Sky has ruined football...Utter bollocks

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Maybe the problem there is not that Watford are getting £99 million but that the people of Lincoln aren't interested enough in the club to turn out in numbers sufficient to make the club viable?

Institutions of 100s of years in the country where football was invented. And those at the top couldn't give a toss.

Even the USA's NFL has a system whereby talented players are distributed fairly.

And don't get me started about the fait accompli from the PL on the academy system. In one fell swipe they've destroyed the ability of small clubs like Crewe to sustain themselves.
 

Maybe the problem there is not that Watford are getting £99 million but that the people of Lincoln aren't interested enough in the club to turn out in numbers sufficient to make the club viable?

Lincoln will get above average crowds for the Conference - it was one of the better supported clubs when they were perennial play off failures in League 2. I guess not every club will have a Tony Stewart like saviour, who will take them from nigh on admin to the Championship, spending quite a bit of money on a new stadium along the way.

I'd be intrigued to know what the bill is for.
 
Institutions of 100s of years in the country where football was invented. And those at the top couldn't give a toss.

Even the USA's NFL has a system whereby

The people of Lincoln couldn't give a toss either. It's not just those 'at the top'.

The NFL is a holding company, the teams are just its franchises. The British system is very different. If you want to change it for a more US system, you're arguing for the MK Dons model.

PS I'd add that clubs went bust before the Premier League; Aldershot, Maidstone, Accrington Stanley...
 
Would it necessarily be a bad thing? There was talk of the a European super league a few years back - the top 4 or 6 from each country going into that and I remember thinking that might not be a bad thing, then maybe the rest of the English football league could become more normal again.

It would be televised for a 12.30 KO and the poor Arsenal fans will have to wake up a day before to get to Munich for kick off.
 
I watch Bundesliga on BT. Their kick off times also vary due to televised games.
The biggest difference is the ticket prices. Which isn't down to Sky per se.
But Germany has a different culture to us. They believe in regulating the free market to benefit their society as a whole.

If I remember correctly, German ticket prices are not regulated by the state, they are subsidised by the state, tax payers actually subsidise fans to go and watch football. Maybe I mis-heard...
 
It would be televised for a 12.30 KO and the poor Arsenal fans will have to wake up a day before to get to Munich for kick off.

but the Chelsea fans could have a lie in, not as far to Watford
 
Lincoln will get above average crowds for the Conference - it was one of the better supported clubs when they were perennial play off failures in League 2. I guess not every club will have a Tony Stewart like saviour, who will take them from nigh on admin to the Championship, spending quite a bit of money on a new stadium along the way.

I'd be intrigued to know what the bill is for.
They owe it to the Cooperative Bank don't they? I thought they had a track record of writing off much larger football debts...
 
This is a phrase that is used time and time again by the modern day football fan, but it is wrong. Sky itself has not ruined football, but it has reduced the importance of the modern day fan.

Lets start with the economics (pay attention at the back). Football is a lucrative business, due to how bloody popular it is. Fans across the world are willing to pay quite large sums of money to watch football on the Tele - be it £45 a month here in Blighty for Sky Sports, or the enormous growing market of Asia (where India in particular are just starting to wake up to the fact that sports other than cricket exist). Hence the money trickles through, with TV companies paying vast amounts for the rights to screen the games, and the Premier League passing this on to the clubs themselves.

Attendance revenue contributes less and less relatively to clubs. The team finishing bottom of the Premier League next season will pocket a cool £99m. If that is, for example Watford, how much will they get from bums on seats that season? Well, in year ended 2014, when admittedly they were in the Championship, they got £4m from matchday revenue. Let's say that in the Premier League this - let's go crazy here - doubles. Or even trebles. £12m. That's less than an eighth of the prize money they'll receive for finishing bottom next season.

If anything, Sky may have saved football. Attendance revenue is so small relatively, clubs can keep fairly reasonable prices to keep fans on board. Fans are no longer the thing that keep clubs going, in the upper divisions at least. It means, that the old broad adage of the larger the attendance, the higher the league position starts to fall - particularly in the Premiership. Teams such as Newcastle, who always relied on their relatively large crowds will no longer have that great an advantage, compared to say, Swansea. An extra £10m, whoop de do.

I think this helps cause the 'apathy' as described by Deadbat on the other thread. We're no longer the heartbeat - the 2 way deal that the club needs us, just as much as we need them on a Saturday afternoon to keep us away from Meadowhell has gone. In the league we're in, then yes, the fans numbers do make a difference, and a couple million should be enough to buy some considerable clout, perhaps even esteemed household names such as Paul Coutts, and Dean Hammond. We've certainly fucked up on that front, but in general the bigger clubs don't hang around here often.

