To All Anti-England Fans
- Thread starter TangerineDan
- Start date
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Those are 2 examples of subjective data but I do agree with what you say regarding the national side and I have already said on this very thread that I'd hang fire on making the assumption that the success of the EPL has contributed to England's relative success of late.
I have also said on this thread that the objective data suggests that the EPL has been an outstanding success and that the EPL was set up for the English national side or Blackpool Football Club.
So in summary, I'm saying the EPL has been an outstanding success but I'm not too sure that it's success has contributed to the national sides recent success.
Wizaard
Well-known member
HMRC would say that accounts are fairly objective.
When the Premier League started there were 12 overseas players. Not only has the England team suffered but all the Home nations who's players used to be plentiful in First Division teams.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
I thought we were discussing whether the Premier League had been successful or not ?
It would appear that you want to discuss whether the England national side has been successful or the other home nations - although god knows what they've got to do with the Premier League.
Subjective I know but do you think that the Premier League has a high number of quality players ?
You appear to have already told me that you believe that's the case.
Do you think that it has been successful in obtaining large broadcasting revenues ?
It has received billions in both home and overseas broadcasting revenues and continues to be in demand, it has been more successful on this front than any other league in Europe.
You talk as if the big clubs have financial problems, they don't, but if they did they are not as a result of huge broadcasting revenues.
The Premier League has been an outstanding success, whether England's national team has been successful or Blackpool Football Club has been successful have not got anything to do with the measure of the success of the Premier League.
voyeur
Well-known member
Don't have financial problems?
Football Club Debt List 20223[TOP 10 RANKED]
Discover which football clubs are in debt and why the biggest clubs have so much of it. Here are the 10 clubs with the most debt in 2022.
sqaf.club
Graham berrys plastic bag
Well-known member
Out of order- leave me out of this, I’m getting specialist help
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Don't have financial problems?
Football Club Debt List 20223[TOP 10 RANKED]
Discover which football clubs are in debt and why the biggest clubs have so much of it. Here are the 10 clubs with the most debt in 2022.
I am talking about clubs in the Premier League.
The big clubs certainly don't have financial problems, they may not be profitable, they may have debts but they are backed by owners who make up shortfalls.
Those that are overtrading without backers willing to cover shortfalls, are certainly not in financial trouble because of the huge broadcasting revenues that they receive as a result of being part of a hugely successful competition.
This whole discussion is around those questioning me when I said that the Premier League had been successful.
If clubs within the Premier League have not been managing themselves well that means that some of the clubs within the Premier League have not been managed well, it does not mean that the Premier League has not been a success.
I will say it again, the Premier League has been an outstanding success.
A poster above suggested - I think 20's agreed with him - that the success of the Premier League had contributed to the success of the England national team.
Personally, I don't believe this to be so - certainly not yet - and while the Premier League has been outstandingly successful, I am not sure that the relative recent success of the England national side is down to the success of the Premier League.
I don't think that the success of the Premier League is up for debate, whether or not it has contributed to England's success is another matter ?
voyeur
Well-known member
5 of the 10 clubs with the biggest debt are in the Premier League. If you look at the article.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Voy
I haven't looked at your article.
I have no doubt that some of the big Premier League clubs have big debts but these debts are serviceable and more to the point, the debts are not caused by receiving huge broadcasting revenues as a result of the success of the Premier League.
Do you think that the Premier League has been successful or not Voy ?
That's do you think that the Premier League has been successful, NOT do you think the Premier League has been good for the England national side or for Blackpool Football Club.
P
Plumbs
Guest
Absolutely but debt is a relative thing eg many of us have mortgages but it's not essentially a debt, and with Belekon his investment was seen purely as that and not a debt either
I think the EPL has been a huge success - ask the players or say the PFA- and there's an argument to say the monies that have tumbled down the leagues and even grassroots (thru the FA) have an impact on bringing talent on. St George's Park has been a tremendous success and we've also been able to redevelop Wembley, so it's a deep and complex subject that has many strands.
Don't forget the consolidarity payments that EFL clubs have had along with generous TV payments, and ultimately it was the PL money that indirectly rid your club of the Os.
voyeur
Well-known member
It depends how you define success.
voyeur
Well-known member
Deep and complex subject.
SpionKop
Well-known member
i just don’t get this Club over Country or vice versa, it just smacks of the ole i’m a better fan than you scenario.
Can’t you just feverishly support both? If Blackpool were playing the same day as England i would 80% of the time watch Blackpool but say England were playing a semi final and i had a chance of a ticket and Blackpool were playing a league game , i’d go to the England game. It wouldn’t make me any less of a Tangerine and would be back the next game cheering the Mighty on.
Can’t you just feverishly support both? If Blackpool were playing the same day as England i would 80% of the time watch Blackpool but say England were playing a semi final and i had a chance of a ticket and Blackpool were playing a league game , i’d go to the England game. It wouldn’t make me any less of a Tangerine and would be back the next game cheering the Mighty on.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Voy
Sorry, I got way laid when we were discussing this but yes, of course it depends how you define success.
The debate seems to have shifted now from whether the success - or relative recent success or whatever we call it and I guess that also depends how you define success !!! - of the England team is down to the success of the Premier League to whether the Premier League has been successful ?
Clearly people are holding different opinions on whether the Premier League has been successful but if I'm honest with you I think it's ridiculous to suggest that the Premier League has not been successful.
Yes, if you choose to measure the success of the England national team as a barometer for measuring the success of the Premier League itself it may not have been successful but I'm saying that success of the England national team should not be used as a performance indicator for the EPL.
Somebody above suggested that England's recent success can be attributed to the success of the EPL, that is possible but personally I don't agree - and certainly not right now - with that myself.
Going back to the original point that was made by a poster above, the success of England is down to the success of the EPL, it is not worth even considering if we don't believe that the EPL has been a success in it's own right.
I believe that the EPL has been outstandingly successful Voy, the demand from overseas has grown and grown and continues to do so - they didn't bung the exiting chairman £5m when he left because the league had been unsuccessful, I appreciate that you may not agree but without wishing to put words in your mouth, maybe you think that the EPL has not been successful because the English national side has suffered - before recently - and because the large revenues generated by the league are not shared equally among the smaller clubs like the Mighty ?
Voy - Rather than chunnering on and boring you with all the nonsense above, perhaps I should have just said, yes, it does depend on how you measure the success !!!!!!!!!!!
voyeur
Well-known member
It's ok, nowt wrong with a good chunner from time to time. I don't have a strong opinion. I think commercial success is a bit over rated though, but that's just my personality and personal values. I'm 60 and I preferred the game before the money men moved in big time. It feels like players are being farmed now. Maybe just a feeling I have and nothing more, but we do have a worldwide hoovering up of kids and huge academies that sort of clone players, it seems to me.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
No problem Voy, you made fair points and plenty will agree.
I just thing that what you say doesn't mean that the EPL hasn't been successful.
I know I said that I wouldn't go on but one last quick analogy:
Chain A is on the high street for 100 years until Chain B comes along and blows them out of the water, plenty of people might be up in arms at the loss of Chain A but that wouldn't mean that Chain B hadn't been successful.
GodBlessTheSouthStand
Well-known member
Don't we have a section for politics and can this discussion fuck off there please?
coppiceman
Well-known member
I think you'll find that the point being made is that Chain B is just Chain A but with three billion quids worth of debt that is completely unnecessary.
In any case these aren't high street chains, they are community assets, so your analogy is utter nonsense.
Wizaard
Well-known member
The EPL was set up by the FA to make shedloads of money, but they also explicitly said it was to improve the England team. You might not see it as a measure, but the FA do, and for 30 years they've generally failed.
voyeur
Well-known member
Er, we are discussing football.
voyeur
Well-known member
I think chain A became chain B. And chain B is run by people who have created billions of debt. But I understand what you're saying.
20togo
Well-known member
So when the PL started England hadn't made the last four of a major tournament since 1968. But in 1996 we made a semi-final and we've now made the semi finals of the last two major tournaments. I'd suggest that is comfortably better than anything we did prior to 1966 and that there seems to be an upturn of how far we are going in tournaments. So if there is now this further progression into tournaments how can you equate it to that the England team has suffered when factual evidence contradicts what you say.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Wiz
I guess you can measure the success of the EPL how you like.
As I've already said, although I am of the opinion that the EPL has been outstandingly successful, I am not of the opinion - and certainly not at the moment - that the relative recent success of the English national side is down to the success of the EPL.
Me and thee aren't going to shift on this one, you are not happy with distribution of the huge revenues generated by the EPL and I think that it goes without saying that those responsible for generating those huge revenues should want to retain as much of those revenues as possible.
Then we are back to how much we value those in the pyramid and we've been there before plenty of times.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Coppice
So you have decided that a football club should be referred to as a community asset and that means my analogy is utter nonsense.
Do you think that the EPL has NOT been successful ?
Or do you think that the EPL has been successful but the England national team has not been and that Blackpool Football Club should get a bigger share of the huge revenues generated by the EPL ?
Or if the EPL has not been successful, how on earth does it continue to generate huge revenues from broadcasters ?
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
I think the key to the question or the answer lies in how you choose to define success.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
20's
Although I am generally in agreement with you re the EPL debate, I'm not sure that it has been responsible for any upturn in England's fortunes.
With the format of international football as it is, there are fine lines between success and failure, England could have won the World Cup in 1990, they might win Euro 2020 but they might miss out by one penalty kick.
