Another day, another screwy proposal
This story contains more grains of salt than a Midwestern road after a snowstorm, and it isn't going to happen any time soon, but the fact that it's even mentioned as a possibility is somewhat unsettling.
7 months ago
pdb
61 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I don’t understand all of the inner-workings of it, but the article says that even if enough owners (14 of the 20) voted to abolish relegation, the FA would have to approve it and would never do so.
My fear is that if there ever gets to be enough owners that want it they'll break away from the Premier League and form their own closed league
at which point I will stop watching top flight soccer entirely.
I agree, just as a knee-jerk reaction
this idea is easily one of the most depressing I’ve heard in a while.
Who gets to decide which of the current 20 teams makes up the all-time Premier League? Should Leeds be in it? Forest? West Ham? WHO GETS TO DECIDE THIS?
Honestly, sometimes I wonder if people think with ANYTHING besides their bank statements.
by Ted Harwood on Oct 17, 2011 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
This is what I was thinking.
Do we just stick with whoever’s in when the vote happens? Do we let “historic” teams in? This is stupid.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 17, 2011 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
I would be willing to bet it would be a hand picked league designed to maximize rivalries and TV revenue
So you’d have the obvious:
Manchester United
Manchester City
Chelsea
Liverpool
Arsenal
Then because of rivalries for those teams you’d get Spurs and Everton. In terms of other desirable rivalries you’d get Newcastle and Sunderland, and I would be willing to bet if this came to pass there would be a strong push made for Celtic and Rangers to join as well. Aston Villa would probably be there as the biggest club from the second biggest city in the country, which would probably mean Birmingham City joins too.
That’s 13 teams, so 7 more are needed assuming a 20 team league; any team that finishes in the top 10 that is not already in this list would probably get a place, and the rest would probably come from teams that could pay a presumably extraordinarily large entry fee.
Certainly it would at the lower end
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 17, 2011 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Watching the same teams play the same teams all the time in soccer is boring as hell
The nice thing about promotion/relegation, and about the various tournaments, is that you get to see other teams. Closed leagues take the fun and drama out of anything. Take the lovely 8-2 game from earlier this season. In a closed league, that result doesn’t matter – league position is unimportant, goal difference is meaningless, it’s just another Tuesday night MLB game between the Mariners and Twins at that point. I can see plenty of those games, I want my soccer to matter a bit.
People don't.
Managing Editor, OnceAMetro.com
by Ben Schneider on Oct 17, 2011 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
This is a terrible idea.
It’s not like the US where you have usually 1 pro team per sport for a city. In that case the limited number of teams in existence makes a franchise system workable. But this is football, there are many times more pro teams than can be fit into a single division. Not to mention teams that deserve to be promoted will then never have the opportunity.
SBN Bloglist:
The Short Fuse (Arsenal, EPL)
Sactown Royalty (Kings, NBA)
I would imagine if this came to be that there would still be a Premier League and promotion/relegation to lower leagues
made up of teams that aren’t in the Emirateihad Platinum League or whatever the hell they’d call this monstrosity.
The Golden Corral Super-Anglo Football Consortium, presented by Shell Oil
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 17, 2011 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
actually, I think I like this better than the name we have now
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 17, 2011 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I doubt this will ever happen
All of England’s fans would be up in arms if this ever happened. Not only that, all teams, Premier League and Football League, are all part of the FA, therefore, all get an equal chance at playing at the top level of football if they work their way up there, nobody cannot deny them the right of not being able to move up. It’s unconstitutional against football!
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
And then I realized the EPL and Football League are two different entities
so damn, this could happen anyways. But I still think that, there would be such a backlash against it that it would just be a lost cause. I’m not even sure why this is being proposed by the foreign owners anyways, considering that all of them all own teams that finish in the top half of the table, it’s not like they really worry about relegation anyways.
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
Forgot about Newcastle
Even though they’re looking decent nowadays, but the likes of Sunderland and Blackburn would probably appreciate the security of no more relegation.
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
for sure
call me naive, but I really think that they need to accept security as what makes the game, and life, exciting, and not think about money being the final, ultimate goal of everything.
