Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Project "Big Picture" - "Big" Clubs Plan Overhaul of English Football

1234568

Comments

  • Or leave English football to rot.....
  • Detail of the Times report Henry linked to:

    The Premier League clubs have kicked Project Big Picture into the long grass and agreed instead to hold an urgent strategy review involving all 20 members, as well as making a new bail-out offer to the EFL.

    An emergency meeting of the 20 clubs called after last weekend’s announcement of the Project’s aims to revolutionise English football — put forward by Liverpool and Manchester United and backed by the EFL chairman Rick Parry — has effectively killed off the plan at birth.

    It would have handed all voting powers to the top teams in the Premier League and hugely increased their financial income but ran up against opposition from a large majority of the top-flight clubs.

    It is understood that the meeting instead decided to commission a strategy review that would involve all 20 clubs rather than just the elite to plan for the future, with the understanding that it would take place promptly.

    There was also an agreement to put together a rescue package for the EFL, with the offer including an option for the bail-out funding only to go to the League One and League Two clubs. That, however, could still be vetoed by the Championship clubs. As reported by The Times last week, the EFL had rejected an offer of a grant of less than £50 million and a £100 million loan — all with conditions attached.It had been expected that there would be some fiery exchanges aimed at the Liverpool and Manchester United representatives but according to one club executive in the meeting it was “civilised”. However, there was irritation about the role of Parry in Project Big Picture, with some clubs suggesting he had attempted to destabilise the Premier League.The project had won some EFL clubs’ support by promising 25 per cent of Premier League TV revenue with the three lower divisions. At least 14 of the 20 top-flight clubs were opposed, however, possibly some of the ‘big six’ clubs too, according to Premier League insiders.The fans’ trusts of the big six clubs had also united to object to the Project’s plans, stating they were “totally opposed to concentrating power in the hands of six billionaire owners and departing from the one club, one vote and collective ethos of the Premier League”.The FA chairman Greg Clarke had also spoken out, warning Liverpool and Manchester United that the governing body would use its special powers to prevent a breakaway league and stop them playing in the Champions League.Clarke said the FA would use its “special share” in the Premier League to protect “the best interests of the game” and pointed out the FA nominates which leagues and clubs qualify for European competition. He confirmed that the threat of a breakaway league — understood to have been suggested for the big six Premier League clubs to join the EFL — had been raised in discussions between the two clubs and Parry.Project Big Picture has been driven by Liverpool’s owner John Henry and president Mike Gordon, along with Manchester United’s co-owner Joel Glazer, but none of the trio faced the music at the Premier League meeting, which was held by video conference. Instead, Liverpool’s chairman Tom Werner and chief executive Billy Hogan took part, along with United’s executive vice-chairman Ed Woodward.Clarke confirmed yesterday in a statement that he had taken part in early talks with the group around fixture congestion, with the knowledge of senior FA board members and the chief executive.He said: “However, in late spring, when the principal aim of these discussions became the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few clubs with a breakaway league mooted as a threat, I of course, discontinued my involvement and counselled a more consensus-based approach involving all Premier League clubs and its chair and CEO. Our game needs to continually seek to improve but benefits need to be shared.“We, the FA Board and Council, have to ensure that any changes would be to the long-term benefit of the whole of football and we have substantial controls to help ensure that the best interests of the game are served by any new proposals.“In addition, to the Special Share in the Premier League, which prevents certain changes being made to the constitution without the FA’s consent, it is also the FA’s responsibility to sanction competitions in England — including any proposed new competition — as well as being responsible for licensing clubs, through Uefa, to play in Europe. Additionally, Uefa look to us to nominate the league, and therefore the clubs, that will play in their competitions.”In a thinly veiled warning against Liverpool, United and Parry, Clarke added: “Let’s continue to work together to determine what is best for English football, with full dialogue between all key stakeholders. However, there is more to our game than economics. Change must benefit clubs, fans and players; not just selective balance sheets. In these difficult times unity, transparency and common purpose must override the interests of the few.”The Times has seen the full project proposals and the documents outline the incredible extent of the power and money that would be given to the top sides.Premier League clubs would be allowed to show Saturday 3pm matches to British viewers on their own TV channels and digital platforms if the broadcast blackout is lifted permanently, in what would be another significant money-making opportunity for the big clubs.The big six clubs would not only dominate the voting rights in the Premier League — their powers would also extend to setting a salary cap in the Championship and wielding a veto over the fixture calendar in the second tier of English football.

