The New European Super (borefest) League

muon said:
This is all about how tv rights money gets split.

Big clubs don't like sharing the money (as they believe it's them that create the value), and also not getting any when they fail to qualify for the CL.

To understand this all you have to do is go through the history of how CL TV rights money has been allocated over the last 20 years or so.

Remember that every team is immediately awarded the same amount when they qualify for the CL (before performance payments kick in).

Then there is the market pool which was introduced to give a lot of the tv rights money to the clubs from those countries. This used to make big clubs from the big countries unhappy because they felt the, as an example, the turkish tv rights money was earnt by them and not turkish teams.

They then moved a lot of the market pool money to a payment that is allocated by uefa coefficient and paid the top 32 clubs. 32nd would get 1 share and 1st would get 32 shares.

Seems the big clubs which have pushed for these changes are still unhappy at sharing the money.

https://www.football-coefficient.eu/money/

The top premier league clubs are also obviously secretly unhappy about how evenly the PL TV money is split, although they won't say it out loud.
Click to expand...

Thank you for doing the research, as you discovered the money share is already extremely biased towards the bigger clubs and leagues.

The question is money wise at what point do they become happy? 90% share? 95%? 99%? 100%?

You are right about the EPL as well and slowly overtime that split is been changed e.g. the new oversea rights deal has a larger amount going to the teams who finish higher up.

These clubs should realise a more even money spread creates more competition which creates more excitement which creates more revenue, however I think short termism is king here, and they just want that bigger %, even if it means making the league like the SPL with absolutely huge competitiveness gaps between the giants and the rest.

This season we have West Ham and Leicester competing for CL is that a bad thing?
Leicester won title in 2016, a bad thing? Apparently this was the catalyst for talks.
Same with Blackburn earlier on in the EPL.
Makes you wonder what would happen if someone like Arsenal got relegated.
 
The complaint about sharing money is hypocritical bs. Why don't Leicester or Everton want to share the money they gain from being in a League with Liverpool & Utd with the EFL?
Azza said:
The control they want is control over other teams finances and making sure they can't upset things by spending money.
Click to expand...
Again, this is nothing new. This is why FFP was introduced, something that I've always spoke out against.

FFP was meant to be a financial control that prevented sides racking up huge debts but the biggest sides didn't want that, they wanted to put barries in place that stopped another Jack Walker or Abramovic.
 
BaZ87 said:
It's not certain but it's a huge advantage to sides that go down and giving those sides that advantage is the sole purpose of parachute payments. As for who these clubs are, clubs like Norwich, West Brom, Fulham, Newcastle - they've all been relegated and promoted back to the PL within a 1-3 years.
Click to expand...

Parachute payments exist so promoted sides can invest without fear of going bankrupt on relegation. In other words to give them a chance to compete. It probably could be handled better, but I find it amusing you talk about unfair advantages when thats exactly what you supporting.
 
chrcoluk said:
Thank you for doing the research, as you discovered the money share is already extremely biased towards the bigger clubs and leagues.

The question is money wise at what point do they become happy? 90% share? 95%? 99%? 100%?

You are right about the EPL as well and slowly overtime that split is been changed e.g. the new oversea rights deal has a larger amount going to the teams who finish higher up.

These clubs should realise a more even money spread creates more competition which creates more excitement which creates more revenue, however I think short termism is king here, and they just want that bigger %, even if it means making the league like the SPL with absolutely huge competitiveness gaps between the giants and the rest.

This season we have West Ham and Leicester competing for CL is that a bad thing?
Leicester won title in 2016, a bad thing? Apparently this was the catalyst for talks.
Same with Blackburn earlier on in the EPL.
Makes you wonder what would happen if someone like Arsenal got relegated.
Click to expand...
They want a consistent revenue stream that will allow them to earn more and spend more than the rest of the league.
 
chrcoluk said:
Parachute payments exist so promoted sides can invest without fear of going bankrupt on relegation. In other words to give them a chance to compete. It probably could be handled better, but I find it amusing you talk about unfair advantages when thats exactly what you supporting.
Click to expand...
This is complete and utter rubbish. Football clubs can and do insert clauses in players contracts so that if a club gets relegated a players pay is cut. Just last season we saw Utd out of the CL and their wagebill dropped because they have CL qualification clauses in players contracts. Parachute payments are there so that clubs that get relegated can hold bigger and better squads than sides in the Championship, allowing them a better chance of being promoted.

