Proposed changes to the Premier league

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes mate I have many times
Been to Both Dundee clubs as my family from my dads side were from there
Also went to Everton v Rangers Dave Watson’s testimonial and the Ranger’s fans behaviour was appalling
So I’ve seen it first hand
Also ask the people of Manchester and see what they think
I've been to many games in Scotland too and can honestly say I have never seen a fight. Not saying there hasn't been any, of course there has, just not in my immediate vicinity. If your experience is that there has been fighting in your vicinity, then that will obviously cloud your judgement, the same way my experience has no doubt clouded mine.

But to come from England and complain about other countries having violence at football games is a bit laughable really.

Anyway, I fear we are going to get off track. More money for lower league clubs is good, power grab by the 2 red teams is bad
 
Everything as it stands is set-up currently for the top six clubs to be relatively self-sustaining in terms of competitiveness, when was the last time I wonder over the last decade when any one of those clubs failed to qualify for Europe for example, if only the Europa League.

We have a long way to go by those standards if mere Europa League qualification is seen as disappointing.

I'm completely against the proposals, but in real-world terms, I think the club is in a difficult bind in a sort of political sense. They have to oppose the sub-group that Moshiri is probably desperate to join. The offer of special voting rights is just an empty sop, and we won't fall for that but it's all about influence really, and getting revenue up to enable that influence.

I think there will be a lot of game-playing and posturing behind the scenes. We have to be very clever in how we manage this, publicly and privately. Utd and Liverpool are the drivers of this, and stand to be the main beneficiaries, we should be looking to isolate them within the top six. Now is the time for Usmanovs silent influence to come to bear, with all of the dexterity and trickery that characterises business and deal making in Russia and Eurasia.

Spurs to me seem to be the ultimate aspirant club, the footballing equivalent of a middle-class wannabe. But we have links with Arsenal in particular, and we should be looking to exploit even the merest hint of any division within the top-six as a stand-alone group.

I think this is a very nuanced post.

There is a lot of talk about a top 6 being united together. I am not so sure. I'm not so sure that Abramovich or City are not looking at Uniteds plight and thinking about how they can maximise it. I'm not sure they would want more restrictive rules on spending for example.

It's interesting that it looks very much like United and Liverpool have led this. Maybe there was wider support in the top 6 initially and its trailed off having seen the backlash, or maybe theyve just gone out on a limb. All very interesting.

I'm not even convinced all 6 would want to join a super league. Being team 15-20 in the super league, or being team 1 or 2 in the PL is a big carrot as well. It's a big gamble either way.

I'll say what I've always said though. If the option of a viable super league was there, with a nod and a wink from sponsors and broadcasters that they would follow, it would have already been set up by now. The fact it hasnt, tells you it's not viable as things stand.
 
To me the real question is "what compromise are they looking for" These clubs have a habit of making outlandish requests, which are then pacified by a compromise of some sort - European cup becoming a league, runners up qualify, top 4 qualify etc.

The proposal they have put forward is not what they are expecting to recieve. Within a week or two, there will be a watered down proposal which will be more palatable, but still provides those clubs with a guaranteed increase in cash, just remains to be seen what it is they are really after, and just as importantly, how they manage to keep that extra profit for themselves and not have it syphoned off by agents and players.
 
I've no problem with getting rid of the league cup and shield.
Move the FA cup to the league cup calendar so it finishes in March.
Stop teams stockpiling players and loaning out whole teams of players.
Keep the premier league at 20 teams with each team having one vote.
The tricky part is figuring out how to support the lower league teams.
Maybe the PL can take more control of transfers, somehow regulating agents fees and reducing them by 50%, invest the other 50% in the lower leagues.
Essentially, tax transfers both in and out and invest that in a pot for lower league clubs, maybe make funds available through interest free loans that are collected if the club gets promoted and redistributed back down the leagues.
Agents fees are a cancer in the game and going after them would definitely mean some of the bigger names would not come to the league but it did fine in the 90's with only a handful of elite foreigners and it would create a boom in academies and help make the path from grass roots to top level football easier.
 
