Jump to content

Football Leaks


David Edgar

Recommended Posts

Honestly think it would be the best thing for our league though.

 

Football will go on like it always did. The national leagues will move on. Provide a cheaper, more local option which will eventually win out. Eventually the "Super League" will just be for African and Asian fans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very surprised yes, the Premier League already dwarfs every other Football competition in the world for TV money and even thats been slowed down a bit with the newest packages.  Not to mention people do actually support other teams in the Premier league outside of the top few.  Those fans aren't going to pay subscription fees only to watch a super league that has no involvement with them.  So significant money will still need to be paid for Premier League rights.  There's only so much cash you can gauge out of people.

 

I think clubs from some of the other leagues going into a super league will see big improvements in TV money, but for instance Man United?  No I don't see there TV money shooting up to a point where it would make the cash they get now look like a pittance, not even close.

 

Yeah but think about the kickbacks from the money laundering. A super league would be like a world cup every weekend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very surprised yes, the Premier League already dwarfs every other Football competition in the world for TV money and even thats been slowed down a bit with the newest packages.  Not to mention people do actually support other teams in the Premier league outside of the top few.  Those fans aren't going to pay subscription fees only to watch a super league that has no involvement with them.  So significant money will still need to be paid for Premier League rights.  There's only so much cash you can gauge out of people.

 

I think clubs from some of the other leagues going into a super league will see big improvements in TV money, but for instance Man United?  No I don't see there TV money shooting up to a point where it would make the cash they get now look like a pittance, not even close.

 

Fair enough. I think the fact it would be a global product that would appeal to most of the largest-supported clubs in the world, encompassing the vast majority of glory hunters around would give them a heftier pay packet.

 

Plus I think they'll heavily target the casual fans in countries where their own leagues aren't of much standard. If those people had a chance to choose the PL or a European league with the most 'desirable' PL clubs in there anyway, I'm pretty sure they'd choose the European league.

 

I guess agree to disagree. All ifs and buts really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be dubious about the long-term success of a Super League too, but if it happened it's all a lot of the big foreign markets would be interested in, and I think the money in the Premier League would plummet. If people are convinced that the Super League really is the best of the best, and the disparity in resources only grows across the first few seasons, then who knows.

 

Anyway, I've had a cursory read of a few articles, and Manchester City fans seem of the opinion that Financial Fair Play was only implemented at the behest and for the benefit of the established big clubs, i.e. as an exclusionary measure meant to prevent the rise of the likes of them and PSG. According to this perspective, the reduced fines and relative lack of punishment City and PSG have faced, and the implication of behind-closed-doors agreements, owes more to the threat of lawsuits than it does to any good will, favours, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be dubious about the long-term success of a Super League too, but if it happened it's all a lot of the big foreign markets would be interested in, and I think the money in the Premier League would plummet. If people are convinced that the Super League really is the best of the best, and the disparity in resources only grows across the first few seasons, then who knows.

 

Anyway, I've had a cursory read of a few articles, and Manchester City fans seem of the opinion that Financial Fair Play was only implemented at the behest and for the benefit of the established big clubs, i.e. as an exclusionary measure meant to prevent the rise of the likes of them and PSG. According to this perspective, the reduced fines and relative lack of punishment City and PSG have faced, and the implication of behind-closed-doors agreements, owes more to the threat of lawsuits than it does to any good will, favours, etc.

which lets be honest it was, iirc chelsea of all clubs were all in favour of FFP which given how they got where they were is hilarious

Link to post
Share on other sites

They kind of already are.  Some 'tradition clause' now guarantees Bayern an extra 30m CL revenue before a ball has even been kicked.  The other big clubs will undoubtedly be getting about the same.

 

The solution found with UEFA will be beneficial primarily to the top clubs. Thanks to the new regulations, they will receive more money than ever before. The tradition clause alone, which allots greater revenues to those clubs that have found success in the last 10 years in the Champions League and Europa League, will generate over 30 million euros for FC Bayern starting with the 2018/19 Champions League season -- money that is guaranteed even before the club had even played its first game.

 

A pittance compared to what they can make in a closed shop super league. People are vastly underestimating the money these clubs can earn by fucking off. Now, hopefully it’ll all burn to the ground if they do, but there’s very little UEFA can do to stop it if the clubs make the decision purely from a money perspective and not history/sporting perspectives.

 

What's this based on exactly? the idea that they could earn so much more in a super league.

 

Would you not be surprised at a massive TV package that dwarfs the current PL package? Not to mention the price hikes to tickets etc that enough people would probably still be stupid enough to pay.

 

I still think it would implode within a few years when the novelty wears off but I think it'd make complete financial sense in their eyes at the initial stages.

 

Not to mention the money get in from TV deals, price hikes and extreme exposure the clubs would get - in addition to not having to share it with "shit" teams in their national leagues and european competitions. At this very moment, Crvena Zvezda has made more in TV money from their CL appearances this season than Liverpool (due to going through qualifiers).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I very rarely watch Champions League games these days, in fact I find the Europa League more competitive than the Champioons League. I don’t watch El Classico, etc. Even this pre-season Champions Cup doesn’t get enough interest to get fans attending to fill out the stadiums. A European Super League would only be decent for a few years until the novelty wore off. If our top 5-6 teams want to fuck over to that then let them. Pretty sure Man Utd would start losing fans and commercial deals when they start struggling in mid table year after year. Only Man City would be good enough to provide a title challenge for it.