  • WSS said:
    bobmunro said:

    NEW: Premier League clubs reject Project Big Picture - clubs agree prompt strategy review involving all 20 clubs not just 2 - new bail-out offer for EFL agreed, possibly only for League One and League Two clubs - full story:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/premier-league-clubs-reject-project-big-picture-at-emergency-meeting-dp8jwq69g
    As expected - they have called the big 2's (6) bluff.
    The Mancs and bin-dippers won't be happy!
    Cue the threat of a breakaway and Euro Super League. 
    Already happened BEFORE the meeting apparently:

    https://news.sky.com/story/top-premier-league-clubs-threaten-to-break-away-unless-radical-changes-to-english-football-are-backed-12103649?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
    Bye then, and don't come back when it all fails because nobody will want to see the top 6 play each other every week
  • It was never going to happen, the rest of the PL were never going to vote in favour.

    And as others have said where would the big 6 break away to? They won't form their own league as no one would be interested in a 6 team league.

    A European super league would take years of planning and another 14 clubs from across Europe to all decide to leave their national leagues. Plus with the imminent expansion of the Champions league is there even an appetite for a european super league any more?
  • Q: Who would you rather have running the Football league: Rick Parry or Andy Holt?

    My money would be on Mr Holt. I have a lot of time for him, he talks a lot of sense.
    Simon Jordan and get rid of Prick Parry
  • Sponsored links:


  • Go on the Lincoln and Stanley chairmen!
  • Greed, greed and greed drives this plan. Not a love or care for the game of football. It makes me sick that they tried to wrap up the money for the EFL as a sweetener, yeah we all believe that.
  • Is there any evidence that the other 4 clubs in the big 6 were pushing this?

    Obviously they wouldn't have complained had it gone through, but wasn't this driven by Liverpool and United? I've not seen anything that says the other 4 were actively seeking it.
  • Off_it said:
    Go on the Lincoln and Stanley chairmen!

  • Q: Who would you rather have running the Football league: Rick Parry or Andy Holt?

    My money would be on Mr Holt. I have a lot of time for him, he talks a lot of sense.
    Simon Jordan and get rid of Prick Parry
    Always new you were a Nigel 
  • edited October 2020
    I think someone needs to put a housing analogy together
    I’ve been struggling a bit with this one, but here goes …

    Many years ago a group of friends got together and built a house. Over the years the house was extended and more people came and lived with them. To maintain order in the house each room had an equal vote but, owing to a lack of space, a number of the new arrivals and not-so-well-off people had to share rooms so they didn’t have as much a say in proceedings as those in the big rooms.

    Over time people moved from room to room, sometimes going to a bigger room, sometimes going back to a shared smaller one; some people left the house to be replaced with new people.

    Then, about 30 years ago, some of the people decided they didn’t want to carry on sharing the kitchen and bathroom with the others so they built a new shiny building next door for their own use. After they moved out there was more room in the original house so the remaining tenants were able to have a room each and so had an equal vote in that house. There was still movement between rooms and even between buildings but some of those in the new house were getting a bit snobby and didn’t really want the great unwashed from across the path joining them; normally new arrivals were kicked out again the following year. They certainly weren’t too keen on still paying some of the upkeep of the old house.

    In recent years the residents of the old house have fallen on hard times and have been struggling to pay the rent and the bills; the house has fallen into a bit of a state. The big house doesn’t really want to help them out any more as they’d rather play with their European pen pals instead of their next door neighbours.

    What the big house wants to do is dig up the path between the two buildings and build a big wall around their building with a security gate to stop anyone getting in. They’ve offered to pay the leccy bill in the old house for the next couple of years but probably only if the old house looks after the big house’s kids in their rooms.

    I think the big house’s scheme might have fallen foul of the Planning Committee but they’ll no doubt tweak them slightly, probably after seeing a new architect, and they’ll get waved through.

