But ... but that doesn't happen except in the US! Huh? The top teams aren't the ones facing closing doors for good ... lower league clubs are.
Lock out of European cups and empty stadiums arenot going to bring in the money to pay the absurd wages of the top stars. How much was Barcelona losing this summer?
The entirety of "clubs not paying for their stadiums/receiving funding" has been bandied about in this thread over the years. ... interesting comment given the arguments FOR the pro/rel camp in this thread about pro/rel IN AMERICA. Interesting indeed.
Somebody obviously missed the parody copy of what has been said about the non American commentors in here
Really? they own ManU and Liverpool. Despite mediocrity on the field, ManU remains the third richest football club on Earth. Liverpool is the 8th, I think, but they've had a bit of success recently. Now, their proposal was doa and almost certainly intended to eventually allow the rich to take full control of television and streaming contracts, but it did offer lower league clubs a chance to survive. Those most strongly against it were the 11 Prem clubs considered outsiders and expendable. Promotion and relegation does not get stronger if lower league clubs start to fold up their tents, which is expected to begin in significant numbers by spring. It's unlikely this report was leaked to the press before most clubs had seen it because it was intended to be a final draft. It was, instead, a warning shot across the bow. The truly massive clubs are using this time of no gate revenue to consolidate their power. The message in this report was clear: We can save the poor clubs, but the cost for financial support will be steep. The alternative option, that the rich clubs should just give the poor ones $300 million with no strings attached, is not attracting at lot of support among those would write the checks. In the end, this is an attack on the FA, EFL and Prem. UEFA and FIFA will be next.
What the big clubs (=American owners) forget is that it's the FA's as partner of the UEFA and the UEFA are the ones which sets the rules for participating in the profitable European cup tournements. If all over (Western) Europe competitions are going to collaps because of small clubs faulting, the most easy way to counter that is by reducing the pay out of those tournements and using the money to support the small clubs. Without leagues there's no UEFA.
I wonder what the situation would be if the approach was diff ... say ... a process by where ownership groups had to have a certain amount of net worth/assets or something that would allow for things like, for example, a global pandemic that wipes out the "paycheck to paycheck" living of match day revenues that so many rely on to survive. I mean, hypothetically ... wonder what that would look like in light of that report. The Prem/La Liga/Serie A either don't/won't share monies down their respective pyramids in any manner of relevancy .... but you think UEFA will? K
That, IMO, was the point of the proposal.The big clubs are playing Mr. Potter right now. They're seeing a crisis as opportunity and will be paying pennies on the dollar for the power they've been edging towards for many years. It doesn't matter who does all the living and dying and passing and scoring if the teams can't pay their bills. I mean, I want Reading to survive, but sometimes in real life Mr Potter wins. As has been discussed in this thread a couple thousand times, the major non governmental organizations are seen as more powerful than they should be. In the US, the primary anger vented in this way is towards the NCAA. Most commonly in football, we question the ethics of FIFA, or the Olympic Committee, in picking hosts. But who adds value to football: the people who organize a league, or the teams people around the world will pay to see play? I'm not suggesting the rich want to destroy the poor and the NGOs, they just want them weak enough to be easily drowned in a bathtub.
If let's say the sole pro survivors are the clubs with money in their account and let's suppose these are about 8, which doesnot necesarily mean all of the top 6 included, they will face the problem that they themselves will fold as there's going to be zero EPL tv billions to grab, there's zero home match day revenues to collect, there's no CL/EL tv and matchday money to collect. It's their end. The folded clubs simply can restart in first instance as non pro clubs and start all over again.
One thing you don't seem to realize is that Project Big Picture was an English Football League proposal, representing 72 lower division professional clubs, led by the original CEO of the Premier League and involving the head of the Football Association [according to today's Guardian]. I do believe that there is a huge gulf between American team owners and others in that American owners expect to make a profit, which most have done in their own leagues for many years.
Except their proposal included quite a bit of money for the poor clubs.They don't want them dead, they just want them subservient
It's the money the UEFA already payes out to the (top) clubs. There's no benivolent gesture, just another way of distributing it.
It was a liverpool, ManU plan, from the Guardian (and not just the Guaridan, but Conn): Some in the EFL were also trying to look on the bright side after a fraught few days that have not cast the most flattering floodlight on the inner workings of the great game. They figure that at least the idea was surprisingly raised in the Liverpool and Manchester United plan, for a 25% sharing of the Premier League’s multibillions with the EFL, and must now be negotiated.
And the fact that some pro pro/rel folks on here are actually American anyway. Of course, at least one "normal culprit" likes to denigrate those who hold differing opinions to him as being foreign and thus somehow being "unworthy".
So that every one can read the story here's the link. Seems Clarke pushed the idea of Premier League B teams in lower divisions (which went nowhere) and the creation of a "Premier League 2". But, he walked away: "Clarke said this week he had been involved in Project Big Picture discussions but had walked away “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”. https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...mier-league-2-and-b-teams-project-big-picture Also, as Placid pointed out, the chairman of the Football League used to be the chief executive of Liverpool. Not a conflict of interest per se, but certainly something to be aware of.