 Nov. 2009.
Anderson, John L. “Gangland: Who Controls the Streets of Rio de Janeiro?” The New Yorker. 5 Oct. 2009: 46-56. Print.
Barrionuevo, Alexei. “Violence in the Newest Olympic City Rattles Brazil.” New York Times. New York Times, 20 Oct. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Duffy, Gary. “Vigilantes Take Over Rio Shanty Towns.” news.BBC.co.uk. BBC News, 8 March 2008. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Grohmann, Karolos. “Olympics-World Cup a Bonus for Rio's 2016 Games Bid.” reuters.com. Reuters, 18 June 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Hersh, Philip. “Crime More than ‘Public Safety Challenge’s’ for Rio 2016 Bid.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 4 Sep. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Macur, Juliet. “Rio Wins 2016 Olympics in a First for South America.” New York Times. New York Times, 2 Oct. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
“Pan Am Success Aided Rio’s Bid.” SI.com. Sports Illustrated, 18 Sep. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Shaw, Robert. “Rio de Janeiro Parties but Plenty of Obstacles Remain Before 2016 Olympics.” The Daily Telegraph. The Daily Telegraph Newspaper, 3 Oct. 2009. Web. 4 Nov. 2009.
Runner-Up: Justin Morse, "Kentucky-Fried Cruelty"
Picture a chicken with white feathers, ignorant and happy. Now this chicken gets thrown across the room, against walls. Trying to escape its pursuer’s grasp, it flails as it is grabbed by the neck, and thrown into the air once more. The chicken’s beak is now cut off, without any kind of anesthesia or antibiotics. The chicken bleeds from the wound, further angering the worker because it's still alive. The chicken is then kicked, then, with one last shriek, its head is torn off its body by the worker’s hands. These acts were documented being done to several chickens in Kentucky Fried Chicken supplier factories by an undercover investigator in 2004. Along with severe animal cruelty, selling unhealthy food and mistreating workers are abundant practices within the KFC enterprise. Advertising that portrays KFC as a wholesome family-oriented company contrasts radically with the reality of their unhealthy products and unjust business practices in addition to masking all of the animal abuse the chickens endure before ending up on the dinner table.
In 2004, Kentucky Fried Chicken underwent litigation for animal abuse when an undercover member of an animal rights group shot video of employees abusing chickens in many ways that were against regulations. The investigator saw many acts of cruelty, involving “workers tearing beaks off, ripping a bird's head off to write graffiti in blood, spitting tobacco juice into birds' mouths […] suffocating a chicken by tying a latex glove over its head, and squeezing birds like water balloons to spray feces over other birds” (McNeil). When veterinarians and other court members viewed the tape, they were filled with disgust. Such behavior against any other living creature is a true travesty to the human reputation.
The real problem stems from Yum! Brands, who supplies KFC’s chicken, in addition to other companies such as Wendy’s and Pizza Hut. Yum! Brands, created in 1997, uses the cheapest method of animal stunning and killing, rather than more humane alternatives. The chickens are hung upside down on wires, where a machine containing a blade slits their throats so that blood can be drained from their bodies. Draining the blood is intended to make the chickens numb before going into the melting pot, where their feathers are scalded off. Many chickens flail back and forth on the hangers, completely missing the blade, making it so that they go into the boiler completely conscious. Despite numerous attempts at getting Yum! Brands to conform to more humane methods of animal killing, their methods remain the same. Such pleas for change by activists have been a success in the past, getting popular fast food chains such as Burger King to submit to similar requests. While nothing in Yum! Brands’ practices has changed, the KFC website declares that it is 'committed to the humane treatment of animals' (Moore). Rather than change the ways in which their chickens are killed, KFC dismisses such allegations, saying they treat their animals humanely, and continue to advertise wholesome meals to the public.
