General Aid for the EFL?

Hang on it was them who screwed the system with their breakaway money chasing and now they want to tell the Efl exactly how many clubs they can have in their own league,well foxtrot oscar i say, why not 4 Leagues of 23. Why only 2 relegated and then a tournemant for the other + 3 Championship clubs so more games then.
So no League cup so let's even things out and say Premier League "Winners" Only into Champions League how do you like that you wan*ers.

A later start so they can play more cash chasing games in Asia and the states

why the fu*k do you want a prem league tournemant every 5 years

So no more dreams for fans of the smaller clubs

15 players on loan, how many players do they want in their set up, so nigh on 300 players farmed out but 2 clubs must drop out of the pyramid bollo* to that
 
horseman said:
15 players on loan, how many players do they want in their set up, so nigh on 300 players farmed out but 2 clubs must drop out of the pyramid bollo* to that
Click to expand...
And now you’re starting to see why the salary cap for us little folk included caps on squad size, while the Championship and Premier League can have as many players on their books as they like, and offer higher wages than we can, purely because they can then farm them out to us and own the asset. Thus increasing their wealth and giving them an ability to handicap any club below them in ways they couldn’t previously. It’s all linked.

A lot of people have finally heard the shot being fired, but sadly that means the bullet is already on its way.
 
I know it's a bit childish, but I really really really hate the Premier League. Absolutely no interest in the traditions or structure of football in this country, no regard for the supporters or players of the team who make up the bulk of the countries clubs and sheer naked greed. Personally I wouldn't care if they all buggered off to play in some European Super League and left us alone.
 
Mike_H said:
Football would be more enjoyable if the big 6 football clubs were shut down instead. Kick the selfish b**gers out.
Click to expand...


They'll be gone soon enough, but not kicked out. Another step towards a European Super League, 5 years from now it will be so different and who knows if we will survive, many won't
 
This looks like a terrible deal but one caused by the EFL clubs not being able to run a sustainable budget. It is criminal that the football league clubs could spend more than they earned and fans just cheered it on as ambition. Well now the banker needs paying and those EFL clubs have no capital saved for a rainy day. The premier League is sustainable due to its huge uneven income. It's like complaining your neighbor has a Ferrari when you brought a BMW you couldn't afford on finance and the bank comes to reposses the car because you cannot pay.
 
well Zaki seems to like the proposals.
Subject: Tweet by Zaki M Nuseibeh on Twitter
Click to expand...

[URL='https://twitter.com/nuseibeh?s=11']Zaki M Nuseibeh​
logo_twitter-1497383721365.png
spacer_464x1-1582829598167.png
Yet to understand the full details but many elements are welcome. A solution is badly needed for EFL clubs (even prior to Covid). A more balanced share of revenues with lower leagues is necessary and will reduce the culture of gambling to get into the promised land of the EPL [/URL]11/10/2020, 15:06
Click to expand...
 
I read a few months ago that the PL had a 1.5 billion warchest independent of the clubs. Is that true it was in a reputable newspaper!
 
The proposals arent all bad as was said the devil is in the detail. Obviously one cant trust their intentions at all but we can start negotiating and need a lot more pr. It would be good if more managers players and fans in the pl backed the calls for a fairer distribution.
 
So, there is an acknowledgement that the money is there to offer support, and a proposal to facilitate that, but that doing so is going to come at a price to football in England that is not worth paying.
Some of the tweaks to the top end are not necessarily bad - dropping the Community Shield for example - and perhaps putting 3rd bottom into the playoffs instead of 6th in the Championship would actually be fairer, as it always seems a bit wrong to me when a team finishing so far off the automatics wins the playoffs over another that maybe missed out on goal difference.
Even, at a stretch, dropping the Prem to 18 teams could be stomached in isolation, not least given that the pyramid is already one club light this season (Macclesfield), although I would prefer things to carry on at 20 clubs.
However, dropping the League Cup is a no - and not only from an OUFC perspective - and whatever this 5 yearly tournament is is completely waff, but as with most people, this power grab by the current big six (who seemingly forget that the big clubs change across eras), is obviously criminal.

This whole 6 from 9 and the rest of you don't count is a grotesque suggestion in any context, and how anyone expected anyone to be fooled by the 'three longest serving clubs*' acting as patsies in the whole thing is beyond me. The "Elite" can never be allowed to be the majority, otherwise the whole structure is doomed.

*Incidentally, what a bizarre step this is - presumably to get around the Everton FOMO problem - by convoluting a system that also gets to include the jobs for the boys down at West Ham. So four North West sides and four London, with no representation for the Midlands or North East, with minnows like Villa, Leeds & Newcastle and which currently make up over a third of clubs in the top flight. (For the record, Villa, even after their recent excursion into the abyss, have had more seasons in the top flight than any of the 'Big Six', while Newcastle have had more than Spurs and Chelsea, and West Brom just four fewer).
And what happens when one of the three (eg perennial strugglers West Ham) is relegated, do the next longest servants (the mighty Crystal Palace) step up? The big boys may have to be careful, Burnley are third on the waiting list and they won't want them joining in will they?

Sorry, take out the governance element, crack on with the support that they acknowledge that can be given, and then put the other stuff up for debate and then maybe there is somewhere to go with all this, but as it stands.....NAH!
 
the only bit that I like is the existing "solidarity payments" to be more evenly spread amongst all clubs rather than being mostly taken up by the parachute payments.
the consolidation of power into so few hands is a huge danger, and will just lead to B Teams in the league.
 
tonto said:
The proposals arent all bad as was said the devil is in the detail. Obviously one cant trust their intentions at all but we can start negotiating and need a lot more pr. It would be good if more managers players and fans in the pl backed the calls for a fairer distribution.
Click to expand...
I agree with you - the devil is in the detail.

