We know that EUFA are determined that football clubs are more fiscally responsible and recent events have shown that profligacy can lead to success for some but for those that don't succeed it leads to ruin. The international economic crisis has restricted the amount of money that is being invested in the game and the recent spate of clubs entering administration may increase given these trends. So is a move to Community based clubs the way we need to go? It would seem that the UK government are keen on the idea and PoorOldPompey's administrator seems very keen on the idea.
I don't want these oil rich tycoons coming in, spending **** loads of money and taking away any competitiveness from the League - it was hardly competitive as it was What we need, is a cap on the wealth of the owner OR how much money theycan spend or invest (which thankfully, theya re doing but some clubs arwe still finding a way around like, eg Man City)
I want Saints to be owned by a Swiss-based company for ever. More seriously, I don't know what can be done about it, but it does seem wrong that a financially sound football team can be bought by people who actually raise money on the club and shove it into debt. Even a team like Chelsea would be in trouble if Abramovich called in his loans (apparently he has to be repaid within a few years if he does so). It can happen to any company, look at Woolworths, but football clubs mean so much to the community. It's not like a company, it's more like someone buys your family.
I know it's impossible to turn back the clock to 1992, but if it were, I would not allow SKY to become involved in football. In every conceivable way, except one, their involvement has been to the detriment of football. The except one way is simply that clubs have been forced to build new stadia and facilities to compete, and so fans have been made more comfortable. As it is not possible to turn the clock back, we have to get the cat back into the bag another way. UEFA's financial fair play rules go some way to reining the clubs back in and it is a start. When the likes of Grimsby Town can again have a better chance of becoming competitive, then football will have made some real progress.
The premier League is the best thing to ever happen to english football.Attendances have gone up since 1992,quality of pitches and stadiums have improved and also the standard of football has been improved aswell. You can say that football was more competitive prior to the inception of the PL,but Liverpool were the dominate force in english football... The clubs that have gone into administration or have had financial difficulties is because o their bad judgement,not because of SKY's TV money.Some clubs can cope with all the money,others can't. What UEFA should do is impose a cap on wages and transfer fees.
Not sure I'd want fans to be running Saints rather than Cortese. A mechanism for having an input might be good, but most people buying a company wouldn't expect the customers to have an active say in how it's run.
I think Sky has been good for football in improving coverage and putting money into clubs that has been spent on facilities for the fans. Don't see how they can be held responsible for what people have done with the money and for the fact that undesirables have been permitted to take clubs over. I don't like so many games not being on a Saturday for reasons of tradition, but that may even suit some people who can go on a Sunday and during the week but not Saturdays.
Can we afford the reputed 1 million a year he earns? Might have to go down the back of my sofa to fund that
No, not entirely. If you read my post, and I assume you did, you'll see what I like about SKY's involvement and what I don't like. As I said, we can't put the cat back into the bag, and also we can't forget our experiences of watching football that has been produced with oodles of money. But the game was an affordable weekend attendance pastime for the majority of the working class public. Now it isn't. It has completely lost touch with its roots. No disrespect [remember that as you read the next few words], but that will mean little to you, as you are almost certainly of the SKY football generation. As of this moment, I've still followed Saints longer, in a pre-SKY world, than since. So I do know a little of what it was like before. Football used to be much more affordable. Players were much more part of the community, and they were paid a realistic, if impressive salary for their efforts and skill. They were comfortable, let's say. Clubs had a much closer relationship with their game attending fans. All this is true of the pre-Premier League back then. The Football League is different and actually retains a close resemblance to pre-Premier League days. You may guess where all the real competition is.
You are right Fran, but one of the biggest issues with this is that if any tycoon/chancer (in Portsmouth's case) gets hold of your club and runs it into administration it is the local community and local suppliers who do not see their money return, therefore worsening the local communities economy. Add to that the fact that any written off debt (ie unpaid tax) will have to be underwritten by HMRC and therefore as taxpayers we are taking a hit as a result. I am amazed that people are still happy to go along with this brand of economics, it is madness.
I have to say I like the German model which prevents any one team dominating. I think the PL has been a mixed blessing in that as has already been said it put more money into clubs and the stadia have improved beyond doubt. As much as I loved the old Dell I would want to go back there after the facilities we now enjoy at St Mary's. However the impoverishment of the lower league teams because of the greed is an aspect I don't like nor the impact of agents and the ridiculous money paid to footballers. I would like to see an absolute cap on the proportion of income that can be paid on ALL wages and salaries associated with a club. A fairer distribution of the TV revenue so that Div 2 & 3 teams get a bigger proportion than now. I would like to see every team that is entered for the FA cup having to name a squad of 18 players for the competition for the round at which they enter which should stop the big clubs fielding so many reserve and development players and then introduce their better players in the later stages. To make clubs behave responsibly I would want the current arrangements for preferred creditors turned on its head. Any club crazy enough to sell a player to a club on installments knowing full well that it will probably stuggle to meet the payments should carry some of the responsibility. No player should be allowed to be sold until all monies owed for his purchase have been paid. Any club failing to pay HMRC should be docked 20 points. I could go on but I am sure others have many much better ideas.
Wage cap (plus block any loopholes like "Appearance Rights") and transfer cap would make a massive difference to the game and for the better. Owners would not be able to buy the league. The youth team would become very important as a means for raising new superstars on the cheap.
If every club was run like FC St Pauli or Athletic Bilbao, we would have ourselves a much better sport. I'm so grateful for what Liebherr and Cortese have done, but I'd rather see it lead to a self-sufficient club owned by the fans, than a mega-rich club spending its rich tycoon owner's fortune. My opinion is that, if Man City are to win the league this season, their fans cannot be proud of the achievement. They will have done it simply because they had the most money. I would like any of Saints' future achievements, of which I am hopeful there will be many, to be far less hollow than that.
I admire Bilbao so much for their efforts in bringing their player through the academy,maybe they go a bit over the top by just having an all spanish squad,but having said that they might finish 4th (champions league place.Fantastic club. Llorente is the spanish Lambert .