I think this is a very nuanced post.

There is a lot of talk about a top 6 being united together. I am not so sure. I'm not so sure that Abramovich or City are not looking at Uniteds plight and thinking about how they can maximise it. I'm not sure they would want more restrictive rules on spending for example.

It's interesting that it looks very much like United and Liverpool have led this. Maybe there was wider support in the top 6 initially and its trailed off having seen the backlash, or maybe theyve just gone out on a limb. All very interesting.

I'm not even convinced all 6 would want to join a super league. Being team 15-20 in the super league, or being team 1 or 2 in the PL is a big carrot as well. It's a big gamble either way.

I'll say what I've always said though. If the option of a viable super league was there, with a nod and a wink from sponsors and broadcasters that they would follow, it would have already been set up by now. The fact it hasnt, tells you it's not viable as things stand.


I'm assuming mate that before this was floated, as it stands the other 4 clubs from the big six signaled their approval of the proposals. No way would they go into this divided, now.

But this is just the opening gambit. There is no realistic prospect of a contained super-league, it falls at every hurdle because every league must have its also-rans. I don't think Chelsea, Arsenal, and Spurs would fancy their chances long-term, nor would their continental equivalents.

As I see it, we must play both sides of the debate off against each other, and play the top six off against each other as well, or at least try to. This is essentially a political task that Moshiri must handle. We must delay, prevaricate, and confuse.

Navigating through this unscathed is a mammoth task though. It's going to be like House of Cards this. Just worth saying again, that we cannot afford financially or in a footballing sense, for Usmanov not to be a central figure in our response to this. Whatever people's ethical views, we cannot have an individual of his relative wealth and influence, not in our corner, alongside the other billionaires and sovereign states. This is a game of strategy, so Bill and Co. would need to step out. We've already missed the boat in not appointing a new chairman and directors, and I hope that doesn't become critical.
 

Everything as it stands is set-up currently for the top six clubs to be relatively self-sustaining in terms of competitiveness, when was the last time I wonder over the last decade when any one of those clubs failed to qualify for Europe for example, if only the Europa League.

We have a long way to go by those standards if mere Europa League qualification is seen as disappointing.

I'm completely against the proposals, but in real-world terms, I think the club is in a difficult bind in a sort of political sense. They have to oppose the sub-group that Moshiri is probably desperate to join. The offer of special voting rights is just an empty sop, and we won't fall for that but it's all about influence really, and getting revenue up to enable that influence.

I think there will be a lot of game-playing and posturing behind the scenes. We have to be very clever in how we manage this, publicly and privately. Utd and Liverpool are the drivers of this, and stand to be the main beneficiaries, we should be looking to isolate them within the top six. Now is the time for Usmanovs silent influence to come to bear, with all of the dexterity and trickery that characterises business and deal making in Russia and Eurasia.

Spurs to me seem to be the ultimate aspirant club, the footballing equivalent of a middle-class wannabe. But we have links with Arsenal in particular, and we should be looking to exploit even the merest hint of any division within the top-six as a stand-alone group.
I am fairly sure Stan Kronke has little or no time For Farhad Moshiri or Alisher Usmanov and would not entertain any suggestion of co-operation between the two clubs
 
Why not have the league cup for just the teams not in Europe ? There doesn't have to be all these changes just for that, more chance for the rest to win a trophy.
Because the top 6 need all the Europe places for themselves
What if one of them had a bad season ,finished 7th and did not get a place in Europe
Cant be having that malarkey
 
I am fairly sure Stan Kronke has little or no time For Farhad Moshiri or Alisher Usmanov and would not entertain any suggestion of co-operation between the two clubs

Yes, but we have to find a weakness somewhere. That group is made up of six clubs, each with its own agenda when all is said and done. Effectively this a power grab by Utd and Liverpool, City are happy to go along as well perhaps, but the other clubs are pawns albeit to a lesser degree than we are. I'd wager there are a lot of knives drawn in the private discussions that we are not party to. It's ultimately about forming alliances. In no way are Arsenal or Spurs in particular operating in a vastly different universe to us.

