MCLF: A long read on Wigan. And why it matters to us.

A good read that. Also, a deflating read. It was bad enough in the 90s when we used to say, "where are we going to find a sugar-daddy?" Nowadays it's, "where are we going to find a leader of a Middle-East autocracy who wants a football vanity project?"
 
Or "where are we going to organise a movement to actually challenge the situation before it gets even worse" would be another way of looking at it.

I dunno!

Maybe I'm optimistic or naive but I hate being defeatist. There's good ideas out there. Far better thinkers than me have got good plans. People within the game, supporters all over the country.

Fans have more potential to connect than ever.

We can't just give up. It's our game! (as proved by how uninteresting the closed door stuff is)
 
td53 said:
Or "where are we going to organise a movement to actually challenge the situation before it gets even worse" would be another way of looking at it.

I dunno!

Maybe I'm optimistic or naive but I hate being defeatist. There's good ideas out there. Far better thinkers than me have got good plans. People within the game, supporters all over the country.

Fans have more potential to connect than ever.

We can't just give up. It's our game! (as proved by how uninteresting the closed door stuff is)
Click to expand...
Perhaps I'm being defeatist but ordinary people can only do so much. Yes, it was brilliant the way that Blackpool fans boycotted games to highlight the evil of the Oystons and we got some great coverage in the national press: Jack Gaughan, Henry Winter and, notably David Conn. But even that's not enough to give ordinary people leverage. To achieve success requires either a change in the Law or someone with clout to force rogue owners to face up to their responsibilities in the Courts. In Blackpool's case, of course, it was Valeri Belokon who enabled the change we needed.

But that's one club. What you're describing is a sport that needs systemic change and whilst football fans remain so tribally connected with their own clubs, that is an almost impossible ask. For instance, those fans across the country who have become disillusioned and see our professional game for the oligopoly it really is, could vote with their feet and choose to watch non-league football instead. Was that not the original idea behind FC United?

For me, the answer must lie in a 2 tier European League, with no routine entry via promotion. In other words, kick out the big teams: Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea and another two. Let them go into a proper European League with the top 4 or eight from each major football country and free up the EFL to become a more competitive national league with spending limits. That way, football supporters can be fans of two teams: one in the EFL and one in Europe - and the only meeting place for the two would be in the national cup competition (ie. the FA Cup for us).
 
Simply will always come back to the wages required by footballers. Wage caps don't work in the real world so ultimately at some stage wages need to fall dramatically.
If that is 60% as DF Dave suggested Blackpool were looking at, then so be it.
 
Chunkylad said:
Simply will always come back to the wages required by footballers. Wage caps don't work in the real world so ultimately at some stage wages need to fall dramatically.
If that is 60% as DF Dave suggested Blackpool were looking at, then so be it.
Click to expand...

I sort of agree, but wage caps work in NFL - I know it's a different context and it's full of franchise stuff but NFL is a great competition and football could learn from how it stays interesting. Not suggesting you can wholesale take their model but there's something in capping club spending and having tight rules.

Point being it works for owners too as they have more stability and certainty over outgoings/incomings as wages can't ride in uncontrolled way. Clubs share risk not take risks on own (which then makes other clubs take risk and eventually someone falls over)

Suggesting a wage cap is probably naive but it's a better answer than relying on fit and proper test which doesn't work and even if beefed up doesn't work against the actions of owners once club sold.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Perhaps I'm being defeatist but ordinary people can only do so much. Yes, it was brilliant the way that Blackpool fans boycotted games to highlight the evil of the Oystons and we got some great coverage in the national press: Jack Gaughan, Henry Winter and, notably David Conn. But even that's not enough to give ordinary people leverage. To achieve success requires either a change in the Law or someone with clout to force rogue owners to face up to their responsibilities in the Courts. In Blackpool's case, of course, it was Valeri Belokon who enabled the change we needed.

But that's one club. What you're describing is a sport that needs systemic change and whilst football fans remain so tribally connected with their own clubs, that is an almost impossible ask. For instance, those fans across the country who have become disillusioned and see our professional game for the oligopoly it really is, could vote with their feet and choose to watch non-league football instead. Was that not the original idea behind FC United?