  • EXCLUSIVE: Premier League chairman Gary Hoffman slams EFL counterpart Rick Parry over bailout negotiations and claims he is trying to 'create division' among top-flight clubs after fallout of doomed Project Big Picture

    • Premier League chairman has hit out at EFL chief Rick Parry in an explosive letter
    • Hoffman claims that Parry is refusing to engage over bailout talks with the EFL
    • He says this is direct result of Parry's failed attempt of Project Big Picture
    • Hoffman also accuses of Parry trying to 'create division' among the top 20 clubs 

    By MATT HUGHES FOR MAILONLINE


    Premier League chairman Gary Hoffman has accused his EFL counterpart Rick Parry of jeopardising a bailout for the lower divisions as the top-flight's conflict with the lower divisions continued.

    In an explosive letter sent to the EFL after Wednesday's meeting of the 20 Premier League clubs Hoffman claims that Parry has refused to engage in negotiations regarding the proposed bailout, due to his secret talks with Liverpool and Manchester United over Project Big Picture.

    Hoffman goes on to accuse Parry of deliberately seeking to create division among the top 20 clubs, an incendiary claim that raises real questions over whether the Premier League and EFL can continue to work together.

    Premier League chairman Gary Hoffman has hit out at the EFLs Rick Parry in an explosive letter
    +6

    Premier League chairman Gary Hoffman has hit out at the EFL's Rick Parry in an explosive letter

    Hoffman claims that EFL chairman Parry right is refusing to engage with the Premier League over bailout negotiations following the fallout of the failed Project Big Picture
    +6

    Hoffman claims that EFL chairman Parry (right) is refusing to engage with the Premier League over bailout negotiations following the fallout of the failed Project Big Picture

    He also claims Parry is now trying to create division among the top-flight clubs in addition


    The letter from Hoffman outlines the terms of the Premier League's bailout offer - a £20million grant to clubs in League One and Two with the possibility of a further £30m in loans to follow - but the newly appointed chairman also takes aim at Parry. 

    The EFL clubs will discuss the offer at divisional meetings on Thursday afternoon, but are minded to reject it initially as they claim it is insufficient and are unhappy that the Championship clubs have been excluded.

    'In times of crisis it is even more important that we work together rather than create division,' Hoffman writes. 

    'Despite Rick's actions on a number of matters which have deliberately created division and put in jeopardy a much-needed rescue package for EFL clubs, the Premier League today gained Club approval for an offer for League One and League Two clubs.'

    The missive from Hoffman outlines the terms of the Premier League's bailout offer - a £20million grant to clubs in League One and Two but nothing for the Championship

    Hoffman's letter also confirms Sportsmail's story from earlier this week that the EFL have already rejected the first bailout offer - without putting it to the clubs - of a £40m grant and £110m in loans due to the conditions attached.

    'Rick Parry did not engage with us,' Hoffman writes. 

    'However, on 13 October we received feedback of our funding offer from Dave Baldwin (who has been nothing but professional throughout). He stated that the caveats applied against both the proposed loan and grant funds were not something the EFL Board could put before your clubs.'

  • Sponsored links:


  • The Price of Football podcast (Kieran Maguire and his Stripey Nigel mate) have asked why the media isn't all over the story last week that the EFL had received a £375m investment offer from an American private equity fund. All that is known is that they were discussing it, including the level of autonomous control the EFL would retain, and then they suddenly stopped. Last Friday. Does anyone think the timing of that would be a coincidence? You know, like the CEO's resignation was?

    Kieran made the point that the EFL had shared no details whatsoever with its member clubs. Given what came forward from the FAPL, that seems completely inexcusable. he further made the point that the EFL had earlier in the year rejected a proposal that the EFL should have three independent directors ideally QCs, to provide oversight.

    Parry really has to resign, forthwith.
    Definitely has to go, playing his own game here. It’s not on. 
  • https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54558837

    Call for an independent regulator from group called 'Saving our beautiful Game' led by Gary Neville, Dennis Lewis and David Bernstein.
    Good luck with that!
  • Bernstein and Neville fair enough, but Denise Lewis is a bit random, never seen or heard of her having anything to do with football?
  • What does Denise Lewis (aka Dennis) bring to the table?
  • I doubt the Premier League will give the Championship money until they see some financial discipline in that division, and the Football League won't accept help unless it includes the Championship for fear of a breakaway
  • Bernstein and Neville fair enough, but Denise Lewis is a bit random, never seen or heard of her having anything to do with football?
    iaitch said:
    What does Denise Lewis (aka Dennis) bring to the table?
    She ticks two boxes on the "diversity" chart?
  • edited October 2020
    Also Telegraph. Some of the reader comments suggest its childish. In which case, I'm having Alphabetti Spaghetti for dinner.

