Devils Advocate. 0 Posted October 10, 2013 Given the recent news that qualification for Europe is not planned for on economic grounds, are you disappointed at all ?. Does it restrict our choice of player in any way. Wouldn''t you fancy some extra publicity or the chance to appear on Channel 5 on a Thursday ?. Is staying in the Prem the best we can hope for ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill 1,788 Posted October 10, 2013 for the time being Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Aggy 752 Posted October 10, 2013 Well that''s not quite how it was reported DA. It wasn''t a case of "no, we don''t want to finish in Europe because it costs you money", it was more a case of "we aren''t really worrying ourselves about it because it isn''t a big money spinner anyway."When they say that it actually costs you financially, they are talking on a game to game basis. They aren''t taking into account the premier league prize money. If you finish 10th with no European football, or 6th with European, then you''ve got an extra, what, 5million (?) from premier league prize money. Playing in European competitions doesn''t cost you that, even if you do lose money on a game to game basis until the later rounds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shefcanary 2,385 Posted October 10, 2013 Ah ha; so effectively Europa league football is a tax on success in the Premier League for upstart mid-table clubs, designed to keep the big 5 ahead of the pack. Who''d have thought that! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scrivvy 16 Posted October 11, 2013 I''m not saying those running the club are wrong or that I disagree with the points that were made, but it does show how football has changed.Remember the excitement of qualifying for Europe in 1985, then again in 1993 and this time being allowed to compete.For clubs of the stature of Norwich, it seems staying in the Premiership is the be-all and end-all of everything. Even domestic cups don''t seem to matter that much if it risks retaking Premiership status.Like I said, I don''t necessarily disagree, but it is a bit sad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubai Mark 0 Posted October 11, 2013 Spot on Aggy, why would anyone read it otherwise? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted October 11, 2013 Reaching the round of 32 in the Europa League would probably be worth 5m Euros for a club of Norwich''s size. Clubs were awarded 1.3m Euros just for reaching the group stage last season. Going out at the group stage would probably still be worth around 4m euros. These figures don''t include money from ticket sales and match day revenue etc. McNally said it would only be worth one or two additional places in the Premier League based of figure of £1.2m extra clubs are given per league position - I think that is playing down the value a little bit even considering additional costs that Norwich would face having to travel around the continent. The Europa League certainly isn''t a massive cash cow and it would ultimately cost Norwich finances if playing in Europe meant a drop in league position by around 4 or 5 places. However there are non-financial benefits in increased exposure and stature meaning a larger potential pool of players in transfer market (not to mention the benefit to the fans of having a European campaign to get excited about). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cornish sam 944 Posted October 11, 2013 I think that these comments go to prove that the change in format of the UEFA cup to the Europa league were badly thought out and counter productive for the bigger leagues. Yes it guarantees more revenue for those from the smaller leagues as they have a guaranteed number of matches, but, for teams of our size in the big 5 leagues it probably isn''t worth the hassle due to the impact it then has on the following season. Also, with the larger number of teams and meaningless/predictable matches in some ways it can be a turn off for the fans. Bring back a simple, pan-european knock out competition, two legs per round. Increase the number of teams to 64, have no seeding at all and bang, you get excitement for all of the clubs in every match and you may get smaller teams making a run to the final, which in the current format is very unlikely... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted October 11, 2013 [quote user="cornish sam"]I think that these comments go to prove that the change in format of the UEFA cup to the Europa league were badly thought out and counter productive for the bigger leagues. Yes it guarantees more revenue for those from the smaller leagues as they have a guaranteed number of matches, but, for teams of our size in the big 5 leagues it probably isn''t worth the hassle due to the impact it then has on the following season. Also, with the larger number of teams and meaningless/predictable matches in some ways it can be a turn off for the fans. Bring back a simple, pan-european knock out competition, two legs per round. Increase the number of teams to 64, have no seeding at all and bang, you get excitement for all of the clubs in every match and you may get smaller teams making a run to the final, which in the current format is very unlikely...[/quote] It is the lack of interest in England that makes the Europa League less valuable to Premier League teams - most of the money recieved comes from TV rights, sponsorship and marketing, this differs for each club as the rights to their games are sold seperately (some times by each clubs, and sometimes by territory). For example the three English clubs in the group stage in last years competition each gained about 2m euros from ''market'' however the 4 Italian clubs recieved between 2.4m to 5.9m in ''Market'' money alone. Lazio and Newcastle both reached to Quater Finals but Lazio gained 9.5m in total and Newcastle only 5.3m. The club that gained the most money from the Europa League were semi-finalists Fenerbache who gain 11.2m, more than winners Chelsea who gained 10.7m. I''d say the only country that the Europa Leage isn''t a clear benefit to is England. Due to the massive Premier League deal and the comparatively small interest of the tournament. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cornish sam 944 Posted October 11, 2013 Blimey, I didn''t realsie that there was such a big variation across Europe! I still prefer the idea of a pure knock out tournament though my reasoning for it just lost one of it''s legs... Thanks Bethnal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Devils Advocate. 0 Posted October 11, 2013 Would it be different if we were to revert to the old format of the UEFA cup, European Cup and European Cup Winners Cup ?. I must admit that that I dislike the Europa League, too many games too many obscure teams. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bryangunnshairline 0 Posted October 11, 2013 I think its quite sad that football has come to this. I love the fact the club are in the top flight but its not really a league we have any realistic chance of winning. Fans of teams like ourselves should be looking and hoping we qualify for the Europa league or have a good run in a cup. I understand the board are thinking of the money but me as a fan im not driven by that. An away day to Valencia like Swansea just had does. I would take a 17th place finish and win the league cup with a day out at Wembley and the prospect of following city abroad the following season over a top ten finish any day. The top ten finish will eventually become a bore to some. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted October 11, 2013 really easy, finish 1st - 4th or win one of the cups and every one gets stuck into the "Cup of Europe"no seeding. 1 game knockout format.. winner takes all.oh for another red star Belgrade, or even Steua Bucherest beating Barcelona in the final again.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted October 11, 2013 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]really easy, finish 1st - 4th or win one of the cups and every one gets stuck into the "Cup of Europe" no seeding. 1 game knockout format.. winner takes all. oh for another red star Belgrade, or even Steua Bucherest beating Barcelona in the final again....[/quote] It''s not like their wins were massive upsets - Belgrade were regulars in the semi-finals and Bucherest were losing finalists a couple of seasons later and made a couple of semi-finals as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
norfolkbroadslim 223 Posted October 11, 2013 Is Bowkett the master of contradiction? European football off the radar, yet we are targeting a top 10 finish this season!?[:S] The drawbacks of competing in Europe appear to have been looked at in depth, but have the benefits of competing in Europe been fully analysed?[:^)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kolin Kob 0 Posted October 11, 2013 Er... what about Moratta? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellowbeagle 0 Posted October 11, 2013 [quote user="cornish sam"]Blimey, I didn''t realsie that there was such a big variation across Europe! I still prefer the idea of a pure knock out tournament though my reasoning for it just lost one of it''s legs... Thanks Bethnal[/quote]Totally agree, I''d like to see the knockout structure back too also no Champions Leagues losers coming in at a later stage. It wouldn''t bother me personally if the Champions League was a smaller tournament which was actually for winners of something it might breathe some life back into domestic cups. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
norfolkbroadslim 223 Posted October 11, 2013 [quote user="Kolin Kob"]Er... what about Moratta?[/quote]Quite excited by that, wouod be a decent signing in January, but would have thought Real would want a hefty fee. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*** 0 Posted October 12, 2013 If the board have told Hughton not to worry about aiming too high...................[:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