For me, the answer must lie in a 2 tier European League, with no routine entry via promotion. In other words, kick out the big teams: Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea and another two. Let them go into a proper European League with the top 4 or eight from each major football country and free up the EFL to become a more competitive national league with spending limits. That way, football supporters can be fans of two teams: one in the EFL and one in Europe - and the only meeting place for the two would be in the national cup competition (ie. the FA Cup for us).
Click to expand...

You don't need to boot out all 8. Boot out a few and you'd deflate the value of the brand domestically and reduce tv income etc. The remaining 5/6 couldn't operate in same way they do now.

I don't have a problem with 'big clubs' - I have a problem with set up that makes big clubs bigger every year and I think top 2/3 in superleague would kill much of premier league appeal globally - domestic rights are stagnating and even falling. Global rights is money game now and euro/world league would be massive.

There we go, we've sorted football between us lol.

Now world peace.
 
td53 said:
You don't need to boot out all 8. Boot out a few and you'd deflate the value of the brand domestically and reduce tv income etc. The remaining 5/6 couldn't operate in same way they do now.

I don't have a problem with 'big clubs' - I have a problem with set up that makes big clubs bigger every year and I think top 2/3 in superleague would kill much of premier league appeal globally - domestic rights are stagnating and even falling. Global rights is money game now and euro/world league would be massive.

There we go, we've sorted football between us lol.

Now world peace.
Click to expand...
You're right about the effects of losing TV money but that would be spread around the clubs,so everyone has to work from 'first base' as it were.
There is also an element of inevitably about a European Super League so I agree with 1966 that it needs to happen,thus allowing the rest of us to dine on 3pm kos and a more sane approach to watching football.

I have listened to the Football Supporters Association who are moving to working with the European Clubs fans.but to my mind the real issues are with the EFL lower divisions,the Non League pro/am set up and grassroots. That might not sit well with ManU,Liverpool,Real Madrid etc but TV is the preferred option to many 'fans' nowadays and the traditionalists need to get their heads around that.

Good debate on this-refreshing and no agenda pushing which is good to see.
 
I agree with 1966 that the paradigm needs to change, though I don't agree that his solution is right or desirable. I doubt it would do anything to change the underlying problems in the game - merely shift their focus. To be fair though, his solution is "credible" in the sense that a fair number of big clubs (notably Juventus) want this to happen.

So far, the move in this direction has been beaten off (temporarily) as a result of a lot of "bottom up" resistance. And therein lies the first fundamental problem, namely :

1. The game at the global level is corrupt to an endemic degree. No institution with principles or self-respect would have behaved in the manner that FIFA has with regard to the award of WC2018 and (worse still) WC2022. No institution with principles or self-respect would (as UEFA are doing) seek to promote the creation of a self-electing European elite who take even more of the financial pot than they already do. That the latter isn't happening yet has nothing to do with the organisations who are supposed to be custodians of the sport, and is actually in spite of them.

This is compounded, in England by the second problem :

2. The national game is structurally unsound in two main ways - the first being that the distribution of funding is inequitable and elitist (see above) and designed to attract owners who are venal, corrupt, or both. The second being that the game is also criminally inept at regulating itself, and has been for some time. The two problems reinforce and perpetuate each other.

My paradigm shift involves two main things :

3. Counter-intuitive though it may seem, I feel we need to either take a significant amount of money out of the game - or (more realistically) distribute it far more evenly to ensure that a far greater proportion of it trickles down beyond the Championship, in fact to the sixth tier and ideally beyond.

4. We need to take regulation out of the hands of owners (who can't be trusted to do it in good faith) and the current competition organisers (who have neither the desire nor the ability to do it properly).

All of the above only happens though if :

5. Parliament starts viewing football clubs as community assets and cultural treasures that merit appropriate protection

6. Fans mobilise nationally to assert their economic and moral power such that they get - and can therefore use - a much greater role in the game

7. We treat football as an industry as being akin to public utilities or local government - and create (and fund) an independent and publicly accountable regulatory body that reports to Parliament every year about how it has policed the game, what it plans to so in terms of promulgating best practice and setting out the resources it needs to continue its role in the future.

