|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Oct 12, 2020 7:07:11 GMT
Operation’ ‘Big Power” is what this is according to the Accrington owner.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 7:14:29 GMT
Says it all that it's been cooked up by two American owners, and the ex-Liverpool employee. Seems that Chelsea and Spurs are on board, but the remainder of the Big 6 - Arsenal and Man City are not so keen.
I think that when Leicester won the PL there were some loose bowels in the boardrooms of the Big 6, and they want to make sure that the smaller PL clubs are kept in their place in the pecking order.
As Roadman might say - sh*tehousery of the highest order!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 8:29:29 GMT
In principle though, some action needs to be taken. The current income and cost structure of the EFL does not add up. Even before Covid and empty stadiums.
|
|
|
Post by rememberhalifax on Oct 12, 2020 9:05:14 GMT
As with any negotiation you never get every thing you want and have to compromise. Most of the proposals seem to be no brainers to me with just one or two perhaps not sitting well with every one. I don't see the loan clause as a problem as i can not imagine any lower league club fans or owners wanting to field a team of 11 loanees, there being no obligation to have loan players at all, it is very much there choice as to what extent they use the system. The reduction of 2 in league status may start alarm bells ringing in some clubs but if truth be known there are a handful of clubs who ,once over the pride factor, would be happier in the National league where the financial pressure is not so great, the difficulty comes in the method used to decide on the casualties. It would be unfair to do it on a 'one season' relegation basis, as we know only to well every club can have a bad season, i do not have the answer. Many see this as a power grab by those at the top but do they not have that power unofficially anyway? Years ago communities and organisations were founded and based on the Feudal system where the people at the top ran the estate, business, or what ever but they made sure the whole community, workforce, benefited and were looked after, recognising that without them they could not survive and it was to there benefit to look after them properly. Of course not all those at the top saw it that way but those that did were rewarded with lasting legacies and it all depends how you view the motives of those who now put forward these proposals. Do you believe, as Mr Parry plainly does, that these owners have the best interest of all clubs at heart, or do you believe its a sinister plot to have absolute control in the hands of a few, i lean to wards the former but then i always look for the good in people until i know otherwise, i am sure this will be debated up and down the football pyramid and lets hope the right conclusion is reached for the benefit of the game we all love. s
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,339
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 12, 2020 9:22:41 GMT
I've long thought the League Cup should just be for the three EFL divisions and scrap the EFL Trophy.
Would going back to regional leagues help with travel costs? We could have 3 regions feeding into the Championship, league winners go up automatically with a 4th team joining via a playoff between each league's second and third placed teams.
Four up, four down would keep things interesting for so called 'established clubs' in the Championship too.
|
|
|
Post by neilv93 on Oct 12, 2020 9:34:55 GMT
I've long thought the League Cup should just be for the three EFL divisions and scrap the EFL Trophy. Would going back to regional leagues help with travel costs? We could have 3 regions feeding into the Championship, league winners go up automatically with a 4th team joining via a playoff between each league's second and third placed teams. Four up, four down would keep things interesting for so called 'established clubs' in the Championship too. Regional leagues certainly could be a viable option, though wouldn't we miss trips to Sunderland, Blackpool and the like? Likewise, grouping clubs geographically is dangerous given geography doesn't relate to ability or infrastructure and leagues could be top/bottom-heavy in some cases - in theory a nice idea though.
|
|
stuart1974
Proper Gas
Posts: 12,339
Member is Online
|
Post by stuart1974 on Oct 12, 2020 9:47:02 GMT
I've long thought the League Cup should just be for the three EFL divisions and scrap the EFL Trophy. Would going back to regional leagues help with travel costs? We could have 3 regions feeding into the Championship, league winners go up automatically with a 4th team joining via a playoff between each league's second and third placed teams. Four up, four down would keep things interesting for so called 'established clubs' in the Championship too. Regional leagues certainly could be a viable option, though wouldn't we miss trips to Sunderland, Blackpool and the like? Likewise, grouping clubs geographically is dangerous given geography doesn't relate to ability or infrastructure and leagues could be top/bottom-heavy in some cases - in theory a nice idea though. When they are good enough to join us in the Championship then we'll play them again 😀 Pro and cons all round, agree that it has a lot of issues to overcome, even if it was realistic. Could make them feed into L1 instead with the National League and L2 becoming split.
