Quantcast
Project Big Picture - Page 2 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
luxury_scruff

Project Big Picture

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

It’ll just get fucked off anyway won’t it?

Will it? 

 

The championship clubs are desperate. 

 

At least 3 of the current PL will be championship clubs again soon. 

 

Probably half a dozen of the PL teams feel being in the championship is a real threat every season. 

 

For at least 1 TV cycle, this will be good for the EFL and by association those clubs. 

 

The PL needs 14 votes to get this through. It would seem they'll have 9 onside with this 6+3 voting system. I assume longevity will have some teams pushing to be part of that 9. So somehow the big clubs need to pick off the votes of 5 of the remaining 11 sides - 6 of whom will feel relegation could be a reality. Any who vote against it without a shadow of a doubt will be sold in the media as the teams who tried to kill off the EFL because of their own self interest. 

 

There's a reason this has come out now when the idea has been kicking around for 3 years. There's without doubt a feeling with the top clubs that they can get this over the line because of the desperation of the EFL. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The document says: “A reset of the economics and governance of the English football pyramid is long overdue”.

The proposals also rewrite the Premier League’s 20-club democracy in favour of placing huge power in the hands of the nine clubs with the longest continual stay in the division. As things stand that is the big six, as well as Everton, Southampton and West Ham. Those nine clubs afforded “long-term shareholder status” would have unprecedented power, with the votes of just six of them required to make sweeping changes. These clubs would even be able to veto a new owner taking over a rival club.

Let's be honest, it's a power grab, plain and simple, and if we weren't one of those nine clubs we'd be fuming about it. As Barry says it's just turning the PL into even more of an oligarchy than it already is, and it stinks.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DaveT said:

Do you think 15 is too many or too few? Chelsea have 29 players out on loan this season. https://www.squawka.com/en/chelsea-loanees-2020-21-season-clubs/

 

I'd have a maximum of four players allowed out on loan per season, to any destination. The proposed 15 player limit is only for domestic loans. I'd expect Chelsea to continue their antics under the proposed system, plenty of their players go on loan abroad anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, MegadriveMan said:

Making the League cup only for teams not in European competitions is a good idea. It would give the likes of Southampton and Wolves a good chance of winning a trophy. 

It really wouldnt. They'd still play a second team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll be surprised if the likes of Chelsea and City would allow a full access to their books. 
 

the blocking of takeovers is also just a way to create a closed shop.

 

there are some good things in there like help for the EFL but it’s all just a power grab for future changes they they will be able to force through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems a bit shit to be honest. 

 

I can understand only giving the main clubs a say seeing as it will affect us the most, but it still doesn't sit right, but how else do you handle it? Give all the current Premier league teams a say, even though three of those will be gone in a year and three others will replace them?

 

Or go halfway into the championship seeing as it could affect them one day and ask them to meddle in the affairs of another league? 

 

Funny that Man City keep were giving it the big one about "breaking up the cartel", but they don't seem as keen now they are in with the big boys. Load of shite, they just want to be the Dons themselves, bunch of hypocritical cunts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its come from the brain of Rick Parry. The same Rick Parry who thought Hicks and Gillett were the right suitable owners for Liverpool FC. 

 

I wouldnt trust anything this snake says.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

It's the footballing equivalent of what happened in Russia after the break up of the Soviet Union though isn't it? All the staff were given shares in the company when they stopped being state owned, but then cunts like abramovic chose not to pay them, instead offering to buy their shares off them so they had money to put food on the table. I'm sure those guys would have been really glad of the money at the time, but it was just a power play and get rich quick scheme by abramovic (and others like him).

 

Here the rich clubs who've been frustrated from getting even richer year by year by having to support the pyramid (including the bottom half and yo-yo clubs), will then be able to do what the fuck they like going forward as long as it's in the interests of the majority of rich clubs. What was it Ayre said, nobody is paying to watch Stoke city?

 

So now it feels all nice and cuddly. The football league get to survive, the fa gets a hand out to keep quiet and the premier league big clubs get to play 18 games a season and no league cup. But that's not to play less games is it? It's not to improve the quality for the fans. To protect the interests of over worked players? It's already in that proposal, it's to play more high value games even if they're meaningless friendlies. 