All this does is further entrench an oligopoly—if you’re Ipswich, doesn’t this de-incentivize you? Or are you meant to be “playing for the joy of the game”, while somehow Blackburn are free from such simplistic moral presuppositions in their quest for cash? I dunno.
It’s just a game.
Now I feel bad.
Kind of reminds me of the Pittsburg Pirates then
We can suck all we want and trade away everyone, as long as we’re reeling in a profit. I guess when you look at it everywhere, professional sports aren’t really about integrity and the love of the game anymore, it’s all just a profit model…
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
There is a reason that every square inch of a ballpark, including cup holders, is plastered with ads
(PNC is pretty much my favorite ballpark I’ve ever been to by the way)
You're not naive, you're just wonderfully optimistic about motives
In sports, money rules all. And once money starts flowing, it ruins all. It could be argued at this point that sports leagues and teams only exist as vehicles to sell stuff – all sports, not just soccer. The sport aspect is largely irrelevant – the people paying those dollars/pounds/euro to be on the front of the shirt or in the program or on the wall of the stadium want the eyeballs and wallets of the people watching the sport, they don’t give a damn about the sport itself.
Where does that leave the game? Screwed.
Oh, for sure
I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise, of course. For me, it’s more of an overarching ethos—they do everything they can to eliminate risk and secure their profits. I think that makes sense from their short-sighted perspective, but I do think that they risk (ha) ultimately ruining what makes their product so compelling—and profitable!!—in the first place: risk. The risk of relegation, which is a deeper, longer version of the risk of losing.
If you cannot lose, there is no drama. Perhaps that’s oversimplifying it, because there is plenty of drama in sports without relegation, like baseball, to use the example above. But it’s part of what makes league football so compelling, in my view, and that power to compel is part of what’s made their product what it is.
When the rich make moves that are perhaps an overreach to stay rich, I get angry.
Actually, I can see it as a definite possibility.
Just think of this in terms of money. To the twenty clubs that are in the EPL every year, there is a boatload of cash available. This has drawn foreign investment which drives up the profits. Now, what happens when the league gets to around having 15 (or more) teams bought by rich billionaires. Well, they are going to want to ensure their investment is wise, which means they don’t want to be relegated. You don’t drop so many millions or billions to watch your teams worth disappear. By locking the league down, the profits are assured and, some will argue, the league will be more competitive because all teams will end up being owned and big money thrown around like tomorrow will never come.
It is scary, it is absurd, but it makes sense. I won’t welcome it, but it could happen, easily.
The idea that people would buy something with risk
and then change the rules so there’s no risk for them is a fact of human existence that will never cease to amaze/anger/frustrate/depress me.
The Premier League was formed as a blatant cash grab
so there’s no real reason this new thing wouldn’t happen for the same reason. It’s depressing as hell because it will also ruin the rest of the league pyramid in England – people think it’s bad now that Manchester City can buy whoever they want, imagine an entire league of that, and imagine not being a fan of a team in that league.
I think I would become an AFC Wimbledon fan at that point.
What I don’t understand is what a team like Arsenal, Man U, Chelsea, et al have to gain from this. The amount of incompetence it would take to erode their institutional advantages to the point that they might be threatened with relegation is enormous. Given that they made the investment to buy the team, shouldn’t we take it as a given that they all believe they have the ability to run their teams at reasonable level of competence?Now, anything’s possible and even likely given enough time, but why would they incur such a certain and enormous loss of goodwill among the fans/media in order to protect themselves from a downside risk seemingly remote?
It seems more likely to me that this is kinda of thing is being sent out as a “trial balloon.” It’s something that somebody’s more or less interested in, but they’re even more interested in gauging the reaction to it. They will take everything they can get, but they aren’t entirely insensitive of the public response to their actions. It’s really important that supporters of all teams, especially those whose clubs are considering this, come out forcefully against this kind of thing. That’s likely to ensure that we don’t hear about it again.
The TV money alone would enable any one of the clubs to buy a Central American nation and have cash left over
What do they have to gain from it? Money. Plenty of it. That’s really all this is about.
How would the elimination of relegation increase TV revenues?
Isn’t the amount of money Sky, et al. spend based on possible advertising revenue, which is based on viewership? Do they really think that many more people would watch a league without relegation than one with it? I suppose you could optimize the markets involved in the league, but I feel like that would only be a marginal improvement.