Achieving 5-7 above is highly ambitious and threatens a lot of vested interests. But those vested interests are strangling the game, and one thing COVID has done is to show that if you strip away the hype, and keep fans out of stadiums, the product loses a lot of its romantic allure and commercial appeal. Let's be honest, Burnley v Watford might as well be the Red Lion v Highfield Social for the casual viewer once you remove all the trappings.

It also means that fans as a collective have to be a lot more active, and a lot more ambitious for the sport, as well as for their individual clubs. A small number of fans work tremendously hard to lobby for change - a great many more watch on, wring their hands, but don't get involved. We need more people doing things, offering their skills or even just participating in football democracy. I know that a great many people are dissatisfied with the game - but they don't use the influence that they have to lobby for change.

The game may seem to be superficially OK to many. But if we get a European League, how often will fans want to turn out to watch Man United v Porto - every season? If we somehow manage to avoid that, how long are the fans of clubs like Brighton, Palace and West Ham going to be enthralled by the prospect of fighting to stay out of the bottom three and maybe qualifying for a second-rate European cup competition where they might have to play seventeen games to win it? How long are fans going to actively support League competitions when you can't be sure that every team reaches the start line (let alone the finishng line), or that some won't get an arbitrarily imposed penalty along the way from a ruling body that clearly doesn't know what it is doing?

All the above might sound very downbeat and gloomy - but some of it is happening already, and the rest of it may very well happen before very long. Is this really the best we can do? When you tot up each year the hundreds and thousands of pounds you plough into the sport, do you really feel that you are getting full value for money?

I've been watching football since I was four. I've gone through being fascinated, partisan, enthralled, dejected, euphoric and frustrated, and embraced all of these things. Nowadays I am radicalised, angry, but also disenchanted with how the game works, and who makes the decisions that shape it. If the game loses the likes of me, it really will be in trouble, and I'd hazard a guess that post-COVID, at least some people will never return. If we don't see big changes, that put fans back at the heart of the sport, the trickle of people turning away could become a flood.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
td53 said:
mclfoot.blogspot.com

Yet another bad owner. Where do they breed them?

This is Brooks Mileson. He owned Gretna FC. If you don't know who he is or what the score is with Gretna, it might be worth giving it a on...
mclfoot.blogspot.com mclfoot.blogspot.com

It's a long one this, but you've had 2.5 weeks without any ill disciplined rambling about how shit football is. I really miss writing 800 word upbeat match reports.

Hope all well.
Click to expand...
Cracking read. Thanks for that. I think it's going to take a global catastrophe for people to sit up and realise the fatuousness of the way football is currently run. Oh...

As long as there are people wanting to throw money at it, then nothing will change. See also as long as the clubs control the rules. The mad men have literally taken over the asylum.

There will never be a widespread boycott and even if there were, the Premier League are showing just how they can get by without fans.
 
Wizaard said:
Cracking read. Thanks for that. I think it's going to take a global catastrophe for people to sit up and realise the fatuousness of the way football is currently run. Oh...

As long as there are people wanting to throw money at it, then nothing will change. See also as long as the clubs control the rules. The mad men have literally taken over the asylum.

There will never be a widespread boycott and even if there were, the Premier League are showing just how they can get by without fans.
Click to expand...

Cheers wiz.

I dunno how well Prem is coping tbf. As a short term measure it works but as a product it is much diminished...

But yes, wishful thinking I suppose... but if you don't have a dream etc...

Think a lot more people noticing what is wrong and hopefully ideas will take root.

I think key is selling to clubs that change is in their interests. It really is for a lot of them.
 
I also meant to say it was a good read td53, and I forgot. I got the sense you don't really know what you think the answer is?
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Perhaps I'm being defeatist but ordinary people can only do so much. Yes, it was brilliant the way that Blackpool fans boycotted games to highlight the evil of the Oystons and we got some great coverage in the national press: Jack Gaughan, Henry Winter and, notably David Conn. But even that's not enough to give ordinary people leverage. To achieve success requires either a change in the Law or someone with clout to force rogue owners to face up to their responsibilities in the Courts. In Blackpool's case, of course, it was Valeri Belokon who enabled the change we needed.