    If the self-styled Big Six want to break away from the rest of the Premier League, let them go. Let them make good on their threats, rip up the ransom note, shove it down their throats and give them a kick up the backside to help them on their way.

    If they want to go, let's help them pack up and move on. If they want to stay, make them apologise. We have seen their threats, we have seen them offer a rescue pan to the EFL with one hand and a clenched fist power grab with the other. We have seen them for what they are. The question now should be, do we want them anymore?  

    When you threaten something, it is always best to know you can go through with it. The Big Six are bluffing so hammer that home. They need the Premier League, even as they launch their shameless attempt to seize total control of it.

    There is, in reality, nowhere for them to go if they quit. They could join the EFL, but I am not sure Manchester United vs Wycombe Wanderers and Liverpool vs Rotherham holds much appeal or makes any sense to their broadcast partners while Everton, Wolves, Aston Villa, Leeds United, Newcastle, Leicester City and the rest remain in the top flight.

    If they want to pursue their dream of a European Super League let them try find others to join them from the continent because it will be a while until they get enough teams and they can rot while they wait.

    How can they qualify for the Champions League next season if they are not in the Premier League anymore? What will their shareholders think about that? They are not the only side in this civil war who can make threats. The Football Association can deny them permission to compete in Uefa competitions if they want to play tough. I wonder how long their star players will be willing to wait around then?

    What they should be doing now is festering on the consequences of their ugly collective ambition because, if they were to leave, the only realistic option, in the short and medium term, is a six-club competition run by and for themselves.

    Let them crack on and do it. One of this self-interested cartel can win the league each year, they can be certain of that. They deserve each other’s company. Let them play in an exhibition tournament, touring it around the globe like a warped version of the Harlem Globetrotters.

    Let them seek their own television deals, let them try and persuade the richest broadcasters in the world that they do not need the rest of English football to attract a global television audience.

    Let them play each other from September to May, the big boys going at each other over and over again for months on end. Let them play in their own competition, where Manchester United can reacquaint themselves with Liverpool roughly once every five weeks.

    Let them create a league where the fixtures come round with mundane regularity. Let their dream be to play in football’s equivalent of an American basketball division. 40 games a season against five different opponents. Let them go on tours to the Middle East, the Far East, South America, North America, Australasia and even Antarctica if they so wish.

    Let them broadcast every single game on their own websites, let them put every single player up for an interview with their in house media, let them release as many fly-on-the-wall documentaries as they desire. One for each club - glossy, controlled and sanitised - every single year and see how quickly the novelty wears off.

    And let the rest of us get on with watching the Premier League, free from their omnipotence, free from their greed.

    The results will be far less predictable, the action no less intense, the interest just as widespread, perhaps even more so when you have different teams competing for silverware, different towns and cities celebrating the sort of success they are so intent on denying them their twisted scheme.

    There might well be less money sloshing around the Premier League if they go, but they won't. And if they do go, simply promote the top six clubs from the Championship for next season and replace them. They will miss the Premier League when they see how it thrives without them. You can be sure of that. Meanwhile, everyone else  - Premier League, Government and the Football Association - can focus on agreeing and delivering a rescue package for the EFL clubs facing financial oblivion in this global pandemic.

    Offer them salvation without being forced to back this odious attempt by a group of billionaires to control the top level of English football forever more. 

    The majority of EFL owners may well back Project Big Picture but they are reacting like a loved one would respond to a ransom note. They all want something they love to survive and any price seems worth paying. Spare them that Hobson's choice and cut the Big Six adrift instead if we must.

    There is a wonderful Geordie send-off given to someone who leaves an argument they have already lost. Off you ****. It has never felt more apt.

    More or less what I have been saying for nearly thirty years. Only I said it in far fewer words...  ;):D
  • edited October 2020
    It was a shame that quest highlights were mainly in favour of what Liverpool and man u were doing. Saying it was similar to a celebrity highlighting a good cause. Also that parry was doing it for the good of the lower leagues. Then again what do you expect from the N.irish presenter who supports man u and Ashton who has been hit in the head more times than my man Jake lamotta.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!