|
|
|
Post by lpgas1 on Oct 12, 2020 9:52:57 GMT
Yes, I agree. I think there is a big difference with that though for football supporters. Morecambe could have a starting 11 on loan from Premiership clubs for example but the fact it is for Morecambe not Man City B team is perceptively seen very differently by supporters etc. Agreed. It seems the EFL chairman Rick Parry is supposedly on board the proposals. He's a Twat
|
|
|
Post by lpgas1 on Oct 12, 2020 10:00:35 GMT
I'm contemplating doing a petition about this, could the government intervene at all? The Culture Secretary was on BBC Breakfast this morning - he is against the proposal. He feels that the premiership clubs are using the current situation to enable them to restructure the football leagues via the back room deal (paraphrasing here, as my memory is like a sieve). If the PL try to push ahead with it, there is something in the Conservative manifesto about reviewing the way professional football is run, and he would invoke this. Apparently PL clubs have said they would not let a smaller club go to the wall, but have not put any meat on the bones as to what they would offer to do. No doubt something will appear on the BBC website soon, so you can get an accurate record of what was discussed! Where were they when Bury and Macclesfield went under? (and I blame the EFL for their fit and proper person check not being good enough)
|
|
|
Post by lpgas1 on Oct 12, 2020 10:03:40 GMT
As with any negotiation you never get every thing you want and have to compromise. Most of the proposals seem to be no brainers to me with just one or two perhaps not sitting well with every one. I don't see the loan clause as a problem as i can not imagine any lower league club fans or owners wanting to field a team of 11 loanees, there being no obligation to have loan players at all, it is very much there choice as to what extent they use the system. The reduction of 2 in league status may start alarm bells ringing in some clubs but if truth be known there are a handful of clubs who ,once over the pride factor, would be happier in the National league where the financial pressure is not so great, the difficulty comes in the method used to decide on the casualties. It would be unfair to do it on a 'one season' relegation basis, as we know only to well every club can have a bad season, i do not have the answer. Many see this as a power grab by those at the top but do they not have that power unofficially anyway? Years ago communities and organisations were founded and based on the Feudal system where the people at the top ran the estate, business, or what ever but they made sure the whole community, workforce, benefited and were looked after, recognising that without them they could not survive and it was to there benefit to look after them properly. Of course not all those at the top saw it that way but those that did were rewarded with lasting legacies and it all depends how you view the motives of those who now put forward these proposals. Do you believe, as Mr Parry plainly does, that these owners have the best interest of all clubs at heart, or do you believe its a sinister plot to have absolute control in the hands of a few, i lean to wards the former but then i always look for the good in people until i know otherwise, i am sure this will be debated up and down the football pyramid and lets hope the right conclusion is reached for the benefit of the game we all love. s and what if in the future Chelsea say no you cannot have one player, you must take 5, and they all must play
|
|
|
Post by lpgas1 on Oct 12, 2020 10:08:30 GMT
I've long thought the League Cup should just be for the three EFL divisions and scrap the EFL Trophy. Would going back to regional leagues help with travel costs? We could have 3 regions feeding into the Championship, league winners go up automatically with a 4th team joining via a playoff between each league's second and third placed teams. Four up, four down would keep things interesting for so called 'established clubs' in the Championship too. I cannot see the other Prem clubs wanting to scrap the league cup, and for the lower league clubs, who can get a big team at home it is a money spinner. Regional leagues would save on travel and hotel expenses, but for fans it would limit their experiences, although of course when everyone is queing at the service stations for hours charging their electric cars it wont be a problem
|
|
|
Post by Baxtinho on Oct 12, 2020 11:27:23 GMT
As someone else posted earlier, it does feel like Greeks bearing gifts.