But that's one club. What you're describing is a sport that needs systemic change and whilst football fans remain so tribally connected with their own clubs, that is an almost impossible ask. For instance, those fans across the country who have become disillusioned and see our professional game for the oligopoly it really is, could vote with their feet and choose to watch non-league football instead. Was that not the original idea behind FC United?

For me, the answer must lie in a 2 tier European League, with no routine entry via promotion. In other words, kick out the big teams: Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool, Chelsea and another two. Let them go into a proper European League with the top 4 or eight from each major football country and free up the EFL to become a more competitive national league with spending limits. That way, football supporters can be fans of two teams: one in the EFL and one in Europe - and the only meeting place for the two would be in the national cup competition (ie. the FA Cup for us).
Click to expand...
You don't need that, when we were in the PL half our home gate were fans of someone else.
 
basilrobbie said:
I agree with 1966 that the paradigm needs to change, though I don't agree that his solution is right or desirable. I doubt it would do anything to change the underlying problems in the game - merely shift their focus. To be fair though, his solution is "credible" in the sense that a fair number of big clubs (notably Juventus) want this to happen.

So far, the move in this direction has been beaten off (temporarily) as a result of a lot of "bottom up" resistance. And therein lies the first fundamental problem, namely :

1. The game at the global level is corrupt to an endemic degree. No institution with principles or self-respect would have behaved in the manner that FIFA has with regard to the award of WC2018 and (worse still) WC2022. No institution with principles or self-respect would (as UEFA are doing) seek to promote the creation of a self-electing European elite who take even more of the financial pot than they already do. That the latter isn't happening yet has nothing to do with the organisations who are supposed to be custodians of the sport, and is actually in spite of them.

This is compounded, in England by the second problem :

2. The national game is structurally unsound in two main ways - the first being that the distribution of funding is inequitable and elitist (see above) and designed to attract owners who are venal, corrupt, or both. The second being that the game is also criminally inept at regulating itself, and has been for some time. The two problems reinforce and perpetuate each other.

My paradigm shift involves two main things :

3. Counter-intuitive though it may seem, I feel we need to either take a significant amount of money out of the game - or (more realistically) distribute it far more evenly to ensure that a far greater proportion of it trickles down beyond the Championship, in fact to the sixth tier and ideally beyond.

4. We need to take regulation out of the hands of owners (who can't be trusted to do it in good faith) and the current competition organisers (who have neither the desire nor the ability to do it properly).

All of the above only happens though if :

5. Parliament starts viewing football clubs as community assets and cultural treasures that merit appropriate protection

6. Fans mobilise nationally to assert their economic and moral power such that they get - and can therefore use - a much greater role in the game

7. We treat football as an industry as being akin to public utilities or local government - and create (and fund) an independent and publicly accountable regulatory body that reports to Parliament every year about how it has policed the game, what it plans to so in terms of promulgating best practice and setting out the resources it needs to continue its role in the future.

Achieving 5-7 above is highly ambitious and threatens a lot of vested interests. But those vested interests are strangling the game, and one thing COVID has done is to show that if you strip away the hype, and keep fans out of stadiums, the product loses a lot of its romantic allure and commercial appeal. Let's be honest, Burnley v Watford might as well be the Red Lion v Highfield Social for the casual viewer once you remove all the trappings.

It also means that fans as a collective have to be a lot more active, and a lot more ambitious for the sport, as well as for their individual clubs. A small number of fans work tremendously hard to lobby for change - a great many more watch on, wring their hands, but don't get involved. We need more people doing things, offering their skills or even just participating in football democracy. I know that a great many people are dissatisfied with the game - but they don't use the influence that they have to lobby for change.

The game may seem to be superficially OK to many. But if we get a European League, how often will fans want to turn out to watch Man United v Porto - every season? If we somehow manage to avoid that, how long are the fans of clubs like Brighton, Palace and West Ham going to be enthralled by the prospect of fighting to stay out of the bottom three and maybe qualifying for a second-rate European cup competition where they might have to play seventeen games to win it? How long are fans going to actively support League competitions when you can't be sure that every team reaches the start line (let alone the finishng line), or that some won't get an arbitrarily imposed penalty along the way from a ruling body that clearly doesn't know what it is doing?

