Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues/Archive 34

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

→

Archive 40

Motion to reconsider "Fully Pro" and "Not Fully Pro" as valid metrics within WP:FPL

From reading and browsing through many discussions within WP:FPL, it strikes me that almost every discussion comes down to having to prove or show CLEAR financial data or evidence (such as an Audit) that a league is "Fully Pro" and "Not Fully Pro" or that all players within the league meet General notability guideline standards - thus leading many discussions to no truly clear decision that cannot be challenged in one way or another. There are so many unknowns and grey areas within World Football that I don't believe those are realistic distinctions to achieve nor are there a wide offering of truly reliable sources to pull from. When I look at the countries from which "Not Fully Pro" leagues are listed, I believe that its a fair consideration to make that some of the leagues may indeed pass financial guidelines and perhaps many of the players are even considered notable within the country as football is indeed the worlds sport - but how will we ever find documents online to prove this from say a Fiji or Liberia Federation - which may not be as organized as The FA, LFP, DFB, etc- without actually going to the country physically and doing research or looking for paperwork to scan and then share online? It's simply not realistic and because of this, a countries top professional division is unjustly considered "Not Fully Pro".

• For me one of the biggest issues with this is that many players spend their whole lives pursuing dreams to be professional footballers and many get their starts in either the little known leagues or the lower leagues 3rd, 2nd, - considered "Not Fully Pro" - before making the top "Fully Pro" divisions. No player makes it to the 3rd or 2nd division and thinks they've made it, lets live off a barely livable wage for the next 12 years - in the same way that no player says I'm in the 2nd division but I'm "Not Fully Pro". The majority of players know and accept that anything below the 1st divisions (beside maybe England) or anything outside the biggest football nations will be a grind financially and not the ultimate goal for them but they can still be proud of being considered a "Fully Pro" footballer if the countries federation determines that league so - this is an achievement in itself for many footballers. To have editors on Wikipedia sitting comfortably at home behind their nice laptops or dual screen setups telling a young player from Fiji's top flight "No your league is not fully professional" because you don't earn enough and no one knows who you are is disrespectful to athletes grinding it out at a professional level perhaps in an small country but dreaming of reaching one of Europes top 5 leagues someday.

In closing, I propose that the distinction is updated to only reflect FIFA's own standards which are only determined as Professional or Amateur. Leagues should only be distinguished as such to keep things very black or white - the current distinctions create a LOT of grey area and only increase the debates and animosity between users on the talk pages. See here on page 9 of an official FIFA document on player statuses it states that there are only TWO distinctions recognized by FIFA - Professional or Amateur. https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/regulations-on-the-status-and-transfer-of-players-2018-2925437.pdf?cloudid=c83ynehmkp62h5vgwg9g Futbol10p 14:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

No. Firstly the notability guideline specifies fully-professional leagues, so the scope of this list cannot be changed without getting the guideline changed.

Secondly, it would be a total nonsense, as it would add hundreds of leagues to the list of "professional" leagues. Football in England is only amateur at the 11th level and below (and even some players at that level are paid). This would open up articles on tens of thousands of players.

While there have been some cases where it's difficult to prove either way, in many cases there are references to leagues being fully-professional or semi-professional/part-time.

And regardless of all this, what you really want is an article on Patryk Tenorio. However, you've failed to prove that he passes the WP:GNG, so it's irrelevant what league he's coached in. Subjects that fail WP:NFOOTY can still be kept if there is evidence they are truly notable, while subjects pass WP:NFOOTY can still be deleted if it's proved they don't meet WP:GNG. Number 57 22:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

• Sigh...Here we go with the animosity and accusations again without having a normal discussion - cue eyeroll... So basically this would create more articles which you are against for some reason? Whats wrong with new leagues being added if its accurate? Is there a limit to how many leagues can be considered professional that I am unaware of? Are you in charge of writing those tens of thousands of player pages that it bothers you so much? Also those references you mention apparently aren't good enough as I found three regarding NISA specifically stating "Fully Professional" which were deemed not good enough - so again a grey area. Just want to add as well for @Number 67s understanding since he seems to take things personally, that regardless of the NISA decision which I could care less about anymore, this topic is completely separate but indeed has stemmed from some of the conversation raised in that discussion as well as others seen across the Talk Archives.