Unless this is basically just a Trojan horse intended to blow up the Premier League and allow for the European super-league, I just don’t get where the extra money is coming from in this proposal.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 18, 2011 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
your second point is closer to the truth I think
The extra money comes from the fact that TV companies don’t have to account for games between Manchester United and Bolton any more – every matchup is a premier matchup, and the league can charge accordingly.
Plus
there’s the fact that the Premier League currently makes “parachute payments” to the three relegated teams every year, so they’re not burdened with a ridiculous wage bill in a lower division, that last for a couple years – not having to do that would save a not-insignificant amount of money they could then throw at the big boys.
We have a European Super League though
It’s called the UEFA Champions League, and it’s a cash cow that rivals that of the World Cup. If they’re looking for a regular season, like 36 game, 20 team table of a European Super League, then I guess I wouldn’t be too opposed to it, but only if there’s a relegation/promotion of the bottom “x” teams with ones deemed to replace them. To be honest, I’d love to face Bayern, Madrid, and Milan on a regular basis. I don’t know, it’s a touchy topic that hits every part of football square in the face, but no matter what changes happen to the English, European, or International game, we always end up adjusting and still end up cheering for the same cause, and that’s for Arsenal to kick some ass on the weekends (and occasionally during the week)
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
by UMDfutbol11 on Oct 18, 2011 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I like to look at it working like this...
If there was the implementation of an European Super League, G-20, whatever you want to call it, I guess the way I would want it to work out, would be to have the top 20 teams in Europe (this could be another whole big debate by itself), relegate the bottom 2 or 4 of the Super League, and implement a new 2 or 4 teams through a playoff of the top teams of European country’s leagues, also known as today’s Champions League. So basically what we would end up with, is a promotion/relegation system that starts with individual leagues in European countries, and ends up with a giant league that sprawls across Europe. The factors going against it are, us the fans (I’d rather not see this happen, but if it did, I guess I wouldn’t mind it), the setup of not only European football, but world football as well, because it tends to follow in the direction that European football goes in (unless your MLS), and possibly UEFA and FIFA, who probably wouldn’t want to risk imploding it’s current system when it’s already making massive dollars as it is. Personally, I think UEFA and it’s member would shoot down any chance of this happening, and should would FIFA, just because it would create a chaos amongst all the federations, but now I’m just looking too far into some rumor about foreign owners scrapping relegation/promotion in England, and yea…
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
by UMDfutbol11 on Oct 18, 2011 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
It would be incredibly boring to play the same teams multiple times a year though
at least to me.
A European Super League as originally floated would be a closed league, which is probably what would happen this time if it comes to pass. I don’t love the Champions League as currently constituted, but it at least has that aspirational quality to it – you’re good enough, you get in. If that gets closed off, what’s the point?
Scarcity creates value – if Arsenal play Barcelona four times a year with nothing really at stake (Barca can’t knock Arsenal out of a knockoutless league!), why should I ever get excited for Arsenal to play Barcelona? It becomes, to quote Andy Gray, a Tuesday night in Stoke. And in all honesty, if Arsenal become part of a closed Premiership or a closed European Super League-type thing, I would walk away and go be a fan of a lower-league team.
Money has ruined most big-time sports, and there will come a time that I refuse to be an ATM.
We already play the same teams multiple times a year. Twice, usually.
Sometimes more.
Managing Editor, OnceAMetro.com
by Ben Schneider on Oct 18, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Which is fine in a league context
but if you make the Champions League a closed contest where it’s the same teams every year, it removes the interest (to me) of what the Champions League is – it’s supposed to be a reward for an excellent domestic season, but if they close it and make a superleague out of it, that goes away and it’s just another league.
Why wouldn't they have to account for those games?
Unless the idea is “no relegation, only we start out by relegating everyone but Manchester United, Manchester City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and Spurs” those games will still happen. Bolton’s still going to be in the league, I would assume.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 18, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I just have this feeling that in a closed Premiership the Bolton Wandererses of the world need not apply
but I could be wrong.