If we have no influence, all this is moot as we are then irrelevant anyway and things will play out and we have to accept them. But if we can bring anything to the table, and of course we should fight for our own interests first, then we have to do so.
 
Two clubs, one who is terrified of becoming what the other became for 30 years and the other managing to get back to the top and are scared of becoming themselves again, or being "a Leicester". Both coming together to try an screw the rest of the league over! Their attempt to include the rest of the "top 6" to get them on side is pathetic and if it worked would show how weak those 4 other clubs are... oh and the ridiculous proposal of giving the EFL a 25% cut of the TV rights is diabolical!! The bigger picture shows the 12 teams not in the "top 6" will have to pay the same amount to the EFL as the "top 6" yet will not have the same air time so advertising deals will be lower which will also be affected by the fewer fixtures. Everything is aimed at 6 clubs. If they want to make a change, sound, take those 6 clubs out of the league, set up a new one like the six nations where its a 1 off tournament a year...

Tbf the other three clubs in the nine proposed would have equal shareholder voting rights. As it takes only six to pass anything the result is the same. It has always been the way with TV executives deciding on exposure and how many games of each team's are covered that the most successful, and especially those with a huge worldwide fanbase, will be on TV far more often

The current situation without this plan is the top six get far more air time, far more exposure, and as it's paid per game covered, far more money even as a baseline so it's no change from the present really. The change is all about voting, the size of the league, the cut to the EFL and the power centred in those with voting rights. I'm totally against this plan but I'm not trying to change the rules of commerce that already dictate that TV companies will be more interested in the top six clubs
 
Last edited:

I'm assuming mate that before this was floated, as it stands the other 4 clubs from the big six signaled their approval of the proposals. No way would they go into this divided, now.

But this is just the opening gambit. There is no realistic prospect of a contained super-league, it falls at every hurdle because every league must have its also-rans. I don't think Chelsea, Arsenal, and Spurs would fancy their chances long-term, nor would their continental equivalents.

As I see it, we must play both sides of the debate off against each other, and play the top six off against each other as well, or at least try to. This is essentially a political task that Moshiri must handle. We must delay, prevaricate, and confuse.

Navigating through this unscathed is a mammoth task though. It's going to be like House of Cards this. Just worth saying again, that we cannot afford financially or in a footballing sense, for Usmanov not to be a central figure in our response to this. Whatever people's ethical views, we cannot have an individual of his relative wealth and influence, not in our corner, alongside the other billionaires and sovereign states. This is a game of strategy, so Bill and Co. would need to step out. We've already missed the boat in not appointing a new chairman and directors, and I hope that doesn't become critical.

I mean possibly. I am not wholly convinced.

However if they all supported it initially, the fact they are not throwing their weight behind it, as it gets torn apart is very interesting.
 
The more I think about the more to me it looks like the first step of progressing the super league.

Reducing the league to 18 teams with no league cup is quite a reduction in games. Possibly around 5-6 games at least.

Tbh this has always been a daily obvious endgame aspiration and cutting the numbers in the top domestic leagues across Europe always envisaged as a step towards this. I don't think it's particularly hidden or not now out in the open, however I don't think it's very close either. Germany and the other members of the top six are known not to be keen, but would go along with an expanded Champions league ,in terms of more quality games not in terms of more teams involved though.
 
The 3 Stooges think that they'll be on the inside pissing out. But they forget that while they may be in the 9, the shight 6ix will always out vote the 3 stooges

3 stooges, West Ham and Southampton have come out AGAINST it, calling them that despite their opposition seems very harsh to me.

They're not undecided
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top