I just feel that it's hard to accurately measure the contribution of the EPL to the English national team.
coppiceman
Well-known member
As someone else said it depends on how you define success. You seem dazzled by money that papers over a lot of cracks and is causing massive issues below the EPL.
As for success at the national level - it has been nearly thirty years of unparalleled wealth and so far we have three semi finals to show for it. That might be good enough for you, but not for me.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
BFC
Absolutely and we have already been there.
I'm saying that the EPL has been outstandingly successful but some people are not happy with the lack of success of the England national side and with the distribution of the huge revenues that it has generated.
That doesn't mean that the EPL has not been successful, that means that the EPL has been successful and that some are not happy with the lack of success of other parties.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
There’s been some upside and some downside to the EPL. So whilst I agree that you might look at it fairly superficially and say it’s been a success, I’m not sure how that would stack up when you consider the overall impact.
I mean you could make a case that the EPL and the response to it has brought football to its knees.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Coppice
Exactly, the issues are below the EPL, the EPL has been outstandingly successful.
As for success at national level, I have already said repeatedly on this thread that I don't feel that the recent relative success of the English national side is down to the success of the EPL.
You feel that achievements of the English national side are not good enough for you, I certainly have no problem with that, your levels of expectancy are exactly that.
Personally, I don't feel that the English national side has performed very well over the last 50 years but I am Scottish and couldn't care less.
All I was saying is that although I have absolutely no doubt that the EPL has been an outstanding success, I would not be so quick to attribute the recent success of the English national side to the success of the EPL and nor would I be so quick to blame the EPL for any failings of the English national side.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Coppice
Exactly, the issues are below the EPL, the EPL has been outstandingly successful, Chain B is not unsuccessful because it has forced Chain A to cease trading.
As for success at national level, I have already said repeatedly on this thread that I don't feel that the recent relative success of the English national side is down to the success of the EPL.
You feel that achievements of the English national side are not good enough for you, I certainly have no problem with that, your levels of expectancy are exactly that.
Personally, I don't feel that the English national side has performed very well over the last 50 years but I am Scottish and couldn't care less.
All I was saying is that although I have absolutely no doubt that the EPL has been an outstanding success, I would not be so quick to attribute the recent relative success of the English national side to the success of the EPL and nor would I be so quick to blame the EPL for any failings of the English national side.
coppiceman
Well-known member
That is the root of it, isn't it? You don't care what happens below the EPL, and as long as it gets it's huge wedge every season all is fine and dandy.
You might get the point we are making if or when the rest of the pyramid collapses. But I am not sure even of that.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
That the success of the EPL has caused issues is not up for debate.
All I am is saying is that if say a football club with a great history, let's say currently in the Championship was to go to the wall because they invested too much in trying to gain promotion to the EPL, that wouldn't mean that the EPL hadn't been a success.
That would mean that the EPL had been a success and that a football club with a great history had failed to live within its means.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Coppice
It's got nothing to do with what I think.
It does all come down to what value we put on those lower down the pyramid.
It goes without saying that those responsible for generating the huge revenues will want to retain those revenues and will not value the input of those lower down the pyramid as highly as the clubs lower down value themselves.
If the lower clubs are not happy with what they receive and failed to manage their resources appropriately that does not mean that the EPL has not been successful.
It means that the lower clubs have failed to manage their resources appropriately.
I fully understand the issues and do so as well as everyone else, I am just not daft enough to think that there will be a change in statute that will lead to a change in the way that the huge revenues generated by the EPL are distributed.
Wizaard
Well-known member
It's not what you or I want. The number one priority for the FA according to their strategy document is for England to win a major trophy. They see the EPL as the forefront of that, as all their players come from that League and they run it.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
Sorry, I’m struggling to grasp what you are saying?
It feels like you are saying that it’s possible to isolate ‘success’ by simply focusing on the positive aspects of something and ignoring the negatives?
I appreciate that some ‘issues’ might not be directly impacted by the EPL and of course, it’s impossible to really know where we might have been had the EPL not come about in any case.
I think the EPL is an attractive league from a commercial perspective, but I don’t think it has had a positive effect on football in a wider context… In fact I’d probably argue that the overall impact has been negative.
You see this is the thing with football in some respects, that differs so much from normal ‘commercially driven’ aspirations. In football it’s desirable to be better than your competitors, but not to destroy your competitors or ‘competition’
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Coppice
It's got nothing to do with what I think.
It does all come down to what value we put on those lower down the pyramid.
It goes without saying that those responsible for generating the huge revenues will want to retain those revenues and will not value the input of those lower down the pyramid as highly as the clubs lower down value themselves.
If the lower clubs are not happy with what they receive and fail to manage their resources appropriately that does not mean that the EPL has not been successful.
It means that the lower clubs have failed to manage their resources appropriately.