All the above might sound very downbeat and gloomy - but some of it is happening already, and the rest of it may very well happen before very long. Is this really the best we can do? When you tot up each year the hundreds and thousands of pounds you plough into the sport, do you really feel that you are getting full value for money?

I've been watching football since I was four. I've gone through being fascinated, partisan, enthralled, dejected, euphoric and frustrated, and embraced all of these things. Nowadays I am radicalised, angry, but also disenchanted with how the game works, and who makes the decisions that shape it. If the game loses the likes of me, it really will be in trouble, and I'd hazard a guess that post-COVID, at least some people will never return. If we don't see big changes, that put fans back at the heart of the sport, the trickle of people turning away could become a flood.
Click to expand...
Another excellent post on this thread. As is often the case with you BasilRobbie you cover a lot of ground and put in a lot of thought. I suppose my suggestion of the two-tier Euro-League was a starting point for me because I believe the European giants are already too powerful, with too many vested interests, to enable your ideas of removing powers of regulation from the owners to succeed. That is not to dismiss your suggestion but from where I'm sitting I can't see how it could happen.
National Governments hate getting involved with football - well, ours does. There's always the likelihood of losing votes from one set of fans as you gain the support of others. I suppose my fatalistic view says, to hell with the big boys, take your TV revenue to Europe and leave the terraces to us.
 
Seasideforever said:
Fans have 2 teams? Are you for real?
Click to expand...
It happens already. Outside of your main team, who do you want to win the Champions League? I'm not saying fans would split their loyalties or invest as much feeling for a European League team but the two would be so dissociated that it may as well be your favourite football team and your favourite Formula 1 star.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
It happens already. Outside of your main team, who do you want to win the Champions League? I'm not saying fans would split their loyalties or invest as much feeling for a European League team but the two would be so dissociated that it may as well be your favourite football team and your favourite Formula 1 star.
Click to expand...
In all seriousness I have absolutely no interest in the Champions League, partly because it's a clear misnomer and also I drew the line at another subscription and refused to pay any money to BT sport. I know there's ways round it but I'm not interested.
 
Well done. You've clearly put a lot of work into it.
We all hope and prey that our current owner is a "fit and proper" person.
 
basilrobbie said:
I agree with 1966 that the paradigm needs to change, though I don't agree that his solution is right or desirable. I doubt it would do anything to change the underlying problems in the game - merely shift their focus. To be fair though, his solution is "credible" in the sense that a fair number of big clubs (notably Juventus) want this to happen.

So far, the move in this direction has been beaten off (temporarily) as a result of a lot of "bottom up" resistance. And therein lies the first fundamental problem, namely :

1. The game at the global level is corrupt to an endemic degree. No institution with principles or self-respect would have behaved in the manner that FIFA has with regard to the award of WC2018 and (worse still) WC2022. No institution with principles or self-respect would (as UEFA are doing) seek to promote the creation of a self-electing European elite who take even more of the financial pot than they already do. That the latter isn't happening yet has nothing to do with the organisations who are supposed to be custodians of the sport, and is actually in spite of them.

This is compounded, in England by the second problem :

2. The national game is structurally unsound in two main ways - the first being that the distribution of funding is inequitable and elitist (see above) and designed to attract owners who are venal, corrupt, or both. The second being that the game is also criminally inept at regulating itself, and has been for some time. The two problems reinforce and perpetuate each other.

My paradigm shift involves two main things :

3. Counter-intuitive though it may seem, I feel we need to either take a significant amount of money out of the game - or (more realistically) distribute it far more evenly to ensure that a far greater proportion of it trickles down beyond the Championship, in fact to the sixth tier and ideally beyond.

4. We need to take regulation out of the hands of owners (who can't be trusted to do it in good faith) and the current competition organisers (who have neither the desire nor the ability to do it properly).

