Poll: Premier League Shake-Up?

PL/EFL changes of structure

  • 18 Team PL, all the power to the top 6 and save the EFL

    Votes: 1 1.4%

  • 18 Team PL, little or no more power to the top 6 and save the EFL

    Votes: 56 78.9%

  • 20 Team PL and the EFL dies.

    Votes: 14 19.7%
  • Total voters
    71

BaZ87

BaZ87

BaZ87

Don
Joined
9 Jun 2004
Posts
47,203
A massive story just coming out in the Telegraph. Liverpool and Utd, supported by the rest of the big 6 and the entire EFL are proposing massive changes in the structure of the PL. They want to cut the League down to 18 sides, scrap the League Cup and Community Shield, allow the top 6 (+ Everton, Southampton & West Ham) to have complete control of decision making in the PL and in return they will massively increase the payments made to the EFL.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...an-utd-liverpool-driving-project-big-picture/

How they're going to convince at least 5 more PL clubs to back this plan, I've no idea but they've got the full backing of the EFL and maybe that's the pressure they need to sway a few of the other PL sides.
 
Basically the big boys taking advantage of the EFLs plight for their own gain.

Can see they're skint so will chuck out a few more crumbs from the table while feathering their own nest long term.
 
They're proposing to give more PL tv money to the EFL guys! I've not given it a massive amount of thought as yet but on the face of it, this proposal works for everybody except the other 11-14 PL sides. The top 6 get the calendar cut down to create more space for them to play in an expanded CL and or a future FIFA club tournament and the EFL get much much more money than before. It's just the smaller PL sides that are having to give up more of their PL money without the perks a bigger CL/FIFA tournament.
 
BaZ87 said:
They're proposing to give more PL tv money to the EFL guys! I've not given it a massive amount of thought as yet but on the face of it, this proposal works for everybody except the other 11-14 PL sides. The top 6 get the calendar cut down to create more space for them to play in an expanded CL and or a future FIFA club tournament and the EFL get much much more money than before. It's just the smaller PL sides that are having to give up more of their PL money without the perks a bigger CL/FIFA tournament.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The big 6/9 stay the big 6/9 and the other teams just fight it out and never get the chance of competing for the title or Europe again.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
Exactly. The big 6/9 stay the big 6/9 and the other teams just fight it out and never get the chance of competing for the title or Europe again.
Click to expand...
Is that any different to now though? The only realistic way a side outside the current top 4/6 can break into the CL spots is with massive outside investment - Everton or Leciester receiving £10m less in TV money isn't really going to have a meaningful impact on their prospects of challenging the top 4/6.

From a sporting integrity point of view, I don't see much of an issue here. Nothing being proposed is going to make a meaningful difference to how successful sides would be or can be - the same sides will be competing for titles/europe, the same sides will be scrapping around midtable and the same sides will be in relegation battles. The issue is financial. 2 of the other 14 sides are going to have to be kicked out of the PL, costing them huge amounts of money and the other 12 face losing £10m or so a year to help fund the EFL. Persuading enough of these clubs to vote for that will be difficult.
 
BaZ87 said:
Is that any different to now though? The only realistic way a side outside the current top 4/6 can break into the CL spots is with massive outside investment - Everton or Leciester receiving £10m less in TV money isn't really going to have a meaningful impact on their prospects of challenging the top 4/6.
Click to expand...
But this appears to be sowing the seeds from stopping that happening as well. Why should 6/9 teams have control of who owns another club? If Tim Cook decides he wants to buy Bristol City and plough billions in to them, what right do we have to veto that? Absolutely none.

The more I think about this the more disgusting I think it is. Ourselves, along with the other clubs that have already agreed with this, are using Coronavirus to pray on the vulnerability of smaller clubs outside of the Premier League.
 
Pigeon_Killer said:
But this appears to be sowing the seeds from stopping that happening as well. Why should 6/9 teams have control of who owns another club? If Tim Cook decides he wants to buy Bristol City and plough billions in to them, what right do we have to veto that? Absolutely none.