Lastly, I don't appreciate the attack you are making on me regarding the article I tried to create which has no connection to this discussion at all. I have actually already stated that I was wrong in doing so because I admit after being educated on the subject, that regardless it failed WP:GNG - if you review the above NISA discussion, you'll see I already made that same point days ago. Please don't respond on this discussion if you are going to be a troll and attack other users with completely unbased, off-topic things. As previously mentioned and clearly displayed by your response - this "Fully/Not Fully Pro" discussion only creates more debate and animosity which I am trying to remove as it has no place in Wiki discussions. Futbol10p 16:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

It's been a while since I have been actively involved in this discussion, but it would be helpful for there to be more clear definitions for what constitutes "fully-professional". The argument made by SportingFlyer of "meaning a player must make their full-time wages from the sport" was the best argument I have heard and the first time I had seen such an argument made. Could we define this more precisely? Is the argument that the players cannot earn money on the side to supplement their income? Or is it a regularity of payments by the club? Some objective standard would be helpful for deciding how the leagues at the margins should be considered (e.g. USL League One). For the record, I have always felt the standards for player notability are obscenely low, but I think a clear definition at the top of the page would reduce the arguments. Jay eyem (talk) 22:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jay eyem: I think it's just that simple and I mean that without any caveats: If a player's full time job is to play football, they are paid as such and train as such, and everyone in the league satisfies that standard, the league is fully professional. Players are free to earn money on the side, they are free to be paid once a year, but their full-time job must be football. For instance, a player who receives a lump sum of $1m from a club on 1 January and then opens a restaurant will still be a full-time footballer, since that's their primary wage. A player who trains two or three times a week and may receive a couple hundred dollars a week to play football is not a full-time professional. I'm sure there are edge cases, but the spirit of the rule is as simple as it seems: "do they make a full-time wage playing football?" SportingFlyer T·C 02:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I guess a lot of this just feels kind of subjective to me, especially with how some of the leagues are determined. And I feel it would be helpful to have this detailed out formally somewhere on the page. Your definition makes perfect sense, but I can understand how some newcomer wouldn't immediately understand the definition of "fully-pro" versus "professional". And my concern has generally been those edge cases, and I feel like the assumption of notability is already more liberal than it needs to be, so I think that formal statement would reduce the confusion. Jay eyem (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

• Absolutely not - especially as this seems to be a proposal to lower the bar. WP:FPL isn't perfect, but it does at least set a lower boundary above which players are likely to be notable. Furthermore, due to the hard work of number of editors we have a clear rrferenced boundary for pretty much every country in the world. This feels like extreme agenda pushing to me. Fenix down (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• No: the standards are good as they are now. What constitutes a "fully professional league" is not a gray area. The definition of a "professional" is that of being solely able to make income from football, without having to resort to other means to live by. I can only really speak about Lebanon, of which the top-level league (Lebanese Premier League) is semi-pro. The players are not amateurs, they do get paid on a regular(-ish) basis. However, the average monthly wage of a footballer in Lebanon is 1,500$, definitely not enough to be considered pro. The infrastructures are appalling, there is no investment, and even national team players (such as Kassem El Zein) have to resort to secondary jobs in order to live by.

It would be easy for me to be biased, and push for the distinction Futbol10p is trying to present, ergo pro/amateur, removing the idea of "fully pro". I would love the idea of having thousands of Lebanese players' pages available for creation. However, I have to be objective and realistic. This is Wikipedia, not WikiFootball. We can't have our footy-related biography count rise tenfold, given that we already have a ridiculous amount of biographies pertaining to the sport on this website. I really don't understand Futbol10p's remark ("To have editors on Wikipedia [...] telling a young player [...] "No your league is not fully professional" because you don't earn enough and no one knows who you are is disrespectful to athletes [...] dreaming of reaching one of Europes top 5 leagues someday"). How is it disrespectful to tell a footballer, who's top achievement in football was playing in a mid-tier Lebanese club earning 1,000$ a month, that he cannot have a Wikipedia article?

Not everyone "deserves" and article just because. The guidelines we have now are already pretty wide in of themselves, given that some Lebanese player who played 1 minute in an international friendly against Sri Lanka gets himself a Wikipedia page. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 01:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't agree entirely with this statement. The definition of "professional" is just that the athlete is paid for their performance. It has nothing to do with how much they are paid, or whether or not they choose to earn supplemental income. That's why we have the "FULLY" professional designation, but that isn't clearly stated anywhere on the page. It should be readily apparent with an objective standard when you look at the top of the page; one shouldn't have to go digging in the archives of the talk page to figure out what is the consensus. Jay eyem (talk) 05:52, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Of course the amount an athlete is paid is relevant to being "professional". I have multiple friends who play in the Italian 9th division, and get paid €200 a season for their performance. But under no definition would my friends be considered "professional athletes", nor would the Terza Categoria be considered a "professional league". I'm not sure if my previous definition was correct, but the amount one earns must be paramount in defining professionalism. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I actually really like SportingFlyer's definition i.e. that as long as the player's primary job is football, for which they are paid, then they are fully pro. I think the ninth Italian division like you describe would pretty clearly be semi-pro at most, since I imagine that your friends don't live off of €200 a year based on your post. Major League Soccer is an excellent example of this if you look at the salaries of the early history of the league: a lot of players were basically making US poverty level wages, but they would still be considered fully professional. And of course players should, in theory, still need to pass WP:GNG. Jay eyem (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose, but clarify Wanted to formally post this in case it wasn't clear from my other comments. I think this is an unnecessary and enormous change that isn't warranted. FPL is really just a gatekeeping guideline for presumed notability for players in these leagues. In theory, those players still need to meet WP:GNG to qualify for an article. Of course probably ~90% of them don't, but we keep them up anyway. I think the tone of the OP regarding Fijian players is unnecessary and frankly irrelevant: what is important is if the individual player can pass GNG, not the necessary level of "respect" being given to players.