I'm not really sure how they could hold a league that only had six teams.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 18, 2011 9:27 PM EDT up reply actions
They probably would, I just don't know that there are enough of them to craft quite the disaster scenario we're assuming
But then I’m often an optimist when it comes to things like this. I just don’t think there’s that much of a chance of this happening. The degree of change from where we are now to where we would be in this proposal just seems to me to be too large to allow it to happen. But I could be wrong.
WRITTEN IN THE STAAAAARS, A MILLION MILES AWAAAAAAY
I write a bit for The Short Fuse.
by Thomas Wachtel on Oct 19, 2011 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions
This is a terrible idea
For one thing, it’d kill the attendance of the teams in 8-20. And without the more equal revenue sharing that we have in American sports, it’d completely kill the competitiveness of the league.
AAARRRRRRRSSSSSHHHHHHHHAAAAAAVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNN!
Dream goal!
The key of this proposal is that it would require FA approval
And if this were ever formally presented to them, they’d quickly turn it down due to their role of being the stewards of the game in general and not only to the EPL, as the article states.
While being the dumbest thing I’ve easily read about in a few days, I honestly don’t think this has any possibility of becoming reality.
"I know you're from Middle America, and sometimes you feel like you're representing more than just a school or a conference, maybe an entire group of American citizens out there."
by Twin Cities Hawk on Oct 17, 2011 4:15 PM EDT reply actions
The FA would be powerless to stop these teams from forming their own league if they wanted to
They couldn’t stop the Premier League, after all. If this becomes a thing the teams want, they’ll just break away from the existing league structure just like they did in 1992.
At that point, with the game the way it is ($$$)
You’re not looking at a domestic breakaway league, but a continental league (or two).
"I know you're from Middle America, and sometimes you feel like you're representing more than just a school or a conference, maybe an entire group of American citizens out there."
by Twin Cities Hawk on Oct 17, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
The G14 called this concept the "Europa League" back in the early 2000's
and I would not be at all surprised to see the concept come around again here in a few years, with a different name.
The FA could have the ability
To restrict clubs from their competitions, so while it may be small change compared to what the clubs could achieve, the traditions of the game not being an option could upset a section of supporters.
"I know you're from Middle America, and sometimes you feel like you're representing more than just a school or a conference, maybe an entire group of American citizens out there."
by Twin Cities Hawk on Oct 17, 2011 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions
If you think a massive club like Manchester United or Arsenal
would miss out on the massive payday of a closed, English or pan-European league just so they could stay in the FA Cup you seriously misunderstand the relationship clubs have with their fans money.
People love to think that sports teams are benevolent and would never do anything to alienate their fan base. What they forget is that for every fan that leaves there are 10 more behind him or her.
I'm not saying the clubs would act according to their supporters wishes and demands
I’m just tossing out hypotheticals at this point as to what sort of reaction the FA would take to a breakaway league.
"I know you're from Middle America, and sometimes you feel like you're representing more than just a school or a conference, maybe an entire group of American citizens out there."
by Twin Cities Hawk on Oct 17, 2011 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Nope, can't tell. At all.
In all reality, I don’t see much happening regarding “breakaway league(s).” The legal challenges alone would, IMO, scupper any plans.
"I know you're from Middle America, and sometimes you feel like you're representing more than just a school or a conference, maybe an entire group of American citizens out there."
by Twin Cities Hawk on Oct 17, 2011 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions
What the FA or FIFA declared that playing in such a league would disqualify players from international competition?
FIFA would never do that because they don't care about club soccer at all
All they care about is the World Cup. And the FA can be bought – again, look at the example of the Premier League itself. The FA didn’t want that to happen, and yet it happened.
What if UEFA had something to say about this?
In the event that the EPL would kill the promotion/relegation system or just break away from the FA, do you think that UEFA would deny them Champions League spots to keep it promotion/relegation style? Or if it really came down to it, do you think FIFA could stop this idea dead in it’s tracks for the sake of football integrity? I mean, we all know that nowadays, money talks in every language, and UEFA and FIFA aren’t exactly the ideal “integrity keepers” as they like to say they are (Qatar 2022 anyone?)
LANS! - "Like A New Signing"
"This type of thing used to be civilized, you'd hit a guy, he'd whack ya, done"
I honestly think that a closed European league would replace the current Champions League
so UEFA would be a full participant and partner.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