Fuck them and let them go. All in all we don’t need them. Ok TV money will go down, but our clubs will withstand it and adjust accordingly. Let them go and never darken our door again.

Also why the fuck should PSG be allowed in the league? They are club that’s only 40-50 years old, don’t have their own stadium, and have recently just came into money to give them the allusion of being a mega-club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be dubious about the long-term success of a Super League too, but if it happened it's all a lot of the big foreign markets would be interested in, and I think the money in the Premier League would plummet. If people are convinced that the Super League really is the best of the best, and the disparity in resources only grows across the first few seasons, then who knows.

 

Anyway, I've had a cursory read of a few articles, and Manchester City fans seem of the opinion that Financial Fair Play was only implemented at the behest and for the benefit of the established big clubs, i.e. as an exclusionary measure meant to prevent the rise of the likes of them and PSG. According to this perspective, the reduced fines and relative lack of punishment City and PSG have faced, and the implication of behind-closed-doors agreements, owes more to the threat of lawsuits than it does to any good will, favours, etc.

which lets be honest it was, iirc chelsea of all clubs were all in favour of FFP which given how they got where they were is hilarious

Makes loads of sense. Closing a loophole which would allows others to compete with you after you have used that loophole to compete with others you wouldn’t ordinarily be able to makes loads of sense as it’s preventing competition after giving yourself a the boost you needed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get the super league theory tbh. Do we not already have one in the Champions League?

 

The TV money and such get shared with "shit" clubs that only, in the eyes of the big clubs, make up the numbers. It's the same argument they use against the national leagues.

 

Think UEFAs only way out of the formation of a super league in the near future is to establish a new version of the CL where "super" clubs have guaranteed access and there's no teams from "shit" countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the alternative is the bigger clubs pushing for a huge chunk of the TV money like in La Liga, we would be better off telling them to do one and form their own league.

 

Feel free to snipe at them, but Tottenham are well run, so is excluding them sending a message? Is it just an indication of how much of a closed shop they want? You either need current success through megabucks or to be established through unforgotten former glories to be in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The English clubs really think more highly of themselves then they are.

No one likes Man Utd, same with Chelsea who are the tramps who won the lottery. No one can compete with Man City, the only possible team out of them who you might say would be a miss is Liverpool, even then I think the majority of fans of other clubs would welcome them doing one.

The businessmen who run other clubs will miss those teams until the league settles without them, the fans will not.

 

They have been talking of this super league for 15-20 years, just fuck off already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is it going to cost for fans to travel over to the continent every weekend to watch a football match?

In all fairness let’s say we got invited (not happening). It would be cheaper for me to travel to Barcelona, Madrid, Amsterdam, Paris etc then it would be to travel to London. Of course the price of away tickets will be much higher than a Premier League ticket, everything else though would be cheaper than say travelling to London.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Howaythetoon

A break away league will never happen, it’s a threat.

 

If it did those wanting back in would have to start at the bottom of the footy pyramid should be the rule.

 

It would reduce TV money, but would even itself out in time and make things more competitive for the remaining clubs. Mind the formula would in time also produce the same results with some clubs being able to outspend others so a new top 4 would emerge or a dominant force. But clubs wouldn’t rely so much on TV money or sponsors to do that or becom the only way.

 

One of the reasons the Championship, although low on quality, is so tough and competitive is because big gates and big budgets doesn’t always make the difference, in fact it’s often the opposite so it becomes more about the actual football and gives clubs a more even chance.

 

I’d welcome that even if it meant losing the likes of Man Utd and players like Salah, Hazard et al.

 

You want your club to play the best teams of course that’s why it’s the top flight everyone wants to join in a sporting sense because it contains the top teams, but at the end of the day that’s not the reason why we turn up, we turn up to watch our own teams to give it their best for 90 minutes and at the moment the game is unequal, uncompetitive and unfair in ways where 90% of the time the outcome is predictable and a formality based on financial clout. Be it individual games, the top of the table or silverware.

 

The Premier League used to be so exciting even if it didn’t have the best players playing here or best managers or if teams from other leagues were better than our teams. Today staying up or finishing mid-table is having a great season. Back then that was finishing 6th or qualifying for Europe which a lot of clubs could aim for from Norwich to a newly promoted Forest or Leicester.

 

The elite clubs won’t leave though, but I can see as the TV money stays the same or drops, individual clubs using their clout and the threat of breaking away to negotiate individual deals to make more money just for themselves, PPV only fixtures being played in the States with TV companies and advertisers competing to televise and sponsor it for example. Man City vs Man Utd. Like. Boxing match. They could make lots of money making fans pay to join a scheme to give them a chance to get a ticket to such a game or a package, ticket, flights, hotel, player meet and greet, lead the team out etc. People would pay top dollar for such an ‘experience’, individuals, celebrities or businesses.

 

NUFC would be lucky to make 300k profit on a match day with a full house, imagine getting even 5m just for one game hosted in the States or China. I can see that happening, it’s already been explored.

 

By the way players and clubs like our own made more money playing exhibition matches in say Brazil in the 30s than they did all season domestically so it’s nothing new.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Howaythetoon

One of my apprentices went to Manchester on the Megabus and it cost £15 and took 5 hours.

 

Was it James Milner?

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my apprentices went to Manchester on the Megabus and it cost £15 and took 5 hours.

 

Was it James Milner?

 

No, I dont think we have a James Milner at work

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
×
×
  • Create New...