 

It's an inevitable step imo and would have come about at some point down the line, but it's another example of the opportunism of the top of the game. It's probably very good for the owners of LFC, MUFC and others, I don't see how football as a game in this country at least benefits from it aside from perhaps getting us through this immediate danger and live another day. 

So what would happen if this proposal wasn't put forward? And what's the alternative?

 

I'm not disagreeing with your points, Barry. I'm just trying to understand what should or could be proposed instead.

 

Because as far as I can tell, this is a progressive move to get things back into some sort of order.

 

For far too long, the big decisions were being made by corrupt opportunists. This (though it could be argued is much of the same) at the very least brings these decisions to some of those directly affected by the decisions. Not to mention those who have incredibly large fan bases, who will as a result, also have an influence.

 

And as I read it, its not the top 6, it's the top 9 of which 6 need to pass the vote. 6 from 9 who are most impacted from the PL and where the money goes. The other 11 often chop and change, aside from the clubs boosted by sovereign funds.

 

And as long as they lose out, I'm all for this.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aventus said:

Seems a bit shit to be honest. 

 

I can understand only giving the main clubs a say seeing as it will affect us the most, but it still doesn't sit right, but how else do you handle it? Give all the current Premier league teams a say, even though three of those will be gone in a year and three others will replace them?

 

Or go halfway into the championship seeing as it could affect them one day and ask them to meddle in the affairs of another league? 

 

Funny that Man City keep were giving it the big one about "breaking up the cartel", but they don't seem as keen now they are in with the big boys. Load of shite, they just want to be the Dons themselves, bunch of hypocritical cunts. 

You could do weighted voting with the other clubs getting one vote between them and make it seven votes out of ten to make changes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, m0e said:

So what would happen if this proposal wasn't put forward? And what's the alternative?

 

I'm not disagreeing with your points, Barry. I'm just trying to understand what should or could be proposed instead.

 

Because as far as I can tell, this is a progressive move to get things back into some sort of order.

 

For far too long, the big decisions were being made by corrupt opportunists. This (though it could be argued is much of the same) at the very least brings these decisions to some of those directly affected by the decisions. Not to mention those who have incredibly large fan bases, who will as a result, also have an influence.

 

And as I read it, its not the top 6, it's the top 9 of which 6 need to pass the vote. 6 from 9 who are most impacted from the PL and where the money goes. The other 11 often chop and change, aside from the clubs boosted by sovereign funds.

 

And as long as they lose out, I'm all for this.

Well I have lots of thoughts on alternatives, one of which includes the government helping out - football even without the PL must be one of the best tax paying industries per employed person in the UK. The government have been telling us how important the clubs are.to the communities. This same government wanted.to tell us how they want to help forgotten communities at the last election. 

 

So there's a start. There's other things i could rattle on about, but the difficulty is unless you're in the middle of all the legal documents between the footballing organisations and between the footballing organisations and TV companies, it's pretty impossible to know if those thoughts are valid. What I'm certain of is the majority of football chairman will be in a state of panic right now and that's normally never the best time to make decisions. What I do know is people who think football is a family and the PL will do anything for the good of the game are nothing more than romantics. It's why the premier League clubs should be at the back of the queue for solving this problem. 

 

Personally I think going forward we maybe need to accept having 90-odd professional clubs is actually pretty unrealistic. Maybe there needs to be an acceptance many of the players in the bottom 2 tiers need to be part time. Would it alter the experience for fans of Fleetwood, Tranmere or many sides in those levels if say they had 8 or 10 full time players and 15 part timers and kids? 

 

In just the same way the PL could fund this scheme with loans against future earnings, I'm pretty sure so could the EFL while they got their house in order and get through this next 12 months. But we know Parry's view towards loaning money, he sold the family silver to save David Moores needing to take out a stadium loan. That worked out well. 

