Jump to content
 Badger

Big clubs possible move could ‘end football as we know it'

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, ncfcstar said:

I think that becomes true if these teams essentially become franchises, and that is probably the only route for them if the league comes into fruition.  I can't see how the majority of real fans of the six will attend the ESL games, and it will be hard to fill stadiums in Manchester/Liverpool with new fans each week.

Move them all to London (Red Devils v Mersey Birds) with games played at a purpose built franchise stadium (new White Hart Lane) or play all ESL games in Asia/Middle East/US and then you perhaps guarantee full stadiums for these teams who are just no longer the teams that are currently in existence.

Unfortunately I think there will be enough plastic fans willing ti step into the void, at least initially. Old Trafford and Anfield will just be full of tourists and uk based gloryhunter fans. The atmosphere will be terrible though and as a product i think the games will suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

I don't think you're in the minority, I agree, but I think the Championship is also more interesting than the PL currently and the TV deal for the EFL is nowhere near the value of the Sky PL deal because of the 'big six'.

You are certainly not in the minority of proper, "legacy" football fans.

However, in terms of "consumers" or tv viewers of the EPL worldwide you (and I) are in the minority i'm sure. It would take a while I think for broadcasters to have the confidence that a premier league product without the big 6 is worth paying big bucks for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, king canary said:

That is all true but my general point is that a willingness to detach a club from its heritage and sign up for this soulless farce of a competition isn't exclusive to the bogeyman of foreign owners. 

Not exclusive, just primarily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won’t pay to watch any of it, I will have no more interest in it than the very passing interest I have in the Champions League now. If the bulk of the domestic fan base including ‘legacy’ supporters turn their backs on the big 6 and don’t buy subscriptions to watch this sham, I wonder what the owners will do? Up sticks and play all the games in Asia? Imagine, the years of history and ties these clubs have with their areas and communities gone forever. The parasite owners should be made to sell up and invest their massively borrowed funds in Beijing Rovers, Kuala Lumpur Utd etc, the prospect of them ‘whoring’ out the names of Europe’s clubs just for their financial gain is just shameful.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Unfortunately I think there will be enough plastic fans willing ti step into the void, at least initially. Old Trafford and Anfield will just be full of tourists and uk based gloryhunter fans. The atmosphere will be terrible though and as a product i think the games will suffer.

If you’ve gone to a baseball or NFL game, the actual sport being played feels like of secondary importance. Lots of people milling about not necessarily watching the game.

That’s what we’re in danger of here. All passion to leave the game. Players and teams moving around all over the place. The LA Knights vs the Mersey Reds vs the Shanghai Steelers vs the Sydney Roos. 
 

Hope more players speak out against it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Strikes me this is the nub of the matter, particularly for the Americans involved. Where is this fabulous money coming from? It is borrowed cash, this is financial engineering of the sort that the Glaziers used to take over Man U. It doesn't matter for them whether it works or not, the SuperLeague will be loaded with debt and they will award themselves millions in dividends. If it works fine, if it doesn't they make money too.

it appears what these owners all want is a stiaution like owners of NFL or MLB teams have- one where the overall financial health a profitability of the clubs is somewhat divorced from their success on the pitch. I actually don't think this is a bad notion and like all things it has positives and negatives but it also needs to extend to the rest of football.

The best things to import from American sports would be ideas like salary caps and (if you want to get truly radical) getting rid of transfer fees. I wouldn't actually be shocked if the new ESL would have a salary cap in there somewhere to prevent it just leading to much bigger arms race. The bit American sports generally do have though is a collective concern for the overall good of the game (I'm sure driven largely by selfish reasons) that is missing in football. Clubs like these 12 are concerned only about their own financial health, the overall health of the game is something they pay lip service to at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the stadiums are a big deal. The money spinner is the brand. Stadiums don't increase the brand value. Players do. Stadiums don't sell any shirts. Stadiums are for legacy fans...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, king canary said:

Clubs like these 12 are concerned only about their own financial health, the overall health of the game is something they pay lip service to at best.

It's the owners not the clubs. They are concerned about their own financial health and really care nothing about their own clubs, let alone football in general, unless it contributes to the bottom line 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Not exclusive, just primarily.