All of the above only happens though if :

5. Parliament starts viewing football clubs as community assets and cultural treasures that merit appropriate protection

6. Fans mobilise nationally to assert their economic and moral power such that they get - and can therefore use - a much greater role in the game

7. We treat football as an industry as being akin to public utilities or local government - and create (and fund) an independent and publicly accountable regulatory body that reports to Parliament every year about how it has policed the game, what it plans to so in terms of promulgating best practice and setting out the resources it needs to continue its role in the future.

Achieving 5-7 above is highly ambitious and threatens a lot of vested interests. But those vested interests are strangling the game, and one thing COVID has done is to show that if you strip away the hype, and keep fans out of stadiums, the product loses a lot of its romantic allure and commercial appeal. Let's be honest, Burnley v Watford might as well be the Red Lion v Highfield Social for the casual viewer once you remove all the trappings.

It also means that fans as a collective have to be a lot more active, and a lot more ambitious for the sport, as well as for their individual clubs. A small number of fans work tremendously hard to lobby for change - a great many more watch on, wring their hands, but don't get involved. We need more people doing things, offering their skills or even just participating in football democracy. I know that a great many people are dissatisfied with the game - but they don't use the influence that they have to lobby for change.

The game may seem to be superficially OK to many. But if we get a European League, how often will fans want to turn out to watch Man United v Porto - every season? If we somehow manage to avoid that, how long are the fans of clubs like Brighton, Palace and West Ham going to be enthralled by the prospect of fighting to stay out of the bottom three and maybe qualifying for a second-rate European cup competition where they might have to play seventeen games to win it? How long are fans going to actively support League competitions when you can't be sure that every team reaches the start line (let alone the finishng line), or that some won't get an arbitrarily imposed penalty along the way from a ruling body that clearly doesn't know what it is doing?

All the above might sound very downbeat and gloomy - but some of it is happening already, and the rest of it may very well happen before very long. Is this really the best we can do? When you tot up each year the hundreds and thousands of pounds you plough into the sport, do you really feel that you are getting full value for money?

I've been watching football since I was four. I've gone through being fascinated, partisan, enthralled, dejected, euphoric and frustrated, and embraced all of these things. Nowadays I am radicalised, angry, but also disenchanted with how the game works, and who makes the decisions that shape it. If the game loses the likes of me, it really will be in trouble, and I'd hazard a guess that post-COVID, at least some people will never return. If we don't see big changes, that put fans back at the heart of the sport, the trickle of people turning away could become a flood.
Click to expand...

Robbie, I'm just going out but just on point one. I read Goldblatt's state of the globe book on football recently. The corruption is stunning. It gets repetitious and almost rhythmic "in (insert name of country) betting/political shenanigans/ethnic tensions have ruined game"

It's why premier league is a global product as it feels pure and good and everything that football in (insert name of country) isnt. Of course people want to watch English football when their domestic game is in tatters. I'm aware that compared to many places, we have it good.

I'll come back to this later as want to give it a proper read through again.

In relation to your question about 'the answer', it's a league run by sporting principle above all else. How to get there is a matter of debate and I wouldn't take issue with many of your suggestions tbh. My favoured route atm would be proper salary control - I wrote a very long piece on it - it's idealistic but sport should confirm to ideals. Sport isn't business. There is a business alongside the sport, but the problem we have is the business has become more important than the sport and the sport is run for the benefit of the business. Tail/dog.

However you do it, by capping, redistribution, deflating wages, the central problem is an inequality that renders the sporting contest increasingly unappealing. It becomes a contest of economic power above all.

I think there's some constructive ideas out there and possibly we are seeing the EFL begin to work out answers. I'm not sure if a salary cap will happen, but it will be an interesting experience to see if it can be applied and how much it levels things out. I fear it will be strangled at birth by PFA and ambitious clubs though. I also fear it's pointless without Premier League taking part.

My long winded attempt at an answer:

mclfoot.blogspot.com

Cap in hand: For a new modern football

Two of my favourite players ever. No reason. Just because it's my blog and I can. So there. Foreword This is a long pos...
mclfoot.blogspot.com mclfoot.blogspot.com

basilrobbie said:
I also meant to say it was a good read td53, and I forgot. I got the sense you don't really know what you think the answer is?
Click to expand...
 
Insider said:
Well done. You've clearly put a lot of work into it.
We all hope and prey that our current owner is a "fit and proper" person.
Click to expand...