All this being said, the issue remains that what constitutes a "FULLY professional league" as opposed to other "professional leagues" is not clearly stated on the page. I checked WP:NFOOTY and didn't see it there either. At the very least there should be some clear and objective criteria by which we judge leagues to carry that presumption of notability, and it should be made clear at the top of the page. That would certainly reduce the amount of discussion that occurs on this talk page, and should reduce the room for debate. Jay eyem (talk) 05:52, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose - nope, every few months/years somebody tries to change this and they cannot suggest a better alternative. As N57 points out you are angry that your article has been deleted. I respectfully suggest you WP:DROPTHESTICK and move on. GiantSnowman 09:51, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose "fully professional" is a stricter guideline than "professional" precisely because a professional soccer player may not meet WP:GNG, but if the player plays in a league which can afford to pay every player in the league a full time wage, that player is very likely to pass WP:GNG due to the nature of the coverage received. SportingFlyer T·C 02:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose The rule is fine the way it is but I can totally see why for new users they could be confused and not understand fully what fully-professional means. So perhaps a clear guideline is in order, but not a change to the guideline. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 12:56, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree that an explanation/definition should be added to the page. GiantSnowman 07:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

References

New section - 'what is a "fully professional" league?'

Suggestions for a definition to add to the page here please. GiantSnowman 07:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I'd suggest something like "Leagues in which almost all players are full-time professionals who do not need second jobs to earn a living."

This Sporting Intelligence study could be used a source and provides a technical definition, which has three elements: "a) every player is contracted to earn a minimum salary; b) that salary is at the very least a ‘living wage’ in the nation where the league is based, and preferably around or above the average or median national wage; and c) that the ‘professionalism’ of the league extends to sufficient ‘contact hours’, and facilities, equipment, expenses and other support as necessary to allow ‘full-time’ pursuit of the sport." I think points (a) and (b) feed into the "do not have or do not need second jobs to earn a living" wording of the above (and (a) is probably irrelevant for all but the more marginal leagues), while (c) is effectively saying they are full-time professionals who spend a significant amount of time training (as opposed to part-time players who might train two evenings a week).

This ("The definition of ‘fully professional’ is that the players are paid a salary that they can live on") could also be used as a simpler source.

I used the "almost all" caveat to avoid Wikilawyering around cases like Dave Rainford. Number 57 12:26, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

• My question is, what about youth players? Football is a game where you can have kids as young as 15 playing a senior competitive match between two teams who are "fully professional" but those 15-18 year olds are paid a salary below the minimum or in some cases are given special exemption from being paid (such as in USL Championship). So how would that be worked in to the definition for fully-professional? I do at some point, a way for Asian clubs to qualify as a fully-professional league would be to pass the Asian Football Confederation club licensing rules or something along those lines. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 16:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Good point; I suppose that is covered by the "almost all" caveat in N57's example above? GiantSnowman 16:21, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I would say so. And those ages you are still not considered a full adult in many countries, so the wage earning requirements aren't as relevant. Number 57 17:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

• Should stability of the league be a factor in fully professional recognition? Under the U.S. defunct leagues section there are six-ish leagues that lasted under two seasons (not counting the individual USISL seasons). Additionally, some of the only listed sources for these leagues are the year-by-year entries of David Litterer in his "The Year in American Soccer" pieces, which don't necessarily prove roster-ed players were making a "livable wage" from playing alone. Is there a specific "grandfather-ing" process leagues like this get since they are that old? What's to say these leagues aren't in a similar situation to the American Soccer League (2014–17) (claims to be professional, not listed here)? ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 17:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
  • To the first part of your point, I don't think so – if the league was fully-professional, it meets the wording of the guideline. However, if players were not making a living wage, they wouldn't count as fully-professional anyway. Number 57 17:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Sorry I kinda diverted into two directions. I'm implying that if those leagues only lasted a handful of years, and little evidence is cited to prove they were paying players a consistent, livable wage, I'm having trouble listing them alongside things like the NASL or MLS. Like I can't imagine players being paid enough to live if the league didn't last that long. Plus I don't see evidence cited on the project page itself. ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 17:55, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
      • If there is evidence that they weren't paying a living wage, then they shouldn't be on the list of fully-pro leagues. How long the league existed for is irrelevant in terms of whether it was fully-professional or not. Number 57 18:17, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
        • That makes sense, just looking to confirm. Sorry for the rambling I got hung up on the "evidence" part. Just feels like it would be hard for me to find evidence they weren't getting paid "livable wages" when it doesn't feel like there's evidence provided in the first place that players were paid that at all. Once this discussion gets more discourse in it I might make a new section on this matter. ColeTrain4EVER (talk) 18:27, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
          • I've found it tends to be easier to focus on finding references to leagues being part-time or semi-professional (or players needing a second income) if you have concerns a league is not fully-professional. Number 57 18:31, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I really like that first source and definition. I would say one of the important aspects to me of that definition is the "living wage in your country". Obviously that varies by country, so maybe emphasizing that in the definition would be helpful? I would just add in that country to the end of the proposed sentence. Jay eyem (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

