May I ask why? Not questioning the joke that is the French league as of now - but could Stephen Curry bring the same game once in a month when he'd play with the Harlem Globetrotters every other week?
Good question - I don't know. I'm not an elite athlete, but I think there is a disadvantage to playing inferior opponents who are afraid of you every week, and then
occasionally playing a one-off match (or two-legged tie) in a knockout competition against equal or even superior opponents, where the smallest loss of focus could be fatal.
The theory being that playing in a "Mickety Mouse league" hurts a team's motivation and focus, because they are used to winning without putting in a full effort and their mistakes are not always punished. People have made the same arguments with respect to Celtic and Bayern Munich. La Liga is similar, but there are at least two (now three) serious competitors.
On the flip side, playing in a very competitive league is exhausting, which can also lead to a loss of focus or squad depletion due to injury.
Anyway, part of why Paris looked so good was certainly Chelsea displaying any lack of tactical impact. It's crazy when you think about such a squad with such rich talent and the inability to play a coherent system to overcome or threaten the opponent. That's one big "flaw" I see with basically every English team now though. It's almost "kick n rush" or "give the ball to the most talented player and let's see what he can do".
There is definitely still a certain cultural mistrust of "systems" in England, despite the growing professionalism and international character of English football. Systems are still seen by some as being effete, continental, tricksy or - the horror! - French, Italian or Soviet. Courage, shouting, physicality and effort are often prized over "systems" by fans, pundits and some managers (though mostly older managers). One of English football's greatest managers (possibly THE greatest), Jimmy Hogan, spent most of his career in Europe because his ideas were disparaged.
One of my favorite quotes from Johnathan Wilson's
Inverting the Pyramid comes from the very birth of association football, when it split from rugby in the 1860s. In one of the first meetings of what would eventually become the Football Association, the rules of the game were unified and it was proposed that
hacking (tripping an opponent by kicking their shins) be banned.
Francis Maule Campbell, favoring rugby-style rules, objected to the proposal - claiming that banning hacking would
do away with all the courage and pluck from the game, and I will be bound over to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice.
I think that sums up the English attitude nicely. Much has changed since the 1860s, but the English veneration of "courage and pluck" has not.
