Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pete Raven

Is the new TV deal bad news?

Recommended Posts

Nice article,  not much new and can be summed in 4 words

 

Dont beleive the hype.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Little Ol'' Norwich" all but disappeared in the days of Martin Peters and into the eighties and early nineties, replaced by "Not so Little Ol Norwich".   However, that reverted back once the Premiership got under way. The premiership destroyed  the hopes of millions of fans all round the country who believed that with good management and a well run club their team could win the top League.  The more money that is poured into this badly conceived football set up, the more it perpetuates the top five or six clubs at the expense of the rest of us.   Also, if we can afford to spend 10m on a player it means that other clubs will be able to spend 20m, so the effects of that extra money will be negated.   Sure we might get some more nice foreign sounding names in the team, but relatively, we will still be in the same position as we are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Teams like Everton, Sunderland and Villa are saddled with debt don''t know exact figures but i know its not pretty, and are losing money at alarming rates, we are about to virtually debt free meaning all extra revenue can be directed to the team, where as the aforementioned will not get maximum benefit from the extra money. We really are well placed to become an establish Prem side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you can keep your billions. The best thing to happen to football isn’t the new TV deal, it would be if Richard Scudamore woke up one day and thought ‘you know what, football was a lot more fun in the 1990s’. After all, it would be nice to have the chance to see Norwich finish in the top three again, wouldn’t it?

 

It is not clear what is being suggested here. That Norwich City should unilaterally give up receiving TV money? Not sure that would find favour in the NCFC boardroom. Or that Scudamore should commit career suicide by refusing to accept TV money on behalf of the clubs that effectively employ him? The Premier League would simply hire someone else. If people want the billions to disappear from the Premier League then they have to stop watching live football on satellite TV. I don''t, but I gather a fair number of fans do, as shown by the sharp drop-off - sometimes to zero - of postings here for two hours on Tuesday and Wednesdays evenings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Ha ya got a loight boy"]"Little Ol'' Norwich" all but disappeared in the days of Martin Peters and into the eighties and early nineties, replaced by "Not so Little Ol Norwich".   However, that reverted back once the Premiership got under way. The premiership destroyed  the hopes of millions of fans all round the country who believed that with good management and a well run club their team could win the top League.  The more money that is poured into this badly conceived football set up, the more it perpetuates the top five or six clubs at the expense of the rest of us.   Also, if we can afford to spend 10m on a player it means that other clubs will be able to spend 20m, so the effects of that extra money will be negated.   Sure we might get some more nice foreign sounding names in the team, but relatively, we will still be in the same position as we are now. [/quote]True, but it''s still a far better position to be in than a small club just down the road apiece. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Ches right hand man "]It seems its always easier to blame the money rather than the people in charge.[/quote]The people in charge are those that have the money. Why would they want to change anything when change can only be to their disadvantage. The big six will always rule the roost unless changes are enacted to make the Premier League more competitive. It''s just not going to happen, turkeys will never vote for Christmas.It has always seemed strange to me that in the most capitalist country in the world the NFL is run with the idea of promoting parity between teams, yet here in a much more socialist Europe big money rules most leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Ches right hand man "]It seems its always easier to blame the money rather than the people in charge.[/quote]The people in charge are those that have the money. Why would they want to change anything when change can only be to their disadvantage. The big six will always rule the roost unless changes are enacted to make the Premier League more competitive. It''s just not going to happen, turkeys will never vote for Christmas.It has always seemed strange to me that in the most capitalist country in the world the NFL is run with the idea of promoting parity between teams, yet here in a much more socialist Europe big money rules most leagues.[/quote]Because the big American boss''s don''t care about winning they care about making money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hate it when people slag off the money Sky et all injects into the league, without that a well run club like us (Swansea/West Brom) etc doing things the right way would never be able to compete with the soulless sugardaddy clubs like QPR. Sky''s money is just helping other clubs compete. If every club was run like ours Sky wouldn''t need to plough that much money into the game and tickets would probably max out at about £30.

Without that money our budget would have probably been £0 last season and we would''ve gone down. Also without the prospect of that money coming in should we reach the Premiership we wouldn''t have been able to restructure the debt with a view to paying it off when we got there as the money wouldn''t exist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The franchise league are set up to make money, there selling point is competitiveness. They try to create an even playing field each season by allowing the worst teams of the previous season to pick first from the college graduates roster hoping to picked the top youth player. But even the big teams sometimes get round this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Ches right hand man "]The franchise league are set up to make money, there selling point is competitiveness. They try to create an even playing field each season by allowing the worst teams of the previous season to pick first from the college graduates roster hoping to picked the top youth player. But even the big teams sometimes get round this.[/quote]True, but it''s a lot less predictable than the EPL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the responses guys. I''m new to writing about football so still finding my feet.

Purple Canary - I''m not seriously expecting Scudamore to wake up one morning and really think that; he''d have to be mad. It''s a fanciful notion to illustrate what I would like to happen. Not everything has to be read literally, apologies if that wasn''t clear.

Asdfghjkl - Without the billions from sky the sugardaddies wouldn''t be interested. Before the sky deal it was far easier for clubs of our size to compete - as highlighted by the number of teams who finished in the top 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely its only bad news if at some point we get relegated and end up looking in the window from the outside? (Although morally I don''t like the amount of money in football and the way its changed the professional game, it appears here to stay and its too late to close that door)

As the article points out the Premier League has been mainly dominated by the same handful of teams since its inception, this new deal isn''t going to make that worse.

In fact, can it not be argued that the more TV money clubs get the closer it brings us towards equality with the "Richer" if not the "Richest" clubs? The more it makes anyone but the richest Sugar Daddy irrelevant? Tottenham, Arsenal, Everton and Liverpool don''t appear to flushed with cash and conducting spending frenzies any more. Look at Villa''s decline from a regular European challenger.

As pointed out all the money pumped into QPR by owners isn''t making them as competitive on the field as Us, Swansea, West Brom etc. Man U, Chelsea and Man C (the latter two because of their owners) will always be there and there abouts in the title race but the rest of the league looks a lot closer to me and a lot less predictable than recent years.

Maybe I''m reading it wrong but it feels like the last few years money hasn''t always equalled success like people thought it did. Well lead and managed clubs are thriving, and no reason why we couldn''t continue to grow, maybe not to title chasers, but definitely top 6 challengers like Everton. What this money also does is make us more competitive in the World and European transfer markets, RVW is hopefully the first of many top class European stars inbound and if that money lets us fend off Clubs in Italy, Spain, Holland, Germany etc. that can''t compete with our finances, well that''s good for us imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sky''s money may have been the problem in the first place but this new deal is hardly bad news for our club. The investors are already in and telling sky to shove their money would be disastrous for a club like ours as we''d end up with no transfer budget.

A better solution would be to stop owners from investing a penny into clubs, let the income come solely off ticket sales, merchandise, transfers and whatever TV deals are going at the time.

Things would soon go back to normality and fans of underperforming clubs could start dreaming of a great player or manager coming into the club to turn their fortunes around instead of wishing for some oil tycoon or Russian Gangster to pump stupid amounts of money in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Premier League was created to make the big clubs bigger and to reduce the income of smaller clubs. With the Sky money it''s worked better than they could have ever dreamed !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting little piece. Surprised the author didn''t mention the issue of club debt more though. It''s this time-bomb of clubs living beyond their means that should have us all worried. There may be more money coming in, but it seems to be going out the exit door at a higher rate. And much as I dislike rival clubs, I don''t want to see them going out of business altogether.QPR may have a sugar daddy, but their financial results from last year stated they were spending a whopping 90% of their income on wages. And this was last year''s figures (2012), before the arrival of high earners like Remy and Samba.  Would Fernandes stick around and pay off their £100million debt in the Championship? Or do they just call it a day?How are Portsmouth and Coventry these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Daniel Brigham"]Thanks for the responses guys. I''m new to writing about football so still finding my feet. Purple Canary - I''m not seriously expecting Scudamore to wake up one morning and really think that; he''d have to be mad. It''s a fanciful notion to illustrate what I would like to happen. Not everything has to be read literally, apologies if that wasn''t clear. Asdfghjkl - Without the billions from sky the sugardaddies wouldn''t be interested. Before the sky deal it was far easier for clubs of our size to compete - as highlighted by the number of teams who finished in the top 3[/quote]

 

Daniel, I admire anyone who does a regular column or blog. It is very hard to be interesting week in, week out. In this case, as another poster said, you weren''t really telling readers something they weren''t aware of. Now a blog that started...

"We all know TV money has screwed football. This is what we should do about that..."

....would have grabbed people''s attention!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Purple, thanks for that. Good idea, but might leave that to the headline (which I write, admittedly) otherwise it''s a bit tabloid. At least you got to the bottom of the piece - I have to be chuffed with that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely an extra £30mil a year is going to make a lot more difference to those clubs out side the rich elite. To Chelski, a drop in the ocean, to Norwich, a debt free immediate future, the means to but better players, ergo, a better chance to compete with the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The extra money means a lot to a well run club like ours, buying abroad will have to be he way to get best value, also buying early, which of course is what we seem to be doing. Good management!

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...