Jump to content

Football governance


Nobody

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, CalmintheChaos said:

I love the outrage and that it would will “kill competitiveness” as if the PL isn’t already a closed shop. Only Leicester in the last 15 years who has broke the top 4? It can’t get much more boring, predictable and unfair at the top. Man City have 50m pound players on the bench ffs 

The point is though, is that Leicester can win the Premier League (or finish in the top 4) and quality for the Champions League. They wouldn’t within a Super League and that just is not right and totally anti-competitive.

 

 

Edited by et tu brute

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ben said:

My main concern now is for the Super league clubs that will be left behind when the 4 team Super Dupa league is formed 

 

55 minutes ago, B-more Mag said:

They'd be all like "I can't stand the rain."

 

Also, I've grossly misjudged the market for Super League/Missy Elliott crossover humor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, et tu brute said:

The point is though is that Leicester can win the Premier League (or finish in the top 4) and quality for the Champions League. They wouldn’t within a Super League and that just is not right and totally anti-competitive.

Yeah they could. Uefa would still run the champions league. I can’t see anything stopping them from doing so or any reason why they wouldn’t. We would still have the PL, relegation, European qualification, promotion from the championship and below. 
 

The only negative side I can see of this is for the fans of them 6 clubs but I have no sympathy as most are armchair fans anyhow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Giselle said:

Appreciate that you’ve given time and effort to respond. The CL is a worldwide product, as the premier league is. The premier league gets £4bn/year from international tv rights, £4.5bn/year from domestic tv rights. In the next cycle, it’s likely that international rights will be worth more than domestic rights. Whenever this switch occurs, it’s likely to be permanent. In a typical weekend, the premier league is on tv for 20 hours. 12pm kickoffs are really for Asian audiences, 7.45pm Mondays are for domestic audiences. They put an effort in to generate worldwide interest. The champions league is supposed to be an even more marquee product, with greater prestige and tradition. It should earn much more than it is currently earning, to the detriment of every European football club (and economy). UEFA are just lazy, and they are not product-driven. Their incentives are not aligned with clubs and with the champions league. 

The early Saturday games, and even the Monday night games have been slated by many supporters groups, especially when they make it so teams have to travel vast differences.

Foreign TV rights will overtake domestic rights, but it makes sense as you are selling to the rest of the world. What that tells you is that on the whole the foreign fans do not invest as much as fans from this country, as the figures would far outweigh the domestic rights if they did. On average they don’t. It also shows you that as the money is increasing, foreign fans, or a least companies see nothing wrong with the ‘product’. As has been stated, foreign fans watch because it fits in, it does not compete with their own sports. As soon as it does the viewership will drop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tomato Deuce said:

Most U.S.-based supporters have accepted that PL and CL matches aren’t always going to be held at convenient times for us. It’s fair, it’s a Europe-based game. 2:00PM on a Tuesday/Wednesday generally means I don’t get to watch most CL matches. No big loss, as I’ve gotten pretty bored with the CL in recent years. And I actually rather enjoy the PL on weekend mornings...it doesn’t compete with U.S. sports schedules.

Pip isn’t wrong that the CL is in need of reform and that UEFA probably doesn’t manage TV deals all that well. 

Selling the TV rights for one country is a completely different beast than doing it worldwide. The NFL has a base in the US, its primary TV market. It - as UEFA does - then sells the worldwide TV/Streaming rights on a country by country or region by region basis, there's no "one rights package to rule them all". Nobody could afford that anyhow, except perhaps Amazon or another streamer, which would be anti-competitive in nature. The CL doesn't have a base country and interest in matches will vary in different countries on an annual basis depending on if a team from their country qualifies, so you can't really price it too high with that uncertainty. 

The SL would solve that issue when it comes to distribution rights, which is why they can demand a higher TV fee - as networks would know exactly what they are buying and can do their fiscal analytics based on that metric without uncertainty. But the uncertainty is what makes the game entertaining, so in all honesty it's kind of a paradox. 

 

 

Edited by Kaizero

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Giselle said:

The premier league do the exact same thing though? It’s on tv for 10 hours every Saturday and Sunday. UEFA are just lazy. 

There's a pandemic on. Loads of people died. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Giselle said:

The premier league do the exact same thing though? It’s on tv for 10 hours every Saturday and Sunday. UEFA are just lazy. 