And you have a real issue reading. Where have I said I support this League?
mysticsniper said:
The ESL wouldn't last 3 seasons, then they'll be begging to come back, when they realise they can't sign any new players outside of their own Mickley mouse League. :o
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't they be able to? :confused:
 
BaZ87 said:
This is complete and utter rubbish. Football clubs can and do insert clauses in players contracts so that if a club gets relegated a players pay is cut. Just last season we saw Utd out of the CL and their wagebill dropped because they have CL qualification clauses in players contracts. Parachute payments are there so that clubs that get relegated can hold bigger and better squads than sides in the Championship, allowing them a better chance of being promoted.

And you have a real issue reading. Where have I said I support this League?

Why wouldn't they be able to? :confused:
Click to expand...

IMO I can see complete transfer ban after the fallout and condemnation from the leagues.
 
BaZ87 said:
This is complete and utter rubbish. Football clubs can and do insert clauses in players contracts so that if a club gets relegated a players pay is cut. Just last season we saw Utd out of the CL and their wagebill dropped because they have CL qualification clauses in players contracts. Parachute payments are there so that clubs that get relegated can hold bigger and better squads than sides in the Championship, allowing them a better chance of being promoted.

And you have a real issue reading. Where have I said I support this League?

Why wouldn't they be able to? :confused:
Click to expand...
UEFA registration would be denied.
 
"Fair competition" says Gary Neville How much have Salford city fc spent compared to their competitors again?

Sorry but the idea of docking points and putting clubs at the bottom of the league for this is nonsense.
 
BaZ87 said:
I don't believe this League will happen but there's literally no chance that a player could be prevented from joining one of these clubs.

They wouldn't be part of UEFA :p
Click to expand...

There will definitely be banned if they are not recognised by any footballing country.

If there was no transfer ban, each club in the ESL, would have their pants pulled down on each transfer, far worse than what Leicester are doing now :p
 
omnomnom said:
"Fair competition" says Gary Neville How much have Salford city fc spent compared to their competitors again?
Click to expand...
Gary's idea of fair competition is that all the other clubs have 'fair' opportunity to get themselves some rich benefactors and ***** a load of money too
 
mysticsniper said:
There will definitely be banned if they are not recognised by any footballing country.

If there was no transfer ban, each club in the ESL, would have their pants pulled down on each transfer, far worse than what Leicester are doing now :p
Click to expand...
Nobody could stop a player joining one of these clubs. The threat is they'd be banned from playing in International tournaments - even this is questionable given that FIFA's view on this possible League is unclear. Officially they've spoke out against it but there's been a lot of reports that they're supportive of it.

All the talk of clubs being kicked out of Leagues or players being banned from playing International football is nonsense though. Whether we like it or not, money is the sole motivation for all these clubs, Leagues and associations. An International tournament without 90% of the best players in the world would be a farce and not generate UEFA or FIFA the $bn's they currently generate, just like the PL and another other major League. Everybody knows this, which is why we keep coming to this point - the biggest sides know the power they have and each time a TV deal is being renegotiated or the structure of the CL is being changed, the big clubs put the squeeze on. As they take more and more the threat has to get bigger and bigger though.
 
Banning top players from playing in international football would hurt FIFA/UEFA and their respecive tournaments more than it would any player. It'd be like banning Phil The Power Taylor from the BDO, the PDC is where all of the money is at so what does he care.
 
mmj_uk said:
Banning top players from playing in international football would hurt FIFA/UEFA and their respecive tournaments more than it would any player or the Super League, it'd be like banning Phil The Power Taylor from the BDO, the PDC is where all of the money is at so what does he care.
Click to expand...
And the BDO/PDC example is exactly why Leagues wouldn't kick sides out nor FIFA/UEFA ban players from International tournaments. The PL without the biggest clubs would quickly become the football equivalent of the BDO with every half decent club & player quickly jumping ship.
 
BaZ87 said:
And the BDO/PDC example is exactly why Leagues wouldn't kick sides out nor FIFA/UEFA ban players from International tournaments. The PL without the biggest clubs would quickly become the football equivalent of the BDO with every half decent club & player quickly jumping ship.
Click to expand...
How would they feel if they’d never get to play for their country or go to a Euros or the World Cup?
 
MissChief said:
How would they feel if they’d never get to play for their country or go to a Euros or the World Cup?
Click to expand...
They wouldn't like it but me and you have more chance of playing for England than FIFA banning the best players in the world from entering their showpiece, $6-10bn tournament.
Bigpig said:
So what time is the is the big announcement? Getting a little boring now but this made me chuckle
Click to expand...
Arsenal being battered 4-0 every week? AFTV might end up sponsoring the League.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom