This would be bad news for Ipswich if this takes off in other leagues.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36328609
Apparently Ipsqit and Tesco boys are jointly purchasing a number of blow up dolls to put in place to simulate a crowded stand.
It won't work, why would any club vote for less games? = less revenue. Stupid idea, won't happen! Bah!
I guess for lower league clubs you could argue the reduced travel (particularly if league 2 and 3 became N/S leagues), wear to the pitch, and ability to get away with fewer players might balance out the loss of gate revenue, but I'd want to see the figures to believe that. Judging by that article though, if that analysis has been done then it looks like the clubs are going to be worse off but it's been suggested anyway. The number of dissenting chairman the BBC have quotes from suggests the Football League are a long way short of 90% approval.
Depends is a new sponsorship, and prize money for finishing position in each league go up to cover it/cover it and increase it.
Celtic appoint Rodgers as Manager. I think that's a perfect fit. Celtic will be a lot better team next Season under him. Will be interesting to see. They obviously know they have to drastically improve for the return of Rangers, and not to get humiliated in Europe again.
I'm not sure how many sponsors want less exposure as s result of less games. Or how more prise money can be generated for less games = less potential broadcasts, corporate hospitality and for more divisions. Anyone coming up to a 5th division from non-league might gain but the 4 extra teams dropping down from the champ to the lge1 and lge1 to lge2 won't feel to good! At a push if the money is the same for 20 instead of 24 in tv rights then that could give a bit of an increase. But that's hardly benefiting everyone Bah!
They pretty much lead the article with how it will be a better share of finances down the football league.So I'm guessing, like the Premiership money goes up every Season, I was assuming they were thinking of sending more of the money down the leagues. Otherwise, if that is not the case. Then no reasons enough teams would agree, and no was it would benefit with the decrease in games.
But if they are generating more money is it because of the new formats appeal to sponsors? Or just they were getting more anyway? Sounds to me like only the champ 20 would benefit. You would have 4 less than usual in that tier and I doubt very much they'll be earning as much in the new 20 team lge1 as yhe 24 team champ. Ditto the 8 that could have been lge1 and the 12 that could have been lge2. Like I say I think the 8 from non-league moving to lge2 may benefit but overall I don't c how it works? How do they justify this prospect of greater funding that could not be ploughed into the existing format? Bah!
ILD, I've just seen this in an article about LvG and where it all went wrong for him. Note Norwich not in top 6! Premier League 2015-16 most passes backwards Team Backwards Manchester United 3,222 Arsenal 2,946 Chelsea 2,933 Manchester City 2,896 Liverpool 2,842
I assume counting is not your strong point Dave as you only list 5 teams. Maybe City are in fact 6th.
Sturridge misses training again with another injury Just leave him at home, he's going to waste a place on the plane. He'll get injured again in the first training session out there!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36339159 Good. I think he played one 90 minute Premiership game all season. Shouldn't be anywhere near the squad.