The guy behind this scheme thinks a 90 minute match is too long and boring for their target audience and the length of games might need to be reduced, how is he going to keep them watching hours of programming either side and inbetween?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, BlueStar said:

The guy behind this scheme thinks a 90 minute match is too long and boring for their target audience and the length of games might need to be reduced, how is he going to keep them watching hours of programming either side of it?

Meanwhile his target audience are currently outside Stamford bridge protesting against the ESL.

 

 

Edited by Stifler

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stifler said:

The early Saturday games, and even the Monday night games have been slated by many supporters groups, especially when they make it so teams have to travel vast differences.

Foreign TV rights will overtake domestic rights, but it makes sense as you are selling to the rest of the world. What that tells you is that on the whole the foreign fans do not invest as much as fans from this country, as the figures would far outweigh the domestic rights if they did. On average they don’t. It also shows you that as the money is increasing, foreign fans, or a least companies see nothing wrong with the ‘product’. As has been stated, foreign fans watch because it fits in, it does not compete with their own sports. As soon as it does the viewership will drop.

Yes, the premier league is doing well. Foreign fans love it. The champions league isn’t, because UEFA are lazy. The champions league should be run more like the premier league. Yes, early and late night games inconvenience local fans. But without money, the league will be deprived of its best players. No one wants to see the league become like Serie A, where even the locals tune out because the best players no longer play there. Attendances there have trended down for a while, only perking up in the last few years. Small Italian teams and their fans will rarely if ever see the best players in the world play in their stadiums. That’s the other side of the coin to not being product-driven. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Disco said:

There's a pandemic on. Loads of people died. 

What? UEFA have run the CL badly for years. This is not a single season issue. The premier league has also been well run for years, continually iterating and evolving, growing audiences worldwide. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In 1998 Berlucsoni got far with his SL-light proposal (16 teams guaranteed qualification, the group potentially changing every five years based on merit). That proposal was shut down by EU courts as monopolization. Why would this not get stopped as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CalmintheChaos said:

Yeah they could. Uefa would still run the champions league. I can’t see anything stopping them from doing so or any reason why they wouldn’t. We would still have the PL, relegation, European qualification, promotion from the championship and below. 
 

The only negative side I can see of this is for the fans of them 6 clubs but I have no sympathy as most are armchair fans anyhow. 

Which is fine as long as the 6 Super League clubs are kicked out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

In 1998 Berlucsoni got far with his SL-light proposal (16 teams guaranteed qualification, the group potentially changing every five years based on merit). That proposal was shut down by EU courts as monopolization. Why would this not get stopped as well?

Presume the 5 other teams they're on about is their attempt to avoid anti competition laws?

Edit: Misread your post. Unless the laws have changed it should be the same then

 

 

Edited by triggs

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stifler said:

Meanwhile his target audience are currently outside Stamford bridge protesting against the ESL.

Legacy vermin. 

1 minute ago, Giselle said:

What? UEFA have run the CL badly for years. This is not a single season issue. The premier league has also been well run for years, continually iterating and evolving, growing audiences worldwide. 

Good to see you didn't read what you posted and what I commented on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BlueStar said:

The guy behind this scheme thinks a 90 minute match is too long and boring for their target audience and the length of games might need to be reduced, how is he going to keep them watching hours of programming either side and inbetween?

I’m not arguing in favour of the super league. I’m arguing in favour of aggressively reforming the champions league. I don’t agree or want to see the super league. It would kill the premier league. It would be bad for a club like ours. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, triggs said:

Presume the 5 other teams they're on about is their attempt to avoid anti competition laws?

At the time there would be 16 other teams qualifying as well. It was just him trying to ensure Milan would always be qualified and never get off the CL gravy train.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In homage to the guy that always makes me smile with his succint and sporadic contributions to the takeover and Bruce threads with "This c**t been sold yet?" and "this c**t been binned yet"

"these c**t been kicked out yet?"

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, triggs said:

Edit: Misread your post. Unless the laws have changed it should be the same then

This version doesn't even allow for a potential reshuffle every five years so would be even more monopolized. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Giselle said:

Yes, the premier league is doing well. Foreign fans love it. The champions league isn’t, because UEFA are lazy. The champions league should be run more like the premier league. Yes, early and late night games inconvenience local fans. But without money, the league will be deprived of its best players. No one wants to see the league become like Serie A, where even the locals tune out because the best players no longer play there. Attendances there have trended down for a while, only perking up in the last few years. Small Italian teams and their fans will rarely if ever see the best players in the world play in their stadiums. That’s the other side of the coin to not being product-driven. 

You're gross. 

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...