Offer the EFL the money it desperately needs now, in return for power to vote in ersatz B-Teams by changing the loan rules.
The "Top Six" will just get stronger and harder to break into, then will negotiate higher share of TV rights, so on and so on until it's even more of a closed shop.
|
|
|
Post by rememberhalifax on Oct 12, 2020 12:14:11 GMT
As with any negotiation you never get every thing you want and have to compromise. Most of the proposals seem to be no brainers to me with just one or two perhaps not sitting well with every one. I don't see the loan clause as a problem as i can not imagine any lower league club fans or owners wanting to field a team of 11 loanees, there being no obligation to have loan players at all, it is very much there choice as to what extent they use the system. The reduction of 2 in league status may start alarm bells ringing in some clubs but if truth be known there are a handful of clubs who ,once over the pride factor, would be happier in the National league where the financial pressure is not so great, the difficulty comes in the method used to decide on the casualties. It would be unfair to do it on a 'one season' relegation basis, as we know only to well every club can have a bad season, i do not have the answer. Many see this as a power grab by those at the top but do they not have that power unofficially anyway? Years ago communities and organisations were founded and based on the Feudal system where the people at the top ran the estate, business, or what ever but they made sure the whole community, workforce, benefited and were looked after, recognising that without them they could not survive and it was to there benefit to look after them properly. Of course not all those at the top saw it that way but those that did were rewarded with lasting legacies and it all depends how you view the motives of those who now put forward these proposals. Do you believe, as Mr Parry plainly does, that these owners have the best interest of all clubs at heart, or do you believe its a sinister plot to have absolute control in the hands of a few, i lean to wards the former but then i always look for the good in people until i know otherwise, i am sure this will be debated up and down the football pyramid and lets hope the right conclusion is reached for the benefit of the game we all love. s and what if in the future Chelsea say no you cannot have one player, you must take 5, and they all must play You say 'Well, that's jolly decent of you chaps and thankyou for your kind offer but no thank you.
|
|
|
Post by xenongas on Oct 12, 2020 14:21:13 GMT
Obviously the ones who came up with their plan (without any consultation with other stakeholders it seems) will have self serving interests. Some of the ideas have been around for a long time and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand though. The main points (copypasta from BBC Sport):
The Premier League cut from 20 to 18 clubs, with the Championship, League One and League Two each retaining 24 teams. I don't think this is a heinous ideal. I'm not sure if it will increase the gap between Prem and Championship or not. It has been spoken about for years as a way to cut down on fixtures which should in theory help the national team. The biggest losers will be the 2 teams who drop out of the 92 but I think that will be a short term hit (although maybe that opinion is distorted by our quick escape).
The bottom two teams in the Premier League relegated automatically with the 16th-placed team joining the Championship play-offs. Again, not a terrible idea. It would be interesting to see how teams set up in a relegation playoff.
The League Cup and Community Shield abolished. I don't watch the Community Shield because I don't care about it. I don't know who does really. I don't think the League Cup will be scrapped because I think the compromise will be teams in Europe that season won't have to participate which I've got no problem with.
Parachute payments scrapped. A £250m rescue fund made immediately available to the EFL & 25% of all future TV deals I don't know the exact figures for parachute payments but I am sure the proposed offer is a better deal for the EFL than them. The only losers here are West Brom, Fulham, Norwich etc that bounce around the Prem and Championship.
£100m paid to the FA to make up for lost revenue. I'd be careful that this does not turn out to be a Wonga loan that looks terrible in a few years. But investment into grassroots should get a boost.