Drawing back to the main point - the money hasn't killed the game. The 5:30 FA Cup final hurts, but listening to Greg Dyke, he said it was something like £30m difference in TV revenue. That's a lot of grassroots (a word I personally hate, but seems be the buzzword now) football that can be started - or conversely a lot of FA suits that can be paid. I don't mind games on a Sunday. If I had a choice, I'd have 8 PL games on Saturday afternoon, and then 2 on a Sunday. I like nothing better to either swing by the boozer and watch a match, or swig a beer at home watching it on the box.

So what is 'ruining' football? Well, collecting from the above paragraph, no consideration paid to fans, when TV games are stupidly re-scheduled. Yes, top idea, let's have Southampton V Newcastle on at 12 o'clock, who cares about those Geordie types leaving at 5am. That's no good for anyone. That probably is Sky, I give you. But the PL should be able to veto such ridiculous occurrences.

Secondly, lack of TV replays. That's not Sky - that's the faggots at FIFA. They're a different tale. There, money is corrupting, and anyone who starts to complain gets more money thrown down their throats to shut up (hello Irish FA). I know 'in the good old days' we didn't use replays, and just played on. But then, you didn't have 56 cameras clearly showing how the referee missed a blatant penalty. Now we do. I think cricket and tennis have (broadly) led the way here - let teams have 2 challenges each, or maybe even 1. If they fuck it up on some dive, it's their fault. When so much rides on these decisions, let's make sure we're getting it right.

Third - Crooks running clubs. I don't mean clowns, like we enjoy, I mean proper crooks, like the fellow up the M1, or any of the previous 300 chaps down on the South Coast. More must be done to stop clear thugs like Cellino coming on board. How he passed any fit and proper when he's barely avoiding jail back home puts the whole thing to shame - and instead of laughing at how it couldn't have happened to a nicer club, there should be some serious anger in how a guy so rotten even Berlusconi would say he was a rascal has managed to own the club, and still own it after God knows how many controversies.


I think the Sky money has helped football beyond belief. Shit management of these new riches, and the authorities being too happy to take cash themselves, rather than look at wider consequences, has damaged football more than anything. Sky (and other TV companies) are offering the large sums, but the authorities should also have the balls to say 'here are some restrictions'. Until then, fans will be shafted. But for every Newcastle fan losing his Sunday travelling down to the South Coast, there'll be millions watching at home, in pubs, and paying good money to do so...

I'm sorry but Sky have ruined football. They aren't totally to blame, fans following like sheep to shell out £60 per month on subscriptions, Premiership money men like Scudamore are in that frame also along with a case of thousands. Pure and simple if people didn't want football this way it wouldn't exist. It suits your average Chelsea, Liverpool, Man United (insert next big name here) fan in London, Amsterdam, Paris, New York etc etc to just turn the TV on and watch their team play. Outside of those big names no one really gives a fuck about football/soccer.

It all went tits up the very second that fans weren't the most important part of the club. These days I find any football pretty tedious viewing. It isn't a spectacle any longer because you can turn 15 channels over and there are probably 15 different games to watch.

To be honest I wouldn't give a shiny shit if the whole thing imploded and didn't exist tomorrow. It isn't a shadow of the game it was or should be.
 
I'm sorry but Sky have ruined football. They aren't totally to blame, fans following like sheep to shell out £60 per month on subscriptions, Premiership money men like Scudamore are in that frame also along with a case of thousands. Pure and simple if people didn't want football this way it wouldn't exist. It suits your average Chelsea, Liverpool, Man United (insert next big name here) fan in London, Amsterdam, Paris, New York etc etc to just turn the TV on and watch their team play. Outside of those big names no one really gives a fuck about football/soccer.

I like to watch any football that't on TV and £60 a month isn't too much considering that id spend 5X that watching football in the pub :)
 
What if your beloved Blades sold you to Leeds. Would you still try hard?
Good point BB and yes, I probably would.
Always did as an amateur.
I guess it's just the way I am.
I think money has spoiled the game by spoiling the players.
How do you motivate someone on £250,000 a week if they don't fancy it?
 
I'm sorry but Sky have ruined football. They aren't totally to blame, fans following like sheep to shell out £60 per month on subscriptions, Premiership money men like Scudamore are in that frame also along with a case of thousands. Pure and simple if people didn't want football this way it wouldn't exist. It suits your average Chelsea, Liverpool, Man United (insert next big name here) fan in London, Amsterdam, Paris, New York etc etc to just turn the TV on and watch their team play. Outside of those big names no one really gives a fuck about football/soccer.

It all went tits up the very second that fans weren't the most important part of the club. These days I find any football pretty tedious viewing. It isn't a spectacle any longer because you can turn 15 channels over and there are probably 15 different games to watch.