I fully understand the issues and do so as well as everyone else, I am just not daft enough to think that there will be a change in statute that will lead to a change in the way that the huge revenues generated by the EPL are distributed.
The whole thing has been done on here time and time again Coppice, I have no problem with the lower clubs getting a bigger share but it doesn't matter what I think, it's not happening.
Wizaard
Well-known member
I'm saying the pool of available players is smaller, but we've hit lucky with the current crop of players(or maybe adapted styles for a more 'continental' game) and that's paid dividends. Back in the day, no one got a call up after 25 or so games, but that's happening now. Opportunities at League level are restricted by the amount of overseas players (and coaches)
Wizaard
Well-known member
"If the lower clubs are not happy with what they receive and fail to manage their resources appropriately that does not mean that the EPL has not been successful.
It means that the lower clubs have failed to manage their resources appropriately.
The lower clubs were robbed of their share by a Big 5 cartel who wanted all the revenue for themselves, got it, and have kept it, ensuring they'll never have to flirt with the possibility of relegation. That's not competition, it's a monopoly and it's not good for the overall game, despite the EPL brainwashed saying otherwise. "Best League in the World"
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
BFC
That's about right.
If the those below the EPL can't manage their resources appropriately they will fail and I'm not putting the blame for that failure down to the EPL.
The EPL has created a bigger gap between the bigger and smaller clubs and again I'm not going to suggest that the EPL has not been successful because of that gap.
It goes without saying that those responsible for generating the huge revenues will want to retain as much of the huge revenues that they generate for themselves.
It's been done time and time on here before and it comes down to what value is put on the clubs lower down the pyramid.
I have no problem with the clubs lower down getting a greater share, personally I have no problem with them getting an equal share but it's not going to happen.
Sorry to disappoint all the Tracy Couch lovers out there but there is not going to be any change in statute that will alter the distribution of revenues.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Absolutely Wiz.
The bigger clubs generate the big money and want to keep it.
The European Super thing was just an extension of the Premier League and I wasn't surprised to see the big clubs looking to do something like that.
The only thing that I found funny was that we had football supporters declaring Gary Neville, 15 years or so at Man Utd on fortunes and now employed by Sky TV, as the saviour of football.
20togo
Well-known member
Does thar monopoly happen in the other major European leagues or is it just an English problem?
Funny how so many had so little sympathy for championship club Derby County too. Or a good few other clubs. Don't know the answer but have payments to the Championship clubs[and lower] been reduced?
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Wiz
We have been over this one time and time again.
I know how you feel on it and you know how I feel and we are not going to change.
I don't even think we disagree.
We have been over this one time and time again.
I know how you feel on it and you know how I feel and we are not going to change.
I don't even think we disagree.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
To my mind that feels like a fairly short termist view. You can rip the arse out of any commercial enterprise in the short term, but with football I’m not sure you can dismiss what the ‘eventual’ impact of short term ‘success’ might look like.
I also don’t agree that you can simply absolve the EPL of blame for the demise of clubs who are essentially pursuing success that is being driven by the league ethos. Similarly the disparity between leagues and all the associated negative impacts down the pyramid, which result from EPL policy decisions.
Last edited:
Wizaard
Well-known member
So your retort is, it happens elsewhere so it's fine here. That really is no argument at all. The payments haven't reduced, but the percentage share has. It's like saying the nurses have had a pay rise when inflation is 2 points above it but in a massively bigger scale.
coppiceman
Well-known member
I don't think you understand in the slightest, tbh.. Your argument Is a bit like telling a robbery victim his financial problems result from him not making the best of what he is left with afterwards.
BFC_BFC_BFC
Well-known member
Well that’s another spin off issue really.. The ‘success’ of the Prem has also had a negative knock on effect in other European countries too…
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Not a problem x3.
I'm only stating the blindingly obvious, in that the EPL has been an outstanding success.
The debate - maybe going back more than a day now - was not really about whether or not the EPL has been a success or not, it was whether or not the relative recent success of the English national side was down to the success of the EPL.
20's and Wiz have just touched on that, I'd be more with Wiz than 20's on that one but I can certainly see a debate, unlike the success of the EPL which is not - or should not - up for debate.
coppiceman
Well-known member
It is pretty clear that you don't understand the issues and haven't bothered informing yourself about them.
It's odd really, cos most Spurs fan are up in arms about it.
SEASIDE2020
Well-known member
Only that nobody has been robbed and that the "victim" has actually received a subsidy from the party that has supposed to have robbed him.
Apart from that, that's a great analogy Coppice.
There is nothing to understand, you just appear to be of the opinion that those responsible for generating the revenues should put a greater value on the input of those lower down the pyramid.
As I've already said, I don't have a problem with lower clubs getting a bigger share - or even an equal share - but it doesn't matter what I think or what you think, it isn't going to happen.
If you want to blame my lack lack of understanding for that then so be it.