Kentucky Fried Chicken’s most recent commercial entails a chipper young woman going into work while narrating how delicious and wholesome southern-cooked KFC chicken really is. This is ironic considering how the first KFC was established on 3890 South and State Street in Salt Lake City Utah, and not in the South. Cheerful music plays in the background as she puts on her apron and heads into the kitchen while she describes how KFC is perfect for families who care about filling and nutritional meals on the go. Nowhere in the commercial does this spunky chef mention how the chickens are tortured by factory workers then boiled alive in 212οΎ°+ Fahrenheit water. Nor does she mention that these nutritional meals consist of deep fried processed chicken, preserved mashed potato mix, and baked biscuits containing high amounts of MSG, or monosodium glutamate, a flavor enhancer that has been known to also increase asthmatic symptoms as well as causing other harmful effects to humans. Instead of informing their consumers of this pertinent information, KFC launched its new line of chicken, “Kentucky Grilled Chicken,” which is supposed to be healthier for customers instead of the traditionally fried chicken. Again, KFC failed to mention to the public that their new grilled chicken contains carcinogens which have been linked to several forms of cancer in humans.
While customers run to the nearest KFC to get their family dinner with a side of cancer and a slice of nausea from MSG, they also get an enormous amount of calories. One piece of KFC’s fried chicken is roughly 370 calories, and one biscuit is 190 calories. In addition to unnecessary calories, customers also get enough sodium to last them three days in relation to the chickens’ caloric content. Each piece of chicken contains about 1,050 mg of sodium, whereas the daily recommended serving is 1000 mg for every 1000 calories consumed. Even a salad at this fast food chain can be up to 340 calories, excluding dressing, with 840 mgs of sodium (KFC.com/nutrition).
Consumers continue to stay uninformed because nutritional facts aren’t offered in the franchises, and customers order these supposedly healthy foods without weighing the pros and cons of what they’re eating. If the nutritional facts were posted for everyone to see in every KFC franchise, consumers could make conscious efforts towards actually eating healthier. There are more than a billion adults world wide that are now overweight, with 300 million of those people being clinically obese (WHO). The number of overweight Americans is growing at an outstanding rate, and childhood obesity is already becoming an increasing concern across the country. If posters showing how the customer’s dinner was fed growth hormones and antibiotics and killed were posted in each franchise, consumers would be aware of the abuse and make informed financial decisions on where their money goes when they eat at the fast-food chain.
In addition to being unaware of these important topics, customers of KFC also don’t know about how unfairly Yum! Brands field workers are paid and treated. The majority of field workers that work for Yum! Brands are illegal immigrants that are paid below minimum wage. Many of these employees receive no benefits, no healthcare, and no paid vacations. Pizza Hut (KFC’s sister company and another Yum! Brands company) drivers aren’t reimbursed for miles driven or gas used when they deliver. Tomato pickers for Taco Bell (another sister company/Yum! Brands company) make about $7,500 a year, and still have to pay taxes, while the CEO of Yum! Brands makes about 8.8 million a year comparatively (Posner). The difference between the two incomes is phenomenal, and completely unfair. Field workers spend long days in the sun with very little water and almost no rest time, whereas the CEO of Yum! Brands does no manual labor.
In addition to underpaid field workers, factory workers are also treated unfairly. Many factory workers spend their time stepping through chicken feces and handling birds all day. Stress levels have shown to be higher for factory workers, who then mistreat the chickens. Because factory workers are under high amounts of stress and are made to stay late nights often, the stress turns into violence towards the birds. One worker in the undercover investigation videotape complains of having to stay late one day because of a new shipment of chickens. While he complained, he kicked chickens across the room and relished in doing so (McNeal). If workers in factories had more time to relax, there wouldn’t be as much abuse.
With all of these negative consequences from eating at Kentucky Fried Chicken, it’s not hard to see why so many have decided to boycott the franchise altogether. Reyna Stevens, a former KFC employee, says, “I know what goes on behind closed doors there, not to mention the pain the animals endure, I’d never eat there after knowing all I know now” (Stevens). If an employee from KFC won’t even eat at the popular fast food restaurant, it’s hard to believe that the American public would choose to eat there if they were aware of KFC’s business practices. The key to change is awareness. It is the fuel to the inevitable fire that is already starting to spark within the American public.
