Anyone catch Football Mundial on FSW on Friday Feb. 21? They had a part on the SPL and talked about the three aforementioned topics. Something interesting I didn't know is that many people think that there aren't enough young players coming through because they're not given enough chances. They basically get one and if they don't perform then they don't have much of an opportunity. It also mentioned Berti Vogts revising the Scottish youth national teams and development systems. I don't remember what they said about the financial state of the league if they even said much at all, but the obvious thing is the ridiculous financial gap existing between the Old Firm and the rest of the league. And then they mentioned that since its been so long since a team outside the Old Firm has one a chamionship, television deals for the remaining clubs looks very unattractive and are therefore, hardly offered. Then, that night on the FSW Report, I saw the report about Bayern potentially getting in trouble because of some secretive sponsorship deal. During the report, they mentioned the television deals in the Bundesliga. It got me thinking about the SPL. Why doesn't the whole league just share revenue from television deals and work it out so all teams are shown on television? Is it really that hard? It would reduce the huge financial gap, yet still giving the Old Firm their advantages in all other aspects. It seems only fair IMO. I recall the whole SPL television deals saga happening, but I was uninterested at the time, so I paid little attention. So why is this such a huge problem in Scotland?
It isnt shared equally and fairly because the old firm demand an 80% cut of the deal between them usually, they see it as they are attracting bigger tv deals than a league the size of the SPL deserves and thus they should get the lions share, 20% between 10 clubs is 2% each for the rest. I agree its not fair and in the interests of the league and raising the standard of scottish football a 12 way split of the (I think it was 10 million over 2-3 years the BBC deal probably more than 10) money would be the way to go, but the old firm wont do that as it is taking money out of their pockets. Its a business decision. Thats why the rebel 10 thing happened a few months back in which the non old firm clubs resigned from the SPL, that dispute has been sorted now but there is still no equal share of the television revenues. Anyway you look at it clubs that average 50,000 and 60,000 respectively every single week have a huge financial advantage over smaller clubs in any league, in a league where the next best attendance is pushing 14-15,000 its a massive gulf without taking the lions share of the telly money too, but thats the way it is, to be honest when the likes of hearts etc did have money to spend they went the wrong way with it, they spend loads on duff foreign players trying to keep up with the old firm when it was impossible, they should have invested in their future with training academies and indoor pitches and training facilities but they didnt. The grass roots level of the top flight is in a shambles to be quite honest but we are still bringing through quite a promising crop of youngsters.
Re: Re: SPL television deals, financial state, and youth development This is what pisses me off about the Old Firm. They bitch about lack of competition and aren't willing to make a financial change to improve the quality of play in the SPL. Like you say, the Old Firm still have the ridiculous gap in stadium revenue, the T.V. deal sharing would just reduce the gap a lot. The only way this hurts the Old Firm is a little bit in Europe because they may not have as much money to spend on payers. But its ridiculous that they won't share T.V. revenue. It would seem like a win-win situation to me. The other teams improve and the Old Firm get some of that improved competition they want. Maybe this time, the remaining teams would spend their money wisely.
I still don't understand how the "breakup" last year got patched up without significant concessions on the part of the Old Firm. Considering the overhead of the two big clubs, I think the smaller clubs would have been more able to survive a Year Without the Old Firm, than the OF would, if you get my drift. I mean the 10 clubs could have just played a league schedule, put together some sort of ad hoc or ala carte TV deal and spread the wealth among themselves and probably have hobbled through the year. And Lo' a real championship race! Where would the Old Firm have gone? Tits up is my guess. They weren't joining the English Premiership, that's for certain. So what happened there? Lack of nerve on the part of the other clubs? Proper revenue sharing and salary caps is the only thing that’s going to save professional football in Europe in the long run. Everyone had better start wising up, or there are going to be more disasters like in Italy.
Re: Re: Re: SPL television deals, financial state, and youth development a 16 team league playing each other twice seems like a win win situation to most people in scotland and the easiest thing to do to improve the standard both of play and of competition but the 12 SPL clubs wont agree to it as it cuts their television revenue even further, football is a business now and sad to say most of the current chairmen and chief executives in the scottish top flight are extremely short sighted businessmen.
I agree but the details of what exactly was arranged are sketchy at best in the public domain, i think it was managed with not a lot of sway on the side of the old firm, most of the rebel 10 chairmen are gutless idiots anyway so it wouldnt have taken a lot of money being tendered to patch things up i think.
Someone is going to have to come in and do something about the league. I've become so interested in it since I got FSW two weeks ago and I really would like to see changes. More parity within the SPL is an absolute must for it to ever go places. I can't stand the domination. The Old Firm hardly have to break a sweat in many of their games and its just really annoying. I'm assuming that you Celtic fans enjoy European nights a hell of a lot more than League games.
The problem was that you have a few teams in the league who are "influenced" by the OF. For example, Livingston are run by two guys who used to be directors at Celtic, and Killie's CEO also used to be at Celtic. Then you add in that there isn't much common interest between the ten, since they all have different aspirations. This was made clear by the fact that the three clubs who held out the longest in the dispute were Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts, who have most to gain from reducing the gap between the OF and the rest. The ten really made a few tactical errors in the last dispute. They didn't set clear objectives beyond changing the league voting system (which they did). They were in a strong position this time, as the Old Firm had no real alternative (ie England didn't want them, and UEFA is resisting major cross-border moves). Yet this position was not fully exploited. Television wouldn't accept this, as the OF fans form the major part of the audience. They could do a little bit more, eg showing more of the derby games (only showing one Dundee derby game this season is terrible), but major change on this is unlikely. There are three things which may bring in some balance: 1/ the OF fans appear to be losing some interest in the domestic football. However, as long as they season book sales are good, this will not significantly impact; 2/ they are carrying debt burdens which may be difficult to ease. But most of the other clubs are also carrying comparable (pro-rata) debt, which reduces their flexibility; 3/ there appears to be a better crop of young players in the Scottish game. This should (in theory) improve the weaker teams, and may make it impossible for the OF to sign most/all of the good players as in the recent past.