Kind of. The three Spanish clubs are all owned locally by members and Juventus are owned locally too. Milan and Inter are seemingly owned by hedge fund types but I'm not certain Berlusconi or Moratti would have objected to this if they were still in place. So its a 66/33% ownership split, with foreign owned PSG being one of the high profile teams to say no. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BigFish said:

It's the owners not the clubs. They are concerned about their own financial health and really care nothing about their own clubs, let alone football in general, unless it contributes to the bottom line 

Not sure I agree there- some of them sure, I don't think the Glazers or Kronke really care that much but I don't doubt that Perez or Agnelli care about their teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, WD40 said:

If you’ve gone to a baseball or NFL game, the actual sport being played feels like of secondary importance. Lots of people milling about not necessarily watching the game.

That’s what we’re in danger of here. All passion to leave the game. Players and teams moving around all over the place. The LA Knights vs the Mersey Reds vs the Shanghai Steelers vs the Sydney Roos. 
 

Hope more players speak out against it

Totally agree with that. Been sadly to the odd Baseball game in Atlanta.

The baseball on the pitch was of only passing consequence. More about the beer and hotdogs and chatting to family  / friends. Bored out of my mind.

Saw a much better game in Japan - Hiroshima vs Yokohama - at least people watched it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, king canary said:

Not sure I agree there- some of them sure, I don't think the Glazers or Kronke really care that much but I don't doubt that Perez or Agnelli care about their teams. 

Agreed, I was thinking of the English clubs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I don't think the stadiums are a big deal. The money spinner is the brand. Stadiums don't increase the brand value. Players do. Stadiums don't sell any shirts. Stadiums are for legacy fans...

I disagree, you need full stadiums to give the plastics the idea that it's popular and inspire them that one day they might be able to attend.  You also make the stadium a desirable place for entertainment during the match (as others have said much like the NFL). That's why I think they'll either play all the games abroad or in a dedicated ESL stadium in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ncfcstar said:

I disagree, you need full stadiums to give the plastics the idea that it's popular and inspire them that one day they might be able to attend.  You also make the stadium a desirable place for entertainment during the match (as others have said much like the NFL). That's why I think they'll either play all the games abroad or in a dedicated ESL stadium in the UK.

I believe the NFL still operates a policy of local TV blackouts to try and ensure full stadiums- so if the Atlanta Falcons don't sell out their game then it won't be broadcast on TV in the local area for instance. Could be wrong though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be very sad if having gotten through Covid and been promoted that there aren't any matches next season. If both parties dig their heels in, government gets involved and legal proceedings begin, I really can't see this being sorted by August!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

I disagree, you need full stadiums to give the plastics the idea that it's popular and inspire them that one day they might be able to attend.  You also make the stadium a desirable place for entertainment during the match (as others have said much like the NFL). That's why I think they'll either play all the games abroad or in a dedicated ESL stadium in the UK.

I'm not so sure. There's no real return on the investment. But I agree to a point because last time I went to the Emirates it was like an airport with people holding up cards with names for the tourists to find them. But ultimately I  think global competition has no need for a local base. It doesn't add to the brand or sell merchandise. But then I've never believed many people invest in clubs for the local community.

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, king canary said:

I believe the NFL still operates a policy of local TV blackouts to try and ensure full stadiums- so if the Atlanta Falcons don't sell out their game then it won't be broadcast on TV in the local area for instance. Could be wrong though.

I think you're right, but in my opinion I don't think that makes a difference here, the local fans aren't the ones being targeted.  The NFL is a bit different as US fans are used to the franchise system, and have picked their team (and a lot will still follow them even if they move locations i.e. Rams/Raiders recently).  We're talking about clubs here which have local fanbases built out over 100+ years who are suddenly expected to follow a team which is essentially franchised in all but name, I don't see them accepting it and therefore a blackout makes little to no difference to attendance.  I personally think it's far more likely that the ESL games are played abroad with maybe a few feature games being played in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

I'm not so sure. There's no real return on the investment. But I agree to a point because last time I went to the Emirates it was like an airport with people holding up cards with names for the tourists to find them. But ultimately I  think global competition had no need for a local base. It doesn't add to the brand or sell merchandise. But then I've never believed many people invest in clubs for the local community.