The only aspect I really don't like is an increase in the number of loans. The loan system is already overly abused. Chelsea for example, have no less than TWENTY-NINE players out on season long loans - that is ridiculous! Call me old fashioned, but I like to see clubs develop their own talent. We still can do that at the moment, but we are in danger of just having a squad full of players who are too s**t to get into the Fulham, Burnley or Wolves first teams.

Agree with getting rid of the parachute payments - they were intended to soften the blow of leaving the Premier League, but history has shown that clubs just spunk the cash recklessly on players in order to try and bounce straight back up again - and when that plan fails, they get into even more financial trouble and end up dropping down another division or two.
 
boogaloo said:
I agree with you - the devil is in the detail.

The only aspect I really don't like is an increase in the number of loans. The loan system is already overly abused. Chelsea for example, have no less than TWENTY-NINE players out on season long loans - that is ridiculous! Call me old fashioned, but I like to see clubs develop their own talent. We still can do that at the moment, but we are in danger of just having a squad full of players who are too s**t to get into the Fulham, Burnley or Wolves first teams.

Agree with getting rid of the parachute payments - they were intended to soften the blow of leaving the Premier League, but history has shown that clubs just spunk the cash recklessly on players in order to try and bounce straight back up again - and when that plan fails, they get into even more financial trouble and end up dropping down another division or two.
Click to expand...
Only TWENTY NINE? When we played the scum at theirs they had 3 of the FIFTY players they had out on loan.
 
Posted this on the other thread, but it probably makes more sense here:

Of all possible solutions, I actually think this one is not the worst. At least for a club like ours.

Scrapping parachute payments is great. No reason that clubs should have a competitive advantage just because they played in the PL in the past three years.
25% of all future TV deals is great - wealth-sharing (as long as it's enshrined in law, and difficult to get rid of) is exactly what's needed.
Losing the League Cup would be sad.....but it's been on life support for a while now. No-one at the top of the game cares about it, there's minimal prize money and all it really offers is the chance for a decent home gate while day-trippers watch Man City's 1b team.
The third-from-bottom PL team entering the Championship playoff is whatever.....doesn't make a ton of difference to us, and is actually back to how it was originally set up.

On the other hand, if you're a bottom-half Premier League team, a Yo-Yo team, or a big club with aspirations at the top end of the Championship, it's horrendous.
Two fewer spots in the league, two fewer home gates, no parachute payments if you do get relegated, TV money is going to be redistributed almost certainly to your detriment and your vote is suddenly worth less than the 'Big 9' (and by the way, what the hell with the nine clubs in question? How the hell did Southampton and West Ham earn special status, when Newcastle [more PL seasons than either of them] and Leicester [****ing won the whole thing five years ago] did not???)

Is it worth screwing over the Burnleys and Brightons of the football world to save the Southends and Rochdales from extinction? I'd say probably.

But why would anyone outside of the nine vote for this? And surely it can't get passed with only nine Premier League votes?


Of course, the major worry is that this is the thin end of the wedge and the next move towards scrapping relegation and moving to a closed league. And that everything is happening to bring that future closer increment by increment........
 
They’ve wrapped a lot of good stuff in with some truly abhorrent basically

Hard as a lower league fan to want this to fail but I think overall it’s better if it does
 
Way back when some oracles predicted a European Super League that wouldn`t need fans in the ground.
Seems they`ll get past that by letting a few in and selling online streaming now the tech is catching up.
When Sky got their fingers into the game it was an acceleration of the market, the rich got very rich very quickly. The poor got poorer even quicker.
Those clubs on the cusp of making the hallowed land invariably sign away their futures chasing the dream and then paying a terrible toll....Sunderland, Pompey et el.

The one thing that might (might!) save the pyramid is Oliver Dowden in the DCMS who suggests that the "re-set" in football is fan driven.
Everyone who values the league system has a duty to sign up to the FSA. https://thefsa.org.uk/join/
 
I’ve been thinking about what happens the very first season this comes in, if it does.

PL: top 18 become “new” PL. 2 relegated, none promoted. Only gives Championship teams the opportunity to not get relegated. Maybe have 3 relegation spots from the PL and one promotion spot?

Champ: as above re promotion or otherwise. Champ now has 2 extra teams and so has to ship 2 downstream to L1. So same question re relegation - do you just relegate 2 with, again, no promotion? Or relegate 3/4 and promote 1/2?

L1: exactly the same questions

L2: and this is where it gets sticky. They get the job of actually pushing 2 teams out of the EFL all together.

This all then of course filters all the way down the pyramid.

Now who gets to decide on how all this works?

And all so the big 6(/9) can play a few more friendlies. I can see exactly why Rick Parry is in favour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Big Ron
League One EFL Teams of the Season
Replies
17
Views
605
derek
derek
S
EPL Premier League competitive and sustainable deal with the EFL
Replies
5
Views
582
Essexyellows
Essexyellows
Yellowken
EFL If you could sit down with the Board of the EFL..........
Replies
9
Views
652
SteMerritt
SteMerritt
Leysboy
EFL EFL Playoffs
21 22 23
Replies
444
Views
23K
Northstandboy
Northstandboy
Northstandboy
EFL EFL rights 2024/25+
Replies
13
Views
2K
38yearsofpain
3
Back
Top Bottom