To be honest I wouldn't give a shiny shit if the whole thing imploded and didn't exist tomorrow. It isn't a shadow of the game it was or should be.

I'd be gutted but it would serve them all right.
 

Good point BB and yes, I probably would.
Always did as an amateur.
I guess it's just the way I am.
I think money has spoiled the game by spoiling the players.
How do you motivate someone on £250,000 a week if they don't fancy it?
I don't think you can legally. That said, a lot of footballers are self motivated, like Messi, Ronaldo and many others. Just like the big business people who still get up at 6.00 every morning and go to work when they could easily retire. I'd love to know how they do it.
I think some people are just born that way.
 
The point is that the PL should have the bollocks to tell Sky such an arrangement is unacceptable...Sky are always going to try it on, they make money from it after all, but somewhere along the line there needs to be an 'enough is enough' instruction.

The PL will never ever do that. They will take all the money thrown at it by Sky and BT (let's not forget BT in all this debate now they are trying to flex a bit of financial muscle and get in on the act). The PL are happy to sit back, line its own pockets and spread a little about the clubs that play in it.
I lost all respect for what the PL stands for after the West Ham affair.
I would like to see us back there one day. But honestly, as it stands, that is a very very long way off given our current state.


Maybe the problem there is not that Watford are getting £99 million but that the people of Lincoln aren't interested enough in the club to turn out in numbers sufficient to make the club viable?

What's our excuse then? Consistently turning out 18-20k in the third tier for the 5th season running. I'd say the fans are interested in large numbers but our club isn't a viable entity without investment behind the scenes.
Football as it stands isn't a money making business unless you are in the top 1% in the world.

The problem in all of this is the detachment of the PL from the Football League. It has got to be one of the reasons why the money doesn't filter far down.
The football league tried a sky type thing and that all went tits up with the ITV Digital affair leaving a lot of clubs worse off financially.
 
People talk about the 300k+ per week some of the top players are on. The clubs that pay those wages can afford that because of the commercial and merchandising income that comes from having that player in their team outweighs the wage cost.

How much money does the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Gareth Bale, Neymar et al make for their respective clubs in commercial/merchandising? It is phenomenal. The players like that are global brands and in effect the clubs are justifying their outlay in wages because they are recouping that tenfold in other income because of the globalisation of football.
 
I don't think you can legally. That said, a lot of footballers are self motivated, like Messi, Ronaldo and many others. Just like the big business people who still get up at 6.00 every morning and go to work when they could easily retire. I'd love to know how they do it.
I think some people are just born that way.

Or they just like what they do.
 
People talk about the 300k+ per week some of the top players are on. The clubs that pay those wages can afford that because of the commercial and merchandising income that comes from having that player in their team outweighs the wage cost.

How much money does the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Gareth Bale, Neymar et al make for their respective clubs in commercial/merchandising? It is phenomenal. The players like that are global brands and in effect the clubs are justifying their outlay in wages because they are recouping that tenfold in other income because of the globalisation of football.

Except that most of them lose money hand over fist and need to be propped up by wealthy owners?
 
me too, and I also admire what AFC Wimbledon have done in the face of having their original club stolen.

Been to a couple of lower league games this season (NWCPL - same division Fleetwood were in about 10 years ago) and really enjoyed it, one was against Maine Road, the Man City fans club.

I genuinely believe that non-league football will continue to gain popularity as long as people become increasingly alienated from the modern professional game. Attendances at some clubs have gone from being some old bloke and his dog to hitting the high hundreds/thousands.

When any hope of competing for big silverware and big money disappears, the love of the game is all that remains, and all that really matters.
 
And while ever Sky are dishing out £99m to the worst team in that league and eff all to anyone in any other league, it will continue and get worse.

It is like two separate things now to me - the Sky driven Premier League "product" being sold across the world to be watched primarily on TV, and the rest of the Football league which is still aimed at the real fans. I'd rather spend 60 quid a month going to Bramall Lane (edit: yes, even now) than give it to Sky, the same as I would rather pay a tenner and see a local upcoming band that needs the support than pay 100 or whatever it costs these days to see the likes of Clapton or Springsteen at the big venues. But there are a lot that are willing to shell out and it won't change any time soon.
 
It is like two separate things now to me - the Sky driven Premier League "product" being sold across the world to be watched primarily on TV, and the rest of the Football league which is still aimed at the real fans. I'd rather spend 60 quid a month going to Bramall Lane than give it to Sky, the same as I would rather pay a tenner and see a local upcoming band that needs the support than pay 100 or whatever it costs these days to see the likes of Clapton or Springsteen at the big venues. But there are a lot that are willing to shell out and it won't change any time soon.