• I was going to open an RfC to update the fully professional leagues page header. This is just a draft, I would propose adding it after the first paragraph. Here goes:

A "fully professional league" is a league where every mature-aged player in the league plays football as a full-time career. This is a stricter standard from appearing in a "professional league," as some players may be paid to play football, but require a second job to maintain a full-time wage.

The guideline is designed to identify leagues around the world where every player should meet [[WP:GNG]], as leagues where every team can afford to pay all of their players should receive significant coverage from several secondary sources. However, an article on a player who appears in a fully professional league can still be deleted if the article fails [[WP:GNG]], and a player who has never played in a fully professional league can still pass [[WP:GNG]]. Players are also subject to deletion if they played very marginally in a fully pro league.

The guideline is not construed strictly in terms of adding or removing leagues, but is rather subject to consensus based on the evidence. Evidence a part-time youth player or trialist played several times in an otherwise fully professional league will not disqualify a league from the guideline. Other evidence which may be weighed include league minimum salaries, league rules, whether players receive payment during the offseason, whether teams train every day, and whether players are regularly employed in other fields during the season.

SportingFlyer T·C 18:53, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Defunct leagues

What's the stance on defunct football leagues, such as the Football League Third Division North (England's joint-third division during the 1950s)? Is it to be assumed professional, since today the top four divisions are, or does it have nothing to do with it? I'm asking because I'm unsure whether or not Pat Carlin, who played during the 1953–54 Football League Third Division North, is assumed notable per WP:NFOOTY. Nehme₁₄₉₉ (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nehme1499: For all intents and purposes, I believe all divisions of the Football League are considered to be fully-professional throughout its history. Number 57 10:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

WE League (Japan) in 2021

The Japanese FA announced today that a new, "professional women's soccer league" will be launched in fall 2021 (see link). Noting here to keep track re: FPL status. Seany91 (talk) 07:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

English release notes that this will be Japan's first women's professional football league and will be the top-flight women's league, pushing the Nadeshiko League to second in the pyramid. It looks to follow the MLS/NWSL model with no relegation. Seany91 (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

As this source provides no details as to the state of professionalism, it is not sufficient to to include the league in this list. Just because a league calls itself professional does not necessarily mean that it is fully pro. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Spanish women's leagues

According to this announcement by the RFEF, Spain's top two tiers of women's football are going to be professional. Does this mean we can add Primera División (women) and Segunda División Pro (women) to the WP:FPL list? --SuperJew (talk) 19:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you highlight the precise sections that discuss full professionalism? Fenix down (talk) 20:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Fenix down: Here is a translation from Google (I don't speak Spanish either haha):

"The professionalized competition qualification assumes that in the bases of the competition there will be a series of requirements regarding the professionalism of the footballers and other participants in it, such as coaches. These rules will also set the minimum conditions of a labor nature that the participants must meet, such as the clubs' budget, possible minimum budget for the staff with the first team's employment contract, minimum number of professional licenses, minimum wages to compete, minimum dedication of professional players, etc ..."

"Three different Professionalized Competition Committees will be created, one for the First and Second Division of Women's Soccer, one for the First and Second Division of Futsal, another for the First Women's Futsal. Both the qualification and the creation of these bodies have been approved today by the Delegated Commission of the RFEF."

--SuperJew (talk) 20:26, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't really indicate full professionalism. Sounds at the moment like a bit of a wishlist, I'd want to see the precise rules discussed before confirming full professionalism. To be honest, in the current climate, the idea that anyone would launch to new fully professional divisions, for men or women, seems a little far fetched. Fenix down (talk) 06:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I do hope there will be. I understand if rn this isn't enough to go on. We'll keep an eye on it. --SuperJew (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Case for the Colombian Women's Football League

I was wondering if there was a case for the Colombian Women's Football League to be listed as fully professional? I found this news article that clearly states that there were plans to put limitations on the league, making it semi-professional, but after discussions, the league would maintain it's professional status. Something worth looking into further? Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2020 (UTC)