Football Super League

[Gibbon]

I do care when our government try to jump on the populist bandwagon though to appease football fans.

Com' on you're longer in the tooth than this. Its pure politics and practiced by parties of all persuasions, because that's how it works you know. The new Red Wall Tory voters need looking after, because there won't be any levelling up so give them bread and circuses. Football is mainly watched and played by by the working/benefit class, it gives them hope and a distraction from their not so good lives, it also gives a sense of belonging and shared experiences.

[Paralytic]

I couldn't give 2 flying hoots about football, or the new/not going to happen league. I do care when our government try to jump on the populist bandwagon though to appease football fans.

Again, for someone who does not care, you're made some very emotive statements (all direct quotes, nothing to do with government intervention):

• Why is this all so bad ... apart from football fans think they own the clubs they support - they don’t.
• Love the irony that UEFA and the English Premier League are claiming it's only about money
• Problem is football fans think they own the clubs - they do not.
• UEFA and EPL only want to stop it as they will lose revenue, so it's their own greed that is triggering them.
• Why do we need 90 (not sure on exact number and can't be @rsed to check) professional football teams in England (plus the 2 in Scotland )?
• Go watch another team instead, or better still, another sport
• It's sour grapes from UEFA, and pure jealousy from those teams not invited to join.
• It's interesting to watch the great unwashed get so upset though
• Booooo .... I love it when football fans get upset. I particularly like it when a team loses, and the camera pans to the crowd and there are fans crying.

It's fine you don't like football, and the way it is run. but don't try to kid yourself that you're not emotionally invested (negatively) in the sport.

[shaunbhoy]

Just compare any modern premier league footballer to the likes of Jan Molby

Okay, I'll compare him to Stevie Gerrard. Who has the most League title winners medals?

[shaunbhoy]

Booooo .... I love it when football fans get upset. I particularly like it when a team loses, and the camera pans to the crowd and there are fans crying.

You really need to get out more.

[Whorty]

Again, for someone who does not care, you're made some very emotive statements (all direct quotes, nothing to do with government intervention):



It's fine you don't like football, and the way it is run. but don't try to kid yourself that you're not emotionally invested (negatively) in the sport.

You read it that way if you like, but you're wrong. I started the thread as no one else had and it was the biggest story of the day. But I couldn't give 2 hoots whether the league went ahead, or not, or had 6 clubs or 20, or anything else.

But all the indignity from various sectors was funny and worth a thread. Well, I thought so.

[Lost It]

I understand the footy clubs in Germany are pretty much owned by the fans. Why is the system in this country turned upside down? Because of greed?

[LondonManc]

I understand the footy clubs in Germany are pretty much owned by the fans. Why is the system in this country turned upside down? Because of greed?

Mainly because things had always been done a certain way here. Local businessmen traditionally backed their local clubs. The problem that has always existed is that the local owners sometimes went bust, so clubs suddenly had to sell players. Not a problems when margins between success and failure weren't big financially. In the mid 90s, football became family friendly (boosted by CCTV outside the ground and the popularity of England 96, as well as the introduction of all-seater stadia). The last time a local businessmen funded a club to the league title was Jack Walker with Blackburn Rovers in 1995. Fair play to him - others have tried it before and since without success. Back then, top players were earning about 120k per year. The costs were not huge. For some reason, player wages then started to massively grow - you'd end up with players on the bench regularly on 10k per week and your top men on 50k per week. That was until Abramovich bought Chelsea at a similar time to Real Madrid buying their Galacticos. Both had bottomless pits compared to other clubs - Chelsea were backed by a billionaire and Real Madrid simply had their debts written off by the Spanish government whenever they got too high! The Premier League grew as a brand (eugh!), TV deals got massive.

At this stage (2004), United were a plc. The Glazers then carried out a leveraged buy out. They'd acquired the necessary ~29% to force an offer for the rest by funding it from, I believe, remortgaging their mall business in the US, then borrowed the other £700m to complete it. So, essentially, they'd borrowed about £1.2bn to buy the club but somehow passed a fit and proper owner test that the Premier League had put in place after concerns about buyouts like Abramovich's. Chelsea were going bust without him, though, so something needed to be done to prevent that. After the Glazer takeover, they pushed 15 years ago for a European Super League as part of the then G14 teams (article here). As a United fan who joined Shareholders United, protested their ownership and gave up my season ticket because they'd bumped prices up by 24% and included an automatic cup scheme, I and many other reds had seen how low these gimps stoop - Malcolm Glazer had sued his own sister and were used to using grey areas of markets to make money. The club, as far as I'm aware, are still in debt to the tune of about £500m. The Glazers are making little to no effort to improve the ground or the surrounding area, with leaking roofs and safety concerns abounding. They're also making little to no effort to lower the debt while taking millions out of the club. They've spent over £800m on servicing the debt since they arrived. Would have bought a few decent players and sorted the ground out for sure.

Back to the present and the current TV deal, for smaller Prem clubs, makes up about 60-70% of their revenue. Player wages make up about 50% of their costs. It doesn't take much brain power to see why the Premier League, Sky and Champions League are the main power brokers (yet the new ESL is evil, go figure). Relegation from the Premier League nowadays for the likes of Fulham will cost them massively. Too many clubs are now majority funded and in many cases extensively reliant on the TV deal, something that is completely out of their hands as an individual club. Any financial adviser would tell you that's a bad idea for running a business.

Bottom line is that a move to the ESL would see Sky's TV deal reduced (no race for the top four in a closed shop ESL). This is obviously scary for the "other 14" who wouldn't want to lose a significant portion of the pie - particularly, say, Everton's current owner who has just committed to the new stadium build. It's greed all round, not just the big six (or 5+Spurs) who are at it. FIFA, UEFA, Premier League are anything but the victims in this.

[Gibbon]

Booooo .... I love it when football fans get upset. I particularly like it when a team loses, and the camera pans to the crowd and there are fans crying.

So,
1) You watch football
2) You enjoy other people being upset, yes I know a football team losing is hardly anything significant, me and you both know that unfortunately, but there will be people in that crowd who have or who are going through similar, and yet you enjoy it? really?

or maybe you just tune in at 90 mins to ewatch the misery?