Prince's wealth

[Darren]

Of course it won't happen, because that was why the Prem was created in the first place to get the TV revenue for itself. Unfortunately our beloved club voted for this.

As did Notts County and Luton, who were members of the last old Division 1in 1991-92, but were relegated that season and have never since been within sniffing distance of the PL.

I did often wonder why the "lesser" teams in the old Division 1, who must have realised that the PL would skew things towards the 4-5 biggest teams, just not tell the said big teams to get lost and play amongst themselves if need be.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

The 92 club structure was introduced 100+ years ago for a game that had a maximum wage.
The game has changed beyond all recognition (ie: Rooney on £300K per week).
Football is attempting to keep an outdated structure which is not fit for purpose.
FPP will help but is no good for Premier Clubs or ones hoping to get there.

As for Chesterfield - there has to be promotion/relegation from the 2 top divisions, so for ambitious teams can still make the grade.

As for splitting monies equally, sounds like an Ed Balls policy. Doubt it would happen - the overspending clubs in the Championship (QPR/Leicester/Bolton etc) look as though they are going to challenge the FPP in the law courts - my guess is that they would actually win as would European clubs in their battle with Platini and UEFA.

Failure MUST lead to relegation, so lets say bottom club of tier 2 goes down. The 2nd bottom club goes into a play off with 2nd team in 3rd tier, similar to the play offs back in the 90's.

UTB.......sorry, and FTP

 

[BushBlade]

The reason it won't happen is because the majority of the football customer base has spoken by continuing to buy season tickets at Man Utd and Arsenal and to purchase their Sky subscriptions. Us maniacs may feel that the the way football has gone over the past 20 odd years is terrible. We are in a minority.

True, that and the amount of foreign money the PL attracts, must be good for our economy

 

[BushBlade]

The 92 club structure was introduced 100+ years ago for a game that had a maximum wage.
The game has changed beyond all recognition (ie: Rooney on £300K per week).
Football is attempting to keep an outdated structure which is not fit for purpose.
FPP will help but is no good for Premier Clubs or ones hoping to get there.

As for Chesterfield - there has to be promotion/relegation from the 2 top divisions, so for ambitious teams can still make the grade.

As for splitting monies equally, sounds like an Ed Balls policy. Doubt it would happen - the overspending clubs in the Championship (QPR/Leicester/Bolton etc) look as though they are going to challenge the FPP in the law courts - my guess is that they would actually win as would European clubs in their battle with Platini and UEFA.

Failure MUST lead to relegation, so lets say bottom club of tier 2 goes down. The 2nd bottom club goes into a play off with 2nd team in 3rd tier, similar to the play offs back in the 90's.

UTB.......sorry, and FTP

It won't happen, that's my point. In Germany they were prepared to pass laws that governed how clubs were owned. As you've just proved yourself, as soon as that is mentioned, it's met with accusations of being 'socialist'.

In this country football will remain self governing and the big teams continue to shit on the rest.

 

[Darren]

It won't happen, that's my point. In Germany they were prepared to pass laws that governed how clubs were owned. As you've just proved yourself, as soon as that is mentioned, it's met with accusations of being 'socialist'.

In this country football will remain self governing and the big teams continue to shit on the rest.

It is "socialist". Which just goes to show when we are convinced that something is unfair, we reach for socialist solutions.

 

[Selly]

It is "socialist". Which just goes to show when we are convinced that something is unfair, we reach for socialist solutions.

I wouldn't say the current system is unfair. Rewarding success is not inherently unfair.

But as a sport the element of competition is paramount and the current structure does not promote a healthy level of competition. A healthy level of competition is best served in sport via a more socialist organisation.

The fact that this is practiced in the most free market country of then all in all four of their major sports just goes to show that sport is a special case...

 

[jezzablade]

I wouldn't say the current system is unfair. Rewarding success is not inherently unfair.

But as a sport the element of competition is paramount and the current structure does not promote a healthy level of competition. A healthy level of competition is best served in sport via a more socialist organisation.

The fact that this is practiced in the most free market country of then all in all four of their major sports just goes to show that sport is a special case...

Agreed the US have salary caps, draft picks, none monetary trades (i.e. Players for players) and the lowest ranked teams get the first draft pick. On the other hand there is the nightmare of Franchised leagues and Majors and Minors (which is a horrible prospect).

I don't think we need to look to the US for a model we (the followers and supporters) just need to look at what is best for the game as a whole and think whether concentrating the majority of resources in the top few clubs is best for the people that follow football, the national game and fairness has to play a part as the game was brought up by the communities and run by football people, because they loved football. Now it is run by money people who are more interested by the hospitality at Arsenal than the game itself.

 

[Darren]

I wouldn't say the current system is unfair. Rewarding success is not inherently unfair.

But as a sport the element of competition is paramount and the current structure does not promote a healthy level of competition. A healthy level of competition is best served in sport via a more socialist organisation.

The fact that this is practiced in the most free market country of then all in all four of their major sports just goes to show that sport is a special case...

I always thought the American analogy was a false one. The NFL, for example, is an oligopoly of 32 teams with no promotion or relegation. All 32 teams are valued amongst the 50 most wealthy sports teams in the world. So basically, in the NFL you get (given the differences in population) pretty much what the top football teams in England would like: the super wealthy sharing the loot out amongst themselves and sod everyone else.