Fortunately, there are many alternatives to eating at Kentucky Fried Chicken. In addition to boycotting the franchise all together, people can search for places to buy chicken locally and cook it at home, which is healthier and would promote togetherness with others, an image KFC has strived for so long to convey to its customers. The website localharvest.org is a useful tool that gets customers all over the country in contact with local producers. There are also numerous techniques for cooking chicken rather than deep-frying it like KFC does. And when people cook their own chicken, they know what it contains, rather than having some “secret recipe’” that has God-knows-what in it. Biscuits can be made easily from scratch, and homemade is arguably better than something that has been frozen in order to travel thousands of miles to be reheated.
As for the chickens, action is being taken against KFC, like the lawsuit back in 2004. Animal rights groups such as PETA, or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, have filed numerous lawsuits against KFC and pleaded with them to change their methods of chicken-killing. What many people don’t understand is that PETA is not asking KFC to stop killing their most popular menu item, but rather to switch to more humane methods of killing. One very inexpensive method is called Controlled Atmosphere Killing (CAK) which entails chickens getting put into plastic crates (as opposed to the standard wired cages) and stacked in a room to be put to sleep with a gas, knocking them out before they are boiled and cooked. This method has also been suggested to other fast-food companies such as McDonald’s, who have yet to switch methods. CAK is also money-friendly, and is virtually a lateral cost with the amount of money spent on the common methods of killing used today.
Protests have been held outside many KFC restaurant chains, with posters and graphic visuals of the abuse chickens suffer during the process of becoming someone’s dinner. In 2001, PETA launched its’ “Kentucky Fried Cruelty” campaign, which also hosts a website reporting on current events regarding the battle against the company as well as disturbingly graphic videos of horrendous acts being committed by factory workers. KFC has also felt the heat from lawsuits striving to improve working conditions for labor workers in Yum! Brands businesses. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) asked Yum! Brands to pay their employees just one penny more in their salaries. Yum! Brands has yet to submit to the CIW’s demands.
Every day more and more people are becoming informed of Kentucky Fried Chicken’s business practices and are beginning to look past the family-oriented, wholesome image it attempts to portray in its commercials. The alternatives to eating at such franchises are almost endless, and strides towards animal equality are being taken each year. While some of its practices may be unconventional, PETA plays a big role in the current victories over several fast-food companies and have improved living conditions for numerous animals. But because Kentucky Fried Chicken continues to abuse its chickens horribly, treat its workers unfairly, and sell food that is both unhealthy and unethical, consumers should avoid investing their time, money, and health into such a corrupt company.
Works Cited
McNeil, Jr., Donald. “KFC Supplier Accused of Animal Cruelty.” New York Times 21 July 2004. Web. 1 Nov. 2009
Moore, Heather. “Unhealthy and Inhumane: KFC Doesn’t Do Anyone Right” American Chronicle 19 July 2006. Web. 23 Nov. 2009
“Nutrition Guide” KFC.com/nutrition. Web. 23 Nov. 2009
“Obesity and Overweight” World Health Organization. Web. 23 Nov. 2009
Posner, Sarah. “Leading Like Jesus.” Gadflyer.com. 13 Dec. 2004 Web. 01 Nov. 2009
Stevens, Reyna. Personal Interview. 1 Nov. 2009
Runner-Up: Michael Toomey, Position Paper on Spending Caps in European Football
European football (soccer) is a majestic art. No other league, region, or style of play is comparable to it. For years, European soccer has been synonymous with success and brilliance. However, with the way money is being spent by some clubs, the beauty of the game is diminishing. To some, transfer fees and overall player costs are becoming more important than the way teams are actually being run. Consequently, clubs and leagues throughout Europe, and even the world, are taking a hit. If nothing is done to cease, or at least limit, high spending, the brilliance of European football will be a thing of the past.
Rising debt and unregulated spending among European football clubs is undermining the quality of the leagues and will ultimately ruin them if nothing is done to regulate or stop spending outside clubs’ means. Last year, one quarter of European clubs’ finances were in the red (“Almost 1” par 1). According to David Taylor, secretary general of the Union of European Football Association (UEFA), more red ink is expected in this coming year (“Almost 1” par 2). The reasoning behind this is that although income rose last season overall by five per cent, player costs, salaries and transfer fees also increased (“Almost 1” par 7). This increase is known as “financial doping” and it is mainly attributed to bigger clubs who have no worry of salary limits, also known as caps.