Oh I agree there is no need for a local base, that's why I think it's far more likely these games are played abroad or possibly in a dedicated UK ESL stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

 But then I've never believed many people invest in clubs for the local community.

It’s certainly a thing of the past in the Premier League. Fans of these 6 clubs can no longer delude themselves that their club is still part their community. It’s not. Just like Amazon’s delivery depot isn’t part of Norwich’s community. These clubs are businesses with investors that expect returns on their investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw reported that Sky Sports state that they haven't had any discussions on this either  - so I guess they are pretty pissed too.

If that's true though has any other broadcaster had indicative discussions to broadcast this? My guess is that the clubs involved are a bit too arrogant and think the (global) TV rights will be easy to sell. I'm not so sure! There may not be as much competition for them as they think. 

Push on with the revised CL - and  yes these 12 will banned. 

Get Sky on board with a revised and far more exciting PL for everybody. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

I think you're right, but in my opinion I don't think that makes a difference here, the local fans aren't the ones being targeted.  The NFL is a bit different as US fans are used to the franchise system, and have picked their team (and a lot will still follow them even if they move locations i.e. Rams/Raiders recently).  We're talking about clubs here which have local fanbases built out over 100+ years who are suddenly expected to follow a team which is essentially franchised in all but name, I don't see them accepting it and therefore a blackout makes little to no difference to attendance.  I personally think it's far more likely that the ESL games are played abroad with maybe a few feature games being played in the UK.

Personally I can't see your last point happening- even if the 'legacy fans' boycott and are replaced by others, those fans will still want to feel like their going to Arsenal or Chelsea and being a part of that, I can't see them going to an 'ESL stadium' or similar. Some games may be played abroad but I don't see the majority of them being done like that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I saw reported that Sky Sports state that they haven't had any discussions on this either  - so I guess they are pretty pissed too.

If that's true though has any other broadcaster had indicative discussions to broadcast this? My guess is that the clubs involved are a bit too arrogant and think the (global) TV rights will be easy to sell. I'm not so sure! There may not be as much competition for them as they think. 

Push on with the revised CL - and  yes these 12 will banned. 

Get Sky on board with a revised and far more exciting PL for everybody. 

surely they will be looking at setting up their own streaming company and streaming the games themselves so the clubs share all the broadcast revenues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jim Smith said:

surely they will be looking at setting up their own streaming company and streaming the games themselves so the clubs share all the broadcast revenues. 

Possibly Yes - So that means Sky see it a s a threat too - and will be more than helpful in any reformed EPL etc. as the 12 are booted out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC website quote:
The European Super League was created "to save football", says Real Madrid president Florentino Perez.

Nah mate, it was created to save Real Madrid’s brass neck. If you hadn’t seen fit to **** away  400m Euro in the last couple of years you (and your partners in crime with their own leveraged debt) wouldn’t be destroying the very soul of European club football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Possibly Yes - So that means Sky see it a s a threat too - and will be more than helpful in any reformed EPL etc. as the 12 are booted out. 

Unsurprisingly Sky have given Carragher and Gary Neville a platform (and airtime) to voice their disapproval.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Beetley Yellow said:

BBC website quote:
The European Super League was created "to save football", says Real Madrid president Florentino Perez.

Nah mate, it was created to save Real Madrid’s brass neck. If you hadn’t seen fit to **** away  400m Euro in the last couple of years you (and your partners in crime with their own leveraged debt) wouldn’t be destroying the very soul of European club football.

I saw that yesterday and was equally perplexed. How exactly are they saving football with this plan? What about this plan saves football for the rest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, king canary said:

Personally I can't see your last point happening- even if the 'legacy fans' boycott and are replaced by others, those fans will still want to feel like their going to Arsenal or Chelsea and being a part of that, I can't see them going to an 'ESL stadium' or similar. Some games may be played abroad but I don't see the majority of them being done like that.  

Teams will move, like the American Sports model.  

 

Beijing Arsenal or New York Red Devils or something 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Haus said:

Teams will move, like the American Sports model.  

 

Beijing Arsenal or New York Red Devils or something 

Again, I'm not sure that will happen. Maybe but if it does it would benefit the left behind teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Haus said:

Teams will move, like the American Sports model.  

 

Beijing Arsenal or New York Red Devils or something 

Agreed - if they go global there can really only be 1 such club per major city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...