I think he is. He seems very fit and proper and I'm no great hedge fund fan! He's allayed my doubts at every turn and I'm very impressed by his style.

What worries me (I'm a worrier!) is in the hypothetical instance that Sadler isn't there any more (for whatever reason) then we're back in a sea full of sharks.

Currently that seems unlikely and we feel secure but the reality is there for all clubs - football finances are in such a state that anyone sane would stay away.

Damian Collins MP is very good on this.
 
Some cracking stuff on this thread, and great to read a courteous debate. My two penneth for what its worth.

1. The genie is already out of the bottle for the super powers, so I agree with those that say 'let the top 4/6 teams go and form a super league'. They will never want to share the money they get, and for the past 50 years or so there have been very few instances of anyone breaking into the top 6 of MAn U/Liverpool/Arsenal/City/Spurs/Chelsea (Leicester aside), and I don;' think this will happen again, so let them go off into the sunset. They don't care about fans, just money

2. It seems like there are 3 or 4 different types of owners of clubs, with different aims:-

a) Mega rich vanity owners with money to burn
b) Mega rich with money to launder
c) Sort of rich, but with dodgy dealing and looking to make a quick buck, or consolidate their debts
d) benefactors who want to develop their local team (some vanity projects, other well run clubs)

3. Most normal fans care about glory, not money. we would like to win cup-ties, leagues etc and have days to remember. I think most fans, even Prem teams at the bottom would like that.

4) to do that, and for football to succeed, I think we all agree that the monies have to be shared more fairly. But this is not going to happen with the top 6 holding all the money and the power now. What I would like to see, is let these go, then form new leagues with prize money more fairly shared, and TV deals that cover the whole league. After the top 6 go, I would suggest that we only have a couple of other teams who are perpetual top level teams (Everton, and I'm struggling to name others), whilst most of the rest have a tendency to bounce up and down a bit. We have a long list then of 'big' teams, who have recently been in the Prem, but have also suffered relegation to Championship and lower. I wonder if they would like to see a model whereby there is not such a massive gap between boom and bust and they could guarantee a steady income stream, from their shares of the league TV rights. Yeah lets have different revenue depending on the league you are in (Champ, L1, L2) but not such a massive gap.

5. The recent pandemic, financial woes etc should make football authorities think twice. Someone has suggested that The Prem are happy without fans...I sort of get that, but the football served up post lockdown, with no fans in so boring. I wonder if the TV companies will continue to pay mega bucks for such a dull product. I suepct that the paying public will be thinking twice about paying their TV subscriptions for such a product. Similarly after a couple of years, how many will pay to watch a European Super league. Already I think the Champions League has over saturated things, with the pre-Christmas group stages being a bore, and not watched by loads. I wonder if BT Sport are getting a goo return for their money.

6. Finally, as has been mentioned, this need an unbiased, independent governance model, but hopefully made up of people who know the game, and are looking at the long term interest of the game. Ex-players, some owners, some fans groups, TV reps etc all working together to get a sustainable model.

7. Finally, finally, I would also impose a levy on clubs of , say 1% of their revenue to act as a fund to help out histroic teams in trouble, and a levy on agents fees, and payers wages to do likewise. We need to try and stop so much money leaving the game.

All IMHO of course.
 
Brooks Mileson was not a bad owner. He got ill and died. He also is credited as a philanthropist to grass roots football.
 
O4tonygreen said:
Some cracking stuff on this thread, and great to read a courteous debate. My two penneth for what its worth.

1. The genie is already out of the bottle for the super powers, so I agree with those that say 'let the top 4/6 teams go and form a super league'. They will never want to share the money they get, and for the past 50 years or so there have been very few instances of anyone breaking into the top 6 of MAn U/Liverpool/Arsenal/City/Spurs/Chelsea (Leicester aside), and I don;' think this will happen again, so let them go off into the sunset. They don't care about fans, just money

2. It seems like there are 3 or 4 different types of owners of clubs, with different aims:-

a) Mega rich vanity owners with money to burn
b) Mega rich with money to launder
c) Sort of rich, but with dodgy dealing and looking to make a quick buck, or consolidate their debts
d) benefactors who want to develop their local team (some vanity projects, other well run clubs)

3. Most normal fans care about glory, not money. we would like to win cup-ties, leagues etc and have days to remember. I think most fans, even Prem teams at the bottom would like that.