The more I think about this the more disgusting I think it is.
Click to expand...
Something like that would be unenforceable and is a bit of a nonsense line thrown into the article. The PL right now can block a takeover if it wishes but they cannot do it without good reason and are subject to legal challenges, including to the CAS. That would be exactly the same under any new proposal. These clubs can set the rules but they've got to be reasonable because they'll just be challenged and beaten in the courts.

Nothing that's currently being proposed in the article is necessarily bad imo. The biggest clubs will find a way to fit in the expanded CL if they want to, they'll just drop out of the FA Cup or play weakened sides in it or just carry even bigger, stronger squads. The League Cup is going one way or another and I'm not sure anybody cares about the community shield. The question is, is providing the financial support for the EFL more important than a 20 team PL and is the risk of the big 6 making more changes in the future too great?
 
No words, more ******** from the top 6 to maintain their position and not allow any challenges for anyone else wanting to win the league or even challenge for the champions league
 
A blatant attempt at a power grab by the top 6 on the back of Covid. It would be the end of a competitive league forever, no surprise this is being instigated by American controlled clubs.

A move motivated by self interest and nothing else, dressed up as saving football league clubs.
 
woppy101 said:
It would be the end of a competitive league forever.
Click to expand...
Can you explain this point in more detail please. How would staying as we are make the League any more competitive?

The top sides want control, no doubt about that but arguments about competitiveness of the League? The top sides already generate 100s of milions more than the other sides, this will make no difference to the competitiveness of the League. Any extra CL money for the big clubs is coming regardless of these plans.
 
BaZ87 said:
Can you explain this point in more detail please. How would staying as we are make the League any more competitive?

The top sides want control, no doubt about that but arguments about competitiveness of the League? The top sides already generate 100s of milions more than the other sides, this will make no difference to the competitiveness of the League. Any extra CL money for the big clubs is coming regardless of these plans.
Click to expand...
The top sides having a veto on any takeover on another club takes away any competition, say jeff bezos wants to plough a billion pounds into Leeds the owners of Liverpool and Manchester United ain’t going to allow that to go through
 
woppy101 said:
The top sides having a veto on any takeover on another club takes away any competition, say jeff bezos wants to plough a billion pounds into Leeds the owners of Liverpool and Manchester United ain’t going to allow that to go through
Click to expand...
That's complete nonsense, they couldn't do that. The rules would be fundamentally no different to now - the PL cannot just block a takeover for a laugh, they can only do so if there's any sort of criminal activity involved and or the buyer cannot provide proof of funds. That would be exactly the same now, the only difference would be rather than the PL board making that decision, the decision would lie with 6 of the 9 clubs. They cannot abuse this though as they would be challenged and beaten in courts. This is the whole point for having a CAS, so that sporting bodies/leagues cannot just be dictators and make up any old rules.
 
BaZ87 said:
That's complete nonsense, they couldn't do that. The rules would be fundamentally no different to now - the PL cannot just block a takeover for a laugh, they can only do so if there's any sort of criminal activity involved and or the buyer cannot provide proof of funds. That would be exactly the same now, the only difference would be rather than the PL board making that decision, the decision would lie with 6 of the 9 clubs. They cannot abuse this though as they would be challenged and beaten in courts. This is the whole point for having a CAS, so that sporting bodies/leagues cannot just be dictators and make up any old rules.
Click to expand...
Right so you only want to believe one part of the article that suits and not the other bits written?
 
woppy101 said:
Right so you only want to believe one part of the article that suits and not the other bits written?
Click to expand...
No, I'm just not stupid. Under these proposals would these clubs be able to block a takeover? Yes but so can the PL right now. The reality is that unless there are genuine, valid reasons for blocking it then they won't because they can and will be challenged and beaten in courts. They're not going to block a takeover that they know will be challenged through CAS and be beaten.
 
Unless they had thought about it, why even have it in their proposal? There are a lot of good ideas but taking control away from the Premier League shouldn't happen.
 
Why do the 'big 6' + Everton Southampton and West Ham think they're so special. Can't see that any other premier league team would agree to any of this. Why would they?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom