Subscriber RandoEFC+ 7,664 Posted April 4 Subscriber Share Posted April 4 6 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Dunno why the league wouldn't have liked the Leicester storyline. The media absolutely loved the Cinderella story Leicester's title race and victory was - I can't see how that didn't generate more excitement and interest in the league than 4 or 5 seasons of just Man City winning everything there is to win. Seems ridiculous the league would take steps to weaken one of the things that made the league more marketable than other big leagues. But I'm sure there are r€a££y good r€a$on$ for shooting the league's marketability in the foot. It wasn't more marketable though apparently. You'd think it would have been. This article explains it to some extent, there's probably better ones out there but I'm too lazy to look harder than I have. https://www.forbes.com/sites/grantfeller/2016/05/04/what-leicester-citys-unlikely-triumph-can-teach-all-sports-brands-need-competition/ The key passages: In terms of business Leicester’s victory has, so it’s argued, breathed life back into the predictable and boring business of Premiership football. It is 21 years since any team other than Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City or Manchester United won the top-flight title. The narrative to each season was being written before a ball had been even kicked. When Davids have no chance against Goliaths, it gets boring. Well, now David has won and already doubts are being raised as to whether it is a positive thing. One senior economist I spoke to believes the outsider’s triumph is good for the game but bad for business and could well lead to a decline in football revenue, especially on television. “The reality,” he told me, “is that Sky viewing figures are slumping – everyone likes Leicester but no one watches them in live Premier League games. And BT (which shows live games between Europe’s top clubs) is very worried about the Champions League next year because although Leicester has qualified as a top seed it doesn’t have as broad an international following as well-known British clubs such as Manchester United.” ... Some commentators consider Leicester’s triumph to be the kind of shot in the arm motor racing’s revenues need – plucky David conquering all-powerful Goliath. The next six months will show whether that’s true or whether, as astute economists predict, brands desperate to bask in the glory of an unlikely victory suddenly realise that the paying public wants what it always had. A Goliath-controlled status quo. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Gonzo 8,191 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 1 minute ago, RandoEFC said: It wasn't more marketable though apparently. You'd think it would have been. This article explains it to some extent, there's probably better ones out there but I'm too lazy to look harder than I have. https://www.forbes.com/sites/grantfeller/2016/05/04/what-leicester-citys-unlikely-triumph-can-teach-all-sports-brands-need-competition/ The key passages: In terms of business Leicester’s victory has, so it’s argued, breathed life back into the predictable and boring business of Premiership football. It is 21 years since any team other than Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester City or Manchester United won the top-flight title. The narrative to each season was being written before a ball had been even kicked. When Davids have no chance against Goliaths, it gets boring. Well, now David has won and already doubts are being raised as to whether it is a positive thing. One senior economist I spoke to believes the outsider’s triumph is good for the game but bad for business and could well lead to a decline in football revenue, especially on television. “The reality,” he told me, “is that Sky viewing figures are slumping – everyone likes Leicester but no one watches them in live Premier League games. And BT (which shows live games between Europe’s top clubs) is very worried about the Champions League next year because although Leicester has qualified as a top seed it doesn’t have as broad an international following as well-known British clubs such as Manchester United.” ... Some commentators consider Leicester’s triumph to be the kind of shot in the arm motor racing’s revenues need – plucky David conquering all-powerful Goliath. The next six months will show whether that’s true or whether, as astute economists predict, brands desperate to bask in the glory of an unlikely victory suddenly realise that the paying public wants what it always had. A Goliath-controlled status quo. Wow that's mental. That season TV was really pushing Leicester's title race and it was probably the most I'd cared about a team that wasn't Liverpool actually doing well. Kind of fucked up that people would be more interested in this league being dominated by a handful of clubs (and lately one's been much more dominant than the others) than in situations where you can have a side like Leicester get promoted and shortly after... they win the fucking league. I'm surprised that really didn't make the league more marketable. I don't see how you can like football and not like stories like that. When you hear about legends of the past like Brian Clough or Bill Shankley getting a team promoted and then taking the fans of those clubs on a wild ride... and it just seems so far from the reality of modern day football... then you see Leicester do probably the closest possible thing to what these legends of the game did. How is that not entertaining or exciting? I also think it says something about the state of modern football where I'm a fan of a club that's currently in the probably the most interesting title race in years, in an era of supporting my club where it's without a doubt the most successful we've been in my lifetime thanks to Klopp, and my interest in football generally is just so low. Possibly the lowest it's been since I was in my 20s and really only cared about having sex and doing drugs. You would think, all things considered, I'd have a bit more optimism about the state of football considering this is probably the best few years of football my club's had in my life (and possibly ever will have in my life). Yet here I am, feeling weirdly disenchanted with the state of football. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 2,207 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 I dont think the tax will work at all. If people think that clubs like United, Chelsea and whoever arent thick enough to break it purposely knowing they will have to pay, just to carry on trying to win then they’ve another thing coming. It wont affect the bigger teams really 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan 18,389 Posted April 5 Author Administrator Share Posted April 5 8 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Dunno why the league wouldn't have liked the Leicester storyline. The media absolutely loved the Cinderella story Leicester's title race and victory was - I can't see how that didn't generate more excitement and interest in the league than 4 or 5 seasons of just Man City winning everything there is to win. Seems ridiculous the league would take steps to weaken one of the things that made the league more marketable than other big leagues. But I'm sure there are r€a££y good r€a$on$ for shooting the league's marketability in the foot. Yeah you answer your own question in the 2nd paragraph. Might have generated the excitement. But excitement doesn't fill the pockets of these people... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan 18,389 Posted April 5 Author Administrator Share Posted April 5 7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: Yet here I am, feeling weirdly disenchanted with the state of football. I think this is the way it is for so many. Almost as if if you're older than 20ish, you had at least a taste of what football used to be like before foreign investment really took off. Younger than that and that's all you'll know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ 7,664 Posted April 5 Subscriber Share Posted April 5 8 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said: I don't see how you can like football and not like stories like that. When you hear about legends of the past like Brian Clough or Bill Shankley getting a team promoted and then taking the fans of those clubs on a wild ride... and it just seems so far from the reality of modern day football The modern fan has such a short attention span and a disproportionate interest in online "banter" and bragging rights. They don't watch football for the sport of it, they watch it so that they can be a part of the storylines and the manufactured drama on social media. Leicester will never generate the same sort of buzz as the breakaway teams (to varying extents). Leicester winning the league was a nice novelty for most but yeah, the modern football fan doesn't want too many Leicester City's. Football is a drama more than a sport now and people want familiar characters that they recognise, not a different cast every season. The whole sport vs brand is the root cause of most of what us "legacy fans" would call the issues with football now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Palace Fan 3,404 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 8 hours ago, Danny said: I dont think the tax will work at all. If people think that clubs like United, Chelsea and whoever arent thick enough to break it purposely knowing they will have to pay, just to carry on trying to win then they’ve another thing coming. It wont affect the bigger teams really Matt Slater mentioned this last summer when asked if fines would reign in some of the out of control spending we see. He said if Todd Boehly is told that he will receive a fine for spending over a certain amount, he would go well over that amount and factor the fine in to the losses. If he can realise that when asked on the spot, then Richard Masters should forsee this from a mile off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeKhrush 298 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 If the luxury tax goes to lower league football it may see hundreds of millions filtering down. It needs a salary cap to work well, whatever clubs are over the salary cap is taxed at say 50% ratio, say club X is 100m over the luxury cap, that is a lot of money going down the league's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ 7,664 Posted April 5 Subscriber Share Posted April 5 A salary cap or general budget cap would be great in theory. The problem is that if the Premier League agree on that then you might have a more competitive league but you won't have nearly as many of the world's biggest players come. Some of us would be much happier with the state of the English game but the league and the clubs are never going to go for that unfortunately. It would be great if all of the leagues across the world would agree to follow the same budget caps. The likes of Celtic and Rangers, the Turkish clubs, Portuguese clubs, Greek, Dutch, etc. could actually be properly relevant again in European competition - imagine! Even if you could get the UEFA members on board with that though there's always a Chinese Super League or Saudi League waiting in the wings threatening to offer these players unregulated amounts of money. The horse has bolted. The very best scenario that's vaguely realistic is that PSR is implemented in a way using some sort of live accounting where clubs are banned from signing or registering players or offering any of their players or staff bigger contracts once their losses cross a certain threshold. The only way we get football back is if the Super League actually happens, the teams involved take all the rampant capitalism with them and the English pyramid is ripped up and reformed with a lot less money swimming around in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 2,207 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 This is a bit utopian but I want a sort of system where the finances are capped globally and in terms of transfers, every club has the same access to the same set of analytics. At that point it becomes less about what you can spend and more about what your club can achieve in a level playing field. Would also open up greater possibilities of inter-continental competition and allow clubs in countries that have historically been seen as under developed or developing to compete with the dominance of Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick 2,276 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 The only thing that will stop City getting away with it by just paying a fine is the biggest teams in the league. I don’t think the likes of us, Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea or Spurs will sit by and allow them to get away with a slap on the wrist. A points deduction HAS to happen if they are convicted, regardless of new agreements made after the time of charges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Blue 1,901 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 9 hours ago, Rick said: The only thing that will stop City getting away with it Is the hearing that will prove we are innocent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber Dan+ 1,918 Posted April 6 Subscriber Share Posted April 6 I was thinking about how you penalise these clubs and I wonder if embargos are the way to go. The gripe I have with what they've done to us three clubs is that we're in danger of entering a perpetual cycle where we just break rule after rule as they suffocate us and send us tumbling further and further down. At least with a transfer embargo you can't actually rack up any more serious debt beyond wages. The irony is there are periods of time clubs would be better off for it. I firmly believe if we'd been under an embargo in 2021 we'd have come out of it better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber Dan+ 1,918 Posted April 6 Subscriber Share Posted April 6 On 04/04/2024 at 22:12, RandoEFC said: Yeah and don't forget the caving in to the five subs rule, getting rid of various extra time, replays, two legged cup ties that all play into the hands of the clubs with the biggest squads and the biggest fixture lists and limit further the chances for clubs down the pyramid to earn the gate money lottery. I'm still yet to hear a word from any of the Super League Six managers about having six group games in each of the European tournaments, and extending said tournaments by allowing teams that finish 3rd to drop down to the one below for the knockout rounds. All unnecessary bollocks to generate extra lucrative fixtures but when it comes to travelling down to Bristol Rovers for an FA Cup 4th round replay because your second string of £150k a week players couldn't put their £15k a week squad to bed at the first attempt, it's "inhumane what we're asking of these players with this fixture list". You could go on all day really. Eight group games from next season. Hilarious how anybody ever fell for this fatigue line. All it ever was was brinkmanship, which the laughably weak authorities fall for every time. Said it a few times on here lately and I'll say it again - remember the punishment the six super league clubs got for trying to dismantle the structure of the league system less than three years ago? Me neither. And that should tell you who really holds the cards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeKhrush 298 Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I can't see how these changes will absolve city as it is not PSR breaches but other financial foul play charges. If found guilty city will face sanction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeKhrush 298 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 It looks like there is no reprieve for Everton or forest as it seems like the current status quo is going to remain. It would be nice to see which clubs voted for and against amendments. I will not be surprised if the "big 6" and a few lackeys at the bottom not named Everton and Forest voted against it, and most likely Luton, Burnley and Sheffield United. A luxury tax system will salary caps and penalties that include a season ban from domestic and European cups if you exceed luxury tax limits for 3 straight seasons will curtail unlimited spending, it would have also encouraged investment and all luxury tax goes down the league's to boost revenue in the EFL and Vannerama league's, the potential of hundreds of millions would have boosted lower levels. Current rules will ensure that the protected 6 can live comfortably and likely take players from clubs trying to break it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subscriber RandoEFC+ 7,664 Posted April 13 Subscriber Share Posted April 13 To the tune of about £75m as well apparently. Corrupt. Corrupt. Corrupt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Stan 18,389 Posted April 13 Author Administrator Share Posted April 13 Obscene flagrance of the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeKhrush 298 Posted April 13 Share Posted April 13 I thought off field assets don't count to FFP, very suspicious behaviour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.