4) to do that, and for football to succeed, I think we all agree that the monies have to be shared more fairly. But this is not going to happen with the top 6 holding all the money and the power now. What I would like to see, is let these go, then form new leagues with prize money more fairly shared, and TV deals that cover the whole league. After the top 6 go, I would suggest that we only have a couple of other teams who are perpetual top level teams (Everton, and I'm struggling to name others), whilst most of the rest have a tendency to bounce up and down a bit. We have a long list then of 'big' teams, who have recently been in the Prem, but have also suffered relegation to Championship and lower. I wonder if they would like to see a model whereby there is not such a massive gap between boom and bust and they could guarantee a steady income stream, from their shares of the league TV rights. Yeah lets have different revenue depending on the league you are in (Champ, L1, L2) but not such a massive gap.

5. The recent pandemic, financial woes etc should make football authorities think twice. Someone has suggested that The Prem are happy without fans...I sort of get that, but the football served up post lockdown, with no fans in so boring. I wonder if the TV companies will continue to pay mega bucks for such a dull product. I suepct that the paying public will be thinking twice about paying their TV subscriptions for such a product. Similarly after a couple of years, how many will pay to watch a European Super league. Already I think the Champions League has over saturated things, with the pre-Christmas group stages being a bore, and not watched by loads. I wonder if BT Sport are getting a goo return for their money.

6. Finally, as has been mentioned, this need an unbiased, independent governance model, but hopefully made up of people who know the game, and are looking at the long term interest of the game. Ex-players, some owners, some fans groups, TV reps etc all working together to get a sustainable model.

7. Finally, finally, I would also impose a levy on clubs of , say 1% of their revenue to act as a fund to help out histroic teams in trouble, and a levy on agents fees, and payers wages to do likewise. We need to try and stop so much money leaving the game.

All IMHO of course.
Click to expand...
Again, lots of good stuff. New to this thread is the 1% levy to aid clubs in trouble. Whilst I fully agree with this idea I wonder how long it would take Club accountants to work ways to get around it.
 
Firstly another great article

But as Macseasider has said i.m not quite sure you've got your head around Brookes Mileson and his motivations.

In fact, it could be said that he died trying to save his club Yes he was the one who got it into the shit in the first place but hell what a ride he gave those fans from playing in front of a hundred poor souls at Kendal Town in the old NPL to 60k in the Cup Final at Hampden Park and you didn't see too many of them complaining when he started putting the cash in and during the success and the quick climb up the Scottish leagues that swiftly followed.

But you have to go back a little bit further and how BM got involved with Gretna and that was only because him and John Courtenay [ who were both interested in buying CUFC ] couldn't agree to make a joint bid to take over Carlisle, Brooks wanted to let it go into admin first whereas JC who knew nothing about administration [as it was something they didn't have in Eire ] and some very sad old men claiming to have CUFC.s best interests at heart persuaded him not to do it at which point BM walked away leaving him to it which ended up costing JC the best part of 4 million quid over two years and BM walking away to lick his wounds only to be approached by the then Gretna commercial manager just to maybe do a few little sponsorships etc.

I think we all know where it went from there but not only did Brooks bankroll Gretna but he also gave a total of nearly 1 million pounds to any number of other clubs who held out the begging bowl to him as well as giving 750k to the newly formed Carlisle Trust [ which I believe is still today the largest single donation anyone has made to a clubs Trust ] and then after being snubbed once again when JC sold the club to Fred Story in an attempt to undermine Story who had slagged him off mercilessly he was at one point funding the wages of almost half of the squad yet people forget this and sing Storys praises [it's not hard to run a club prudently and achieve success when you have someone else paying half the wage bill ]

So maybe your choice of starting your article with a reference to BM maybe wasn't the best of choices because knowing everyone involved in what happened above to a greater or lesser extent I can tell you the game would be a hell of a lot better if it had a few dozen more Brookes Mileson.s in it believe me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top