blue-shifted
Banned
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-league-clubs-wont-care-if-efl-teams-go-under
A very good writer, Jonathan Liew.
A very good writer, Jonathan Liew.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Terrific Guardian article about lower league finances
- Thread starter blue-shifted
- Start date
Super Steve Earle
Well-known member
Thanks for the read, but I wouldn't say a terrific article. I expected better from the thread title. All about opinions eh? Sorry.
rocker959
Well-known member
They could not care less nor ever will.
We are very lucky that this pandemic happened whilst we are in the Premier League and relatively financially stable. In the late-Goldstone, Gillingham and early-mid-Withdean eras, I suspect it may well have killed the club off.
Come to think of it, lucky is the wrong word - this pandemic is good for nobody... but you get my overall drift.
Come to think of it, lucky is the wrong word - this pandemic is good for nobody... but you get my overall drift.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
The frustrating thing is, for clubs below the EFL, a 1000 fans can spread out easily on terracing and watching a game of football is likely safer than going into a pub in all honesty, or your kids coming home from school.
Bigger all seater stadiums are more difficult to manage, but by having a blanket policy, the government risk putting many clubs below the EFL out of business completely unnecessarily.
It is ridiculous that I can mix with 21 other blokes on a Sunday morning in a full blooded game of football, but I can't stand 2m away from everyone to watch a game.
Bigger all seater stadiums are more difficult to manage, but by having a blanket policy, the government risk putting many clubs below the EFL out of business completely unnecessarily.
It is ridiculous that I can mix with 21 other blokes on a Sunday morning in a full blooded game of football, but I can't stand 2m away from everyone to watch a game.
RossyG
Well-known member
- Dec 20, 2014
- 2,630
It was a bit of a statement of the obvious, really.
It’s naive to expect the big clubs to voluntarily bail out the smaller ones. It’s up to the fans really, but I guess if a club is in debt it might be too much for them.
After all, even a tiny club like Southwick FC managed to get itself into £500,000 worth of debt(*). A Go Fund Me account would only scratch the surface of that.
(*) Not due to the pandemic in this case.
It’s naive to expect the big clubs to voluntarily bail out the smaller ones. It’s up to the fans really, but I guess if a club is in debt it might be too much for them.
After all, even a tiny club like Southwick FC managed to get itself into £500,000 worth of debt(*). A Go Fund Me account would only scratch the surface of that.
(*) Not due to the pandemic in this case.
Worked out that Premier League spending this window has broken a billion with Ruben Dias's move to City. A 1% tax on this to be redistributed evenly amongst the 72 clubs would've meant around £150,000 per club. That's 10% of the yearly salary cap at League Two level and would surely have gone a long long way.
blue-shifted
Banned
- Thread starter
- #8
There but for the grace of god mate
We've existed for 120 years. If this had happened at any time other than the very few years when we can be largely sufficient without fans we'd have been in big trouble.
If it had been any time between about 1993 and 2010 we'd have been gone within a couple of months.
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 6,585
I would agree. Lacking in research of the kind that you would have got from a David Conn, the article just mouths the prejudices that we all feel a bit about the EPL. He cherry picks Dyche's quote, but leaves out Frank Lampard who said the opposite and Paul Barber who, on Saturday morning, gave a reasoned explanation of the economic realities of trying to balance consideration for all with each club's own local challenges and the ruthless competitive nature of the league.
The EPL clubs have not spent years 'actively trying to obliterate' the lower league system, they have grabbed the largest share of the bounty for themselves and neglected the financial needs of the lower divisions. I'd agree with Jonathan Liew that something needs to change, but there's nothing to be gained by painting those with most of the power to make change as the enemy. All of English football would be helped by a reduction in the financial gap between the divisions, but to achieve this, you would have to deal with the concerns of the Paul Barbers at every club in the top twenty, and at those who are aspiring to imminently join the top 20. Their first concern would be their own club and, unless they see measures as realistic in terms of their own financial needs and having equal impact on their competitors, they won't support it. We may disapprove of the situation, but this is the reality and journalists writing in the broadsheets should be better placed to present a more considered and adult response to the problem. Liew has talent as a writer, but he needs to be doing the slog as well as the pretty stuff.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,313
what a load of waffle, the writer projecting their opinion of they think the Premier League collective thinks. one single supporting evidence, Dyche's comments, ignoring Lampards counter point made at the same time.
however in the past we've seen the major clubs in the Premier Leauge support championship and below. they voted against the no relegation suggestion from Bolton's Gartside, and pass cash down they dont have to. there are still "football people" involved in the boardrooms that appreciate the wider football world, happy to take the extra spoils from being at the top sure, but wouldnt want the lower leagues to go either. funding them is probably an impossible challenge while keeping their own heads above water, i dont believe its through ill intent.
however in the past we've seen the major clubs in the Premier Leauge support championship and below. they voted against the no relegation suggestion from Bolton's Gartside, and pass cash down they dont have to. there are still "football people" involved in the boardrooms that appreciate the wider football world, happy to take the extra spoils from being at the top sure, but wouldnt want the lower leagues to go either. funding them is probably an impossible challenge while keeping their own heads above water, i dont believe its through ill intent.
About as Guardian an article as you could expect.
The Premier League is in a better position than clubs in the EFL and NL, but that doesn't mean it is in a strong position or has a large amount of spare cash.
As for the transfer market, Aston Villa buying Ollie Watkins from Brentford means £28m going from the PL to the EFL, but no one mentions that transfer spending circulates money within the game, it's a zero net spend.
A point Paul Barber was making on R5 Live this morning. First responsibility is to BHAFC and their own employees. Also linked it to the Governments U-turn on the return of supporters to grounds - it's preventing us putting our own business back on some sort of footing, whilst at the same time asking us to bail the EFL out.
el punal
Well-known member
Your overall drift is absolutely correct. We, as a club, are incredibly fortunate to be in the Premier League at this time. We have the financial safety net of TV revenue to sustain us and other PL advantages. Had this pandemic occurred twenty years ago, as you stated, we would not have survived.
I have a horrible feeling that many lower league clubs will succumb to being wound up unless there is a prompt return to the “old normal”. I can’t see that happening any time soon.
portlock seagull
Why? Why us?
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,116
It’s the players really that hold the keys to this particular problem. Which is why it’ll never happen. Pointless debate really. Clubs will and must go bust.
Anyway, Sky have got you covered, you just need to pick a new team and there’s even new ones in the USA to choose from. Equally, you can buy all their merchandise online and air your views nationally as an armchair fan on phone ins, which provide quality debate / millions want to hear your opinion having never visited the town/city of your team. When I say your team, I mean the one you’re supporting this season. But I suppose you can always change mid season if they’re not doing very well.
Anyway, Sky have got you covered, you just need to pick a new team and there’s even new ones in the USA to choose from. Equally, you can buy all their merchandise online and air your views nationally as an armchair fan on phone ins, which provide quality debate / millions want to hear your opinion having never visited the town/city of your team. When I say your team, I mean the one you’re supporting this season. But I suppose you can always change mid season if they’re not doing very well.
portlock seagull
Why? Why us?
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,116
EP, what % of the Watkins transfer will Brentford immediately receive? Money that they have in their bank account they day he signed for Villa? It’s interesting listening to Paul Barber this morning that the PL still has many debates to have before agreeing. Which seems a little Insincere, like they’re sending a mule-drawn ambulance to a time critical RTA.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
And Exeter. They have a decent sell on percent on Watkins.
Yeah, it's a column. Literally an opinion piece.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,313
players are key, as by far the largest cost. at some point they'll come to realise half the clubs going will mean there isnt so much market for their trade. hopefully this will prompt them, or more importantly their advisors and PFA, to find a way to cut wages.
Varies from deal to deal, quite often it's 50% deposit and the remainder over time.