After reading "The Crazy World of the Premier League" by Kieran Buxton i felt the need to add to his very interesting article. As a football fan of both the Barclays Premier League in England (PL) and the Clydesdale Bank Premier League in Scotland (SPL) i can see how much of a difference the amount of money spent between the majority of the teams in the PL and of Celtic and Rangers in the SPL is damaging the game for the "lesser" teams such as Swansea, Queens Park Rangers, Aberdeen and Motherwell in a way that it may eventually lead to all of these teams perhaps going into administration due to a lack of investors or not getting as many lucrative TV deals as the "big" teams do.

I understand that the big teams have bigger fanbases as we can see from Manchester United's pre-season tour of america and Arsenal's pre-season tour of Malaysia and China where people flock from all ends of the country just to see their "star's" playing 90 minutes of football. I've also noticed that Manchester City's fanbase has increased an unbelievably large amount since they were bought over and the success that they had of the 2010-2011 season may also have caused this but if it weren't for the investments into the club in the first place then they perhaps would not have won the F.A. Cup or finished third and thus their fanbase throughout the world would not have grown to the vast size it's currently at.

So what i'm trying to say is that perhaps if a small club like Aberdeen from the SPL had such a large investment like Manchester City did then if they won the league their fanbase would grow and grow, more investors are needed into smaller clubs to keep a healthy competition going in each league. If Rangers and Celtic are the only two clubs in Scotland who continue to get money thrown into them then how can other clubs compete? The SPL is thought of throughout europe as a league where ten teams help two other teams win the league and this can only bring scottish football down because people will eventually lose interest in what happens in the SPL they'll simply ask "Rangers or Celtic then?", people won't even be able to tell you what other teams are in the SPL.

In the PL i feel it is fairer for each team that's in the top teir of English football because the money poured into is so vast that each team get's a good share of money. Although the "big" teams such as Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City do still bring so much money into the club the amount of money that they spend to bring in players, that don't always perform at their top level, is quite simply frustrating. This summer transfer window "smaller" teams like Sunderland and Wolves have spent money, not as much as other teams, on more players that often provide better week in-week out performances than those of the "big four" and you feel that the players of Wolves or Sunderland are more grateful for what they do as a living.

One of the things that i compared was the "Tevez saga" where it is said that he no longer wants to play at Manchester City even though he's on hundreds of thousands of pounds a week and has a £50million price tag all he's doing is causing hassle but then you get a player like Roger Johnson who moved to wolves for around £7million because he simply wanted to stay in the premier league and will try his hardest in every match and every training session to earn the money he get's paid whereas Mr. Tevez just expects it to be put on a plate for him, now simply going by the attitude shown by each player i know what one i'd rather have in my team.

Chelsea recently spent over £13million on bringing a manager to the club who, if he doesn't win the league, may get fired after only one year. Roman Abramovich (the Chelsea owner) obviously has money to throw away but has made so many changes to the club that i wonder if it's going to end in a disaster and that whilst Chelsea didn't even have a manager at the club he still made a £40million bid for the young Brazilian superstar, Neymar and i begin to think that perhaps he should have saved that £13million he spent on a new manager, become the manager himself and spent that £13million on improving the Chelsea youth teams? Can you see a club like Fulham spending £13 million on a manager? No, me neither. I feel that the FA should put laws in place so that teams cannot throw that amount of money away whenever they choose.

I myself am a young footballer who would love to play the sport to make a living and i know the chances are very slim but seeing all the money that clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City spend on bringing in older players and not letting the young players that may have been at the club since they were little and have come all the way up the youth ranks get a chance to play is frankly dis-heartening.