 

We continually hear about the value of cup games to EFL sides, we're about to dump them. Then after the PL get their new voting structure, who's to say the next vote isn't to cut off funding to the EFL? And to cut balloon payment to relegated teams? Or perhaps cut the group of 9 to a group of 6, after all they only need 6 votes.to do that. I'm 100% sure if this gets accepted by the EFL clubs they'll be surrendering their future in return for an easy way to survive today. It'll be great economics for LFC, I've no doubt about that. I'm not convinced it will be good for either the EFL or fans or players of the PL clubs. Let's get rid of the league cup and those pesky affordable games for the locals and replace them with games in the USA charging hundreds of dollars per ticket and tons of new fans buying shite shirts from Nike at £100 each. 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

What happens when Southampton and/or West Ham are inevitably relegated?

 

Will they be calling the shots from mid table in the Championship?

My guess (although that could be wrong), they'll be gone and replaced by whoever else is next in line. what happens when they get promoted again is anyone's guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

My guess (although that could be wrong), they'll be gone and replaced by whoever else is next in line. what happens when they get promoted again is anyone's guess. 

I think it's a continuous test. If you're relegated your share goes to the club with the next highest continuous presence. If you come back, you start again. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Well I have lots of thoughts on alternatives, one of which includes the government helping out - football even without the PL must be one of the best tax paying industries per employed person in the UK. The government have been telling us how important the clubs are.to the communities. This same government wanted.to tell us how they want to help forgotten communities at the last election. 

 

So there's a start. There's other things i could rattle on about, but the difficulty is unless you're in the middle of all the legal documents between the footballing organisations and between the footballing organisations and TV companies, it's pretty impossible to know if those thoughts are valid. What I'm certain of is the majority of football chairman will be in a state of panic right now and that's normally never the best time to make decisions. What I do know is people who think football is a family and the PL will do anything for the good of the game are nothing more than romantics. It's why the premier League clubs should be at the back of the queue for solving this problem. 

 

Personally I think going forward we maybe need to accept having 90-odd professional clubs is actually pretty unrealistic. Maybe there needs to be an acceptance many of the players in the bottom 2 tiers need to be part time. Would it alter the experience for fans of Fleetwood, Tranmere or many sides in those levels if say they had 8 or 10 full time players and 15 part timers and kids? 

 

In just the same way the PL could fund this scheme with loans against future earnings, I'm pretty sure so could the EFL while they got their house in order and get through this next 12 months. But we know Parry's view towards loaning money, he sold the family silver to save David Moores needing to take out a stadium loan. That worked out well. 

 

We continually hear about the value of cup games to EFL sides, we're about to dump them. Then after the PL get their new voting structure, who's to say the next vote isn't to cut off funding to the EFL? And to cut balloon payment to relegated teams? Or perhaps cut the group of 9 to a group of 6, after all they only need 6 votes.to do that. I'm 100% sure if this gets accepted by the EFL clubs they'll be surrendering their future in return for an easy way to survive today. It'll be great economics for LFC, I've no doubt about that. I'm not convinced it will be good for either the EFL or fans or players of the PL clubs. Let's get rid of the league cup and those pesky affordable games for the locals and replace them with games in the USA charging hundreds of dollars per ticket and tons of new fans buying shite shirts from Nike at £100 each. 

 

 

Some fair points on the dangers of what may happen, which will be subject to how the terms are written.

 

Yes, they can vote to take all the perks away once they get the power, but what's the alternative? The government taking control instead? We're never getting a handout from them, so its not a point worth discussing.

 

And that's not even going into the likelihood of Tory cuts at every level possible due to the pandemic.

 

In terms of the league cup, its become a bit of a farce, and none of the big leagues in Europe (if any at all) have a second cup competition.

 

In any case, the proposal, as far as I can tell, aims to fund the lower league clubs in a much more balanced way than a good cup run would.

 

The entire resistance to this seems to be based on a load of what ifs, and a general distrust with these types of 'establishment' proposals.

 

I'm cautiously open to this, and definitely  wanting to here more about the arguments against the proposal from those in the know.

 

On the footballing side, I'm also in favour of all the proposed changes.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, m0e said:

I'm not sure what the issues are with this. Maybe I'm being a bit thick.