To be honest I just don't watch a lot of TV; i'd much rather being doing something social like going to a game than sat on my arse like a zombie all Sunday.
 
It is like two separate things now to me - the Sky driven Premier League "product" being sold across the world to be watched primarily on TV, and the rest of the Football league which is still aimed at the real fans. I'd rather spend 60 quid a month going to Bramall Lane than give it to Sky, the same as I would rather pay a tenner and see a local upcoming band that needs the support than pay 100 or whatever it costs these days to see the likes of Clapton or Springsteen at the big venues. But there are a lot that are willing to shell out and it won't change any time soon.

I originally took on my Sky subscription to watch the football, but I can only reflect what you and others have said. I would describe myself as passionate about football, but am so disinterested in Premiership I only keep Sky Sports for the other sports. I am working my way around all the league clubs, and always enjoy the lower league clubs better, almost as much as I enjoy going to non-league clubs.
 
Premier League - not on terrestrial = don't watch it - can't be arsed to watch MOTD these days either - if it's on and I am channel flicking I'll stay on it for a while but then flick the channel when Shearer starts his obligatory diatribe
Champions League - not on terrestrial = don't watch it - mind you, I wasn't that bothered about it when it was on ITV - full of teams that I don't identify with - the standard is patchy, the "competition" is negligible - just like I don't want to watch a boxing match that it too one sided between feather weights - I don't want to watch Barca keep the ball for 90% of a game and score with the only shot they have on target - tedious.
League Cup - if it's not on terrestrial = don't watch it - won't subscribe to anything to watch it.

Cricket - not on terrestrial = don't watch it any more - since I cancelled my Sky Subs for sport approx 4 months ago I've lost all touch with cricket :(

BT Sport - WTF? No additional choice when you have to pay extra for a service that was once all available on one channel
Had BT Boradband for 10+ years and could have BT Sports FOC in recent times but never opted to - looking to switch from BT as now too expensive for what I get.

The FA Cup is probably the only competition I will watch - especially the early rounds when the non-league teams are in it - because it's on terrestrial and it's interesting to see the fight and passion that has all but disappeared from the pro game.

I find I have less choice - unless I want to pay upwards of £1,000 a year to watch "sport" on TV - and then it's not my team that gets featured

Who has ruined football?
Both Sky and Sheffield United, it seems in equal measure

I don't get excited about it any more
I am not sure who we are playing any given weekend - I never used to have to check - I just knew - because I'd paid that much attention before.
When we concede a goal I don't get that pang of adrenalin that gets you in the pit of your stomach any more - the one that makes you feel sick - it just feels like an inevitability that we concede - even if dominant in a game.
I think the only time I ever get that feeling now is if it's the Pigs we concede to - and that seems a distant memory these days.


Still won't change my team - Can't.
I'm in cryogenic suspension
 
To be honest I just don't watch a lot of TV; i'd much rather being doing something social like going to a game than sat on my arse like a zombie all Sunday.
I'm the same. Never had Sky, but around 2001 I got ITV Digital cos I couldn't get to United games very easily and it had the championship (or Endsleigh L1 as I think it was). I did see a few United games but other than that I soon got fed being sat on my arse watching all the various games just to get my money's worth.
 
Sky gives fabulous coverage and has revolutionised tv with 3D multi angle HD , wonderful
The problem arises entirely with how the money they pay is distributed-
Football instead of being one all encompassing family became the Premier League calling all the shots and giving out Maunday money to the FA and the FL72

The evil son of the Devil Scudamore and his greedy cohorts are the ones thats ruining football , Sky pay the money thewy keep 99% of it and create a well off elite and a poverty stricken lower league set up and grass roots gets barely enough to vbuy some balls
 
We how have a premier league that is filled with overpaid foreign players, that come here for a few years to make their money, leaving us with few English players in the Prem and a rubbish English team as a consequence.
We also have stupid ticket prices, not just in the Premier league but also at a football stadium not so far from us.
Improvements for fans? Some of the stadiums have improved, more money has come into the English game from other areas....but a foreign owner is not always a good thing.

I can remember being at Bramall Lane in the 80s, watching dreadful football and
Sat in crowds of 12000. We are definitely better off than then and although the football leaves a lot to be desired I know it will get better.
 

If I remember correctly, German ticket prices are not regulated by the state, they are subsidised by the state, tax payers actually subsidise fans to go and watch football. Maybe I mis-heard...
Not sure. I know that ticket prices are a lot cheaper than here and I know that owners can only own 49% of a club with the remaining 51% being owned by a supporters' trust. (I think the percentages are right). So I'm guessing it's linked.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom