Why I hope United back the new Sky TV deal

[1973Blade]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bb...https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46267320
21 out of the 24 Championship clubs are apparently opposed to the new Sky deal for televising English Football League games.
Like the Premier League clubs, greed is everything for some championship clubs. Football is at its best when it is competitive, and it is vital the lower league clubs get a fair share of the money to allow them to compete. Wilder correctly says that we are not an arrogant club (unlike the lot at S6!) and I hope we remember where we were not so long ago. I hate the level of arrogance and greed there is in football, and how short term the thinking is. I wonder if Bolton Wanderers still want to see relegation banned from the Premier League, which they suggested when they were in the top flight?!
I want United to set ourselves apart from our greedy Championship rivals and make a stance for the lower league clubs!

 

[Harry's Game]

I’m torn on this, I think the Championship is the most exciting competitive league in Europe yet the EFL seem unable to market it and and the main Broadcaster treats it as an afterthought.

We and others are getting numerous fixtures moved, last season we played one three o’clock home fixture after Boxing Day, yet the financial remuneration from the TV company wouldn’t cause a ripple in Bournemouth’s finances.

I can well understand why some clubs are pissed off.

 

[metalblade]

Like it or not no doubt the number of times we were on Sky last season and so far this season will be paying a few players wages come January.

 

[mattbianco1]

It won't affect us anyway. We'll be sitting say the top table in August

 

[grafikhaus]

Like it or not no doubt the number of times we were on Sky last season and so far this season will be paying a few players wages come January.

That's true, but what about medium/long-term? I think this is football's 'Amazon' moment where the 'High Street' didn't see it coming and failed to adapt.

Regardless of the extra money, I think we'll look back (fondly?) on mass attendances. We already have moving fixtures to ridiculous times/days for Sky, the 'Red Button', International Breaks where - once again last weekend - we 'lost' perfect weather and will have rescheduled matches for freezing cold Tuesday nights in Feb/March and now this. We only see the headline figure of how much the clubs will receive, but it will mean yet more Monday night etc. matches.

Throw in the ridiculous obstacles put in the way of actually attending the games (loyalty points, membership, 'are you on the database?', no 'pay on the gate').

More and more people will decide it's just not worth the bother of going to see a match 'live'. This Saturday is a case in point. In t'old days, me and my mates wouldn't have thought twice about meeting up for a few pints in town, hop on the bus or train, go to Rotherham, pay a few quid to get in and repeat. Now it's just not worth the hassle (if you could get a ticket in the first place).

It'll be interesting to see how Sky will over-hype games when there's gaping spaces on the terraces.

 

[cahill]

Baffles me all this. I need to sit down

 

[Tom Bott]

It'll be interesting to see how Sky will over-hype games when there's gaping spaces on the terraces.

That's why they have a generic crowd noise button, as demonstrated during the Last Post.

 

[I should coco]

I want United to set ourselves apart from our greedy Championship rivals and make a stance for the lower league clubs!

See the other thread on this.

it is not about 'greed'. The 15 dissenting clubs have very big concerns about the red button decimating midweek attendances and the fact it is a five year deal. Sky have got a bargain and they know it, but the idiots at the EFL don't have a clue what they are giving away.

 

[BerksBlade]

The 3 clubs that agreed to the deal are Reading, Bristol City & Brentford, apparently.

 

[Sean Thornton]

The 3 clubs that agreed to the deal are Reading, Bristol City & Brentford, apparently.

Are they not the clubs who have representatives on the nine man management panel?

 

[blade too long]

our cut, is still light years from prem money
no Sky or BT exec can tell me Watford v Bournemouth would be worth the difference in money to a West Brom v Villa game
or palace v southampton is a bigger draw than Leeds v Sheff utd , based on fan interest

 

[Fulwood Blade]

football is moving on - the new deal is pathetic and should be rejected.

5 year deal with the pace of change now is just ridiculous - SKY are having our pants down.

Quite happy for a collective deal - but not this one.

