Cascadia, California, Quebec, New England, Texas, Basque Country, Catalonia, Galicia, Lombardy, Sicily, Bavaria, Chiapas, and many other nations around the world request the support of nation-loving football fans everywhere, especially the ones who live on the British Isles, for their unique cultural perspective and historical football cache should provide a hefty amount of sway. - Paul
The simple fact is that no team in Scotland, Wales and NI would be able to compete in the EPL. At least they get a chance to qualify for Champions League whilst in their respective leagues. God there are enough ************ teams in England, we dont need anymore...
You make it sound like it's just a loose confederation. I've been told by a Scot that citizenship is the same, no matter which part of the UK you live/were born in. That doesn't sound like 'different nations' to me... even in the USA, you are only a resident of a particular state and have disadvantages if trying to live in others. Rangers and Celtic are probably about the 3rd-6th richest clubs in the UK.
England, Wales and Scotland are not different nations - not anywhere other than in the eyes of certain sporting confederations in any case (almost exclusively in sports we invented, it might be worth adding). And Rangers and Celtic are not even close to being the 3rd, 4th or 5th richest clubs in the UK. Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool, Newcastle, Aston Villa, Spurs and Middlesbrough are all bigger financially. The Old Firm have a large fan base and a lot of people through the turnstiles every week, but they don't make anywhere near as much from TV and associated earnings. The Old Firm, transplanted into the EPL - now there would be two financial powerhouses. But in the SPL? Nah. Celtic's record signing is Chris Sutton for £6m.
Ahh. I just went by this FOX site rating the 'richest clubs', and where Celtic and Rangers were both in the top 20. I thought it was rated by 2003-2004 payroll. this shows Celtic as 6th.
I count 8th??? Manu (1) Arse (7) 'Pool (8) 'Toon (9) Chelsea (10) Spurs (15) Leeds (16) Celtic (20) The only real substantive difference I see since last year would be Chelsea's standing. The otheres may have changed, but I wouldn't expect dramatically so. Maybe Leeds.
That's turnover. As the list shows, according to turnover, Manchester United are richer than Chelsea. According to reality, they're not even close, for obvious reasons not related to the simple mechanics of a football club as a business. Fact is, Celtic lose money most years because funding a giant in a kindergarten is an expensive and not particularly lucrative enterprise. Of the 20 Premier League clubs in the season you cite, whilst most have serviced debts, only three made a loss in the last published financial year.
Don't know, but likely not. Even with everything else the same with respect to income, the loss of money from whatever differences there are between Prem and Championship television would pull them down significantly. But using the data presented...........
Matt Clark is right, that list was just turnover, only shows one side of it. Also worth bearing in mind that if they were in the Premiership Celtic and Rangers would not be allowed to enter European competition, in the same way that Swansea and Cardiff can't. So although they would get a revenue boost from the Premiership, they would never be near the top 6 clubs as they can't offer the possibility of European competition to prospective players and would not have that extra income even if they finish high enough.
Well, in the thankfully unlikely event that the EPL were to admit Rangers and Celtic, I think we can reasonably assume that UEFA would find some "extraordinary consensus" to bend the rules on European representation for Scottish teams in the English league. Both clubs are, after all, members of the G14. But like I say, it's thankfully a remote possibility that we will ever be in a position to find out for sure.
Ah yes, the UK football team and league. The wet dreams of the UK Plastic fans (which is rather strange when you think about it... plastic fans of a team that doesn't even exist). "Imagine Ryan Giggs in the England line-up!" It won't happen anytime soon. I hope it doesn't. Each nation has their own identity and league. And then look at the repercussions if Celtic and Rangers, et. al did form one league, aka the "Phoenix League" as it was once referred to a couple of years ago. What happens when one of them faces relegation into the nationwide conference? What happens when they lose their Champions-League places? Not so easy... I think some think that if the nation is combined, suddenly there will be 6 automatic spots for England and the league will somehow be expanded. But there would probably be the same amount of teams, same amount of spots, and looking at the obvious difference in quality between the Premiership and Scottish & Welsh leagues, they would be fortunate (Celtic, Rangers) to qualify into the UEFA cup. Also regarding the Olympics - the last I read, there will be a mini-tournament between England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to see who actually 'represents' the United Kingdom. I said it elsewhere, but you may as well just consider it the "England Pre-Olympic Tour".
True, but then after a hundred years or so, a group of rag-tags from the states would rise up and knock the pi$$ out of you .
Wasn't there talk of Celtic and the Rangers joining the EPL a couple years ago? or is that talk of that over with??