Due to the lack of a salary cap, bigger clubs, such as Real Madrid and Manchester City, have messed up the transfer market. This past summer Real Madrid (Spain) and Manchester City (England) spent nearly five-hundred million dollars combined to buy new players. Madrid alone spent two-hundred and seventy-one million dollars to sign just three players (“European Soccer” par 2). This is more than the entire New Castle Football Club (England) was sold for, academy program and all. The practice of financial doping is now being recognized by many high officials in European football, Michael Platini, UEFA president, included (“Almost 1” par 4).
Quite possibly the top factor in financial doping, the act of overpaying players, is the greed of owners. The reason why transfer and salary fees are getting so out-of-hand is that every new owner wants glory for his club. Although Real Madrid and Manchester City headlined the transfer market this past summer, they are certainly not the first clubs to take part in such high spending on few players. Five years ago, the Chelsea Football Club (London, England) was purchased by wealthy Russian oil mogul Roman Abramovich. Upon acquiring the club, Mr. Abramovich signed on famous Portuguese manager Jose Mourninho. Starting off well, Chelsea won two consecutive EPL titles. However, because they still lacked European dominance, Abramovich spent massive amounts of money to sign “big name” players (Lucas par 3). Since those signings, Chelsea has not won a single domestic title, let alone a European one. They have been through several coaching changes, including three in the 2007-2008 campaign alone. They have also, most recently, been banned from signing or selling players until 2011 because of a scandal earlier this season involving their illegal training of a young French player. What needs to be learned is that coaches must be given a chance. Reaching European success is a long-term goal. However, as long as there is massive wealth with single clubs, this lesson will never be learned fully. This is yet another excuse for a salary cap. Owners need to learn how to logically build a team and trust the coaches they hired to do the job.
As it looks now, the Chelsea club is cooling off in the massive financial scene; however, in their place is Manchester City. Purchased last season by a wealthy Saudi family, Manchester City immediately began buying high-profile players at high prices. They also brought in Mark Hughes, a highly regarded English coach most known for his achievement of turning the Blackburn Rovers Football Club into a winning team. However, because City has not stayed in the top four of the league table, Hughes is on the verge of being fired. If he was given a chance, he could take City into European competition and into the top ranks of the EPL. However, because City owners still think they can buy trophies, no true progress will be made (Lucas par 7).
Rising costs have already begun to limit strength from league to league. Of the bigger European leagues, the English Premier League was in the worst financial shape while only Romania, Czech Republic, Ukraine, and Poland produced more clubs in “major” financial trouble (“European Soccer” par 3). At this point in time, any given league has no more than five “big name” clubs. Implementing a salary cap throughout the UEFA-designated leagues is necessary to maintain fairness amongst clubs, now being called “competitive balance” (Holden par 5).
President Platini is one of the biggest advocates for a salary cap in European football leagues. Being from a nation with few teams (Poland), Platini sees it in his best interest to reduce European dominance from the bigger leagues and clubs of England, Spain, and Italy (Holden par 1). Some would say that having a salary cap is an unfair regulation because clubs are privately owned and should therefore operate on their own terms (Holden, par 14). Although these critics are right in saying team owners should be able to spend their money how they please, they must keep in mind the best interest of the leagues throughout Europe and the world. This is an especially important time to impose financial regulations because European football clubs are becoming a hot commodity in the eyes of wealthy businessmen worldwide. European football leagues are becoming more and more competitively unbalanced as each season passes, if this trend continues, current world football leagues will either cease to exist or digress so drastically that they might as well cease to exist. If this occurs, the only people to blame are the high officials of the top clubs in Europe.
