Quantcast
Project Big Picture - Page 4 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
luxury_scruff

Project Big Picture

Recommended Posts

Samuel is paid by Abu Dhabi to write what they want. I know this for a fact as my mate was offered the gig initially but turned it down. Huge, life-long City fan too.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Samuel has always argued for anything that benefits West Ham and against anything that doesn’t.

Needless to say, he rarely agrees with anything that might benefit Liverpool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a no from me on scrapping the league cup and charity shield, and it's a no on an 18 team PL. I also don't want all of the power in the hands of 9 clubs! The only things I like on this are the initial bailout for the EFL, and the continued drip down of more money down the pyramid!

 

I'm disappointed but not surprised at FSG having a hand in this, the Glazers and Coco can fuck off as well!

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

It's a no from me on scrapping the league cup and charity shield, and it's a no on an 18 team PL. I also don't want all of the power in the hands of 9 clubs! The only things I like on this are the initial bailout for the EFL, and the continued drip down of more money down the pyramid!

 

I'm disappointed but not surprised at FSG having a hand in this, the Glazers and Coco can fuck off as well!

No. I'll never stop stalking you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading more in The Athletic today, apart from the voting issues & distribution of TV money, I don’t see a problem with it.

 

I think some Premiership teams are against it because their feelings have been hurt that they’ve not been invited to the party. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Trumo said:

Ultimately there is no solution that will suit all parties because nobody will want to get off the gravy train.

That's true and why there's shitloads of cash on the table. 25% of future PL revenue, annually, to be shared between the EFL clubs, £250m one off to tide them over the current situation as well.

 

Like Ive said, the only bits I dont like are the player loan proposals and the weighted voting.

 

It's a complete joke the way Samuel is reacting over this plus, it seems like the whole press corps has got together in a darkened room to condemn the proposals out of hand.

 

The latest stuff about stadium rebates, they headlines spurs, who'd get the biggest handout because of their stadium cost and us to keep the agenda going. They 'only' mentioned everton, if they get BMD built, Brighton, West Ham, Wolves etc further into the article because, well, it's good to kick Liverpool as one of the lead proposers,isnt it?

 

I'll say it again, they're proposals,a starting point for negotiations, not the end point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any details on how the tv contract money will be distributed?  That's surely the real bone of contention.

 

And how does all this governance stuff compare to how sensible (i,e German) leagues do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that arsed about all this really. Football doesn't have a soul left to sell. Winning for the first time in 30 was great and meaningful but I'm under no illusions about what this game is now. 

 

Speaking of which football sure has been shit over this international break (and just before of course). We've still got the best part of a week when our last result was a 7-2 loss against Aston Villa. 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jordy Brouwer said:

Not that arsed about all this really. Football doesn't have a soul left to sell. Winning for the first time in 30 was great and meaningful but I'm under no illusions about what this game is now. 

 

Speaking of which football sure has been shit over this international break (and just before of course). We've still got the best part of a week when our last result was a 7-2 loss against Aston Villa. 

 

 

 

 

Same here. Some of the stuff is very good, some of it is a bit questionable, even though I understand where it's coming from. Some of the knee-jerk hysteria in the media is, well, absolutely typical. It's a proposal. In the real world, proposals get discussed, amended, binned etc. 

Anyway, after decisions to play a World Cup in the desert, international football during a pandemic and letting Man City get away with their cheating, my well of outrage has pretty much run dry.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the idea about 18 premier league teams but the reality is that the clubs will simply replace the matches with other ones - an expanded champions league/prestige preseason games etc. I don't think it is about reducing the workload at all. Two thirds majority does seem a bit high but reducing it to the nine teams who've been there the longest is way too much. And do we really want to be getting too cozy with the Glazers?

 

The stuff on opening accounts up is impressive - not least since we seem to be relying on Man City and Chelsea to support this proposal! Other than ourselves and United is anyone publicly behind this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I dislike all this, if it's going to happen then I'm glad we're on the right side of the fence.

When the Prem started United moved with the times, the likes of us and Everton stood still and got left behind. 

 

I'd rather be looking back thinking football is soulless but at least we're successful, than thinking football is soulless and becoming bitter that we didn't join the party when things were changing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, RoyHodgeGone said:

I get the idea about 18 premier league teams but the reality is that the clubs will simply replace the matches with other ones - an expanded champions league/prestige preseason games etc. I don't think it is about reducing the workload at all. Two thirds majority does seem a bit high but reducing it to the nine teams who've been there the longest is way too much. And do we really want to be getting too cozy with the Glazers?

