Soldato
I mean anything to break the morally devoid UEFA/FIFA monopolies can't be all bad can it?
The New European Super (borefest) League
- Thread starter Azza
- Start date
Soldato
My understanding too. I thought the idea was to not take part in the CL/EL/EC but teams stayed in their domestic leagues.
Associate
Premier League care because it will bring a lot more money to the other major European clubs meaning they could rival English spending, resulting in more competition, less top players in the league and the Premier League's prestige lowering relative to where it currently is.
Last edited:
And the top clubs now getting richer while the other 14 teams live of the scraps.
I guess it would mean United could win a league again. Positives and all that.
Atlético have it right.
Soldato
This is quite the narrow sighted post and i certainly don't know a great deal on the detail like some however from what i see...
The "big" 6... in the 90s and 00s it was the big 2... it became the big 4... now we have the big 6...
Man City
Man Utd
Liverpool
Arsenal
Tottenham
Chelsea - oh wait it's 7...
Newcastle - oh **** it's 8....
Aston Villa....
It's almost like there is a convergence of wealth and investment happening in the PL that's creating a trajectory of ALL clubs investing in talent (in management and on the pitch) that is creating competition ...
The super league is a nothing but a greed grab to control the money. This is a sport that has wealth through popularity. But it's a sport at it's core and should be governed as such. I'm not saying FIFA or UEFA are the embodiment of good but separation between rules and the players is very important... The super league wealth grab was SO apparent when they no longer wanted to make it a sport and were securing the position of the BIG clubs... the irony of your statement when you consider this.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 549
This is quite the narrow sighted post and i certainly don't know a great deal on the detail like some however from what i see...
</snip>
the irony of your statement when you consider this.
erm.. I think we're agreeing
I disagree with the very idea of a league where it's not about performance to get to the bigger european competitions, which is what I believe the original proposal was.
However if the "big" 6 * are all about the money, then let them leave and do what they want.. but I think if they are allowed to stay in the prem, then it will skew the league even more than it already is.. if the top 6 get access to even more money to prop them up..
* or 8, if you're counting the two newer teams that now has a lot of money to spend and are spending it.. (Newcastle and Villa)
yup they certainly need more money. PSG scraped through.
swissramble.substack.com
Champions League Revenue 2023/24 (after group stage)
Baby, The Stars Shine Bright
swissramble.substack.com
Soldato
Bournemouth would still be about mate.
Soldato
I don't like Uefa or FIFA in the slightest but messing around with such historical formats seems ludicrous. I barely have much interest in football these days thanks to poor refs/var and dodgy money/owners. I think this new league would finish me off for good.
Soldato
erm.. I think we're agreeing
I disagree with the very idea of a league where it's not about performance to get to the bigger european competitions, which is what I believe the original proposal was.
However if the "big" 6 * are all about the money, then let them leave and do what they want.. but I think if they are allowed to stay in the prem, then it will skew the league even more than it already is.. if the top 6 get access to even more money to prop them up..
* or 8, if you're counting the two newer teams that now has a lot of money to spend and are spending it.. (Newcastle and Villa)
Not sure if we're misreading each other then because I think you've missed my point... there was a big X, you're saying a big 6 now (which is wrong as i've listed above) ... The pattern is that the PL and UEFA competitions is bringing investment which is creating a more competitive league. We're seeing it play out over the last 15 years...
Newcastle and Villa are just easy signs of that progress... they're hardly splashing the wealth and yet they've begun to bridge the competitive gap very quickly.... squad depth will come with time as it did with city (who yes got ahead of the curve)... we're still seeing progress.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 549
Villa
19/20 €160m
20/21 €102m
21/22 €130m
22/23 €100m
23/24 €93m
Newcastle
21/22 €130m
22/23 €185m
23/24 €153m
not sure that's hardly splashing the cash myself.. (or maybe €100m a season is more the norm? )
I don't see it as becoming a more competitive/better league, it's just a couple of other teams have jumped on the gravy train
19/20 €160m
20/21 €102m
21/22 €130m
22/23 €100m
23/24 €93m
Newcastle
21/22 €130m
22/23 €185m
23/24 €153m
not sure that's hardly splashing the cash myself.. (or maybe €100m a season is more the norm? )
I don't see it as becoming a more competitive/better league, it's just a couple of other teams have jumped on the gravy train
Associate
Indeed. The more competitive top 10 seen this past few years has come largely from better management then it has overall club spend. Newcastle, Villa and Brighton being the best examples of that. It's not all down to that of course, but it certainly helps as much as anything.
Last edited:
Caporegime
This is quite the narrow sighted post and i certainly don't know a great deal on the detail like some however from what i see...
The "big" 6... in the 90s and 00s it was the big 2... it became the big 4... now we have the big 6...
Man City
Man Utd
Liverpool
Arsenal
Tottenham
Chelsea - oh wait it's 7...
Newcastle - oh **** it's 8....
Aston Villa....
It's almost like there is a convergence of wealth and investment happening in the PL that's creating a trajectory of ALL clubs investing in talent (in management and on the pitch) that is creating competition ...
The super league is a nothing but a greed grab to control the money. This is a sport that has wealth through popularity. But it's a sport at it's core and should be governed as such. I'm not saying FIFA or UEFA are the embodiment of good but separation between rules and the players is very important... The super league wealth grab was SO apparent when they no longer wanted to make it a sport and were securing the position of the BIG clubs... the irony of your statement when you consider this.
Yeah this whole big 6 nonsense is a waste of time. City have circumvented FFP rules to become the highest revenue club in the world whilst have 1/10th of the fans as United and Liverpool and a history of 10 years.
United are now at FFP limits due to how poor the club has been ran.
Newcastle's "revenue" will be the same as the old firm clubs within the next 5 years. Aston Villa the same more than likely. Man City has laid the blue print on how to cheat and everyone is just going to follow that (Those clubs who have unlimited money).
The sport unfortunately is turning into a hedge fund investment grab. Chelsea is a pure form of this. The owners have no intentions of winning anything. They just want to grow the brand and sell it for 10+ billion in the future.
Caporegime
Newcastle are the 5th highest net spenders over the last 5 years and Villa 7th. They have substantial backers too. Brighton is the anomaly but you can't keep buying cheap and selling high. It will get you eventually. Brighton are this decades Southampton but will eventually end up like them as well as sometimes you need to keep players and build on that as buys will dry up as scouts etc move on and get poached by bigger clubs.
Associate
And Villa spent less last year then they have in the previous 5 and yet had our best finish in decades. My point was that spending isn't indicative of success for a lot of clubs.
Last edited:
A Super League isn't going to happen, certainly not in the next 10-15 years but the ruling today is good for football. Regardless of what people think of the Super League, UEFA and FIFA aren't any better and their position of being both a governing body and a competition organiser has clear conflicts of interests, as shown by their ability (prior to today's ruling) to block rival competitions.
Caporegime
Lol, you can't just base it on one year's spending. Your starting 11 wasn't all bought in 12 months. It's cumulative as you add more and more expensive players to the squad. You also went from Slippy G to Emery...
It's not the whole picture, but there are very few clubs that haven't spent a lot that have gone on to win the biggest prizes in the game. You'll get the odd season or manager who does something unreal with a cheaper set of players, but that's the exception.
Last edited:
Associate
I mean yeah, we're in agreement then...? Emery is essentially playing with the same set of players that Gerrard was, the same squad that we where looking to drop with half way through last season...
Again, my point is that having talented playing staff and managers is considerably more important then ploughing money into transfer windows.