Football clubs with “bigger” names are ruling competition in Europe right now. This is fine in the sense that they are doing it fairly; however, it is starting to get out of hand. Smaller clubs in bigger leagues such as the EPL (England), La Liga (Spain), and Serie A (Italy) are succumbing to the effects of their larger opponents dominating domestically. Two very good examples of what can happen to a club when its management over extends itself financially are the New Castle United Football Club and the Leeds United Football Club, both of England. New Castle, which was purchased just two years ago by businessman Mike Ashley for two hundred and seventy million dollars, is now on the market again after being relegated to the Championship (second division). However, now Ashley is trying to sell it for just one hundred and sixty-nine million dollars. Leeds United is an even sadder story (European Soccer par 8). After being relegated about six years ago, they are yet to return to the top flight of the English Premier League, a place they sat in for decades until spending high prices on single players became a common practice (“European Soccer” par 7). The same story can be attributed to the smaller clubs of La Liga and Serie A. When these “minor” clubs do come upon a young talent, they do not retain them for long. The giants of the leagues sweep them up quickly with their higher incomes and budgets (Lucas par 12).
Rising transfer fees and player costs are not just taking a toll on the smaller clubs and leagues of Europe. Leagues around the world are being repressed. The MLS (Major League Soccer) here in the United States is a relatively young league with high aspirations. It also happens to be the most stable professional soccer league in the world, most certainly because of its similar marketing styles to Europe, but with very specific financial rules. Although the MLS has made great strides in strengthening its ability and level of competition, it has been hampered by the lack of salary regulation in Europe. In 2006, the MLS board of directors created a new salary rule. The Designated Player Rule, also known as the “Beckham Rule,” allows for each team to pay one player more than the league’s salary cap, now at 2.3 million dollars. This rule is how the LA Galaxy was able to acquire English star David Beckham (Wahl par 1). It is also how the Seattle Sounders were able to sign former Arsenal (England) mid fielder Freddy Ljunberg. The MLS has its sights set on becoming as strong as some of the top European football leagues. However, with no salary cap in Europe, the MLS is limited on what they can do competitively and who they can bring into the league. Top players know they can make more money it Europe; so why should they come to the MLS?
The crumbling Brazilian league is another example of how a lacking salary cap in European football has played a role in how other world leagues function. Brazil is known around the world for producing some of the best soccer players the beautiful game has ever seen (The Americas par 1). Their national team has also won more World Cup trophies than any other. However, the Brazilian domestic league is quite possibly one of the weakest leagues in the world of professional football. The reason is that the league is unable to retain young players (The Americas par 2). Due to low income and poor club management, Brazilian clubs cannot afford to pay their players large salaries such as the clubs in Europe do. Also, European clubs are not regulated on how much they can spend on a player. The combination of these two factors has lead to Brazil becoming the biggest exporter of professional footballers in the world. It is less expensive for European clubs to move a young Brazilian player to Europe and raise him through their academy program than it is for that club to sign a local player of equal talent (The Americas par 5).
European football has history. It also has beauty and aura of class. However, with the way finances are being run in professional soccer leagues around Europe, it is not only losing its integrity and level of strength, but it is diminishing the quality of football around the world. To avoid this decline, there must be a salary cap implemented and financial doping must be stopped in European football. If nothing is done to cease unregulated and outrageous spending, the leagues themselves will cease to exist. Stronger financial regulation is the only thing that can save the quality and competitive balance in football both in Europe and around the world.
Works Cited
“Almost 1 in 4 Soccer Clubs in the Red: UEFA.” Radio-Canada. 19 Sept. 2009. Web. Oct. 2009.
“European Soccer Wary Over Big Spenders.” Yahoo Finance. 4 August 2009. Web. Oct. 2009.
"Footloose." Economist 374.8410 (2005): 37. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 4 Oct. 2009.
Holden, Jim. “Will the Global Credit Crunch Force European Leagues into Salary Caps?” Sports Illustrated. February 2009. Web. Oct. 2009.
Lucas, Giles. “Football’s Finances Need to be Resolved.” Suite101. 12 August 2009. Web. Oct. 2009.
"Money Matters." Sports Illustrated 110.18 (2009): 32. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 4 Oct. 2009.
Thamel, Pete. "Kraft Has Interest in Owning Team In Premier League." New York Times 26 Oct. 2009: 2. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 28 Oct. 2009.
Wahl, Grant "Bending It for Becks." Sports Illustrated 105.20 (2006): 33. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 4 Oct. 2009.