 

The stuff on opening accounts up is impressive - not least since we seem to be relying on Man City and Chelsea to support this proposal! Other than ourselves and United is anyone publicly behind this?

It's pretty obvious FIFA and its confederations are intent on playing more games at international and club level. Yes, the CL is talking of more games and changing format. The end result if the PL isnt reduced is players are more fucked and pick up more injuries in an over crowded schedule.

 

I love it how samuel and his crowd are pushing the scrapping of the Community Shield and EFL cup bit but he omits to say the proposals also say scrap the EFL Cup for PL clubs or those in Europe. In other words, the EFL clubs still play the EFL Cup plus those PL clubs not in Europe.

 

But saying 'scrap the EFL Cup and Community shield' draws bigger headlines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, aws said:

Opening up the books? Tighter rules on FFP? And Bluto disapproves? Who'd have thought it? 

*Opens City's books*

 

"Look at that, they're paying someone in gravy!"

 

*M.Samuel*

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm suspicious of our owners and the fact the Glazers' are backing it, but from what I've seen the 72 clubs in the Football League stand to benefit massively and it's the less established clubs in the PL that have something to lose. I suspect that the more contentious stuff like the power given to the "big six" (I hate that phrase) and possibly even the reduction of the PL to 18 clubs may have to go, but I don't see anyone else putting proposals forward that will help the smaller clubs. I think pressure will be applied to the naysayers to propose an alternative and I suspect they will have nothing to offer.

 

Two less hysterical opinion pieces from David Conn of The Guardian from the last two days.

 

Plan to mend football pyramid's great crack should not be swept off table

Liverpool and Manchester United have infuriated the Premier League, which was kept in the dark, but the premise of their proposal to reunite with the EFL is sound

 

There are so many extraordinary elements in the Liverpool and Manchester United proposals to reshape English football, and so much understandable scepticism, that the historic move at the heart of it is in danger of being missed.

 

So, for clarity, it really is true that the US owners of these two fabulously rich football corporations have produced an offer that has not been forthcoming and never seemed possible from any Premier League leadership figures for 28 years.

 

There are, undoubtedly, some self-serving elements to their prospectus but by far the most significant is the proposal that the Premier League should share a net 25% of its future TV deals with the English Football League, and provide £250m immediately to help the 72 EFL clubs through their financial crisis.

 

That is an offer, finally after a generation, to rejoin the top division with the three below and repair the vast, calamitous financial gap caused by the breakaway of the First Division from the Football League to form the Premier League in 1992.

 

The wholly negative reaction of the government to this plan for huge financial reparations, which also includes increased money for the FA and grassroots good causes – approximately 8.5% of annual net Premier League TV money – seems bizarre.

 

For months throughout this pandemic and its financial crisis for the game and its cherished pyramid, the culture secretary, Oliver Dowden, has been urging the Premier League to use its financial might to help the “football family”.

 

The Premier League has dithered, delayed and produced nothing solid, despite being told in the spring the EFL had an immediate £250m hole and that many clubs face ruin through a Covid-19 winter of matches in empty grounds. Steve Parish, the chairman of Crystal Palace, recently argued that “Premier League clubs are being unfairly singled out” and should not have to share their money.

 

“No other industry is asking firms to bail out competitors,” Parish wrote in the Sunday Times before offering some comparisons. “The supermarkets aren’t instructed to help the corner shops. Deliveroo aren’t bailing out your local cafe.”

 

Quite apart from the assumption that Selhurst Park counts as a supermarket among corner shops, these are dreary arguments that do not merit earnest engagement. It is the kind of reasoning, for the maintenance of inequality, that also makes it more difficult for the Premier League’s middling clubs to be outraged about Liverpool, United and the rest of the big six looking to cement their own power.

 

With these proposals, United and Liverpool, whose majority owner, John W Henry, is said to have been contemplating the great crack in the English football pyramid for years, have thumped through the last months of stagnation and presented a coming together that has not seemed possible for 25 years.

 

The idea of the EFL having anything like a 25% share of Premier League TV deals last disappeared in the dust in 1995, when with Rick Parry as the chief executive, the top flight did offer 20% but the Football League board, to the fury of many clubs, rejected it.

 

When Parry took on the chairmanship of the EFL only one extremely long year ago, he appreciated that the root cause of the 72 clubs’ various financial agonies is the eye-watering gap with the Premier League and the parachute payments that further distort the landscape in the Championship.

 

When he has spoken up and made that plain, including calling parachute payments “an evil that needs to be eradicated”, he has generally been patronised. The Premier League’s administrators and smaller clubs seem to have been proceeding on the basis they would not be seriously pressured into sharing their money more equitably, as they haven’t for the past quarter-century.

 

To be fair, nobody except Parry seems to have been aware that Henry, across the Atlantic, was informing himself about all of this, apparently becoming more knowledgeable about the bitter 1992 breakaway than many English football people who really should know that history better. And of all people who could be expected to support the idea of putting the game back together, it turns out to be Joel Glazer, of the family whose £525m debt-loading, 2005 takeover of United has been such a burden at Old Trafford and caused so much rancour and unhappiness.

 

Of course it is also true this proposal does not come without some pain but that Henry and Glazer do not envisage feeling any of it themselves. There is a planned consolidation of voting power within the Premier League of the big six plus the three outside clubs that have been in the top flight longest, Everton, Southampton and West Ham, and that is simply not a good look. The 25% for the EFL is mostly to be found by reducing the Premier League to 18 clubs – the original 1990 FA proposal that was never implemented – and scrapping parachute payments, rather than ceding the money out of Old Trafford or Anfield revenues.

 

United and Liverpool envisage their time being freed for more Champions League matches, which will happen anyway from 2024 when Uefa’s competition is inevitably expanded, and lucrative pre-season tours. They insist their proposals are not an effort to seize more of the Premier League TV money but it is likely other Premier League clubs will get less. It will make it more difficult to break into the top six; the more even competition will be created in the relegation zone.

 

So, quite rightly, there should be a battle over the detail of these proposals. If the other 14 Premier League clubs want to fight for the maintenance of the one club, one vote system that is understandable; most football people would agree with it.

 

But the heart of the plan should not be swept off the table, which is for the Premier League to finally reconnect with the EFL, mend the gap and ease the senseless worry that loved and historic clubs will go bust in the time of football’s greatest boom.

 

 

How Project Big Picture changed the politics of football in one swoop

Liverpool’s and Manchester United’s plan has been roundly condemned by the Premier League, but leaves the English game in uncharted territory

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem like a power play (and probably needs some massaging) but the only clubs I have heard making a squawk about it are West Ham and Palace -- two big sides that would have a real chance of getting relegated in the next couple of seasons if the league is trimmed to 18. 

 

Every lower league club I have seen are in support. Coupled with the fact that the PL brass are pretty much useless makes it worth looking at.

 

As an aside if anyone knows -- what happens to West Ham's vote if they go down? Does it pass to the side with the next longest time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Creator Supreme said:

It's a no from me on scrapping the league cup and charity shield, and it's a no on an 18 team PL. I also don't want all of the power in the hands of 9 clubs! The only things I like on this are the initial bailout for the EFL, and the continued drip down of more money down the pyramid!

 

I'm disappointed but not surprised at FSG having a hand in this, the Glazers and Coco can fuck off as well!

Interesting. Aside from my consider about power in the hands of 9 clubs, I've got pretty much an opposing view on everything. I do want to get rid of the League Cup (for top teams, others can do what they want) and Charity Shield. I've no issue with 18 teams in the PL, especially with an upcoming expansion of the CL. The bailout is okay but not something I'm dragging my balls over and I'm not arsed about the drip down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

It does seem like a power play (and probably needs some massaging) but the only clubs I have heard making a squawk about it are West Ham and Palace -- two big sides that would have a real chance of getting relegated in the next couple of seasons if the league is trimmed to 18. 

 

Every lower league club I have seen are in support. Coupled with the fact that the PL brass are pretty much useless makes it worth looking at.

 

As an aside if anyone knows -- what happens to West Ham's vote if they go down? Does it pass to the side with the next longest time?

Yes, I believe so. And if they came back up again, they'd have to start afresh. 

 

The voting rights need to be rejigged so all clubs get a vote but maybe the "senior clubs" could get separate blocking rights over certain proposals and the player loan system might need thinking through a bit more but otherwise I think there's a lot in favour of most of the plan.  The relegation threatened clubs and those outside the Big Six are just as capable as anyone of pursuing their own selfish interests as we saw in the null and void debate and as we see now in their reluctance to help out the EFL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While there is lots of nice shiny things to distract from the genuine essence of this deal, it still remains football would be run by the Glazers, Henry, Abramovich, Sheik Mansour, Joe Lewis and Stan Kroenke. 
 

That should scare the shit out of everyone. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, lifetime fan said:

While there is lots of nice shiny things to distract from the genuine essence of this deal, it still remains football would be run by the Glazers, Henry, Abramovich, Sheik Mansour, Joe Lewis and Stan Kroenke. 
 

That should scare the shit out of everyone. 

Who runs it now?

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  

×