I fear that football is now broken beyond repair. Let the big boys cosy up to UEFA and their commercial partners, they can then form their own self-perpetuating, relegation-free Super League and play each other to their hearts content. That will leave the rest of the game to recover from the present fever, adopt some sensible, practical sporting rules and get on with our own humble existences. Actually, big undoubtedly though the big boys are, the rest of us still outnumber them. If only UEFA were a democracy ....
This is the way I see it going. And I hope it does. As long as "the rest of the game" refuses the "elite" the right to return once their Super League eats itself, I think there's a sustainable and competitive model for football right there without them.
Whilst I think the game is crazy now, isn't it unfair that you can penalize a billionaire for pumping money into his team? As long as it's not borrowed money I don't see how you can fine them.
Surely it's clubs like Barcelona and Madrid who have massive debts, which get written off in spurious schemes that are the problem.
If I was a billionaire and I wanted to invest 300m in charlton out of my own pocket who should be able to stop me?
The only way that clubs would respect FFP is points deductions. The fine for Man City is paltry in comparison for the owenrs wealth and the amount of money that they make winning the league.
I fear that football is now broken beyond repair. Let the big boys cosy up to UEFA and their commercial partners, they can then form their own self-perpetuating, relegation-free Super League and play each other to their hearts content. That will leave the rest of the game to recover from the present fever, adopt some sensible, practical sporting rules and get on with our own humble existences. Actually, big undoubtedly though the big boys are, the rest of us still outnumber them. If only UEFA were a democracy ....
This is the way I see it going. And I hope it does. As long as "the rest of the game" refuses the "elite" the right to return once their Super League eats itself, I think there's a sustainable and competitive model for football right there without them.
This keeps coming up but I can never see it happening. It is national news (and not just sports news) that Arsenal went nine years without a trophy. It has caused mass hysteria that Man Utd have not challenged for the title this season and Chelsea are not far behind in the 'mustn't go long without a title' scenario. This ignores Man City who have spend half a billion pounds in four years!
If we assume that all the top leagues in Europe have clubs that are regarded the same what would happen if sixteen of them were to join together and reduce the number of available titles from four or five to just one? What would happen if twelve of these perennial champions were out of the title race by Christmas three years running? How many people would pay to watch Man Utd vs Real Madrid in a mid table clash in February?
As it stands the top sides in Europe get the lions share of their national league TV money and a huge chunk from the CL. There is no way that the combined TV companies would pay as much to a Super League as they pay in total now to The Premier League, La Liga, the Bundesliga and Serie A added together. Unless every single game in the Super League was televised every single week there would be fewer matches to go around. This would, undoubtedly, reduce the revenue the clubs get from what they generate now.
The top sides have what they want already. A national league where they get to keep almost all of the money and get to win it every couple of years (on average) and dictate to the lower clubs that are only able to survive, financially, because of the revenue that the big clubs bring in. Why would they ever walk away from that?
The only issue is UEFA's power and it is clear that the threat of the top European sides to start their own CL competition and walk away from UEFA will keep the regulator 'in line'.
As for the rest of the clubs not wanting the big boys back if they left. I predict (even though I don't think we'll ever know as they will never leave) that ten of the current Premier League clubs would go into administration and possibly liquidation if the top four in England left and took 95% of the Sky money with them. This would leave those still standing willing to agree to any and all terms that the top four demanded for them to return.
We need to remember that the TV audiences don't care who Man Utd and Chelsea demolish each week. If fact I suspect that one could remove several combinations of twelve premier league clubs and replace them with forth division (or conference) clubs and the TV audience would be just the same - as would those paying to turn up at the grounds to watch live.
Sad as it is, even though there are many more fans that don't support the big boys, the clubs they support are not important to anyone other than the fans of those clubs themselves. No one seems to have missed Leeds or Bolton since they were relegated from the Premier League, nor us, Wigan or Sheff Wed (even though they are massive).
Since the Premier League was formed, football in this country is run by a smaller and smaller group of club Chairmen and this is now irreversible. The owner of Man City could start an invitation only competition (to those that qualified for the Champions League) and offer the clubs twice as much as UEFA and play the games on the same nights as the CL. On the basis that most of the clubs would drop UEFA and chase the money, in the end UEFA need to do what the big clubs 'demand'.
Man City are only allowed to spend £49 million (plus any player sales) this summer. That's fair enough - spend what you earn.
The £50 million fine is a ****ing disgrace - how is that financial fair play?!
It's not. It's just something to line UEFA's pocket.
Manchester Utd talking about spending £200 million but are £600 million in debt - how's that financial fair play? I thought that was the EXACT scenario FFP was brought in to prevent.
Comments
Means that unless the sell someone Poyet will be off their radar Phew :-)
Surely it's clubs like Barcelona and Madrid who have massive debts, which get written off in spurious schemes that are the problem.
If I was a billionaire and I wanted to invest 300m in charlton out of my own pocket who should be able to stop me?
If we assume that all the top leagues in Europe have clubs that are regarded the same what would happen if sixteen of them were to join together and reduce the number of available titles from four or five to just one? What would happen if twelve of these perennial champions were out of the title race by Christmas three years running? How many people would pay to watch Man Utd vs Real Madrid in a mid table clash in February?
As it stands the top sides in Europe get the lions share of their national league TV money and a huge chunk from the CL. There is no way that the combined TV companies would pay as much to a Super League as they pay in total now to The Premier League, La Liga, the Bundesliga and Serie A added together. Unless every single game in the Super League was televised every single week there would be fewer matches to go around. This would, undoubtedly, reduce the revenue the clubs get from what they generate now.
The top sides have what they want already. A national league where they get to keep almost all of the money and get to win it every couple of years (on average) and dictate to the lower clubs that are only able to survive, financially, because of the revenue that the big clubs bring in. Why would they ever walk away from that?
The only issue is UEFA's power and it is clear that the threat of the top European sides to start their own CL competition and walk away from UEFA will keep the regulator 'in line'.
As for the rest of the clubs not wanting the big boys back if they left. I predict (even though I don't think we'll ever know as they will never leave) that ten of the current Premier League clubs would go into administration and possibly liquidation if the top four in England left and took 95% of the Sky money with them. This would leave those still standing willing to agree to any and all terms that the top four demanded for them to return.
We need to remember that the TV audiences don't care who Man Utd and Chelsea demolish each week. If fact I suspect that one could remove several combinations of twelve premier league clubs and replace them with forth division (or conference) clubs and the TV audience would be just the same - as would those paying to turn up at the grounds to watch live.
Sad as it is, even though there are many more fans that don't support the big boys, the clubs they support are not important to anyone other than the fans of those clubs themselves. No one seems to have missed Leeds or Bolton since they were relegated from the Premier League, nor us, Wigan or Sheff Wed (even though they are massive).
Since the Premier League was formed, football in this country is run by a smaller and smaller group of club Chairmen and this is now irreversible. The owner of Man City could start an invitation only competition (to those that qualified for the Champions League) and offer the clubs twice as much as UEFA and play the games on the same nights as the CL. On the basis that most of the clubs would drop UEFA and chase the money, in the end UEFA need to do what the big clubs 'demand'.
Man City are only allowed to spend £49 million (plus any player sales) this summer. That's fair enough - spend what you earn.
The £50 million fine is a ****ing disgrace - how is that financial fair play?!
It's not. It's just something to line UEFA's pocket.
Manchester Utd talking about spending £200 million but are £600 million in debt - how's that financial fair play? I thought that was the EXACT scenario FFP was brought in to prevent.