 

I like the sound of almost every part of that proposal and I'm happy to be shot down so long as there's a clear argument against whichever one you don't like.

That was pretty much my reaction, mate. Not sure about the voting power stuff yet but seems sensible overall. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

Will it? 

 

The championship clubs are desperate. 

 

At least 3 of the current PL will be championship clubs again soon. 

 

Probably half a dozen of the PL teams feel being in the championship is a real threat every season. 

 

For at least 1 TV cycle, this will be good for the EFL and by association those clubs. 

 

The PL needs 14 votes to get this through. It would seem they'll have 9 onside with this 6+3 voting system. I assume longevity will have some teams pushing to be part of that 9. So somehow the big clubs need to pick off the votes of 5 of the remaining 11 sides - 6 of whom will feel relegation could be a reality. Any who vote against it without a shadow of a doubt will be sold in the media as the teams who tried to kill off the EFL because of their own self interest. 

 

There's a reason this has come out now when the idea has been kicking around for 3 years. There's without doubt a feeling with the top clubs that they can get this over the line because of the desperation of the EFL. 

Yeah, it's obviously a power move using the Covid situation to try and get it through.

However as @m0e said, some of it is quite good:

 

  • Two sides automatically relegated from the Premier League every season and the top two Championship teams promoted. The 16th place Premier League club in a play-off tournament with the Championship’s third, fourth and fifth placed teams.
  • Financial fair play regulations in line with Uefa, and full access for Premier League executive to club accounts
  • A fan charter including capping of away tickets at £20, away travel subsidised, a focus on a return to safe standing, a minimum away allocation of eight per cent capacity

That's all stuff I'm down with.  This one though:

  • Later Premier League start in August to give greater scope for pre-season friendlies, and requirement for all clubs to compete once every five years in a summer Premier League tournament

Summer premier league tournament?  Probably held in whichever oligarchy wants to sports wash a few millions to the clubs - that can fuck off. 

Unless they hold it in Australia.

 

Also you'd have to think that the stuff they've flagged for the football league clubs, as well as the fans with the £20 away tickets, has been carefully calculated to be the smallest sweeteners they can get away with. 

 

Is there any suggestion about how the breakdown of television revenues for the Premier League clubs might change under this proposed arrangement?  

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you take a step back from the actual proposal, I think most people agree that there are changes that should be made to how football is run these days. Then it is just more in the details like many have said they like this part but not that one etc. Overall I think it is very healthy to have a big overhaul, because as it currently stands, I see lots of things that to me should be changed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jose Jones said:

Yeah, it's obviously a power move using the Covid situation to try and get it through.

However as @m0e said, some of it is quite good:

 

  • Two sides automatically relegated from the Premier League every season and the top two Championship teams promoted. The 16th place Premier League club in a play-off tournament with the Championship’s third, fourth and fifth placed teams.
  • Financial fair play regulations in line with Uefa, and full access for Premier League executive to club accounts
  • A fan charter including capping of away tickets at £20, away travel subsidised, a focus on a return to safe standing, a minimum away allocation of eight per cent capacity

That's all stuff I'm down with.  This one though:

  • Later Premier League start in August to give greater scope for pre-season friendlies, and requirement for all clubs to compete once every five years in a summer Premier League tournament

Summer premier league tournament?  Probably held in whichever oligarchy wants to sports wash a few millions to the clubs - that can fuck off. 

Unless they hold it in Australia.

 

Also you'd have to think that the stuff they've flagged for the football league clubs, as well as the fans with the £20 away tickets, has been carefully calculated to be the smallest sweeteners they can get away with. 

 

Is there any suggestion about how the breakdown of television revenues for the Premier League clubs might change under this proposed arrangement?  

 

Be careful with the '£20 capped away travel' stuff.Remember in '94 when the Kop was seated and we were told that seats wouldn't cost more than a tenner? I think it lasted one season and now it's more or less 5x that price. Anything that puts more power in the hands of the few is bad for society in general and football is the same. Fuck the greedy cunts.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×