I also hope we are one of the 21.

UTB

 

[Smirth]

But wouldn’t a bigger deal benefit the lower league clubs though since money is distributed across all 3 of the leagues?

 

[BushBlade]

But wouldn’t a bigger deal benefit the lower league clubs though since money is distributed across all 3 of the leagues?

Yes it would but there isn’t a bigger deal on the table, just the thought that there may be one at some point.

 

[grafikhaus]

I think we should have Theresa May negotiating this. It will seem like a 'good deal'.

 

[SelbyBlade]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bb...https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46267320
21 out of the 24 Championship clubs are apparently opposed to the new Sky deal for televising English Football League games.
Like the Premier League clubs, greed is everything for some championship clubs. Football is at its best when it is competitive, and it is vital the lower league clubs get a fair share of the money to allow them to compete. Wilder correctly says that we are not an arrogant club (unlike the lot at S6!) and I hope we remember where we were not so long ago. I hate the level of arrogance and greed there is in football, and how short term the thinking is. I wonder if Bolton Wanderers still want to see relegation banned from the Premier League, which they suggested when they were in the top flight?!
I want United to set ourselves apart from our greedy Championship rivals and make a stance for the lower league clubs!

Although I fully agree with your premise regarding greed and I like you want a fair deal throughout the EFL including all lower league clubs, the EFL have missed a trick. The fact that the Championship has more big clubs in it than the premier league has and therefore more big games than the Premier league means more money could have been negotiated to spread around the leagues.
Having said all of that I would rather there was a world without SKY / BT money at all, so that everyone lives within their means based on money derived from the community they sit in. Rather than a Plutonomy where the rich few get all the money and power at the expense of the people who brought the game to the world i.e. the working class.

 

[metalblade]

That's true, but what about medium/long-term? I think this is football's 'Amazon' moment where the 'High Street' didn't see it coming and failed to adapt.

Regardless of the extra money, I think we'll look back (fondly?) on mass attendances. We already have moving fixtures to ridiculous times/days for Sky, the 'Red Button', International Breaks where - once again last weekend - we 'lost' perfect weather and will have rescheduled matches for freezing cold Tuesday nights in Feb/March and now this. We only see the headline figure of how much the clubs will receive, but it will mean yet more Monday night etc. matches.

Throw in the ridiculous obstacles put in the way of actually attending the games (loyalty points, membership, 'are you on the database?', no 'pay on the gate').

More and more people will decide it's just not worth the bother of going to see a match 'live'. This Saturday is a case in point. In t'old days, me and my mates wouldn't have thought twice about meeting up for a few pints in town, hop on the bus or train, go to Rotherham, pay a few quid to get in and repeat. Now it's just not worth the hassle (if you could get a ticket in the first place).

It'll be interesting to see how Sky will over-hype games when there's gaping spaces on the terraces.

The trouble is grafikhaus premiership games are still playing in front of full stadiums, it will be interesting to see what happens at championship level. I already think it is killing off away support some of the away followings at the lane have been abysmal this season.

 

[grafikhaus]

The trouble is grafikhaus premiership games are still playing in front of full stadiums, it will be interesting to see what happens at championship level.

Arsenal have been lying about 60k crowds at The Emirates for years when the empty seats are there for all to see, but big London, Manchester/Liverpool clubs will always attract their share of corporate schmoozers. Even then. the 'corporate' section at Wembley was mostly empty for the Croatia match on Sunday. Plus they claimed the game was a 'sell-out' when it clearly wasn't. More accurate surely is the 'bread and butter' of the PL - the majority of the teams who are of interest only to their own supporters. Less than two weeks ago Huddersfield were at home to Fulham. The crowd? 17,082.

I already think it is killing off away support some of the away followings at the lane have been abysmal this season.

That's probably more down to the ridiculous £30+ ticket prices for average games (like ours at home to Wigan and Hull a bit back.) And there's the thing. As more money flows into football, ticket prices continue to rise because the money goes on salaries and agents' fees.