a pyramid built on sand

SEASIDE2020

Well-known member
So your statement about record numbers is 2 years old? Ok.

Wiz

You may well be right when you say 20's figures are not up-to-date but I'm not sure how important that is.

The Premier League has been outstandingly successful and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise or ignore that success when debating matters.
 

RUSTY_2_STANDS

Well-known member
I'd be amazed if that Liverpool figure did not include the £200m for Coutinho (sp) and certainly Bmouth have never spent £75m on a player as Lpl did with VvD and still were £125m up.
£145 million for Coutinho. If it were 200 million as you've said that would make him more expensive than Neymar and Mbappe.
And I did say net spend, not overall spend. Net spend is the figure to look at. Whether those figures are 100% accurate or not, they're near enough. Near enough to prove that even the likes of Bournemouth are spending way more than they realistically should be. And that was the point of my post.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
Wiz

You may well be right when you say 20's figures are not up-to-date but I'm not sure how important that is.

The Premier League has been outstandingly successful and it is ridiculous to suggest otherwise or ignore that success when debating matters.
Define success. Getting a worldwide following through TV viewing is one measure, but losing the connection to the fanbase is another. Yes, the games are full when that is allowed, but who is going? Someone said that the average age on the Stretford End is 49, whereas it was 17 in 1968.

A 17 year old couldn't afford to go now. Long term, is that a good thing?

Success for me is building a connection to the fans. The Premier League has gone out of its way to break that connection through subscription TV, outrageous season ticket prices and development of a 'brand' that appeals to people who won't even come to the country, never mind the ground of 'their' team. When you see Premier League teams arriving at the ground in their designer headphones designed to avoid any chance of interacting with the fans, earning more in a week than I will in a lifetime, then how can I relate to those players?

Now, financially that may well be deemed a massive success, but that's not why I go to football. The key word for me is 'go'
 

SEASIDE2020

Well-known member
Define success. Getting a worldwide following through TV viewing is one measure, but losing the connection to the fanbase is another. Yes, the games are full when that is allowed, but who is going? Someone said that the average age on the Stretford End is 49, whereas it was 17 in 1968.

A 17 year old couldn't afford to go now. Long term, is that a good thing?

Success for me is building a connection to the fans. The Premier League has gone out of its way to break that connection through subscription TV, outrageous season ticket prices and development of a 'brand' that appeals to people who won't even come to the country, never mind the ground of 'their' team. When you see Premier League teams arriving at the ground in their designer headphones designed to avoid any chance of interacting with the fans, earning more in a week than I will in a lifetime, then how can I relate to those players?

Now, financially that may well be deemed a massive success, but that's not why I go to football. The key word for me is 'go'

Wiz

I agree with everything you say and certainly your sentiment but the financial success of the Premier League should help ensure the success of the teams within the Premier League.

We've been here before and it often comes down to just how much the Premier League teams value those lower down the football pyramid and regardless of what you me think, I think it is fair to say that the Premier League will think they do enough for those lower down and those lower down will think that they don't do enough.

We can all romanticise about how an equal share of revenues will make things more competitive and I have absolutely no doubt that it would do but I'm afraid we all know - or should do - that revenues are generally distributed among those responsible for creating them.

I know I am only stating the obvious Wiz but it is clear that some seem to struggle with the distribution of Premier league revenues and chose to talk of non existent failings of the Premier League and conveniently forget that it has been outstandingly successful.

Continuing to go round in circles, the Premier League clubs will be in trouble if they don't live within their means - that doesn't mean that they can't borrow or take risks - but so will the lower league clubs and it may be an idea for the lower league clubs to address their problems rather than expect a bigger share of revenues that they didn't generate.

Yes, the lower league clubs are part of a system that helps generate the revenues and I agree that their part in that system has a worth but again it doesn't matter what I think and I'd suggest that worth is being overvalued by the lower league clubs and possibly undervalued by the Premier League clubs.

You know the game backwards and inside out Wiz and I can't tell you anything.
 

SEASIDE2020

Well-known member
Wiz

I can't tell you anything means that you know everything inside out and not that you won't listen although it is probably an idea not to listen to any of my chite.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
Wiz

I agree with everything you say and certainly your sentiment but the financial success of the Premier League should help ensure the success of the teams within the Premier League.

We've been here before and it often comes down to just how much the Premier League teams value those lower down the football pyramid and regardless of what you me think, I think it is fair to say that the Premier League will think they do enough for those lower down and those lower down will think that they don't do enough.

We can all romanticise about how an equal share of revenues will make things more competitive and I have absolutely no doubt that it would do but I'm afraid we all know - or should do - that revenues are generally distributed among those responsible for creating them.

I know I am only stating the obvious Wiz but it is clear that some seem to struggle with the distribution of Premier league revenues and chose to talk of non existent failings of the Premier League and conveniently forget that it has been outstandingly successful.

Continuing to go round in circles, the Premier League clubs will be in trouble if they don't live within their means - that doesn't mean that they can't borrow or take risks - but so will the lower league clubs and it may be an idea for the lower league clubs to address their problems rather than expect a bigger share of revenues that they didn't generate.

Yes, the lower league clubs are part of a system that helps generate the revenues and I agree that their part in that system has a worth but again it doesn't matter what I think and I'd suggest that worth is being overvalued by the lower league clubs and possibly undervalued by the Premier League clubs.

You know the game backwards and inside out Wiz and I can't tell you anything.
You're right and as I see it, the opportunity for a fairer allocation of resources went in 1992. Nothing will change now, as the Premier League is one competition and the Football League is a separate one. The promotion and relegation masks that. It's only grace and favour that keeps it in place. I suspect that should the majority of EPL owners want to stop relegation, there would be nothing the EFL could do about it..

Bit of a sword of Damacles really.
 

20togo

Well-known member
You're right and as I see it, the opportunity for a fairer allocation of resources went in 1992. Nothing will change now, as the Premier League is one competition and the Football League is a separate one. The promotion and relegation masks that. It's only grace and favour that keeps it in place. I suspect that should the majority of EPL owners want to stop relegation, there would be nothing the EFL could do about it..

Bit of a sword of Damacles really.
Well we best get there as quick as we can then. 😉
 

SEASIDE2020

Well-known member
You're right and as I see it, the opportunity for a fairer allocation of resources went in 1992. Nothing will change now, as the Premier League is one competition and the Football League is a separate one. The promotion and relegation masks that. It's only grace and favour that keeps it in place. I suspect that should the majority of EPL owners want to stop relegation, there would be nothing the EFL could do about it..

Bit of a sword of Damacles really.

I wouldn't know the exact ins and outs Wiz but I am certainly against a no relegation top tier.

Please don't say then, "Share all the money then", because I have done more than enough chunnering already.

Of course there is a gap - and ever widening one - but the smaller sides can still dream, I just think they should stop dreaming when it comes to the revenue share.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
I wouldn't know the exact ins and outs Wiz but I am certainly against a no relegation top tier.

Please don't say then, "Share all the money then", because I have done more than enough chunnering already.

Of course there is a gap - and ever widening one - but the smaller sides can still dream, I just think they should stop dreaming when it comes to the revenue share.
I'm not as naive to think that the money will be more equitably shared. The whole raison d'etre of the Premier League was to stop an equitable share and keep the money for themselves.

What I will say is that the competitive edge has gone as a consequence. In the 70s nine different teams won the FA Cup in the decade. There is no way that would happen now, even with sides fielding reserve teams in the early rounds. The likes of Wigan winning eight years ago won't happen again. The power at the top has got that more imbalanced
 

fcblackpool

Well-known member
I wouldn't know the exact ins and outs Wiz but I am certainly against a no relegation top tier.

Please don't say then, "Share all the money then", because I have done more than enough chunnering already.

Of course there is a gap - and ever widening one - but the smaller sides can still dream, I just think they should stop dreaming when it comes to the revenue share.
Even a ESL recognises the need for relegation and promotion.
 

20togo

Well-known member
I'm not as naive to think that the money will be more equitably shared. The whole raison d'etre of the Premier League was to stop an equitable share and keep the money for themselves.

What I will say is that the competitive edge has gone as a consequence. In the 70s nine different teams won the FA Cup in the decade. There is no way that would happen now, even with sides fielding reserve teams in the early rounds. The likes of Wigan winning eight years ago won't happen again. The power at the top has got that more imbalanced
But the same applies to pretty much every other major league in Europe too. And probably to an even greater extent in Spain.
And c'mon, why deliberately choose the FA Cup over the league?

70's different league winners -5
80's different league winners -4
90's different league winners -4
00's " """"" -3
10's -5

So nothing really changed that much in terms of numbers.
 

SEASIDE2020

Well-known member
I'm not as naive to think that the money will be more equitably shared. The whole raison d'etre of the Premier League was to stop an equitable share and keep the money for themselves.

What I will say is that the competitive edge has gone as a consequence. In the 70s nine different teams won the FA Cup in the decade. There is no way that would happen now, even with sides fielding reserve teams in the early rounds. The likes of Wigan winning eight years ago won't happen again. The power at the top has got that more imbalanced

I think we are basically in agreement Wiz.

Could argue that the Premier League didn't go far enough re revenue share as I'm sure people pay to watch Man Utd v Liverpool and not Burnley v Fulham ?

I guess that's where the Euro Super Leagues comes in.

I'm chunnering again Wiz but it's only natural that those creating the revenue are going to want the revenues that they've created.

To be honest, I'm not sure about the long term success of a Euro Super League but I don't think my thoughts will halt any plans.
 

Wizaard

Well-known member
But the same applies to pretty much every other major league in Europe too. And probably to an even greater extent in Spain.
And c'mon, why deliberately choose the FA Cup over the league?

70's different league winners -5
80's different league winners -4
90's different league winners -4
00's " """"" -3
10's -5

So nothing really changed that much in terms of numbers.
Because it shows the monopoly is spreading. The double is an everyday thing now. Never used to be.

Why the sensitivity to anything approaching a criticism of your precious Premier League? No one can say anything without you being all over it. The new BSA😂😂😉
 

20togo

Well-known member
Because it shows the monopoly is spreading. The double is an everyday thing now. Never used to be.

Why the sensitivity to anything approaching a criticism of your precious Premier League? No one can say anything without you being all over it. The new BSA😂😂😉
Constant negativity is not good for anyone. I just like to keep reminding you all of that. 😉
 
Top
X