Nine clubs given 'special voting rights' on certain issues, based on their extended runs in the Premier League. This is the thing that should, and largely is, be dismissed out of hand. Clearly a power grab and perhaps the aim of the whole exercise. It is being used as a lightning rod to poo poo the whole thing though. I reckon the backlash will force a walkback on this particular element (West Ham have already come out to rubbish it and they were a beneficary) which leaves the rest of the more reasonable proposals that should be discussed.
The vast majority of people, especially outside of the prem, have been arguing for reform. Reform is never easy or pretty though and there will inevitably be losers. Liverpool and Man Utd clearly have motives for putting this out there but I don't see why they can't be the basis for something in the future. As has been pointed out by others, the powers that be in EFL, Prem, and Government have yet to put forward anything solid.
|
|
|
Post by legas on Oct 12, 2020 14:35:04 GMT
Obviously the ones who came up with their plan (without any consultation with other stakeholders it seems) will have self serving interests. Some of the ideas have been around for a long time and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand though. The main points (copypasta from BBC Sport): The Premier League cut from 20 to 18 clubs, with the Championship, League One and League Two each retaining 24 teams. I don't think this is a heinous ideal. I'm not sure if it will increase the gap between Prem and Championship or not. It has been spoken about for years as a way to cut down on fixtures which should in theory help the national team. The biggest losers will be the 2 teams who drop out of the 92 but I think that will be a short term hit (although maybe that opinion is distorted by our quick escape). The bottom two teams in the Premier League relegated automatically with the 16th-placed team joining the Championship play-offs. Again, not a terrible idea. It would be interesting to see how teams set up in a relegation playoff. The League Cup and Community Shield abolished. I don't watch the Community Shield because I don't care about it. I don't know who does really. I don't think the League Cup will be scrapped because I think the compromise will be teams in Europe that season won't have to participate which I've got no problem with. Parachute payments scrapped. A £250m rescue fund made immediately available to the EFL & 25% of all future TV deals I don't know the exact figures for parachute payments but I am sure the proposed offer is a better deal for the EFL than them. The only losers here are West Brom, Fulham, Norwich etc that bounce around the Prem and Championship. £100m paid to the FA to make up for lost revenue. I'd be careful that this does not turn out to be a Wonga loan that looks terrible in a few years. But investment into grassroots should get a boost. Nine clubs given 'special voting rights' on certain issues, based on their extended runs in the Premier League. This is the thing that should, and largely is, be dismissed out of hand. Clearly a power grab and perhaps the aim of the whole exercise. It is being used as a lightning rod to poo poo the whole thing though. I reckon the backlash will force a walkback on this particular element (West Ham have already come out to rubbish it and they were a beneficary) which leaves the rest of the more reasonable proposals that should be discussed. The vast majority of people, especially outside of the prem, have been arguing for reform. Reform is never easy or pretty though and there will inevitably be losers. Liverpool and Man Utd clearly have motives for putting this out there but I don't see why they can't be the basis for something in the future. As has been pointed out by others, the powers that be in EFL, Prem, and Government have yet to put forward anything solid. I agree and, like you, don’t think all the proposals are terrible, but I think you’ve hit the nail on the head when you suggest a power grab (from the voting changes) is the main aim and suspect that without agreement to this, the other proposals will probably disappear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2020 14:44:27 GMT
Reducing the size of the Premiership won't reduce the number of fixtures, as clubs just want more time to play lucrative friendlies overseas. Therefore, no advantage for the England team.
If the Prem clubs set up their own platforms PPV games, this will diminish the number and quality of matched available for broadcasters to bid for. Hence, lower price paid, which trickles down to less TV money to be distributed to the EFL clubs.
The Prem money will be distributed with greater emphasis on merit, over the previous 3 or 4 seasons. So, if one of the Big 6 have a blip, they will be cushioned from losing too much money that season.
With regard to loans, the EFL clubs don't have to take players, but, with parent club usually picking up a fair chunk of the wages, it would be an attractive option for most EFL clubs.
I don't think that Rick Parry has any empathy with EFL clubs, he is the Trojan horse, and they opened the gates wide and let him in.
|
|
|
Post by xenongas on Oct 12, 2020 14:45:46 GMT
Obviously the ones who came up with their plan (without any consultation with other stakeholders it seems) will have self serving interests. Some of the ideas have been around for a long time and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand though. The main points (copypasta from BBC Sport): The Premier League cut from 20 to 18 clubs, with the Championship, League One and League Two each retaining 24 teams. I don't think this is a heinous ideal. I'm not sure if it will increase the gap between Prem and Championship or not. It has been spoken about for years as a way to cut down on fixtures which should in theory help the national team. The biggest losers will be the 2 teams who drop out of the 92 but I think that will be a short term hit (although maybe that opinion is distorted by our quick escape). The bottom two teams in the Premier League relegated automatically with the 16th-placed team joining the Championship play-offs. Again, not a terrible idea. It would be interesting to see how teams set up in a relegation playoff. The League Cup and Community Shield abolished. I don't watch the Community Shield because I don't care about it. I don't know who does really. I don't think the League Cup will be scrapped because I think the compromise will be teams in Europe that season won't have to participate which I've got no problem with. Parachute payments scrapped. A £250m rescue fund made immediately available to the EFL & 25% of all future TV deals I don't know the exact figures for parachute payments but I am sure the proposed offer is a better deal for the EFL than them. The only losers here are West Brom, Fulham, Norwich etc that bounce around the Prem and Championship. £100m paid to the FA to make up for lost revenue. I'd be careful that this does not turn out to be a Wonga loan that looks terrible in a few years. But investment into grassroots should get a boost. Nine clubs given 'special voting rights' on certain issues, based on their extended runs in the Premier League. This is the thing that should, and largely is, be dismissed out of hand. Clearly a power grab and perhaps the aim of the whole exercise. It is being used as a lightning rod to poo poo the whole thing though. I reckon the backlash will force a walkback on this particular element (West Ham have already come out to rubbish it and they were a beneficary) which leaves the rest of the more reasonable proposals that should be discussed. The vast majority of people, especially outside of the prem, have been arguing for reform. Reform is never easy or pretty though and there will inevitably be losers. Liverpool and Man Utd clearly have motives for putting this out there but I don't see why they can't be the basis for something in the future. As has been pointed out by others, the powers that be in EFL, Prem, and Government have yet to put forward anything solid. I agree and, like you, don’t think all the proposals are terrible, but I think you’ve hit the nail on the head when you suggest a power grab (from the voting changes) is the main aim and suspect that without agreement to this, the other proposals will probably disappear. I hope not. Now it is all out there it'll be pretty transparent if the voting plan is the sticking point that can't be amended. So I hope the proposal as a whole can be moulded into something more palatable.
|
|
|
Post by darkbluegas on Oct 13, 2020 8:29:24 GMT
This whole situation has taken quite a strange turn now. The majority of the PL, who proposed the deal are against it ( I know it’s a Liverpool/Man U thing) whilst the EFL seem to be broadly in favour of it. I can see the EFL owners and chairmen are desperate to find a way to get themselves out of a massive financial black hole. While understandable, individually, it’ll be sad to see the demise of the football pyramid in this country.
Liverpool/Man U have cynically come up with this deal at this difficult moment to close up the Premier league. They know the real money in the future will be in the European Club league so need to restrict domestic fixtures to free themselves up.
A horribly cynical move but understandable that league one and two chairmen have had their heads turned.
|
|
|
Post by bluebiro on Oct 13, 2020 8:44:55 GMT
What premier league team outside the 6 would vote to reduce the amount of teams in it?
|
|
|
Post by lpgas1 on Oct 13, 2020 18:17:08 GMT
Any coincidence that Liverpool and Man Utd have American owners?
|
|